Disney Infinity Will Have On-Disc DLC

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

*Sighs into hands* ITT People saying that you are "owed" the content on the dvd just because its on the dvd. If the game box does not state state that you are purchasing that special content...YOU ARE NOT PURCHASING IT. It doesn't matter if its on the disk or not, if its not described as part of the product you are buying...you are not buying it.

Also..ya..its like Skylanders so the DLC will be related to actually owning the toys. If you dont have the toys you dont get the content.

So you

TizzytheTormentor:
just don't charge lot's of money for something that people have already paid for.

And you.

Sylveria:
However, if they're going to go all Crapcon and charge for it, then there's a big problem.

need to realize that if they arent describing that extra content as part of what your buying, it isnt yours. On top of that, whos to say its finished. On top of that...Skylanders-esque toy based dlc onlocking thing. So many things wrong with your views on this.

cursedseishi:
That explains jack squat about why they'd put DLC on the disk to begin with.

I say hack the shit out of the game, throw it all out on the internet and laugh. Besides, I'm pretty sure I can guess at least ONE of the "future" products that will be in it.

Spoiler alert: Another Pointless "Pirates of the Caribbean" flick trying to again convince us that Jack Sparrow is good enough for Main Protagonist. Spoiler alert again, he still isn't.

I'm guessing it will be on the disc because most of the content will be done for the year before this ships. Why not put it on the disc? Why force people into downloading it & storing possibly huge amounts on their console when there's room to put it on the disc in the first place?

Actually Pirates 5 isn't slated, at the moment, to be out until July 2015, which not only puts it out of the year window for this game (June 2013 - June 2014 releases), it pretty much puts it outside of the year window for the next game too (June 2014 - June 2015 releases, assuming they release a new version next year in the same month).

I'd say future products could be things like some Marvel (both Captain America 2 & Thor 2 are released in the window so there'd be a tie in to those & appeal to adults), Muppets (again new film releases in window), a "classic pack" - Mickey and them lot (though I have a funny feeling I read about them being in the game already). Personally, I'd like to see a villains pack especially with Maleficent coming out (although that's not slated to release until after the second version would be) and I'd really REALLY like to see Kingdom Hearts but I doubt that would happen.

Oh and the Academy would like to disagree with you about Jack Sparrow being good. Sort of. As well as BAFTA, Empire, Screen Actors Guild, Golden Globes...

TizzytheTormentor:
Why do people call locked content DLC?

DLC means "downloadable content" if it's on this disc, you aren't downloading anything but the activation key.

OT: I get they don't want to spoil the surprise, all fine and dandy, just don't charge lot's of money for something that people have already paid for.

I thought some games (Far Cry 3, I think) started calling on disk content "UnLockable Content/ ULC". It makes a little more sense than DLC, but that name still gives the impression "you need to do something in-game to get this cool stuff", not "We want more money before you start using Pixar's latest cool character".

Doom-Slayer:
*Sighs into hands* ITT People saying that you are "owed" the content on the dvd just because its on the dvd. If the game box does not state state that you are purchasing that special content...YOU ARE NOT PURCHASING IT. It doesn't matter if its on the disk or not, if its not described as part of the product you are buying...you are not buying it.

Also..ya..its like Skylanders so the DLC will be related to actually owning the toys. If you dont have the toys you dont get the content.

So you

TizzytheTormentor:
just don't charge lot's of money for something that people have already paid for.

And you.

Sylveria:
However, if they're going to go all Crapcon and charge for it, then there's a big problem.

need to realize that if they arent describing that extra content as part of what your buying, it isnt yours. On top of that, whos to say its finished. On top of that...Skylanders-esque toy based dlc onlocking thing. So many things wrong with your views on this.

We aren't "owed" anything, If I buy a game for 55 euro at retail, I should get everything I paid for, I get the disc, box, manual, I own the everything that the game should offer, but if they are going to lock content on a disc I paid full price for, I should get everything the disc offers.

If they make DLC after the game is out, fine, I love supporting a game after release, DLC is a wonderful thing, but having to pay extra for something that is already on the disc I paid full price for is just a cash-grab.

Also, does the box of Street Fighter X Tekken say there is content on the disc that isn't mine until I pay for it? (I actually don't know if it does)

Hairless Mammoth:

TizzytheTormentor:
Why do people call locked content DLC?

DLC means "downloadable content" if it's on this disc, you aren't downloading anything but the activation key.

OT: I get they don't want to spoil the surprise, all fine and dandy, just don't charge lot's of money for something that people have already paid for.

