I remember the days where you'd buy a game, and you'd have the whole game.

[peener weener]

I don't own FE13, so what do I know. What I do know is that if I did own FE13, I would like to have all the DLC content, but it will not happen. I believe that the extra content is overpriced considering what it is and how little it adds to the game itself. As Seph said, the game feels complete even without it. I trust his opinion, which has satisfied me in terms of my FE13 thoughts regarding its DLC (thanks for that by the way, Seph).

In terms of better examples, I have none. But I know they exist. I created this topic so that examples can rise from other members and discussed accordingly.

I still remember the days where you'd buy the game, and you'd get the whole game. Nice and simple. Feel free to disagree, by all means.

for fuck's sake raven you aren't even listening to anyone

you pay for fe13 you get the whole game

you wanna see some stupid bikini shit and get roy you pay a few more bucks, it doesn't mean you don't get the whole game

besides additional content you have to buy has been around forever, dont try to pull that shit

i literally just summarized the thread

you just said you made this thread looking for examples and opinions but then disregarded the entirety of it

[algae]

Now that I think about it, L.A. Noire did have some cases that were only available as DLC, and they were meant to be part of the original game. Though to be fair, they didn't put them in because it wouldn't fit onto the game disc.

I think the same kind of thing happened in Mass Effect 3 with Omega. It was apparently supposed to be part of the game but they ran into problems that they couldn't fix in time, so they released it as DLC.

[Dr. Tarrasque]

My thoughts are just this: No DLC should ever be something that gives those who purchased it an easy and huge advantage over those that just play free or bought the initial game (example being equipment in MMOs like Grand Chase, I remember equipment having overall better stats than that which you can purchase through the game's currency as well as having the required class change item purchasable while being rather tedious and difficult to obtain normally for the higher tier classes).

Pricing of the items aside, some of Mann Co's items, Dota 2's comestic purchases and KF's character skins are acceptable DLCs while Defense Grid's newest DLCs ("You Monster" and "Containment") are the most reasonable IMO.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Sirius

[Constable Reggie]

I still remember the days where you'd buy the game, and you'd get the whole game. Nice and simple. Feel free to disagree, by all means.

Damn you Super Mario Kart! I bought the game, but I'm not able to access the multiplayer mode without a second controller. How dare you try and make me pay money for something I should already have! I still remember the days where you'd buy the game, and you'd get the whole game.

I think the same kind of thing happened in Mass Effect 3 with Omega. It was apparently supposed to be part of the game but they ran into problems that they couldn't fix in time, so they released it as DLC.

Bringing up ME3 but not mentioning the disgusting From Ashes? Come on.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Momo]

I still remember the days where you'd buy the game, and you'd get the whole game. Nice and simple. Feel free to disagree, by all means.[/color]

Expansion packs have like always existed though.

Also, for an example of shit actually happening, Mafia 2.

[Superbus]

I don't own FE13, so what do I know. What I do know is that if I did own FE13, I would like to have all the DLC content, but it will not happen. I believe that the extra content is overpriced considering what it is and how little it adds to the game itself. As Seph said, the game feels complete even without it. I trust his opinion, which has satisfied me in terms of my FE13 thoughts regarding its DLC (thanks for that by the way, Seph).

In terms of better examples, I have none. But I know they exist. I created this topic so that examples can rise from other members and discussed accordingly.

I still remember the days where you'd buy the game, and you'd get the whole game. Nice and simple. Feel free to disagree, by all means.

The DLC content in FE13 is completely, totally, 100% optional. It has *nothing* to do with the main game, unless you want to use the characters you can recruit as playable units during the game. That's optional, and extra. If anything, FE13's DLC is DLC done completely right.

And honestly? The DLC characters, in the main context of the game, isn't even that fun, because...

the characters are nothing more than summons from a card. It's described as only a tiny glimpse into the soul of what they once were. Frederick even notes that it's quite sad. So basically, you're looking at a memory, but ultimately, they're just ghosts that can't interact beyond their "own" world. So when you bring Florina onto the map, you're not getting the stumbling woman who would only talk to Lyn; you're getting a Lv. 3 pegasus knight with old art.

So really, the above proves that even the DLC isn't superior to what you already have.

So, long story short: you have the game. You have the whole, entire game. What you're asking for is Nintendo to throw the extra shit in as well, and I don't think that's fair. This is nowhere near, say, Capcom hiding a bunch of Tekken vs. Street Fighter characters behind a DLC code.

[Esau of Isaac]

The DLC content in FE13 is completely, totally, 100% optional. It has *nothing* to do with the main game, unless you want to use the characters you can recruit as playable units during the game. That's optional, and extra. If anything, FE13's DLC is DLC done completely right.

And honestly? The DLC characters, in the main context of the game, isn't even that fun, because...

the characters are nothing more than summons from a card. It's described as only a tiny glimpse into the soul of what they once were. Frederick even notes that it's quite sad. So basically, you're looking at a memory, but ultimately, they're just ghosts that can't interact beyond their "own" world. So when you bring Florina onto the map, you're not getting the stumbling woman who would only talk to Lyn; you're getting a Lv. 3 pegasus knight with old art.

