I didn't say you're a parasite :P I said there always is A parasite :P And i'll probably buy it down the line. I won't be playing multiplayer until june,that's whyOriginally Posted by blissskr
I didn't say you're a parasite :P I said there always is A parasite :P And i'll probably buy it down the line. I won't be playing multiplayer until june,that's why
I don't understand what you're trying to say. How does it help?Every Action Has An Equal And Opposite Reaction,Newton's Third LawGotta take in the What If. 2K prob considered the What If situation of putting the content on disc
But again what's your point in this thread besides trying to ruffle feathers or speak on 2k's behalf when you have neither the authority nor reason to be doing so? And its not about the $5 for most people its the principle, if $5 mattered so much to anyone frankly they shouldn't be buying or playing any video games to begin with.
Because only an odd poster is against your argument. Threads die with one-sided discussion! Anyway,i'm logging out. Midnight
While I dislike the idea that they blatantly locked away finished content in order to charge players more, I'm personally more concerned that they are releasing a non-free update to a multiplayer game that disadvantages anyone who doesn't have it.
That's a great way of killing a multiplayer game.
Funny isn't it that they didn't want to split the player base and ruin the multiplayer lol which is exactly what they accomplished in a way.
i dont know, but if so ... its already on the disc!!! ... so they dont lose money if its free contentNo,I do understand youBut I think that Microsoft would charge 2K for putting the content on Marketplace,so it wouldn't make sense for them to put it up for free and lose money. Maybe Microsoft didn't charge when Rainbow Six was around and they changed their policy?
Well, they didn't technically split the player base, but what they did do is almost as bad.
THEY didn't split the player base, they put it in a situation which causes the players to split themselves.
Are you being ignorant on purpose? He's clearly saying that these were forms of false advertising. And I don't blame him.
Why include those characters in official Xbox 360 gamer pictures and in gameplay videos if they weren't going to be available from the start? It's just as misleading as if 2k had released a total of 10 gamer pictures with a different multiplayer character on each one but only making 2 of those characters available on the disc.
It's clear that this was an intentional deception by the company and I'm glad that it's lost a lot of fans because of it.
Last edited by Electro-Bolt; 03-14-2010 at 09:56 AM.
A "statement"... huh... So they need time to figure out an excuse?
Not cool 2K Marin...
Why do they wish to cheat us! Tell the truth 2K! I don't care if you want to make a profit, but don't call it DLC, call it "content that was cut, then later released as DLC"...oh, but that sound kinda weird, eh?
What's the disadvantage? The weapons aren't more powerful.
I don't buy the reason they gave for not wanting to split the player base because I have numerous times now gotten into a lobby with a friend that invited me, who does not have the content, and it has popped up with a message saying "Some of the users do not have the downloaded content. As a result your game search will be refined."
So the reason is bogus.
So if the only way you can do DLC is if the content is already on the disk does that mean that there aren't going to be any other DLC packs for multiplayer, or that they already exist on the disk and are unlockable?
Considering that I've seen amateur Source mods running on amateur servers allowing people to buy the use of custom skins without either having to have them pre installed by all players or 'splitting the player base' I'm very surprised that Digital Extreme's, one of the oldest FPS developers in the world, with the support of 2K games, can't.
I'm going to paraphrase the message because it happened the day before and yesterday and I'm not going to be bothered right now to duplicate it.
As someone on this board that has said I'm unhappy with the DL content, but also feel 2k can sell whatever they want, how they want and subsequently any reasons given for how and why they did it don't really bother me, it just lowers my outlook on the product, I'm a little bemused by recent events.
The reason that we were given was NOT SPLITTING USER'S online. Correct? I'm not wrong in reading that? We're told content was on the disc so that EVERYONE could continue to play with each other regardless of if they had it or not.
So my question: Why on two separate days while partnered with a friend that DOES NOT haven't the DLC (ODC) does a screen pop up saying, and I paraphrase;
"Not all users have the same downloaded content, as a result your game search will be limited."
Care to explain this to me?
Last edited by Systemaddict; 03-14-2010 at 10:53 AM.