I thought some games (Far Cry 3, I think) started calling on disk content "UnLockable Content/ ULC". It makes a little more sense than DLC, but that name still gives the impression "you need to do something in-game to get this cool stuff", not "We want more money before you start using Pixar's latest cool character".

It makes a little bit more sense, but you are right, it implies it has to be unlocked, which I love doing in games, playing and unlocking all the goodies, more satisfying than paying for it.

Marshall Honorof:
John Vignocchi, the game's executive producer, warns that if tech-savvy buyers hack Disney Infinity discs, they could find content that shouldn't see the light of day for up to twelve months. "We're hoping that isn't something that is widespread reported because then people are going to start looking for it, and it's going to ruin the magic for the consumer," he says.

You know, there's one way to ensure that doesn't happen eh? DON'T PUT IT ON THE DISK!

TizzytheTormentor:
We aren't "owed" anything, If I buy a game for 55 euro at retail, I should get everything I paid for, I get the disc, box, manual, I own the everything that the game should offer, but if they are going to lock content on a disc I paid full price for, I should get everything the disc offers.

If they make DLC after the game is out, fine, I love supporting a game after release, DLC is a wonderful thing, but having to pay extra for something that is already on the disc I paid full price for is just a cash-grab.

Also, does the box of Street Fighter X Tekken say there is content on the disc that isn't mine until I pay for it? (I actually don't know if it does)

If you choose to buy the game, you get exactly what they want to give you. If you dont like that, dont buy it.

The escapist podcast has covered the second point quite a bit. Development cycles and processes are complicated. And during the end of development its likely that after the entire game is built or having the bugs ironed out, that a lot of the dev team has nothing to do. Instead of them not doing anything, they are hired to work on DLC, and its generally it will be too late to actually include that in the game as the game may be being checked by hosting companies etc or the DLC simply isnt finished.

Since they are paying the devs to work on that content when they dont need to, they charge for it, and that is DLC, and if they can they will slip it onto the disk for USER CONVINIENCE.

Also for your Street fighter example. Why do they need to? That kind of content is not available in the game, is not advertised as part of the game and can only be accessed by actually opening the cd and rooting around in the system files. How in the world can you reasonable argue that that is yours when it is not advertised, not available in game and clearly not meant to be accessed via those means.

What bothers me so much is that if devs just made that content before release then just delayed it..YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW. And you would parrot on about how much better that is than having it on disk....ie the more convenient option. That is plain stupid.

while this may appear to be really dumb

accepting the inevitable and making a goodwill bargain while you can is probably more thought than a lot of people have used when thinking about this kind of thing

If you don't want people to see it, don't sell it to them yet.

Im sorry but this seems like selling someone a reveiws magazine with several of the pages stuck together and asking the reader to pay to open the pages later, saying it will spoil the surprise otherwise. I mean, I get where he's coming from in terms of planning ahead but why does it have to be locked, can't we see it as a lil'teaser?

Doom-Slayer:

TizzytheTormentor:
We aren't "owed" anything, If I buy a game for 55 euro at retail, I should get everything I paid for, I get the disc, box, manual, I own the everything that the game should offer, but if they are going to lock content on a disc I paid full price for, I should get everything the disc offers.

If they make DLC after the game is out, fine, I love supporting a game after release, DLC is a wonderful thing, but having to pay extra for something that is already on the disc I paid full price for is just a cash-grab.

Also, does the box of Street Fighter X Tekken say there is content on the disc that isn't mine until I pay for it? (I actually don't know if it does)

If you choose to buy the game, you get exactly what they want to give you. If you dont like that, dont buy it.

The escapist podcast has covered the second point quite a bit. Development cycles and processes are complicated. And during the end of development its likely that after the entire game is built or having the bugs ironed out, that a lot of the dev team has nothing to do. Instead of them not doing anything, they are hired to work on DLC, and its generally it will be too late to actually include that in the game as the game may be being checked by hosting companies etc or the DLC simply isnt finished.

Since they are paying the devs to work on that content when they dont need to, they charge for it, and that is DLC, and if they can they will slip it onto the disk for USER CONVINIENCE.

Also for your Street fighter example. Why do they need to? That kind of content is not available in the game, is not advertised as part of the game and can only be accessed by actually opening the cd and rooting around in the system files. How in the world can you reasonable argue that that is yours when it is not advertised, not available in game and clearly not meant to be accessed via those means.

