412 replies to this topic

[Valdez]

Whats wrong with the expansion pack

[Haasth]

Valdez, on 23 February 2011 - 11:02 AM, said:

Here look:

This is a montage of all modern warfare game trailers. Especially the FPS ones.

Spoiler

Must... resist... urge...
So tempted to just upload something like this, 30 seconds or so, on YouTube and call it "Best Modern Warfare Shooter Montage Ever".

Edited by Haasth, 23 February 2011 - 11:32 AM.

[Sean_Seanston]

Valdez, on 23 February 2011 - 11:19 AM, said:

Whats wrong with the expansion pack

U best b trollin'

[hagren]

Sean_Seanston, on 23 February 2011 - 11:06 AM, said:

But.. but... COD did it so it must be good!

Anyway, they're selling an "Expansion Pack" at launch!?

Jesus ****ing Christ... I swear, if I'd been born 10-15 years later I wouldn't even have bothered with games... I wouldn't have the patience or desperation to deal with its recent avalanche of bull****.

Maybe I'd have become a musician

It's Battlefield 2 content re-made in the new engine and comes for free for those who pre-order, so where's the problem?

By the way, the footage looks blastedly amazing. Newest title to truly stress your PC fo' sho'.

[Erix]

I think we get Crysis 2 to stress our PCs quite a bit before BF3 is released.

Anyway, that is some sexy footage they're showing!

[hagren]

Crysis 2 will so surely slap our PCs with its mighty fist until they weep blood that I don't even mention it anymore

[Gorays]

Looks awesome, I have bad company 2 and I really enjoyed the mp for it(didn't try  sp yet).

[Valdez]

Yeah looks like everyone in the FPS market wants to be the new Crysis/Metro2033 now... I can already imagine Valve wanting to make TF3 and L4D 3 on Cryengine 3

It is a war that rages, between those of the GPU and those of the game graphics. A never ending struggle for supremacy. (funnily I always thought they'd have hit the thermal limit threshold by now)

also

Sean_Seanston, on 23 February 2011 - 01:52 PM, said:

U best b trollin'

No Sean I'm not. Seriously, if we considered the hypothetical situation where FoC came out on the same day as EAW, or Chaos Rising on the same day as DOWII, wouldn't that simply mean more to play with?

Edited by Valdez, 24 February 2011 - 06:49 AM.

[Erix]

Valve have their own Source Engine. As a matter of fact, didn't they reveal a new version of that one last year?

Either way, the Source Engine looks good and doesn't overwork your computer too much which actually makes it one of my favourties.

[Valdez]

Yeah I think the newest Assassin's Creed had a new Source. I guess "using Cryengine" is just a metaphor for pushing the graphics envelope to insane heights. I think it's got to the point where I can't even tell what the new improvements are anymore, because the comparison pics are so similar. Good graphics are getting more and more mainstream on FPS and RPG. RTS needs to follow (hear that PG?)

Edited by Valdez, 24 February 2011 - 06:52 AM.

[Sean_Seanston]

hagren, on 23 February 2011 - 06:26 PM, said:

It's Battlefield 2 content re-made in the new engine and comes for free for those who pre-order, so where's the problem?

The problem is...

Expansion packs used to be comprised of content made AFTER the main game was complete, rather than in parallel to it so they can sell the full game in separate parts for more money.

How about... they just put all of the game they've already made... into the game by default?
This is almost as bad as Capcom allegedly putting SFIV DLC on the disc and then charging to unlock it.

Gorays, on 24 February 2011 - 01:30 AM, said:

Looks awesome, I have bad company 2 and I really enjoyed the mp for it(didn't try  sp yet).

The graphics do look nice... and I'm talking about tiny gifs so they must be good.

Refreshing these days to actually be semi-impressed about graphics.

Valdez, on 24 February 2011 - 02:11 AM, said:

Yeah looks like everyone in the FPS market wants to be the new Crysis/Metro2033 now... I can already imagine Valve wanting to make TF3 and L4D 3 on Cryengine 3

Nah... Valve won't sell out (any more than they already have)... they won't change. They're all about the games, maaaaan

Besides, Gabe's allegedly an actual billionaire, so he can afford to do what he likes.
DEAL WITH IT.

Valdez, on 24 February 2011 - 02:11 AM, said:

No Sean I'm not. Seriously, if we considered the hypothetical situation where FoC came out on the same day as EAW, or Chaos Rising on the same day as DOWII, wouldn't that simply mean more to play with?

I think you missed my anti-DLC-profiteering point.

