Don't try to insult me. The reason behind the DLC data being in the disc has been explained either choice to buy or not to buy the content and stop this childish antics.Originally Posted by blissskr
Don't try to insult me. The reason behind the DLC data being in the disc has been explained either choice to buy or not to buy the content and stop this childish antics.
What we're getting at is that that "explanation" is a load of crap, trying to hide their horrible attempts to milk the fan base.
I'm not agreeing with you in any way. You didn't pay for the DLC its data was merely placed on the disc to fix a technical issue. When you bought the disc you did not pay for the data placed to fix the technical issue. The data was placed to allow those that pay for and don't pay for the DLC to continue to play together in the multiplayer.Your failing to get what im saying, even though your AGREEING with part of what I said XD
The content is on the disk (minus line of text or "code" to unlock) I payed for said disk, and all the content on it. Thefore, I paid for the content already. And the fact that it was READY before release, but some @$$ said "hey guys, I bet we could get more money if we locked of this bit right here, and sold it to people later!" Is pathetic. That would be like them blocking off a level from campaign, or some extra plasmids or something, simply to sell them later. (which they may have actually done, in which case I'm going to start to REALLY wonder if 2K even cares about anything other then money, such as morale or justice.
Just to throw out some other ideas... I'm wondering about future DLC.
As for SP DLC, it doesn't appear to be on the disc, and so it truly will be DLC.
But I have a feeling (just look at the .ini files, folks) that more multiplayer maps are coming, and that content does NOT appear to be on the disc... so wouldn't that invalidate the multiplayer technical reason given by 2K Elizabeth?
Just speculation... albeit founded speculation.
Also I do not see anyone making the argument that they deserve the pre-order exclusive characters... because those are also on your game disc.
Clearly you'll believe anything they tell you because that just isn't the case.
The explanation is reasonable and explains the data being on the disc. They wanted players online not to be segregated into two groups those that had bought the DLC and those that didn't. If you can't except that then don't pay for the content.
I actually have some experience in working with similar concepts though strictly in video animation. Their explanation is very possible and doesn't surprise me as it seems similar technical difficulties cause some of the ideas even simple ones from being possible. After all the Cindy Little Sister was going to have a different model, but they had to remove it. I have enough experience to judge that at least their explanation could be exceptable.
This does not pass of a misunderstanding one.. 2k should call Extra content instead of DLC in my opinion.. So we would stay all happier! XD
personally it does not interest me, I already bought them assumption DLC whom now I call an extra content..
I had a nap and came back to this thread. I think everyone should do the same.
Thanks for the response Liz, and hopefully those of us who are playing Devil's advocate are giving 2k some good ideas for future content releases.
I don't have to pay to get those, and it was clearly stated and announced from the start, that those 2 characters where only for pre-orders...
I'm personally feeling cheated by 2K... not only did I get a vastly inferior product than I expected (with the whole Widescreen support, laggy multiplayer, lack of native Xbox 360 Controller support), but now I have to pay for content that's already taking up space on my Hard Drive, that came with the game I bought!
I wanted to support them for making a GFWL game, but I see I shouldn't have bought it in the first place, if they were going to treat a new customer like this...
The problem here is the concept of "intellectual property", a relatively new slight which has been debated long enough now to know it has no sound reasoning behind it. What it does have behind it is the muscle of the government. It does not inspire innovation, it inspires waste and stagnation.
I even thought the developers parodied copyright in Bioshock's Arcadia level with Andrew Ryan killing, I forgot her name, over the "exclusive rights to produce" the Lazarus Vector. Of course, Rapture was an objectivist paradise, not a Misesian-style, and I find it difficult how a place seemingly based on absolute physical property rights could allow a loophole that for all intents and purposes overrides the former.
AT&T recently got in a class action lawsuit for selling Sim cards to people and then later saying that the content on them belongs to the company. The contracts never stated this however, and they lost their suit. 2K, I doubt you specified that certain portions of the disc were not licensed to your customers and even with your cowardly copyright protections you might be in the same boat as AT&T. 5 dollars, or not. Instead of contemptuously sticking to outdated business models, why not try to succeed as if copyright did not exist?
Valve, Stardock and a few other publishers have realized their content is going to be cracked and distributed freely anyway and have given great incentive people to pay their entrance fee by providing free new content, dedicated servers, and a decent network all around. 2K has slapped their customers with restrictions after restrictions, sometimes I wonder if an IP lawyer coded the system.
You will, in the end, make less money by charging 50 - 60 dollars and then claiming that "5 dollars isn't that much" and, "We aren't forcing you to buy the content." You are right, you aren't forcing us to buy it, but you are threatening us with force if we attempt to unlock your DLC door with a third party crack. Laissez-faire it is not, but even with all your state-distorted practices you are still subject to the whim of your customers. Be happy that I like Rapture so much.