What bothers me so much is that if devs just made that content before release then just delayed it..YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW. And you would parrot on about how much better that is than having it on disk....ie the more convenient option. That is plain stupid.

There are strong arguments for both sides, this and this give their reasoning and both make good points.

I see your reasoning, but on your last point, what about devs that removed finished content from the finsihed product for a quick cash-grab, nothing to do with time or delays, just to squeeze more money from people who possibly paid full price.

You can never really know what the devs were thinking, but to be honest, on the subject of the article, if the person doesn't want the locked content of the disc spoiled, why put it on the disc where people can look in the game files to find?

TizzytheTormentor:

There are strong arguments for both sides, this and this give their reasoning and both make good points.

I see your reasoning, but on your last point, what about devs that removed finished content from the finsihed product for a quick cash-grab, nothing to do with time or delays, just to squeeze more money from people who possibly paid full price.

You can never really know what the devs were thinking, but to be honest, on the subject of the article, if the person doesn't want the locked content of the disc spoiled, why put it on the disc where people can look in the game files to find?

No, you cant ever know what a dev is thinking, so why are we demonizing every single dev that does it then?

And for the second article

Plain and simple: If content is finished in time for certification and ships with the master gold print for manufacturing, there's no reason why it couldn't be included with the game from the start.

This is the basis for the articles reasoning. And it's stupid and flat out wrong. What if the content isnt even finished? What if it isn't balanced? What if its like the Skylanders DLC thing where you need a peripheral or a toy to unlock it? What if that content wasnt in the original design document and while they finished it, they didn't have time to integrate it into the final product?

What if you know what, they made that content as an extra and want to sell it to you as such? What if they made their game..sat down and said "This is our final finished product...THIS over here..this DLC..this is extra content and we dont believe this is integral to our game. We do not wish to include this content in the main game. Therefore we are going to sell it as an extra."

Saying that you haven't got the "full" game, or that they are "required" or that you're "entitled" to that piece of content is ridiculous. You get what you pay for, not what you want, not what you think they should give you, and you certainly are not entitled to every piece of content they have made before release. You get what they give you and what they advertise you on the box. Simple.

1998: Factor 5 and LucasArts hide a playable Naboo Starfighter in the code of Star Wars: Rogue Squadron. They manage to keep it secret for six whole months. They publish the cheat-code to unlock the content when Star Wars: Episode 1 is released.

2013: Disney hides code for playable characters on $60 discs of Disney Infinity. Because Disney made this stupid ass press release, it takes hackers a week to discover and unlock these characters. A year later, Disney charges gamer's $10 to unlock content on the game they already bought.

This is NOT progress! I just plain refuse to buy on-disc DLC on principle...

I could get behind this, if you didn't have to pay for it.

Having content that's supposed to come out eventually on the disc already isn't a big deal. They're waiting for the right time. It would of been like TTG's Walking Dead, where you had to wait a month between episodes, except that was for development. You bought the game with only one episode but you still owned the whole game when it eventually came out.

What I seriously don't get is, why not just not put it on the disc and not even mention it?

Would be awesome if it was just a hoax though, seeing who breaks the code.

Doom-Slayer:

TizzytheTormentor:

There are strong arguments for both sides, this and this give their reasoning and both make good points.

I see your reasoning, but on your last point, what about devs that removed finished content from the finsihed product for a quick cash-grab, nothing to do with time or delays, just to squeeze more money from people who possibly paid full price.

You can never really know what the devs were thinking, but to be honest, on the subject of the article, if the person doesn't want the locked content of the disc spoiled, why put it on the disc where people can look in the game files to find?

No, you cant ever know what a dev is thinking, so why are we demonizing every single dev that does it then?

And for the second article

Plain and simple: If content is finished in time for certification and ships with the master gold print for manufacturing, there's no reason why it couldn't be included with the game from the start.

This is the basis for the articles reasoning. And it's stupid and flat out wrong. What if the content isnt even finished? What if it isn't balanced? What if its like the Skylanders DLC thing where you need a peripheral or a toy to unlock it? What if that content wasnt in the original design document and while they finished it, they didn't have time to integrate it into the final product?

What if you know what, they made that content as an extra and want to sell it to you as such? What if they made their game..sat down and said "This is our final finished product...THIS over here..this DLC..this is extra content and we dont believe this is integral to our game. We do not wish to include this content in the main game. Therefore we are going to sell it as an extra."

