Oh dear. Just when you thought Capcom’s DLC shenanigans may be a thing of the past, it has emerged that the company may be up to their old tricks by including all of the Street Fighter X Tekken DLC characters on disc, and more.
A whole barrage of media is now available to view, clips detailing DLC character gameplay, intro videos and even the ending videos as well. Unsurprisingly, Capcom are yet to comment on this but they are trying to remove the videos from YouTube as we speak.
Capcom fans are like Apple fans.
i will buy it no matter what and never complain even when it doesnt make sense.
Look at SF or MvsC
They release a game, Content (characters) are ALREADY on the disc, and if you fight "random" AI you might even fight a character using their style, but you can't play them.
then they release 3-5 characters you have to BUY, for 5$ each. Now youve dropped 60$ on the game, and 25$ on characters. so you're up to 95$, even if you DIDNT buy any extra music, stages, extras.... BUT THEN they release a "special edition" of the game, with all kinds of stuff you can't get in the origional. So you have to buy a NEW game, making your old obsolete!! THEN they come out with NEW DLC AGAIN!?!
WTF?!
My capcom playing friends don't even blink an eye, they will admit right off the bat, when a special edition comes out they will just sell their copy or trade it in and get the new.
It drives me nuts. Why can't i just "upgrade" my mvsc3 into the special edition? its not like its realy a new game, its like they made it V1.5 of the game, that should be a patch, or add-on, not a new game with MORE pay add-ons.
The character information and files were intentionally included on retail versions of the PS3 and Xbox 360 game to save hard drive space and to ensure for a smooth transition when the DLC is available, allowing players who choose not to purchase the content the ability to play against players that did.
Capcom reiterated what it said February, noting that a "Super" or "Ultimate" double-dip version of the game will not be made available, with all additional content arriving as DLC.
you caont in game advertise like that unless you already have the content.. total Bull
nice to see they say (at least they are saying (FOR NOW) there wont be another edition.. just wait, watch after 6 months pass see if they change their tune..
These days the notion of "DLC" has really screwed up how we view "add-ons", "expansion packs", and little extras that used to come with games "back in the ol' days." I have yet to buy a single DLC because much of the DLC that are being sold are just not worth the price that they're being advertised. Skins? No. 1 to 5 weapon add-ons? No. 4-maps pack? No.
Right now, as it stands, if a game has "DLC", it only tells me that the game was never finished in the first place, in that the game was released "incomplete." Thus the devs and publishers are intentionally ripping people off by diluting the full game experience by delaying parts of a game so that they can finish what they have done thus far. I can't stand DLC the way they're being advertised or abused. I want to be vocal about little add-ons and additional contents but the way I see it, those who agree with my views are pretty much in the minority. We're pretty much never heard because the majority are the ones throwing money at the devs and publishers' ears.
I want those days to return, where games were full, complete, and comes with mod tools so that people can tinker, modify, and create their own add-ons. Now... we'll never see another successful add-on turn into a full-fledged franchise (aka Counter-Strike and Team Fortress).
If you were Activision, EA, Capcom... any big publisher house - would you want to release mod tools, which allow people to create their own content, or would you sell the 'console generation' a skin at a time for a dollar?
Obviously they want to make money. I think they're going about it the wrong way, however.
DLC has blurred recently.
Some DLC is the modern equivalent of an addon pack. Other DLC (Horse Armour, I'm never gonna let Bethesda live that one down; Activisions regular -and extortionately expensive - map+weapon Call of Duty DLC; etc, etc...) is just a way of nickel-and-dime-ing their way to $100+ games. I shudder to think how much all the DLC will cost for Mass Effect 3, for example.
Big business has woken up to the fact that games make a lot of money. And they're now abusing the hell out of the opportunity.
Right now, as it stands, if a game has "DLC", it only tells me that the game was never finished in the first place, in that the game was released "incomplete."
My feelings as well. This is exacerbated by frequent re-releases dubbed "Complete Edition" that have all the DLC included, logically implying that the initial release was incomplete. As such, I no longer buy games new. I wait until such a "complete edition" is available.
Some DLC is the modern equivalent of an addon pack. Other DLC (Horse Armour, I'm never gonna let Bethesda live that one down; Activisions regular -and extortionately expensive - map+weapon Call of Duty DLC; etc, etc...) is just a way of nickel-and-dime-ing their way to $100+ games. I shudder to think how much all the DLC will cost for Mass Effect 3, for example.
I wouldn't be opposed to paying $100+ for a game if it was good enough, and came complete. I am opposed to a $100+ game claiming to cost $60.
Also, bleh:
For both Gold Knights I & II, Capcom offered optional additional microtransactions designed to decrease the difficulty of the game. These included such options as to enable unlimited lives, increase the power and durability of weapons and armor, grant new abilities such as a triple jump, or remove traps and simplify stages. Reviews praised this method of optional DLC designed solely to assist the player as opposed to selling additional game content.
anyone run through Dragon Age?
i mean cmon.. it has a build in Random encounter that triggers during travel and has a guy with a cart asking for help, and if you click on "yes, help him" you get a message saying "click here to leave the game, and go to the website where you can buy this dlc pack". Same thing is in the campsite as well. they are just built right into the game right off the jump.
i loved Dragon Age, it was my fav game that year, but man did that just tick me off to no end.
i never did purchase and play through any of those add-ons. regardless of reviews or anything, i was just ticked they would do that so i didnt buy it out of spite.
Bethesda, not most people heres favorite company as they continue to break all of our UWS fixes with each skyrim patch :P
but they announced that all the dev tools are coming out free for skyrim, and they are working on a big DLC pack. They also publically announced that they think companies that dont release dev tools and put more work into releaseing an "old school style' large scale dlc are doing it wrong.
It's somewhat ironic that Bethesda gets DLC relatively right. Because I blame Horse Armor for setting the precedent of DLC that gets it wrong, and enabling other companies to get it even more wrong.
It's somewhat ironic that Bethesda gets DLC relatively right. Because I blame Horse Armor for setting the precedent of DLC that gets it wrong, and enabling other companies to get it even more wrong.
It has to be guilt.
As an aside, I am proud of myself lately.
Skyrim
ME 3
Dragon's Age II
Witcher II
Amalur
Saint's Row 3
Can't wait for these games to be finished so I can buy them.
Aye, Bioware should have been ashamed of themselves with Dragon Age and its DLC. Bethesda, true, have appeared to redeem their earlier errors with DLC.
Saints Row 3... I've genuinely enjoyed that game. It doesn't feel like they pulled stuff out to make the DLC; in all honesty, I'm at a loss as to where the DLC will fit (I don't have any of it) - I'll think about buying it when it's all released and going for 75% off in a Steam sale.
Regardless, it does damage BioWare's credibility and its argument that this content was developed parallel to the rest of the game and was not completed until after the game had gone into certification. It may be that what BioWare means to describe are the DLC's missions, viewing this character as a game asset and not content itself.
I bought the collector's edition of Mass Effect 3.
I'm a die-hard fan of the franchise. Threw my lot in three times in a chugging contest for 8 oz off-brand energy drinks to get the fastest time to claim a five-foot promotional standee of Commander Shepard.
The DLC was just a bonus to me. I will be purchasing future DLC for ME3, and hope that one of them in the future includes a better ending.
"We would like to assure you that we have been listening to your comments and as such have begun the process of re-evaluating how such additional game content is delivered in the future," Svensson said. "As this process has only just commenced in the past month or so, there will be some titles, where development began some time ago and that are scheduled for release in the coming months, for which we are unable to make changes to the way some of their post-release content is delivered."
Anyone want to point out what is very wrong with that second sentence?
