Well if you're sidequesting and exploring, RTS bit is in the minority - which is a shame as far as I'm concerned as I loved the RTS bits. And really, the game is just basically mix of every genre ever created.
Well large parts of dev. team does free up towards the end of the development cycle when testing is a priority. Level designers, artists, even some programmers probably don't have all that much work by that time, so why not let them do something else for the game?

They might've been making it for the game, but not for the base game itself. ;)

(Also anyone else get upset[or confused] when some people here/elsewhere online complain about pirates pirating games/denying devs "much needed income" while also complaining about being "nickel & dimed" by devs for DLC/etc. o.O)

Sure, they could do something else for the game. I dunno why it must be DLC and not content in the game.

Sound like an arbitrary distinction. As I see it, then all day 1 DLC is okay as long as the management decided that it was DLC made alongside with the rest, just like the graphics are made alongside the programming.

Let's say devs decide "Ok, we're gonna give the player x amount of content[hours/features/levels/etc]", and then later on(or at the same time) they decide "Ok, we'll also make this extra content for those who might want to support us a bit more/give us some extra money." Is that not fair for them to do(as long as they give players a good amount of content for the base game)?

Again, I laugh when I hear people say "Don't pirate! Devs/ip holders are good guys deserving of every dime they can make from us gamers!" while also believing that those same devs are being greedy for selling DLC.


That's not what I meant. :P

Imo, if they actually cut content from the main game to make such DLC then I have an issue with it, but if they truly developed it from the get go as extra content(not meant for the base game) then I have no issue with it. As we can't read into the dev's/pubslisher's minds I don't think it's fair for many to say(here/elsewhere) it like they think/know it's fact that all/most day 1 DLC is content the devs cut from main game content from the get go to make more money.

At first I was put off by many reviewers/players blasting the game as "an RTS disguised as an RPG/adventure game", but then I saw a trailer or two and that(along with the whole "Jack freaking Black is in it!" thing) prompted me to take the leap and join in myself.

Said devs do get paid for the time they work on that content. We're not in the age when developer is also his own boss anymore, you know.
I'll just never be able to understand that. There were like ... 5? 6? RTS missions in that game. As far as story missions go, there were like 20 or 30 in total. I just... Don't get how is that an RTS.

This has become a terrifying crossquoting mess from nightmares. I hope that no "need subforums" guys come here and get a stroke :p

I think they're allowed to make day 1 DLC and sell it, even if I won't buy it or the game as a result. Using some cheap reasoning to say that it couldn't have been in the game or somesuch I am not okay with.

That distinction of "extra content" and "this goes in the game" is still arbitrary unless the extra content is absolutely irrelevant to the rest of the game. I might agree if the day 1 DLC in question was something like a DLC for Starcrat 2 called "Raynor's Nightmare" and you get a few maps in which you're in a bonkers dream hunting octopuses with a harpoon and it has basically no relation to the rest of the game. I've never seen any DLC like that, though. They've always been "the prelude to the war, the first missions of the game are extra content. the base game starts from 'yeah we're in the middle of a war suddenly lol' " or "these plot related characters are extra content lol".

..and as far as I am aware, they'll get paid for sitting on their butts all day during that time as well. Making them do something for their pay sounds reasonable. Saying that that content is okay as day 1 DLC just means that if I ever become a manager in a game company, I'll make a mess of the game's development schedule on purpose so I can make half the game acceptable as day 1 DLC.

But they're not making mess of schedule, they're just using their resources efficiently. For your money you are still going to get the game you were supposed to get by the original plan, and then you may buy some crap on top of it. I have never in my life bought day 1 DLC, and I have never felt like anything was missing from the game, aside from the games which just did it 'wrong' and got a lot of backslash for doing so.

Some companies start working on next installments of games even during development of the previous installment / another game. Buying those other games is not ok as they could have put that effort in to the .. previous game. Hurr hurr.