So really, the above proves that even the DLC isn't superior to what you already have.

So, long story short: you have the game. You have the whole, entire game. What you're asking for is Nintendo to throw the extra shit in as well, and I don't think that's fair. This is nowhere near, say, Capcom hiding a bunch of Tekken vs. Street Fighter characters behind a DLC code.

Spot on. Its not the existence of DLC itself that is unnerving, it's the widespread use of dishonest DLC. A good example, as given earlier, is the From Ashes DLC found in Mass Effect 3, which unlocks a character whose presence is pivotal to the storyline. In this case it's underhanded because they leave out an important part of the experience to purposely force customers to pay more money to get the proper experience. And then there's on-disc DLC which has become rampant all over the industry, perhaps most egregiously from offenders like Capcom. Content that is already on the disc and part of the game but must be unlocked through an online purchase.

Sometimes, I think it's neat to have little packages of extra content that gradually add to a game I've come to like. Nothing wrong with even the presence of horse armor, despite what it signaled for the industry, so long as it's reasonably priced; what's the problem is when it starts moving towards important content, or all of the microtransactions begin noticeably impacting the gameplay and overal quality of the game.

[Constable Reggie]

Sometimes, I think it's neat to have little packages of extra content that gradually add to a game I've come to like. Nothing wrong with even the presence of horse armor, despite what it signaled for the industry, so long as it's reasonably priced; what's the problem is when it starts moving towards important content, or all of the microtransactions begin noticeably impacting the gameplay and overal quality of the game.

At least we know that Square Enix would never succumb to such horrible greed and try something like that.

Hahahahahaha

Edited February 8, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Esau of Isaac]

To be fair you could have seen it coming with the constant re-release of all the Final Fantasy games all of which I bought.

I dream of a world where they will finish Versus XIII and do a high-quality remake of Final Fantasy VII.

[Constable Reggie]

Well, they did have some pretty awesome remakes (DS FF3/4), and the others were pretty good at the least (psp FF1/2/4). It wasn't until recently when they regurgitated FFVII for pc with every drm ever thought of, and an "homage" to the classics that's more akin to throwing your money away dollar by dollar that their greed became extremely apparent.

Edited February 9, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Esau of Isaac]

They did some pretty awesome remakes, but most of the time they're just by-the-numbers cash-ins. FF IV-VI Advance, Anniversary Editions, Chrono Trigger DS, etc. Some of them were of varying level of improvement, but most lacked concerted effort.

[Gold Vanguard]

Most remakes nowadays are just graphical updates with a few tweaks here and there.

[Keiya]

It's a matter of perspective, as well as what kind of DLC you're asking people to pay for. I mean, game companies are business companies, and calling businesses out for making you pay for stuff is like calling firemen out for putting out fires. Since the business of business is business, you can expect that their minds are always searching for ways to make a profit. That's why people are trying to (and at times can) get away with Season Passes, DRM's, Paid Extra Characters, and Stages/Skins on top of already being a $60 game. So while it does come off as jerkish, the each cent earned is another cent in the coffers.

What I do think is lame, is what's the nature of the DLC that we're paying for. Here's an example of both good and bad DLC, both from the same company: In Street Fighter IV, for example, the roster is fully unlockable by just buying the game, and game balance doesn't change if you buy the DLC (which is just costumes). Of course, there's still the issue of making people pay full price for Street Figher IV, and then releasing Super Street Fighter IV, AND THEN releasing Super Street Fighter IV Arcade Edition. But, the point is that the costume DLC doesn't affect game balance, and you can reasonably enjoy the version of SFIV without said costumes.

Compare this to Street Fighter x Tekken: Not only did you have to pay full price for the game, but if you want to have the full experience, you -have- to buy the character DLC, because you bought a game with only part of the roster unlocked. This is further aggravated by the fact that they announced the DLC while the game was still in development, essentially making people feel that they really -are- paying full price for a half-completed game. You can make a reasonable argument that this is similar to Super/AE, but the fact is that they didn't announce straight up that they were going to gimp the roster just so they can get more money off you later.

tl;dr: DLC isn't inherently bad, as long as it enhances the game, and not complete it. For as long as DLC is completely optional to enjoy the game, I think it's completely acceptable.

Also, there's a different between a remake and a remaster. A remake is where they actually spend resources to create a game from scratch, even if the story isn't new (the DS FE's, Tales of Destiny on the PS2). A remaster is when they take the same game, and just port it to a new system with obligatory audio-visual-control improvements to adapt the game better to that console (Any FF port, Chrono Trigger, any Playstation HD Remasters).

Edited February 9, 2013 by Keiya

[Constable Reggie]

The psp Final Fantasy 1/2/4 graphics and sound were fully redone, iirc.

[Keiya]

The psp Final Fantasy 1/2/4 graphics and sound were fully redone, iirc.

... good point. Well, actually, the PSP/PSX/GBA games are remakes of FFI and FFII, and they remastered those remakes to release it on other platforms.