Saying that you haven't got the "full" game, or that they are "required" or that you're "entitled" to that piece of content is ridiculous. You get what you pay for, not what you want, not what you think they should give you, and you certainly are not entitled to every piece of content they have made before release. You get what they give you and what they advertise you on the box. Simple.

You are on this "if they didn't advertise it, it's not yours" If it's produced and on the disc before the game ships, I don't think it's acceptable to sell a code to unlock it, if the content is finished and balanced, include it as part of the game I am paying for.

Do you remember the Risen 2 fiasco? On the PC, players merely had to go the system files, unlock the DLC code and it was theirs for free, they didn't have to pay for it, because it was on the disc and could unlock it as they pleased, they wouldn't have been able to do that if there was no DLC on the disc. The DLC was missing the voice files, but other than that, was perfectly playable.

If the content on the disc is unfinished, then it can't be accessed and played properly until the rest is finished and put online for download, but in the case of Street Fighter X Tekken, there were no issues with the content on the disc, all you paid for was a code.

If the content is completed and on the disc, why charge more for it? Is it not enough that we paid FULL price for the game? If we paid for the disc, we should have access to everything on the damn disc! This isn't "entitlement" it's common sense! If I buy a house with 5 rooms for the agreed price, alright, but then there were 3 other rooms in the house that weren't advertised, but I have to pay extra for those rooms after buying the house for the full price, it may not be a spot on metaphor, but it works the same way.

I've seen ONE argument about on disc D.L.C that I agree with. Here it is.

TizzytheTormentor:
-snip-

Comparing purchasing physical and digital objects is kind of pointless since they are so different(see also the piracy and theft argument)

It doesn't matter if the DLC is finished, balanced, was originally in the design doc and someone said "hey..lets take this out and charge for it".

The basic argument can be broken down like this:

-The dev believes their vision of the "entire game" is what they put out in the DVD available for acces and what they advertised on the box. The DLC is extra, and since it cost money to produce, they will charge for it.

- The consumer(the upset consumer that is) believes the "entire game" is all the content they created up to the relewase date. They belives therefore that the DLC is part of the game, and should be included.

And do you know whos right? The people that actually made the game. I doesn't matter if you think the DLC should be part of the game, and it doesn't matter if you think you should have everything on the disk. Its not your call, its not your game.

In the Tekken example. Those extra characters were deemed by the devs to be extra. Therefore they included on the disk as a convenience to consumers in case they wanted to buy them. It doesnt matter when they made those characters, it doesnt matter what devs made it, it doesnt matter what funding money was used to pay for it, the devs say its extra content and since its their product, what they say goes. Trying to demand what content a dev should include in THEIR OWN product, is arrogant plain and simple.

You can be frustrated that specific content wasnt included in a game, but dont tell me that because you payed full price you are entilted to it just because they included it on the DVD.

Wesley Brannock:
I've seen ONE argument about on disc D.L.C that I agree with. Here it is.

I have to admit, I love me some Jim but thats the only video of his that I find really misinforming and contradictory.

Take a moment to watch it while keeping the title in mind. Go on Ill wait.

You may of realized that nowhere in the video did he say that on disk DLC was by on its own unjustifiable. He straight up does not say that ANYWHERE in the video. What he DOES say, is that devs using the "we have to include it" is a stupid and wrong excuse, and he says that if your going to do paywall content, go to the fremium market.

But then he tells devs to just admit that they want more money for content and thats why they are doing. Isnt that justification? Isn't that a pretty damn good reason they are releasing on disk DLC...to make more money? What if they just want to make more content for gamers to play, but cant afford to give it away for free?(Or dont want to). And nowhere on his video does he say thats not a good enough reason. Nowhere. All he does is say that on disk DLC is not neccesary, therefore saying its neccessary is not a valid reason. And hes right funny enough, but nowhere does he say that on disk DLC is not justifiable.

Sylveria:

..Wait, given the recent era of consoles, the content needs to be on the disc? Isn't digital distribution the thing everyone is pushing so hard for cause its like the greatest thing ever that cuts costs and puts the screws to the consumer? All the major consoles have stores loaded with multi-gig games that can be downloaded. What exactly is holding this particular project back from having their DLC actually be DLC?

Could you imagine if they did this with digital dlc using the cloud system?

They would probably coin it CDLC and it would be the new nightmare all over again.

If it's going to happen the Crapcom way then consider my interest shattered into a million digital pieces and then replaced by Elder Scrolls online instead.