I wonder how many games actually get released like they were imagined in the original plan. From what I've heard, they usually add and remove content continuously during development, and update the plans accordingly. If the original plan is the grand definer, then in most cases a big part of the game is okay as day 1 DLC. You could remove half the maps from Quake 1 and I wouldn't feel like something was missing if I didn't know they used to be there. Could you perhaps provide an example of day 1 DLC that wasn't done 'wrong'?

Some companies start working on next installments of games even during development of the previous installment and then release it on the same day. Nobody thinks that's weird or anything. Hurr hurr. :p

0.o
---------------
Not buying DLC one doesn't like I can understand, but(maybe) not buying a game(even if it's good and is made in a way that one finds "agreeable") just because the devs also made day 1 DLC for it? Seriously? To me that seems a wee bit extreme. :\
----------------
Isn't a good amount of DLC(the kind that integrates into the main game) not needed to finish the game or get the "best" ending/total game play experience?
--------------
That you honestly(seemingly) believe that most/much day 1 DLC is being cut from the main game(without proof, I might add) is why such beliefs irk me to no end. :P
I also find this irritating: People calling game companies greedy for selling/making any sort of day 1 DLC while seemingly acting greedy by complaining like they deserve to get it for free.

Oooh, so that's what you're trying to say, that day 1 DLCs should not be tolerated because games could have more contend without it. Well... I don't know. To be fair, you don't either. And as long as games I buy provide me with enough entertainment for my money, I'm going to be happy. If they don't provide you with that, well, I suggest you wait for sales.

Probably not day 1 DLC, but Shadow Broker for ME2 was good, and isn't/wasn't needed(imo) to enjoy ME 2 or 3.
----------------
Well those of us that don't think devs should give us everything(including stuff they originally made as extras) along with the main game for no additional charge seem to not think it's always weird/wrong. :p ;)



I wonder how many of the "I don't buy new game unless they're sub 10 dollars because anything higher isn't worth it" crowd(those that say/think such & who also have the means to pay more, that is) are also the ones complaining about day 1 DLC/etc. :\

Can we move this DLC argument to a seperate DLC thread? I come in here to read about tumors, dead pets, festering boils, and unemployment...not tech talk. :D

[Requests to divide the forum into subforums]O=(-_- Q ) <(Taste my fist!)
-----------------
I have little tolerance for certain mistakes. Games aren't drugs, and I don't need to stand the "dealers' " ridiculous demands or hijinks in order to get my "fix". I can just walk to the next guy and ask if he's got something interesting or not play, and I won't even get withdrawal symptoms.
-----------------
To get the "best" total game play experience without the DLC, the DLC needs to be irrelevant. I have no problem with irrelevant DLC. If the day 1 DLC is a mustache skin pack (irrelevant if the mustaches aren't a part of the plot or gameplay and if this was an alternate reality where mustaches aren't relevant), I don't mind one bit. For finishing the game and getting the best ending, you can take Quake 1, take all but the first and the last mission out of the game and sell them as "Missing Memories of the Man Traumatized by The Constant Killing" DLC pack. Maybe keep some maps where you get new weapons in the base game for the game play experience.

If you're talking about skinpacks and nothing but skinpacks, then we're talking about different things. I'm talking about day 1 DLC sans skinpacks. Skinpacks can be rubbish for different reasons ("let's disable modding so we can charge for skinpacks, yaay").
-----------------
I believe the decision that "this is in the base game" and "this is extra content" is arbitrary. They feel that both are good enough for the players, they feel comfortable charging money for each, and both are ready for release by the same date.

Limited budget, limited interest, my personality -> I just stop caring about the game as a possible pastime. I get to keep my money for something else, they don't get my money after acting in a way I don't like. My happiness is maximized :p

This is our thread now! :D

Roadblock! Duke! Cobra has infiltrated and taken over the "Bitch" thread! Breaker, contact Scarlette and Snakeyes! It's time to roll! Yo Joe!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eA3XCvrK90&amp;feature=player_detailpage