OK i've refrained from posting in this topic up until this point because I knew it was going to end up being this big mess. However I'd just like to point out to you guys that other game companies do these kinds of things as well (make the DLC before the game's launch), the difference is they don't all have the files already on the disc. Instead they just sit on the DLC and release it sporadically every couple of weeks.
So really when you think about it what's worse? Getting content that was made before the game's launch that you have to wait for it to download and has to take up a bunch of space on your hard drive. Or getting the same content with a shorter download and less hard drive space used.
is everyone crying over!? Who cares...you are acting like this cost you a fortune...I support awesome games and I am willing to pay for additional content...remember RE5? the multiplayer was also 5 bucks and if i remember the multiplayer aspect is something that should have been on the disc ALREADY but they charged Extra for you to enjoy it. If you paid for it...enjoy it, if you havent...then you have to make a choice...I highly doubt they will refund any of the money made...they might make additional dlc maps for the MP free later on...but there is no way you will see your $5.00 again. Ppl pay more than $5.00 for coffee now and they end up urinating it in the end...your "unlockables" are there until you erase it. So let's all just get online...grab some ADAM and reach Lv 50! =)
The price doesn't matter at all.
What they're selling is NOT DLC: that is the issue.
And who cares if other games did this too? If you really want to think it this way, since there are other games that had completely free DLC, we shall demand that we get everything 2K releases for free? No?
(Of course not, I'm just showing you why this line of thought is wrong)
... so they split!?
anyway ... that contend is not worth the price nor a DLC ... when i look at the original game that ur choises on characters and masks are already heavily limited, this contend has to be in that game for free. its nothing that a developer team has heavy amount of work on that like other DLCs. and the original levelmax at 40 sounds so wired ... level 50 sounds more like a levelmax for an original game ...
some time ago developers/publisher give you such little things for free to please you as a loyal gamer that u r satisfied and buy the next game from them too ... today when i look at the DLCs its horrible ... they charge for every stupid thing ... and im left in the thoughts, that i m getting an unfinished game/ or not the whole game ... this has the effect i buy lesser games more and more ...
i am glad i only rented bioshock 2 for ps3 for 3 euro (lesser that 5 euro for that DLC) ...(rented it because i read in many forums that a poor ps3 port / so before i buy it for 60 euro)... and it is a poor ps3 port with graphical issues! ... and in addition to that the many freezes and bugs was horrible ... so what i am learning from that?
buy not every game ... its mostly not worth ... and especially dont buy games on release date for 60 to 70 euro .... when u get it 2 or 3 month later for 15 to 20 with a patch and u dont have all the trouble ...
maybe i get banned for that ... but sometime is enough ... so write here down my anger ... i hate and dont understand today buisssines decicions ... they loose costumers with that and dont care ... i realy loved bioshock 1 ... played that 10 times ... so im realy angry of the bad issuess with bioshock 2 ... if its onother game (like the poor bayonetta disaster ps3 port) i would not bother to write in a forum, just dont buy it ...
Last edited by McCoffeebreak; 03-14-2010 at 04:45 PM.
i've said it in another thread, i'll say it again.
You buy a car, it has a cd player in it. You have the option to buy the MP3 player attachment to the cd player but it will cost extra. It's basically the same thing.
i do have to say i was wrong in the last thread, i was hoping that there would be some SP content. but i was wrong. those who watch wwe feel free to imagine the Edge wrong promo in your head and have a chuckle.
Its not the same as adding an mp3 player to a car. Its deliberate crippling of a game, pausing for a month, then charging people for it.
Lets spell it out. DLC should be released afterwards, and actually be new stuff. If there was a danger of splitting the player base, they could have released it as a patch that stored it on everyones hdd.
If you reward 2k by paying for it, you guarantee they do it next time.
So they are not splitting the player base by turning DLC into unlockable content, huh? Some people here report the opposite is the case! That would be one more reason for those who bought the so called explanation by 2k to wake up. We're lied to, intentionally, and by not saying something productive so far, 2k is just buying some time so more and more uninformed players fall for this great "DLC".
Last edited by Mearl; 03-14-2010 at 09:44 PM.