Doom-Slayer:

TizzytheTormentor:
-snip-

Comparing purchasing physical and digital objects is kind of pointless since they are so different(see also the piracy and theft argument)

It doesn't matter if the DLC is finished, balanced, was originally in the design doc and someone said "hey..lets take this out and charge for it".

The basic argument can be broken down like this:

-The dev believes their vision of the "entire game" is what they put out in the DVD available for acces and what they advertised on the box. The DLC is extra, and since it cost money to produce, they will charge for it.

- The consumer(the upset consumer that is) believes the "entire game" is all the content they created up to the relewase date. They belives therefore that the DLC is part of the game, and should be included.

And do you know whos right? The people that actually made the game. I doesn't matter if you think the DLC should be part of the game, and it doesn't matter if you think you should have everything on the disk. Its not your call, its not your game.

In the Tekken example. Those extra characters were deemed by the devs to be extra. Therefore they included on the disk as a convenience to consumers in case they wanted to buy them. It doesnt matter when they made those characters, it doesnt matter what devs made it, it doesnt matter what funding money was used to pay for it, the devs say its extra content and since its their product, what they say goes. Trying to demand what content a dev should include in THEIR OWN product, is arrogant plain and simple.

You can be frustrated that specific content wasnt included in a game, but dont tell me that because you payed full price you are entilted to it just because they included it on the DVD.

So charging for content that is already on the disc isn't arrogant? The consumer has a voice, it is a practice hated by many because they believe it is greedy to charge for finished content already on the disc (which it is) and the ones who are hit the hardest are the ones who bought it FULL price.

It's simple, If I buy a bar of chocolate, I get everything that I paid for, the whole bar. If I buy a game, I should get what I paid for, the whole plastic disc. If I am not getting what is already on the disc, why is it priced at 55-60 quid? I understand your line of thought, but the consumers are the one getting the short end of the stick, the ones who are providing them with money in the first place.

I know why they do it, to make more money whilst simultaneously giving the finger to anyone who expected to get the full game for full price (getting full content for full price is not being entitled) The whole "it makes everything easier" is a pretty moot argument, massive games like Skyrim didn't have to do for huge expansions like Dragonborn.

Seeing the Jim video (ah, good old Jim) he is correct, it is not a necessary evil, it is a shameless excuse to weasel more money out of the people who bought their product, nothing more, nothing less.

So in essence, yes, I am telling you that for full price, we should be paying for full content, anything off the disc is extra for download.

TizzytheTormentor:
-snip-

*sighs* So you say you understand what I mean but then ignore so many details and go off talking about things I have already addressed...Right Ill try once more since I have nothing better to do clearly.

The consumer has a voice, it is a practice hated by many because they believe it is greedy to charge for finished content already on the disc (which it is) and the ones who are hit the hardest are the ones who bought it FULL price.

I know why they do it, to make more money whilst simultaneously giving the finger to anyone who expected to get the full game for full price (getting full content for full price is not being entitled)

This argument is needless to say one of the funniest I see..and I see it a lot. You're calling this kind of DLC a rip off, that people hate it that it isn't worth it. Yet they do it...and make TONS of money off it. Consumers just like you, who "hate" this kind of DLC...do all this ranting, and buy it anyway. It blows my mind that you can make this accusation that its a cash grab, yet so many people buy it, Its like people complaining MMO's like WOW are a rip off and blindly ignoring the fact that million of people still play them.

It's simple, If I buy a bar of chocolate

Already mentioned this..physical and digital media are different, comparisons are not useful. And Ill mention again, its the same reason you cant compare piracy and theft, because they refer to 2 different things.

So in essence, yes, I am telling you that for full price, we should be paying for full content, anything off the disc is extra for download.

And once again your point is flawed.

All devs do then is release that same content that was made before release on day 1 instead of putting it in the disk. And thats even assuming you realize.

"But then its Day 1 DLC and thats just as ba.."

Then release it on day 2

"But thats still pretty close to relea.."

Do you see how arbitrary it is? Do you see how silly your argument is? And once again your saying that by not getting pre-release day DLC your not getting the "Full game". Repeat the same process as above indefinitely but instead say "But Im still not getting the full game", once again..just as arbitary. You dont decide what the "full game" is, its not your product.

For example. Preloaded games. You obviously cant play these before release dates.. BUT..you own the game, and you may have it on your hardrive or even the disk in your hand. BUT I OWN IT, WHY CANT I PLAY IT? Because ownership isnt the entire law.