[Momo]

For on disc DLC, it really depends on what it is. The game development process means the team could've completely finished the game months before the game came out, and had time to make new content to put on the disc. Said content was not intended to be part of the "complete" game and is superfluous to the experience.

People should really stop bitching about on disc DLC, because that's just going to make the developers using underhanded tactics to simply put the DLC on the market instead of actually fixing what's wrong. Would having to download the content really make you feel better? What you want is for them to stop ripping content out of the game to sell later, focusing on the fact that its on the disc is just a very easy scapegoat for developers to use.

[Constable Reggie]

Because on disc dlc is an obvious and outright insult to the playerbase. Even if they simply held the finished dlc for a few weeks, it would still be somewhat better than on disc dlc. They're not going to be magically getting away with it if the withheld dlc is crucial to the main game, either.

Edited February 9, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Momo]

It's the exact same thing, what you want is for them to not withhold things that should be in the game. Stop using it being on the disc as the main issue.

[Constable Reggie]

Not all on disc dlc is crucial to the game is the thing. Stuff like From Ashes or SFxT's characters should have been unlocked from the start (and withholding it for a few weeks isn't going to somehow magically make all the criticism disappear), but other crap like Gears 3's maps aren't that important, and nobody would have missed them if the game never had them from the start, but it's still insulting to have them on the disc but locked. Another problem is that on disc dlc is starting to become synonymous with online passes, and really, both of them need to stop.

Edited February 9, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Esau of Isaac]

For on disc DLC, it really depends on what it is. The game development process means the team could've completely finished the game months before the game came out, and had time to make new content to put on the disc. Said content was not intended to be part of the "complete" game and is superfluous to the experience.

I don't think this happens a whole lot. There was over a hundred dollars in microtransactions in Street Fighter x Tekken, for example. Sorry, but the content that they put together in the intervening period and assumedly piled onto the game disc isn't worth that much.

The the vast majority of games, if it's concluded before the game is mass-produced then it should be included on the disc at the regular retail value.

[Momo]

Oh, I know that the opposite happens a lot, I'm just saying that being on the disc isn't necessarily a case of them holding back.

It's a very insignificant thing to complain about, in any case. There is literally no difference between downloading a thing and having it already on the disc. Like I keep saying, the issue is when they gut the game to sell it to you later.

[Superbus]

I actually see both sides to this, because what Momo's saying - gutting the game to sell off the rest of it piece by piece - is *exactly* what companies are doing by including the content on the disc and having the content unlocked with a code. It's one thing to have stuff be taken out and then downloaded later; we can't really say one way or the other (unless it's a game where someone or something is critical to gameplay, like a character in Mass Effect or Sazh's story in FFXIII-II. But if they're including it on the disc and THEN having it be unlockable, they're outright saying "we took this out of the game so we could fuck you for a few more dollars".

[Xiltas Crysten]

I've got mixed feelings concerning DLCs... there are good ones, expanding on the story, feeling like the expansion packs of the past, and there are bad ones, being overpriced and/or overpowered items or stuff in-game(for totally lazy players: buy 100 000 EXP so you don't have to grind so much!... That stuff is just milking the cash cow).

An example for bad DLC would be Omega: it's quite nice, finally fighting alongside Aria and beating the shit out of Cerberus troops and learning a tiny bit more about Aria's past (and Turian culture), the length is also okay, BUT it is totally overpriced, not worth the 15 bucks.

An example for really bad DLC would be the Prince of Persia reboot some years ago: They literally cut off the ending, an essential part of the game, and you have to buy it.

Also, concerning Day 1 DLCs, my game industry overview docent gave me one possible explanation: when the final deadline is reached, the game company has to hand over the game to the publisher to be... well, published, which takes time. So when it's clear that a specific part of the game won't be finished till the deadline, they decide to take it out and finish it properly. If it's done before the game hits the shelves, it can't be put on disc anymore, so it'll be released as DLC.

Of course, it's an entirely different matter if the DLC in question is already on Disc, and has to be unlocked via purchase. Or if specific content is cut from the game to be released separately. But most of the time, this decision isn't made by the developer, but by the publisher.

My two cents.

[Rehab]

I think most of us can agree regardless that Publishers at large = New Testament Satan

Edited February 9, 2013 by Rehab

[Nightmare]

They did some pretty awesome remakes, but most of the time they're just by-the-numbers cash-ins. FF IV-VI Advance, Anniversary Editions, Chrono Trigger DS, etc. Some of them were of varying level of improvement, but most lacked concerted effort.

I'm pretty sure some of those (Advance titles, Chrono Trigger), aren't actually remakes in the strict sense. They're just ports with extras tacked on, which I am perfectly fine with because I don't want to be limited to having to scour for games on ancient consoles or using emulators, and I'd get to see the original game in all its glory (except I don't care for the extras because they're stupid and stupid). This is especially good for previously unreleased (in the West) games like FFV. I'm a bit of a purist in this sense I guess, since I believe in ORIGINAL. I guess I just don't see a need for a remake because I'm totally satisfied with the original game, but then again, a different take would be interesting too I GUESS.

Of course, there are times when remakes are absolutely necessary (e.g. FFI or other games that are broken/faulty/archaic beyond redemption).