I agree with this guy completely, it's pathetic the "service" we're getting from 2K. I am (WAS) a loyal fan of bioshock, it was one of the coolest and most entertaining game's I've ever played. And I loved that they had free DLC, which was a great excuse to go back and play it again (which I did, several times xD) So BioShock 2 is released, and I pre order the SE (at the LOW low price of $149 CA) because I love biosohock, and I wanted to support 2K (and cause I wanted the vinyl xD) So I get home, eager to dive back into the world of rapture, and I only had about 20 minutes before bed, so I decided to check out the multiplayer. It was awsome, I loved how it perfectly captured the feel of the first game, and also added to the story in a way I've never seen before in a multiplayer game. Sure it lagged like a MOFO, but it was still fun, and I was sure it would be patched within a week or two (HAH!) Next day, I shake the multiplayer addiction, and start up single player. Opening cut-scene was cool, and although I wished it was In game like the first, it was still pretty cool, and left psyched for the first level. I wake up at the foot of a vita chamber, wondering how the hell I got there, and I hear (spelling is wrong, I know ><) Tennenbaum's voice, and look around. First bad feeling (not fear, I mean foreshaddowing that the game is going to fail as far as atmosphere goes, as well as other things) Comes when I see the coral. The weird, pink coral, that just shouldn't be there. It took away so much from the atmosphere that I waited for almost a full minute, hoping it was a texture glitch, and that it would soon change into a more suiting color and testure. NOPE. So I go through the level, and finally get my first plasmid, I think to myself Hell yeah! this part was awsome in the first game, I can't wait to see what it's like when A big daddy try's out a plasmid. Same as the first game, only watered down. I was left stunned. I can't believe it. They had a chance to do one of the coolest scenes in a game,(imagine after injecting yourself, you go nuts, and like smash down a wall or something, all the while not being able to control electro-bolt, and having it randomly electrocute stuff) and instead they chose to do EXACTLY the same things from the first game (with the SAME plasmid) only watered down, even more so from the fact I'd seen it before) And I could recount every massive let down I had, but that would add 3 more pages to this thread) SO I go back to multiplayer, to get some good narrative, and to drown out my dissapointment with mutliplayer. I finally get to level 40, and wonder why there wasn't more. I mean they added the pre order characters, and a few unlocks, and but it seemed like they could have done so much more. Even if they had of added a little more, say TEN MORE LEVELS, It would have added just enough variaty to tide me over until either a patch, or a hefty DLC. So I wait. No patch. I wait come more. NO patch, or anyone even hinting that they know theres a problem with the game. I wait some more, NO PATCH, and A DLC that adds a LITTLE variaty. I then find out that its content thats ON THE DISK, And that all this time I was wishing for a little more variaty, IT WAS RIGHT THERE. FROM THE START. I payed $149 for a game, plus $5 for a pre order, AND THE CONTENT IV BEEN WAITING FOR WAS THERE THE WHOLE TIME, AND IS BEING "SOLD" TO ME.
~end rant (for now)
PPl complain SO much about the HDD getting to the max limit...this is another alternative for us to save on hard drive space. was the game incomplete? NO, was the multiplayer aspect missing a map or two? NO did you get all the unlockables and trials in the MP? YES. Would you like to unlock more for more $, and save on HDD space?? Hell Yes. see what I mean? ppl have lots and lots of HDD space sure..*i myself have 1 TB space on my PS3* but other ppl stil have the 20,60GB and the game itself takes 5GB to install on PS3...so i dont have to add more to that. so I think its a good idea 2k did something
I think what will be the real kicker is if they removed levels from the single player campaign so they could sell them as DLC. The second kick would be if this "DLC" was also on the disc!
Although these strategies can generate further income in the short term, it has the abaility to drive customers away and reduce recurring revenue in the long term. Risky stuff.
I think the management could have gone about this very differently. To come to this strategic conclusion is rather poor planning IMO, which reflects more on wanting to acheive higher sales figures over retaining customer loyalty for future DLC purchases.
The way in which the whole thing has been handled by 2k is a bit of a disgrace if you ask me. If they'd have clearly stated what you're buying is ultimately a license key then perhaps fair enough but the sheer mention of DLC is disturbing.