I do not have a problem with you charging people for your official door unlocker, but I do have a problem with you attempting to block knowledgeable users from getting around it through their own means.
Last edited by Telpeurion; 03-11-2010 at 09:59 AM.
There is a huge difference between "Making money" off of others and "Scamming money off of others". This definitely falls into the latter category.
Capcom did this with Resident Evil 5's DLC and they banned anyone who, even politely, pointed out that the content was already on the retail DVD. I fear that is what we have here.
Just let one company get away with it and then everyone follows suit. I call this thievery, plain and simple.
At least they had a genuine reason for it... it was a completely new mode that wasn't part of the series until now... and they probably didn't want it impacting, possibly negatively, review scores...
What 2K did is just unlocking part of the multiplayer experience, not adding new modes altogether or anything...
Yes, she "explained" it, but anyone with a modicum of intelligence (and some PC literacy) will tell you it's hogwash.
she claims that the data being on the disc is so everyone has the same content...so as to not split the player base right? Then she obviously means if the entirety of the Sinclair Solutions content was downloaded from GFWL that some will have different installs then others? That makes no sense. If you download it from the same central location as everyone else, you get the same thing as everyone else. If what Liz was saying is true, then my Borderlands DLC areas wouldn't work half the time and some of my friends would not be able to join me. Complete falsehood.
In the army, they call this "C.Y.A."
Google the acronym if you're curious.
haha THANK YOU!!!
No, it would be like this: if half the people get DLC, and half don't, then if you have it, you can only play with people who have it, and if you don't, you can only play with people who don't.
If someone is playing with a character, mask, etc. that you don't have, you can't play with them, otherwise the game doesn't have the files in order to show that person in your match.
Grow up? Who is hiding behind childish "you stole my idea" laws?
That's silly because games like Empire: Total War also have exclusive DLC, but what they do is release the content in their patches so everyone has it, like in this instance, on their computer but are not able to use them themselves. The issue for many here was not that they did this, but that they did it immediately with the disc content already present. I think it is a filthy practice all around so I refrain from downloading these things anyway, but to each their own.
That's what the "free" version of DLC is for... look at Fable II, or Crackdown, you don't have to buy the DLC to play with the people that bought it... and it is actual, real DLC, developed AFTER the game...
Last edited by DarkPGR; 03-11-2010 at 10:37 AM.
This is why Elizabeth is awesome. This is exactly the answer that we were all looking for and it makes total sense. I can't sing her praises enough.
The mods are wonderful, in my humble opinion, I appreciate that Kyburz, FTRapture, and the gang attempt to maintain civility in these threads. Tip of the hat to mods!
While Elizabeth's explanation makes sense, and certainly I mean no disrespect, it is no excuse. Other companies have offered massive DLC, constructed after release, and allowed the game to update to it - for free.
I don't expect all companies to be as forward-thinking, but certainly it means that every game could be equally updated to accommodate any new DLC.
I agree, some companies go about DLC in a way more to my liking... but for me the mystery of "why isn't this free?" is solved, or at least I have been assuaged enough to stop batting an eye at the situation.
I have not bought this DLC yet, though I do intend too, I personally prefer something that's already on the disc and just needs a key to unlock. Simply means I don't have to wait half a day for it to download - yes I have slow Internet but it gets the job done -
I pose the question, if every piece of DLC for every game were like this would you all complain? No, because then if would be deemed normal practice.
Last edited by I-ChooseTheImpossible; 03-11-2010 at 10:38 AM.
Intellectual Property at large is 'normal' practice, but that doesn't mean it is right. Paying royalties for data you already physically own is no different than Monsanto claiming ownership (which it does) to the offspring of the seeds it sells, claiming that the seed's genetic design is theirs, and thus the plants aren't allowed to have spawn without Monsanto's consent. Farmers have to buy NEW seed every year, because they aren't allowed to continue growing from their original pallet. It gets even worse when a stray seed flys into your neighbors' yard and sprouts up.. The farmers are guilty of pirating!
By this argument, you and I are the property of our parents, and they the property of theirs and so on so on.
Last edited by Telpeurion; 03-11-2010 at 10:52 AM.
That doesn't answer my question though, does it?
You asked that if it was normal practice it would be acceptable, not necessarily. All businesses are slaves to their customers, and if we decide one day that something is not acceptable then they will have to cave eventually.
no, no, no, I asked would you complain, which you wouldn't.
