Oldergamer…pracer?

tbh, it’s something that has crossed my mind before, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Kotick put a ‘no freebies’ rule on all CoD products from now on.

I hope not though…

1. Testing. If you can get it tested during the main development process, and you know that it all works before the game is out, you don’t need to worry about things like giant floating exclamation marks and save games that no longer work later down the line.
2. Peace of mind. You can pretty much guarantee that the DLC is going to be ready on the exact date that you want it to be. No need to worry about crunching to meet deadlines or other technical issues getting it the way.
3. Cost. As DD has touched on, all you need to supply at a later date is an unlock script/code, so (depending on your format/setup) no need to worry about covering the cost of the bandwidth that having loads of people download your product will create.

As for why when the content was made is important? I think it comes down to principles. We were all sold on the idea of DLC being something that will extend our enjoyment of our fav games. While at the same time the idea of DLC was being pitched differently to game devs/pubs as something that will extend their profit margines and open up new revenue streams.

I think as a gamer content locked out on the disc doesn’t fit the whole “extends my enjoyment” beyond the retail purchase. And I think that right there is the problem. Some people will agrue that it does and we should be fine with being charged more money to play it. While others will feel whole heartedly that said conetent should be unlocked and included with the full purchase price of the game. I feel that way. If all of the content on the disc is going to cost me 80usd to play, then I feel slighted if the price isn’t 80usd upfront. And I feel cheated when asked to pay more cash beyond the full retail price for content that is on the retail disc.
If gamers differ on this single point, then no amount of talking is going to bridge that gap. That is why WHEN matter so much. Admitedly had IW held the same content off of the disc, and released it as true dlc that needed to be downloaded … then people would all feel better. If the game manual had included a code that imediatly unlocked said content(one time use for new game buyers, leaving out the second hand copies) people would have felt like they won a prize. If the content is unlocked for free down the road, people will feel fine. But if they have to pay extra cash to play content included on the disc they already bought … yes, people will feel badly about that. And I think they should. Alas we may simply have to agree to dissagree.

Edit:
Just a footnote, but I was speaking in general terms. If IW or Acti or whom ever decides not charge for locked out modes, then no big deal.

I do agree with you, OlderGamer, about feeling obliged to get DLC for playlists on MP games if all your friends have it, and that’s one of the negatives of the way that online gaming is going as far as gamers are concerned.

However, as I also said, I was even expecting IW to release new game types at some point, when they’ve got more data about how people are playing the game, for free.

Another thing is that with CoD4, if there was a party of people playing together and one of them didn’t have the map pack, then it was disabled for all players, so there was never a need to worry about losing players who don’t have it from games. I’m assuming that they’re planning to do the same for MW2.

I am not sure how much memory the Map packs are through DLC for COD. SO I can’t comment on the comparisons.

“But when you put said “DLC” on the disc when it ships? In my mind, that is all kinds of wrong.”

Why? Why? Why? Why does it matter *when* it is developed. Surely it just matters that it has to be developed.

Lets also not loose sight of the bigger picture here. There is an assumption these game companies are rolling in cash. The majority aren’t. Successful big games like MW2 help keep the less successful games coming and increase the chances of seeing the next big thing. Get back to reality. Games are costing more and more to make and gamers demand more and more but are not willing to pay more than we did 12 years ago.

You can’t use the DLC is fragmenting argument and I don’t like that as CoD4 and CoD5 did something similar so it was obvious MW2 was going to do something similar. They already announced map packs at E3. So if it’s not something you want to buy in to then don’t buy the game.

Now, I see G1GAs point. But I also know that he is a huge coD fan. I think that is clouding your take on this

Yes Acti/IW can do whatever they want. Yes people can chose NOT to buy it. Right. Lets talk warhawk for a second. I own the game. Loved playing it. And because I didn’t keep up with the DLC, I can no longer find a game to play. Alot of games are like this. If you don’t own the DLC(esp where Map Packs are concerned) your going to be SOL. So many gamers not only feel compeled to buy the dlc, but really they feel forced to buy it for fear that there initial investment in the game will be rendered worthless.
I like the way Bungie has handled dlc in the past. First thing is that DLC was actualy extra conetnt. Secondly is that after a set period of time, the DLC packs became free. You could choose to pay to play right away, and many did. Or you could wait 6 months, and get the same map packs for free. This keep the community from getting segmented and divided. It also helps to continue to sell copies of said game(because buying an older game and knowing your going to have to spend 30usd in DLC is tad off putting to buying the game in the first place). Again you don’t HAVE to pay for the dlc. We get that. But if you want to be able to play the game, the game modes, on the maps, you kind of do. Nothing better then getting the msg pop up that states you don’t own this map, and of course it then asks you if you would like to buy it. That is bad enough. But when you put said “DLC” on the disc when it ships? In my mind, that is all kinds of wrong.
Vide gaming today is a soulless venture. I know I am older and have become jadded as hell. I know that I am not 17 and much of what is made simply doesn’t apeal to me. I get all of that. But when I log on to LIVE and everywhere I go is links to pay more money, advertising from McDonalds to Cell Phones to Mnt Dew, to all of that shiny new DLC. I feel very overwhelemed. I fell like I am at the mail and not sitting in bed or on the couch. I ask myself isn’t this ‘possed to be about playing games? Fun? All I see is more and more ways for companies to make me pay more money. Sure I don’t have to spend it, right? But wait, don’t I already pay for LIVE? Doesn’t at least some of my 60usd I spend on a new game go to support MS/LIVE? Didn’t I already buy the game? And as such shouldn’t the content on that disc be included? Why should I have to pay even more for the stuff I already bought? I get extra DLC, but this isn’t that. And it happens alot more then it should.
The next thing to be in the bullpen is episodes. Wait for it. 30usd for for the first two episodes, and 10usd each for the other 7 episodes. What? Want to unlock the MP modes? 20usd more for that. Don’t EVER fool yourself into thinking that one company loves you. Or that this is somehow about the game experience. or any of the other crap that we buy into. This is big bizz. Period. And it is about getting us to pay as much as possible as often as possible.