Im probably not going to respond after this. I can think of about 3 or 4 other examples I can give of on disk dlc/downlaoded dlc, and I know you wont be able to give a logically consistent answer. The basis of your argument..the "I own the disk therefore I own everything on it and can do whatever I want with it" is completely unture and you haven't provided any basis for it.

Doom-Slayer:

TizzytheTormentor:
-snip-

*sighs* So you say you understand what I mean but then ignore so many details and go off talking about things I have already addressed...Right Ill try once more since I have nothing better to do clearly.

The consumer has a voice, it is a practice hated by many because they believe it is greedy to charge for finished content already on the disc (which it is) and the ones who are hit the hardest are the ones who bought it FULL price.

I know why they do it, to make more money whilst simultaneously giving the finger to anyone who expected to get the full game for full price (getting full content for full price is not being entitled)

This argument is needless to say one of the funniest I see..and I see it a lot. You're calling this kind of DLC a rip off, that people hate it that it isn't worth it. Yet they do it...and make TONS of money off it. Consumers just like you, who "hate" this kind of DLC...do all this ranting, and buy it anyway. It blows my mind that you can make this accusation that its a cash grab, yet so many people buy it, Its like people complaining MMO's like WOW are a rip off and blindly ignoring the fact that million of people still play them.

It's simple, If I buy a bar of chocolate

Already mentioned this..physical and digital media are different, comparisons are not useful. And Ill mention again, its the same reason you cant compare piracy and theft, because they refer to 2 different things.

So in essence, yes, I am telling you that for full price, we should be paying for full content, anything off the disc is extra for download.

And once again your point is flawed.

All devs do then is release that same content that was made before release on day 1 instead of putting it in the disk. And thats even assuming you realize.

"But then its Day 1 DLC and thats just as ba.."

Then release it on day 2

"But thats still pretty close to relea.."

Do you see how arbitrary it is? Do you see how silly your argument is? And once again your saying that by not getting pre-release day DLC your not getting the "Full game". Repeat the same process as above indefinitely but instead say "But Im still not getting the full game", once again..just as arbitary. You dont decide what the "full game" is, its not your product.

For example. Preloaded games. You obviously cant play these before release dates.. BUT..you own the game, and you may have it on your hardrive or even the disk in your hand. BUT I OWN IT, WHY CANT I PLAY IT? Because ownership isnt the entire law.

Im probably not going to respond after this. I can think of about 3 or 4 other examples I can give of on disk dlc/downlaoded dlc, and I know you wont be able to give a logically consistent answer. The basis of your argument..the "I own the disk therefore I own everything on it and can do whatever I want with it" is completely unture and you haven't provided any basis for it.

If you are not going to respond, then I won't bother giving my points, after claiming I will fail to give a logical answer, why should I?

This has gone on long enough, we both share different opinions, we won'r be swayed by one another, so we'll end it here.

TizzytheTormentor:

If you are not going to respond, then I won't bother giving my points, after claiming I will fail to give a logical answer, why should I?

This has gone on long enough, we both share different opinions, we won'r be swayed by one another, so we'll end it here.

Actually...lets do this simply, lets not deal with what I think, but what you think. I like analyzing arguements and we'll see if yours comes up consistent.

So in essence, yes, I am telling you that for full price, we should be paying for full content, anything off the disc is extra for download.

So you say..anything off disk is fine for DLC.

So again to my point. What if they delay the same content they produced before release, and release it as Day 1 DLC available for download only(ie not on the disk) So thats fine? Or are you saying, any content made before release has to be in the game and shouldnt be DLC, and everything AFTER release is fine for DLC?

Doom-Slayer:

TizzytheTormentor:

If you are not going to respond, then I won't bother giving my points, after claiming I will fail to give a logical answer, why should I?

This has gone on long enough, we both share different opinions, we won'r be swayed by one another, so we'll end it here.

Actually...lets do this simply, lets not deal with what I think, but what you think. I like analyzing arguements and we'll see if yours comes up consistent.

So in essence, yes, I am telling you that for full price, we should be paying for full content, anything off the disc is extra for download.

So you say..anything off disk is fine for DLC.

So again to my point. What if they delay the same content they produced before release, and release it as Day 1 DLC available for download only(ie not on the disk) So thats fine? Or are you saying, any content made before release has to be in the game and shouldnt be DLC, and everything AFTER release is fine for DLC?

It's hard to say, my whole argument is that I (and many other people) just feel that having to pay for something on the disc is irritably greedy, yes, the devs can do what they want, but it is still a practice that offers very little to the consumer.

