You seem determined to turn this into some PC vs Console flame war. Reality is, console gamers are indoctrinated to accept and sadly excuse being nickel and dimed. Many are shut in their console only microcosm so don’t have any comparison or alternative.
There is no shame and certainly no superiority complex in people exercising their voices and wallets by demanding value for money and options.
I’m only responding to the comments made to me on the subject. I’m not inciting anything. I don’t “excuse” being nickel-and-dimed. I just realize that creating, programming, editing, testing, and publishing take time and effort, and am not going to stomp my feet because someone didn’t offer me something for free. Oh noes, the console gamers are willing to pay for something we used to get for free! Oh how I loathe the market principles of supply and demand!
There is no shame and certainly no superiority complex in people exercising their voices and wallets by demanding value for money and options.
Correct. You’re more than free to not purchase something you don’t want.
It’s not brainwashing, it’s the reality of the console-based online system. Consoles are not open, never have been and most likely never will be. We aren’t making a sad excuse. There is no alternative if you want to play on their systems.
Stop making it sound like an affliction.
You had a veil pulled over your eyes in the guise that it costs all this extra money to create, money more than made up by the billions made in sales. Popular games get DLC, popular games that made far far more money than it cost to produce, and the excess more than covers the cost of creating a couple of maps… maps that (conspiracy theory) probably were half done already or never made the cut in the 1st place… I mean jeez, half the maps in MW2 were old maps from MW1!
Ignorance is bliss as they say, and you seem to be defending this ignorance. You’re being very narrow minded to think that we’re ‘demanding’ stuff for free, we know exactly the time and effort that goes into map making. You’re on a forum that is full of community map and mod makers, and some that have even gone on to join dev houses and create maps for a living (splash damage were a mod team to begin with).
The other principle is the split it causes in the community. Halo Reach is a prime example, quite a few of my friends bought the map pack, and they dont want to be restricted to standard maps anymore… so if I want to play with them, I need to spend money. Sorry that just doesn’t sit well with me one bit (they’re console gamers, not PC gamers)… I’ve never in my whole time of PC gaming been split from my gaming friends because of money.
[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;257070]You had a veil pulled over your eyes in the guise that it costs all this extra money to create, money more than made up by the billions made in sales. Popular games get DLC, popular games that made far far more money than it cost to produce, and the excess more than covers the cost of creating a couple of maps… maps that (conspiracy theory) probably were half done already or never made the cut in the 1st place… I mean jeez, half the maps in MW2 were old maps from MW1!
Ignorance is bliss as they say, and you seem to be defending this ignorance. You’re being very narrow minded to think that we’re ‘demanding’ stuff for free, we know exactly the time and effort that goes into map making. You’re on a forum that is full of community map and mod makers, and some that have even gone on to join dev houses and create maps for a living (splash damage were a mod team to begin with).
The other principle is the split it causes in the community. Halo Reach is a prime example, quite a few of my friends bought the map pack, and they dont want to be restricted to standard maps anymore… so if I want to play with them, I need to spend money. Sorry that just doesn’t sit well with me one bit (they’re console gamers, not PC gamers)… I’ve never in my whole time of PC gaming been split from my gaming friends because of money.[/QUOTE]
For one, I’m not really talking about map packs. I’m talking about expansions and added content beyond just having a different environment to do the same exact **** you were doing in the main game.
I’m not defending anything but the right of the publisher to charge for their product. I also defend the right for you to ask for or expect free content. I have no “veil” pulled over my eyes. I’m sure they do make money on selling products. Is there a non-profit videogame publisher that you are aware of or something?
While your gripe over exclusion is legit, it’s not the dev’s problem. You can’t play ball without a bat.
Saddly the biggest DLC pusher for fps games is map packs, so it’s very prevalent.
I’m not defending anything but the right of the publisher to charge for their product. I also defend the right for you to ask for or expect free content. I have no “veil” pulled over my eyes. I’m sure they do make money on selling products. Is there a non-profit videogame publisher that you are aware of or something?
Don’t mean to parry what Chris said, but your argument to begin with is that everyone did it, so it’s expected. The Super Meat Boy devs came up with a way to get free content into the game so the publishers couldn’t charge for it. W:ET was a free game. Trackmania is free on steam, so is Swarm. EA released Burnout Paradise for free… what’s your point with this question?
While your gripe over exclusion is legit, it’s not the dev’s problem. You can’t play ball without a bat.
You’re completely contradicting yourself here. You’re saying it costs the devs money to develop this content, so yes it would be the devs problem completely. SD spent their own time and money patching ETQW even when Activision funding was over. This is both admirable and shows their dedication to the community… in other words… they’re not in it purely for the money.
This is not a demeaning question, I just want to understand the basis of your argument… are you a PC gamer? If so, how long have you been a PC gamer for? If not, you’re giving a purely console gamers POV which completely explains the view you’re putting across. I’ve been a PC gamer for 13 years and also owned consoles… so I can see both sides of the fence here.