Other companies have handled on-disc content with things such as VIP codes on release (e.g. purchase a slightly more expensive copy of the game and you get an enhanced version). This is the equivalent of what 2k have done but they have not marketed it this way. The difference between 2k and other people (e.g. EA) is that EA happily advertise what you're getting and therefore the end consumer is under no illusion. A recent example would be Battlefield BC2 whereby you enter a code and unlock additional maps, the game was advertised like this.
Its too late for 2k to turn the clock back but perhaps this might give them a heads up for the next "DLC".
Personally, I hope no one buys it (ok, huge hope as muppets are buying avatar clothing and really is a waste of cash).
For me, they've lost my customer and verbatim win one. Swings and roundabouts I guess.
The tricky thing here is that no one knows how much time was put into the game, and whether the DLC was truly "extra" effort put in. People are more than happy to pay for extra content if they think that the developers put more work in than normal in order to get this extra to them. But when, as is the case here it appears, the content was part of the original plan for the game and merely removed (see video adverts), it upsets people and makes them feel cheated.
The mods make the argument that it's only $5 and that people shouldn't feel entitled to this content. Do you give $5 to everyone that asks for it? No, you don't, because everyone has a limited amount of money, and more importantly, the principle of it is what upsets people. No one is really complaining about the amount of money, but rather the fact that they have to pay ANY money. Even if it was $1, people would be upset.
As to feeling entitled, yes, that's part of it, but maybe not in a negative way. For instance, if the next game comes out and 2k runs video advertisements showing the game as 1680x1050, but then after release says "we're only letting you run the game up to 1024x768, if you want to unlock higher resolutions we require a 5 dollar payment," would you happily hand the money over? Or would you expect that that option should be included in the purchase price? You see, it comes down to the expectations of the consumer vs. the need for the company to make as much money as possible. DLC in the mind of the average consumer is extra work done to the game after release. It's not taking a game and chopping out parts that they think they can make an extra buck on that would normally have been included.
Judging by the amount of bugs complained of here on the PC version, it's not as if they had the game completely polished and decided "gee, we have extra time, let's work on some other content for DLC after release." No, it was more like "what can we chop out of the game that we would have normally included so that we can make an extra dollar from everyone, even though we haven't ironed out many bugs yet and are shipping a buggy product." Priorities.
At the end of the day it's up to the consumer whether to pay for something that was formerly advertised as included in the original purchase price. In fact, those videos, depending on what was said and how they were represented by 2k, could be a basis for a class action suit for everyone to receive the dlc for free. It would be similar to an auto manufacturer advertising a car for with power windows and locks for a certain price without a disclaimer that those are options and not included. Very shady stuff.
Last edited by ryanjm; 03-15-2010 at 12:10 AM.
I used to despise EA and the way they nickle and dimed consumers but lately it seems as if they have taken a newer path with 'dlc'. As in rewarding those who preorder / buy the game when it first comes out by including 'dlc' free. This type of approach I feel comfortable with because it supports EA with selling new copies versus used, as people want the added content and consumers who purchase the game initially get the added content included for being loyal customers. It would have be nice for 2k to have followed a similar approach.
And the 'dlc' content does indeed make the game unbalanced and gives those who paid an advantage which I find unfair. And I'm sure this fact will turn some players away from the game and result in an even smaller player base than we already have.
I have already sent an email to 2K corp and have yet to receive a reply outside of the auto out of office reply. I really hope they take this issue seriously.
Why do you all think you're entitled to every piece of content prepared prior to a game's release? That kind of thinking is wrong. Flat out wrong. If they want to put it on a disc, that should be their prerogative and they should be able to charge to unlock it.
People seem to equate buying a game with buying physical property. You're buying content that is located on a disc, but who said you're buying ALL the content? You bought the game Bioshock 2, not the associated bonus (PAID) content that is the intellectual property of 2K. That bonus/paid content is theirs to charge you to unlock.
This was the same rational Capcom used when people discovered Versus Mode on Resident Evil 5 was in fact DLC (Disc Locked Content). I didn't buy it and many others didn't. But, they did release 2 very worthy true DLCs afterwards.
So I'm hoping 2K does the same.