[Valdez]

Sean_Seanston, on 24 February 2011 - 01:01 PM, said:

How about... they just put all of the game they've already made... into the game by default?

You're saying you wanna pay the price of 1 game to get the content of 1 game + one expansion pack? That's a bit unreasonable and it just becomes an issue of the customer wanting to benefit more rather than the seller wanting to benefit more.

Unless of course you are implying the game itself will naturally cost more (as in "wings of liberty" more) as a result of having more content, then yeah it's understandable.

Ultimately though, complaints are pointless. They are the sellers, they call the shots on how they wanna sell their stuff. A lot of people (myself included) weren't too happy with SCII split into 3 games even though it technically meant more content, but that's just the way it turned out. The final purchase decision still lies with you anyway. And really, quality content is worth paying for, which is why tons of people still bought wings of liberty despite its premium pricing.

Personally I don't really draw a distinction between paid content released now and paid content released a year later, if it's the same content. The only difference is time. Paying now vs paying later is synonymous with being able to play now or only play later.

Edited by Valdez, 24 February 2011 - 01:35 PM.

[Sean_Seanston]

Valdez, on 24 February 2011 - 01:10 PM, said:

You're saying you wanna pay the price of 1 game to get the content of 1 game + one expansion pack?

But how can it be an expansion pack if it's already been made parallel to the rest of the game?

It's like selling FFVII as 3 separate games because each disc is so long.

Except they never used to do this before.

Valdez, on 24 February 2011 - 01:10 PM, said:

Personally I don't really draw a distinction between paid content released now and paid content released a year later, if it's the same content. The only difference is time. Paying now vs paying later is synonymous with being able to play now or only play later.

But it does reveal it as a cynical money-making sham rather than the genuine expansion packs of years ago such as those for RTSes wherein an expansion was a sort of mini-sequel developed in such a manner. Rather than content developed for the game, but withheld for more money.

[hagren]

It's an expansion pack because it's virtually a remake of BF2, and therefore not "true" BF3 content.

Besides, this has been a common practice since at least Diablo 2- remember how the LoD classes and some other stuff already were on the D2 discs?

[Erix]

I never knew those were already on the discs.

[hagren]

So you never wondered why you had to insert your D2 disc(s) to install LoD content?

[Erix]

...

That actually makes sense the way you put it.

[Valdez]

Sean_Seanston, on 24 February 2011 - 04:13 PM, said:

But it does reveal it as a cynical money-making sham rather than the genuine expansion packs of years ago such as those for RTSes wherein an expansion was a sort of mini-sequel developed in such a manner. Rather than content developed for the game, but withheld for more money.

That's just a manner of perspective. You can choose to look at it in a more deliberately negative viewpoint if you want. Maybe in a mirror universe, Sean is a game dev instead and he's complaining that customers are being too picky with their game purchase criterias.

Expansions have always been more about adding additional content on top of the game, not content integral to the game itself, as in: an expansion pack is not meant to be something absolutely necessary for you to play the main game.

Money-wise of course they'd want to make money. That's how businesses work. Do not forget that in a business, it's not about customer satisfaction only. It's a mutual thing between buyer and seller when the transaction takes place.

From the developer's viewpoint, he sees himself as entitled to money in exchange for content. He wants money.

From the customer's viewpoint, he sees himself as entitled to content in exchange for money. He wants content. And sometimes there is the misconception that the customer's preferences take precedence. They don't. Just like how the developer cannot force the customer to pay, neither can the customer force the developer to tailor the product in the way he sees fit. Games are not a customised built-to-order industry.

Edited by Valdez, 24 February 2011 - 09:14 PM.

[Sean_Seanston]

Valdez, on 24 February 2011 - 09:13 PM, said:

Money-wise of course they'd want to make money. That's how businesses work. Do not forget that in a business, it's not about customer satisfaction only. It's a mutual thing between buyer and seller when the transaction takes place.

Sure, there has to be a balance...

But "Money chasing is not business.". Henry Ford said that... and I think he knows a little more about business than you do, pal... because he invented it! And then he perfected it... etc. etc.

Ah the Soldier.

Valdez, on 24 February 2011 - 09:13 PM, said:

From the developer's viewpoint, he sees himself as entitled to money in exchange for content. He wants money.

Seems going pretty far to charge for a map and whatever when say Valve have given so much for free. And in general when so many games are so much bigger than other games but still don't cost any more. Compare... Shenmue (which never had a chance to break even anyway) to Gears of War.

It's got ridiculous in the last few years and it all seems to be fueled by pure greed at the cost of everything else.

[Haasth]

You want more gameplay? Of course you do!