I’m not defending anything but the right of the publisher to charge for their product.
Yes, and I support this as well - just not in they way it is today. A long, long time ago (years) It was common for developers to release these things called “expansion packs.” They were sold as a retail product, and contained enough new content to warrant paying money for them, since essentially, you were getting a new, smaller version of the existing game. Things like map-packs, extra gamemodes, new weapons, etc. were provided free of charge, through either mods from the community or the devs themselves.
A good example of this “acceptable” DLC, would be the Claptrap and General Knoxx expansions for Borderlands, or The Awakening add-on for Dragon Age. But now that publishers have found out that players are willing to pay for just about any sort of new content (even if it is simply unlocking content already on the disc) They will charge for anything and everything they can, until they finally hit the limit - where players refuse to pay for certain things.
It is the consoles own shortcomings (no mods) that contributes to this sort of mindset, where players are begging for any sort of new scraps they can get their hands on, and publishers take full advantage of this - waving food in front of their face saying, " you can have a bite, for a fee."
It’s also breaks into another discussion - Are the games of today, deliberately lacking content and substance, so they can be paid for later by players?
Exactly my stance. H0RSE has a habit of saying my thoughts better than I can 
[quote=Herandar;257069]It’s not brainwashing, it’s the reality of the console-based online system. Consoles are not open, never have been and most likely never will be. We aren’t making a sad excuse. There is no alternative if you want to play on their systems.
Stop making it sound like an affliction.[/quote]
I never said people were brainwashed, the fact that a console is many people’s only exposure to gaming and that exposure says paying for online and paying for DLC is the norm means they come to expect it.
What I don’t understand is that when another group of people tell you it doesn’t need to be that way out rolls Ajax defending it like we’re being the dicks. If you stopped just being so apathetic about it and kicked up a stink too maybe you wouldn’t be paying $15 for a CoD map pack.
And don’t forget the trend Activision set and is pushing with CoD to lock out user content on the PC too. This is hidden behind piracy and justification but any normal person can see it’s motivated to remove the ability to extend a games longevity with user content.
It’s also breaks into another discussion - Are the games of today, deliberately lacking content and substance, so they can be paid for later by players?
I’d say an unscientific yes to that and also shorten the life of online multiplayer games.
[QUOTE=SockDog;257095]
I’d say an unscientific yes to that and also shorten the life of online multiplayer games.[/QUOTE]
Our world is so corrupt.
[QUOTE=Crytiqal;257048]Doesn’t mean that the PC isn’t superior.
There are far less superior’s then the rest of the masses
Which just proofs why the marketing is drivin by the consoles :D[/QUOTE]
nobody developing games for Cray Jaguar.
so platform superiority[PC for example], isn’t as important as playerbase[great in PC case] and developers&publishers.
its nowdays MS/Sony biz strategy - lure developers into trap, then buy their somehow, then brainwash.
so strategy quickly altered from “good competition” to “raw power opression” nazism.
ironically this endangered Microsoft roots more than any other moves, cuz games - is ONLY reason for Windows presence on home PC’s. no Windows on home PC’s ? no easy entry to corporate market[anymore], no cheap HR, no cheap support, no blackmarket daming as PR strategy[counterfeit copies&OEM/OEI deals as way to dominate regional market].
[QUOTE=Dormamu;257166]ta da ta ta taaaa i’m lovin’ it 
[/QUOTE]
That image.
Is our world. :eek:
[QUOTE=brbrbr;257311]nobody developing games for Cray Jaguar.
so platform superiority[PC for example], isn’t as important as playerbase[great in PC case] and developers&publishers.
its nowdays MS/Sony biz strategy - lure developers into trap, then buy their somehow, then brainwash.
so strategy quickly altered from “good competition” to “raw power opression” nazism.
ironically this endangered Microsoft roots more than any other moves, cuz games - is ONLY reason for Windows presence on home PC’s. no Windows on home PC’s ? no easy entry to corporate market[anymore], no cheap HR, no cheap support, no blackmarket daming as PR strategy[counterfeit copies&OEM/OEI deals as way to dominate regional market].[/QUOTE]
Sir I give you a goodwin point
As Horse said you used to add to your game experience via expansion packs. These were usually half the price of the original game and usually had roughly half the content of the original game. They weren’t just a new map, or new armour, or a new game, or anything cosmetic. It was real content, that added to the experience of a game.
As far as I’m concerned if you want to call it “DLC” then release it for free, otherwise call it an “Expansion Pack” and we’ll see if five maps really constitutes as an expansion pack.
Honestly I hope SD are smart (pun fully intended) about this and release single weapons, maps etc as freebies, but if they want to release map packs or weapon packs or new outfits then they need to come as an expansion, or be incredibly, incredibly cheap.
Haha, Really?
I sold that game a month ago because they didnt pay attention to PC or PS3.
I thought the game actually sold for 60 bucks, now theyre making maps the same price as the original. Screw Activision.