I am complaining right now, aren't I? I complain about things all day, nothing gets done if you don't complain. Maybe 2K doesn't care too much about my dollars, but if enough people feel suckered I am sure that they will have to change their tune.
Naturally, I do not feel entitled to anything, but I did pay for the game, twice in fact. I have, if we believe in physical property law, a right to my property unless I make a contract specifying otherwise.
Last edited by Telpeurion; 03-11-2010 at 10:59 AM.
You sir, should get banned.
2K Elizibeth CLEARY said why its a key.
Wow. Go play MW2 if you'r so mad. Don't buy it.
How easy was that?
Again you misinderstand me, what I am saying is if every game, Halo, CoD etc. Had the DLC already on the disc and all you did was download an unlock for it no one would be complainning because it would be common practice, but when one company breaks the norm everyone complains "I already own it why should I pay more?"
What is wrong with a little disagreement. A trade is an exchange between two or more consenting parties, and we, a customer in this instance, are arguing about the price. They can ban us from their private forums, sure, but that is a stain on their image.
Yes. It would be silly. If every piece of DLC for every game were on the disc, it wouldn't be DLC.
And this is not DLC. It's unlockable content.
Just saying.
Call it what it is. Don't pretend it's DLC.
It's like buying a pizza. 9 slices are in one box, and 1 slice is in a locked box. You paid for the whole pizza, but you can't eat one slice because it's locked in the separate box. Then, you have to go back and pay extra to unlock the box and eat the last slice. See how ridiculous that sounds?
Last edited by Relight; 03-11-2010 at 11:07 AM. Reason: Added the pizza story
I would protest it still, as I am doing now.
The title of the thread is "2K: Why is the DLC 24kb only? "
Asked and answered by Elizabeth.
I appreciate that she took the time to answer the question. We may not all like that 2K has gone the route that they have, but we have our answer.
I am personally assuaged at least to the extent that I appreciate some sort of reason from 2K; I wish that everyone was but we can't all be happy.
Of course, the answer is not a catch-all. 2K could have given players updates so that the multiplayer community was not split over this DLC, there are ways of going about such things; I doubt that after all of this rigamarole there will ever be a package of DLC that separates the multiplayer community... and if they can fix the split later they could have fixed it for this DLC without information being on the disk....
My point is that we got an answer, take from it what you will. Now then, I am going to jump online and play a bit of BioShock 2 feel free to join me if you'd like to.
Last edited by Ga1Friday; 03-11-2010 at 11:23 AM. Reason: typos
Indeed, companies, 2K in this instance, arbitrarily claim ownership on the 1's and 0's on your discs and hard drives, and by extension conflict with your ownership of the discs and hard drives. So? Who owns what?
Should Ayn Rand's ghost sue 2K for publishing a work derivative and satirical of her works? Take copyright to its logical conclusion.
Last edited by Telpeurion; 03-11-2010 at 11:11 AM.
Exactly. If more companies did/do this, well, shame on them. I would complain to them as well if I was interested in their product.
That's just sad.
Anyways, I really don't get how you can all get so worked up about 2k charging for their product. It's a business. Some of you really need to get over it. If you are that mad about it then you seriously should find something else more important to occupy your time and energy.
It's pointless to complain about DLC, (or "unlockable" content as you are all putting it) it's here to stay, no matter now annoying it can be.
Last edited by A_Man_Chooses; 03-11-2010 at 11:23 AM.
Damn straight!
Just read thru this whole thread here and all things considered it was pretty reasonable. Some of you, though, just seem to repeat yourselves over and over and seriously, we get it, you made your point. Either come up with something new and constructive to add or just stop posting, saying something 20 times isn't gonna make it any more valid or relevant.
Now as far as this DLC goes, I definitely won't be paying for it, but not bc of the popular "I already own it" thing. I don't care if its already on the disc or its a complete download, don't care if it's $5, 5cents or $500 - all of that is irrelevant to me, its just the principle of releasing more content that we are supposed to pay for after such a shoddy attempt at a MP game.
Yes, this MP is absolutely horrendous and basically outdated right outta the gates. It seems more like a company saying "What the hell, lets throw this in there" rather than actually trying to create a great game and compete with other main MP titles. Funny part is tho, even after all that, I actually love the MP, been waiting to play it more since the launch but since my xbox freezes all the time its just not worth it.
Like many others I'm just waiting for the patch, and that is why I think a DLC like this, whether its on the disc or not, should not be charged for as it's not even great content, and esp given the circumstances, it would be a great sign of appreciation for the fans like myself who have been waiting over a month now to be able to actually play a game they paid for.
Last edited by Spata; 03-11-2010 at 11:25 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Ga1Friday