A lot of points you make are reasonable, mine may not seem the same, but look at it this way, after paying for something, seeing content that has a big "NO U, GO TO MARKETPLACE NAO" is frustrating, especially if you have no internet access (to download the key) or funds to play content already there.

As for DLC, day 1 DLC usually is done to make money while offering something that SHOULD have been part of the game (Fable III is a good example, where the rest of the dye set has to be downloaded, the empty space on the shelves cannot be found in-game, it has to be bought, although I doubt anyone other than obsessive fans did...and even then I doubt it) and having insanely expensive clothing that adds nothing but a cosmetic look (400MSP for an outfit is unreasonable) Some people do buy it, but many are not swayed so easily.

If the devs couldn't finish something and put one part on the disc and you have to download the rest, that's fine and not the issue, my problem is having completed content on the disc and charging extra for it, it is all there, but you have to pay for a key to unlock it, which is inconvenient to anyone who has little money to spend after shelling out 55-60 bucks (a high price for the average person) on a game or if they lack internet connection (which means they can't access the content at all)

Am I starting to make a bit more sense?

DracoSuave:
1)

Anyone surprised that a game that involves buying toys to use in game would have "DLC" on the disc isn't paying attention. Skylanders has 'on disc dlc' in that you need the RFID with the toys to unlock the content.

2)

They're supplying the data for future toys in the system even if they haven't revealed what those toys are or will be. This can be because they haven't manufactured the toys yet, it could be that they're waiting for a movie/tv tie-in, or whatever. But given point 1, it doesn't make any sense to require any sort of download when they already know what they're going to do. Secondly, given that the toys won't be platform specific, they can't simply include the data with the toys without having to provide a copy of the data for every platform the game is for--that's a lot of wasted packaging and material. It'd only make sense to people who think that sort of thing is free and costs nothing.

So, in light of those things, this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone whatsoever. Add in the justification that the target audience doesn't necessarily have internet access and you have the possibility of a lot of people who the product isn't designed for getting huffy over things that probably can't and shouldn't be done any other way.

So, before you get huffy about "on-disc DLC" on principle, consider that this specific product is NOT similiar to most other products, and the product it IS similiar to has On-disc DLC by design as well. Then if you still complain, explain how the product COULD be released without it.

3)

Someone WILL hack it--and I would bet good money that not only will there be 'leaks' about the unlocked content within a couple weeks of launch, some of those 'leaks' will involve people playing with that content as if they bought the content outright.

Just like Skylanders.

You are not getting it, it doesn't matter that this is not a normal game and you buy the content bit by bit as the new figures are released. It doesn't matter that they need the content built into the game so they can just sell the toys, none of this matters because its on the damned disk! They are owed it because they own the damned disk! Its not DLC if its on the damned disk! -has meltdown and hugs a pile of DVDs- my precious disks!

Sylveria:
If the people who bought it are given access for free when the project is released, then I see no problem. However, if they're going to go all Crapcon and charge for it, then there's a big problem.

/signed

Putting it on there in order to keep it a surprise, time it to coincide with something from the real world, etc, if given for free is not only okay, it's actually quite cool. But charging for something already on the disc is not on. I have no issue with enterprising players unlocking this content themselves, like they did with Javik.

Perhaps he's going with "Honesty is the best policy", believing that if they're up-front with On Disc DLC that gamers won't be as upset because it won't seem like they're actually trying to hide the stuff.

Still though, he's grossly over-estimating the good will of the internet. While people might get pissed off that they're hiding DLC content on the disc and trying to be all secretive about it, hoping no one will notice, telling people that it's already there and asking them not to touch it is the same as telling a 4 year old that they must absolutely NOT touch the big shiny red button. We all know that 4 year old is gonna push the button the first chance it gets.

Oh my God I am so shocked, who could have possibly predicted this? (Sarcasm)

Doom-Slayer:
Snip

For the record, he mentions twice that "The industry tries to justify it as (bleh), but....." which implies that it's unjustifiable.

The rest is summed up in his closing argument: on disc DLC isn't DLC. You pay to download a key, not the content itself that's already there. If anything the argument is more along the lines of there's no justifiable reason to call on-disc-DLC DLC at all since, word-for-word, you're not actually downloading content.

The full argument, as presented at the beginning of the episode, is that devs use on-disc DLC for compatability issues. Jim's argument is that the very presence of on-disc DLC creates any issues that it was meant to solve in the first place. It's not so much DLC at that point but rather a cash-grab. He's not saying "Justify your on-disc DLC by just admitting you want more money", he's saying "Don't call on-disc DLC "DLC", call it what it is: a cash grab."