Unlock codes are not DLC, and they've marketed this pack as DLC.
Accidental Double Post.
Last edited by MrClayton; 03-15-2010 at 01:51 AM.
I am a lawyer, and my son brought this to my attention this morning and asked if there was anything illegal being done here. I had a look at the license agreement contained with the game documentation, as well as the one included with the "DLC" on Xbox Live.
This practice would be considered quite shady by any court. It could be argued in court, with both sides having valid points. A case like this would end up coming down to a judge to decide which argument he liked the most.
As a defense, 2k gives you the right to use the content of the game. They make no guarantees that you will be able to use it. In addition, it is also in their right to revoke your ability to use it at any time, with just cause of course.
On the other hand, buying the license to use the content does not suggest that you will be charged additional fees to use it. 2K makes no remark about ever charging additional fees to access content in the license agreement. In effect it could technically be argued that by restricting ANY content that is actually on the disc, the license agreement is being broken by 2K (or any other company who chooses to do so).
Of course, 2K could argue in return that the content was not intended to be part of the game, in most cases they would be in the clear with that, but in this case they are actually proving otherwise. By charging for content that is included on the disc, they are essentially selling you something you can't use, and then asking you to pay for fixing it.
This is similar to the lemon law most states have for selling cars. It is illegal to sell something, then require more money to make it operate as it was suggested when you sold it.
However, you enter a grey area with this specific case, because there is no guarantee made that this content is actually part of the game. Still, if I was to argue this case, I would quickly point out that 2K had knowledge of the content being on the disk, and that it willingly excluded the content to charge future fees for it. While not illegal to do so, they failed to make any comment or notification to prospective buyers that this included content would require additional fees to use until after the purchase.
This would be considered an illegal business practice as well, put in place to defend consumers from things like contractors, who would give an estimate and agree to do a job but add extra charges to "squeeze" more money from their customer. I think this could very well fall into that classification, but it would be a judge who has to decide such.
In summary:
2K made no guarantees or warranties that you would be allowed to access this content, but they knowingly included the content on the disc with the intentions of selling it in the future. No mention of this additional purchase is included with the software documentation, giving the purchaser no prior knowledge of the need to spend additional monies to access any part of the sold content.
The law would see the content on the disc as part of the original included license agreement, even if it was not accessible by the purchaser. By knowingly including content intended to be resold, but failing to notify the purchaser of these additional charges, it is likely to be held as illegal practice. 2K would have to make a strong argument to convince a court that they didn't intentionally deceive their customers.
While I don't handle such cases myself, I see some grounds for a class action suit here. I know nothing of 2K Games, or even this content, outside what I read in the official documentation. But what a court sees on paper is held in high regard over what is being done verbally, or even the intentions of the parties charged.
Regards,
Nathan Parks Clayton
DLC/unlock codes...they're a catchall term for bonus content. You're arguing over semantics, and it's silly.
When and Where will it be posted, you know, 2k's excuse for why the DLC was only 24kb
No, I'm not and no it's not. I repeat DLC != Unlock Code.
Thanks for your informative post.
I don't see it as false advertising. They are showing videos of characters that are all available in-game. I don't think it matters whether they're on the disc or not. It was fairly common knowledge that they were going to be DLC characters
We saw Blanche and Zigo in videos, and people are dying to get them as DLC. I don't think they'd care at this stage whether they'd be on-disc or downloadable
+1
Thanks for the post. It seems like this is a very vague topic. I'd argue that they have the right store the content on the disc. On the back of the gaming case, it says that DLC content will be available (i.e. cost involved). 2K would likely argue that, making such an announcement would ruin future DLC plans. It wouldn't make sense for a company to release a press release before launch saying "Look, in the next few months, we're releasing the new characters, single-player DLC as an extra stop on the Atlantic Express, etc."
Last edited by Ian; 03-15-2010 at 02:02 AM.
It is though, we in fact were paying for 95% of the full game. Yes the content is small and may in fact not reflect 5% of the overall game, but still you are not getting everything when you should, 2k knew they were going to do this and so shouldn't have included them in the artbook or the pre-release trailers to being with, so people would not be aware of this.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote