Hell Kitty

There is no need for any DLC at all, or any base game for that matter. Games are luxury items, there's nothing essential about any part of them. Bethesda didn't need to include this function in the DLC, nor did they need to include in the base game. Bethesda could have allowed continued play after the ending but they didn't, just like the original Fallout and most other RPGs. They did, however, include this in one DLC. This is not a problem. Sure, because they feel they are missing out, missing out on something they believe they are entitled to. That's not true. If you have a problem with the DLC then you can "vote with your wallet" by not buying the DLC, you don't need to miss out on the base game. If you refuse to buy the base game then your issues with the DLC become irrelevant because it's not something you can use anyway.

That's true of all DLC really. As far as limiting is concerned, it all depends on how you look at it. For example, if an additional mission is available as DLC, does it add to the existing missions, or does it prove that the publisher limited the base game by denying you that mission in order to make the DLC more attractive? Just how full is that glass of yours? It's both. To call a product "intentionally weakened" is to assume that the additional content first existed as part of the base product, but was then ripped out to sell later, that you were supposed to get it to begin with, at no extra cost. ie, Something for nothing. There is a game I want. I buy it. Explain how that works against me?

Oh, who claimed that? Anyone who claims that DLC should have been included in the base game. I'm not referring solely to people in this thread. Er, well, yeah, DLC modifies the base game, the same as a mod does, though it can include things not possible in a mod. DLC that offers little value, or just isn't very good, isn't a mark against DLC any more than a lame mod is a mark against modding as a whole.

Would it be better if the DLC was something people didn't care about, that they didn't want? It's irrational to view with suspicion a company that sells you something you'd like, though understandable that folks would like access to it without having to pay for it. Yeah, that's what I mean when I say the problem is how people feel. If you've convinced yourself that the publisher is just trying to rip you off, then it really doesn't matter why they made the DLC. DLC is either something I'm interested in buying, something I'd like but don't think is worth the money, or something I don't care about at all. It's not something I should get purely because I've decided I deserve it. I don't think the publishers are doing anything wrong with selling DLC, but I do thing gamers are wrong in claiming that deserve something for nothing.

As alanschu mentions, publishers could simply hold off on releasing completed DLC for a month or two, though you can be sure there will still be folks whining that they should get it for free. I agree with Purkake that most gamers don't care about this stuff "if they liked the game, they'll get the DLC, otherwise they won't". They aren't going to refuse to buy a game they want to try to "make a difference" they don't really care about.

How people feel is precisely the problem here, with their feelings being irrational. A person buys game x and they enjoy it and feel it was worth the money they paid, but tell them for an additional cost they can purchase at extra set of armor and an extra dungeon, and suddenly the game that was worth it before is now a rip-off. Their purchase = the game. If they haven't purchased additional content, then they aren't entitled to it. Buying a ticket to see a movie in the cinema doesn't entitle you to the deleted scenes that appear onn the DVD. Whining about how that additional content should just be given to them for nothing is just greed. Which is amusing, considering the whiners typically accuse publishers of the same thing.

Same. I don't like DLC being advertised in-game, but I don't understand the whining about DLC that was created before a game is released, as if buying a game entitles you to any and all content made during development. I agree with this, but I think the folks who whine about how they should get it for nothing, how it's unethical, or they're ideologically opposed to it tend to drown out worthwhile feedback.

Yes, violent games really are violent and insisting that we call the violence depicted in games something else seems to be nothing more than an attempt at avoiding the issue of the effect of violence in video games. There is a mission in GTA4 where you need to kidnap a woman, and later you need to hit her while she is tied to a chair so she will look at you and you can take a photo to prove she is alive. I actually found this part to be rather stomach churning, far more disturbing than the hundreds of lives I'd already taken in the game. I've been killing virtual people for 20 years, it's completely normal for me. I've never beaten any virtual helpless women before, however, so that act was disturbing in a way that shooting, stabbing or fireballing virtual peeps has never been. Have I been desensitized to the violence in games and movies? Absolutely. Does this desensitization extend to real life acts of violence? I haven't been exposed to much real life violence, so I couldn't say for sure. Violence isn't all the same. Watching troops kill one another in an RTS isn't the same as performing the act yourself in an FPS. Shooting someone from afar isn't the same as beating them with your fists. A boxer beating his opponent in the ring isn't the same as a husband beating his wife in the family home. But violence is still violence.

Steal one from work, I'm sure Bio have loads of them lying around.

I play most everything at 1920x1080. Went widescreen sometime earlier this year, replacing my the old CRT I had for about 8 years. I love my slim, sexy LCD.

360 can't do AA?

^ Same. And it's the sort of thing that's even less noticeable when you're actually playing a game.

I just finished Death to Spies: Moment of Truth. (Available on Steam and one of the few games available worldwide on Direct2Drive.) Download demo from here. Fans of the Hitman series really should check it out, as the gameplay is almost exactly the same. It's pretty challenging, you're dumped in huge levels and left to figure things out yourself, no hand holding, and there are numerous ways to go about completing your objectives. Like Hitman, you can change outfits, but you need to knock out/strangle enemies or get a head shot to use them, can't go about wearing bloody clothes with bullet holes in them. On hard if you want a uniform you can't use firearms at all, and on the highest difficulty you can't use other outfits at all. You can drive a variety of vehicles, but this aspect itself isn't terrible interesting. You aren't an assassin, so you get more objectives than just killin'. Go play it now, jerks.

I've played through The Dark Mod and I'm kinda disappointed. I liked that Saint Lucia demo mission released a while ago, but the three missions currently available aren't very impressive. They're all pretty small and look like higher res versions of stuff that could have been built in Dromed. The lockpicking is interesting, being entirely sound based, but otherwise I think I'd prefer to stick to fan missions for Thief 2.

Jumped on the Risen bandwagon and I just completed it. Sided with the bandits, loads of fun. Now I'll play The Dark Mod (Thief inspired Doom 3 total conversion) which was just recently released.

Yeah, that story sounds like a filthy lie. I'm horrified by my actions, now I'm a potential serial killer, now I'm sad again. Complaining about someone laughing? Jerky McJerkface and her aunt sound like they'd cause a fuss over any old thing if it got them some attention. I have some relatives like that, I feel your pain bro. Oh, and read her reply and report back to us, thnx. Also, as a wedding present, you should send her a box of poop.

I really hope a whole bunch of stuff gets made with CryEngine 3. It'd be a shame to see it go to waste.

Hurling guards off of rooftops in AC is indeed quite enjoyable. I especially like when they survive the fall, climb back up, and I do it again.

It's fab. The player character is a real jerk. The game does being bad better than the silly evil options you typically find in RPGs.

That's the problem. Sometimes it feels like people are more interested in being right about how awful a game is than they are in getting a game they would enjoy.

This is so vague it's useless. That is, it doesn't tell me anything about what games you like. What makes a game complex? Do all aspects of the game need to be complex before the game as a whole can be called complex? When does an aspect stop being simple and become complex? Now that I think about it, I guess I feel the same way about complexity as I do about innovation. If something happens to be complex and that works for the game, that's great, but I don't think it should be something to aim for. While there are things I enjoy in different games that might be considered complex, I don't enjoy them because they are complex, I enjoy what that complexity adds to the game. But what works for one game might be wasted in another.

I agree with this 100%. I also feel the same way about originality/innovation. If something happens to be innovative then great, but I don't think it should be the aim. Too simple and more people will find it boring, too complex and more people will find it tedious. While folks here do like to complain about things being "dumbed down", it's probably important to note that complexity isn't necessarily a good thing.

I own Uncharted 1, yet don't have a PS3. It was just sitting there on the shelf in all it's $20 non-greatest hits version glory. I had to buy it. Same reason I also own Infamous and MGS4:LE. Heh. I remember when I walked into EB, saw MGS4, and even though I don't have a PS3 I just couldn't not buy it. I still don't have a PS3, but at least I have played through the game.

Er, clearly his point was that now we know AP is delayed, he'd like to know why it's delayed, not that he'll die without it. I don't think it's unreasonable to want to know why, the reasons could make the game more or less appealing. Of course, like you say any info we get would just be PR.