So your right G1GA we don’t have to pay. Hell we don’t have to play either. But, my friend, as a fellow gamer, and worse as a CoD fan, I would understand how you would be livid over this. I honestly can’t understand why your not.

Anyway, probably the most important point of note that seems to have gone missing here in a story about a hidden gametype, is the fact that IW gave loads of these away for FREE last time around.

(In fact, I personally, am totally expecting the exact same thing to happen this time around, and I’d like them to put first person Team Tactical back in there.)

So until there’s some actual proof that anyone is going to charge anything for this incredibly unimpressive looking ‘capture the nuke mode’ (which, again, looks like a canned game type to me), everyone else should expect the same again.

By doing it this way they are able to reuse some of the main body of staff to help on the DLC when they would normally not be utilised, they also save distribution costs by having it on the disc. If they had done the DLC post completion it would have required 6 people to work on it an extra distribution costs (downloads have a cost to the publisher).

Some of the money they save gets passed on the the consumer so the DLC is 400MSP instead of 560MSP. The consumer also benefits by not having to use hard disk space for the DLC.

Result – a bunch of whining consumers who would much rather pay more and use valuable HD space at a later date.

A few levels arbitrarily held back with an unlock code you have to pay for isn’t substantial content.

That’s the trap publishers often fall into: wanting premium DLC but not having the time to make premium DLC.

Down Loadable Content (DLC) =/= Downloadable Codes for Content that we could’ve given to you on day one but thought the better of it and wish to eek out as much money as possible from you mugs (DLCFCTWCGTYODOBTTBOIAWTEOAMMAPFYM) Got a nice ring to it all the same.

Question: If this DLC is discovered on the disc at some point, does it matter?

Does it matter considering that
1. It’s additional content that the game doesn’t actually need for you to be able to enjoy it as originally intended, and therefore didn’t affect the review scores/previews/features of the game that you thought that you were buying.
2. People already knew that they would be charged for extra content way back in the summer, so if they want it, the delivery method after purchase is unimportant.

People are expecting DLC, so if they buy it and it turns out to be on the disc, or it gets delivered by carrier pigeon, or they have to dig it up at the back of their garden, it’s still what they knew they would have had to buy seperately if they wanted it.

Therefore, the idea that IW/Activision are springing a surprise on us that we were all unaware of and that we already ‘owned’ it doesn’t quite work for me.

If I buy MS Office, then usually, there are 3 versions in the installer.

Basic, something else and Enterprise.

Should I complain that MS won’t unlock Project for me even though I only paid for the Basic version??

It’s the same thing.

If you just putt it on the disc already, then it looks like an arbitrary way to increase the price of the game, downloading for the sake of downloading.

It should be treated like expansion packs were in the past. A way to bring extra content to the game that is actually worth something to the gamer.
You don’t do that on day one, and you don’t do that by having it already on the disc.

And not every game has long enough legs to have substantial DLC after release, forcing DLC into the proces anyway just makes you look bad and generate angry reactions.

Why?

You do know that about 80-90% of development on most games stops months before the game is released, right?

It’s actually during that time that DLC and sequels actually start going into development. Long before the game hits the selves.

They’re not just going to sit around until release day sitting on their hands just to make you happy.

This DLC hidden onto the game is them locking stuff out and not developing anything for the game but just sitting on their hands until they “release” it. THis is just a milking scheme which is typical for activision with 3 studios making COD.

‘I don’t like the game, and I’m not going to buy it.’

Fair enough.

When people start going on internet campaigns, with the petitions, and the YouTube vids and all the rest, then that’s just nonsensical.

These people are like spurned lovers obsessed by a VIDEO GAME that lacks some features that they have convinced themselves into believing that they somehow deserve.

It’s like IW came into their house and took away their human rights!

There are plenty of games that I don’t like, but I don’t feel the need to spend all of my spare time trawling the internet, leaving negative comments and trying to convince the world that the game is somehow evil!!

Because of a few features!!!

This isn’t the NHS, or thet Royal Mail, or something that the general public NEED to be able to have a basic standard of life…

It’s a game that they don’t even need, and if they lived their whole lives without playing this game, it wouldn’t affect them in the least.

The key difference between your examples and what we have here is that when you bought MW2 you knew what was in it.

If this DLC was released 3 months down the line and involved a large download would that be ok? Why does when it is developed and whether it is on the disc matter? The dev has still had to work and test the features – why shouldn’t they get paid for it?