Well this is a dumb idea - "Ooh, we have spoilers for our new films, but we're gonna Hide them on the disc until the right time to sell them to you"... No, some Genius rogue'll have that hacked + out in the open inside a Week.

So if this game is trying to capitalize on the success of Skylanders, why the hell would it need DLC at all? Why not just sell figurines and stuff? I mean, people are way more likely to buy that than they are DLC. This is why this game isn't going to do as well as Skylanders, in my opinion.

Captcha: Keep More Money

Thank you, Captcha.

VanQQisH:
Seems like a silly idea if you ask me. Some crafty person out there will reverse engineer the files and release the info onto the internet within days of release. I'm willing to bet this is actually a clever ploy at marketing, making people actively search for the "yet to be announced" Disney projects.

This.
Reading all the comments, they make this guy out to be a huge idiot. This is Disney we are talking about - they have been marketing and branding for years. It is next to impossible for them not to know that the sort of thing they are "afraid" of will happen. So, why not announce it now and generate a "hype" for knowledge about future Disney projects? It is evil marketing genius is what it is. He is relying on the internet to behave like the internet. Welcome to the future.

"We're hoping that isn't something that is widespread reported because then people are going to start looking for it, and it's going to ruin the magic for the consumer,"

- he says with an evil smirk on his face.

J Tyran:
You are not getting it, it doesn't matter that this is not a normal game and you buy the content bit by bit as the new figures are released. It doesn't matter that they need the content built into the game so they can just sell the toys, none of this matters because its on the damned disk! They are owed it because they own the damned disk! Its not DLC if its on the damned disk! -has meltdown and hugs a pile of DVDs- my precious disks!

It's...

...a game...

...based on game-toy interactions.

....which requires toys...

...to interact with...

...so....

...ellipses are fun...

Sheo_Dagana:
So if this game is trying to capitalize on the success of Skylanders, why the hell would it need DLC at all? Why not just sell figurines and stuff? I mean, people are way more likely to buy that than they are DLC. This is why this game isn't going to do as well as Skylanders, in my opinion.

Captcha: Keep More Money

Thank you, Captcha.

:facepalm:

The... figures... are how... you... unlock... the... content...

...it's like people don't even read.

I can see this ending real well.

Marshall Honorof:
< "We're hoping that isn't something that is widespread reported because then people are going to start looking for it, and it's going to ruin the magic for the consumer,"

Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment, and you've just challenged the denizens of the internet not to spoil everything.

Disney needs a lesson in economics... When your customers are rooting for the pirates, you've really screwed up

Go pirates!

Personally I'm really glad to hear about this. They just saved me money by warning me to stay away from their product or from buying it for any of my relatives for that matter. It's like how you know to stay away from brightly colored frogs. They're super poisonous, or in the case of this Disney IP, cause intense delusions should you come into contact with one.

Doom-Slayer:

Wesley Brannock:
I've seen ONE argument about on disc D.L.C that I agree with. Here it is.

I have to admit, I love me some Jim but thats the only video of his that I find really misinforming and contradictory.

Take a moment to watch it while keeping the title in mind. Go on Ill wait.

You may of realized that nowhere in the video did he say that on disk DLC was by on its own unjustifiable. He straight up does not say that ANYWHERE in the video. What he DOES say, is that devs using the "we have to include it" is a stupid and wrong excuse, and he says that if your going to do paywall content, go to the fremium market.

But then he tells devs to just admit that they want more money for content and thats why they are doing. Isnt that justification? Isn't that a pretty damn good reason they are releasing on disk DLC...to make more money? What if they just want to make more content for gamers to play, but cant afford to give it away for free?(Or dont want to). And nowhere on his video does he say thats not a good enough reason. Nowhere. All he does is say that on disk DLC is not neccesary, therefore saying its neccessary is not a valid reason. And hes right funny enough, but nowhere does he say that on disk DLC is not justifiable.

Listen I except that its GREED but that in and of itself isn't an acceptable way for a company to behave. Movie theater owners don't stop a movie in the middle of a showing and tell the audience " If you want to watch the rest you have to pay a fee "( not even the indie movies do that keep in mind they don't have a lot of cash either ). Books aren't sold a single page at a time my point is that D.L.C isn't being used to add content but being used to force the person who PAID for the content to pay yet again. You wouldn't pay twice for the same book , movie , music so why would you pay twice for content that you already paid for. ( This is the ONLY response I will do )

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here