They used to be called GOTY editions at least...

[DaytonaUSA]

I've been playing a game I recently purchased quite a bit; Dirt 3. It's a great game, and infinitely better than the energy drink, extreeeeeeme stunt, X-Games centric Dirt 2 which I hated (call me old fashioned, but I like European rally races... not stunt arenas meant to entertain monster truck loving hicks). During the single player world tour campaign, I noticed that after the first "triangle" section, there are whole levels within said triangles that are completely blocked unless you buy the DLC. These levels aren't the only things missing from the story mode, as "teams" (cars) are also blocked out unless you buy DLC.

 

Well, it's certainly annoying, but unfortunately the reality is it's been getting more common and it's something most games have now... single player required DLC to truly finish the game. So whatever, maybe I'll buy the DLC down the road....

 

So I look online to research the DLC and low and behold I find that a "Complete Edition" was just released. It's at this point that my blood started to boil. It was the last straw. Let's just say if I was Bruce Banner we'd have some major issues.

 

DLC has evolved in this way: Welcome additional but not needed content to a good, complete game > Multi Player additional content for online play > costume packs and character packs > "online pass" DLC if you got the game used that not only allows you to play online but unlock parts of the game blocked to you > and now, single player content... IE: THE FREAKIN' GAME... being locked out.

 

Before, very annoying editions of games called "Game of the Year" editions were released. Batman AA comes to mind, as well as LBP and in a completely different way Street Fighter 4. I bought several additional DLC packs for these games, just for the damned GotY version to come out a month or so later. But at least it wasn't so obvious as the DLC wasn't really needed to complete the game completely, and the name of the edition wasn't so bluntly worded.

 

Dirt 3's "Complete Edition" is exactly what it sounds like. The game, simply put, was purposely shipped INCOMPLETE. Single player portions ALL OVER THE PLACE are missing, and now they try to sell this edition down the throats of people who already purchased the other version at full price. The version they should have released at launch. It also makes my edition useless as if I were to buy all the damned DLC that the "complete edition" comes with, it would cost me well more than the new game itself!

 

Again, this is different than typical GotY games. Dirt 3 had MISSING CONTENT in SINGLE PLAYER MODE. To put it lightly, it would be like if Mario 3 was released in the NES days, and you had to go purchase a code from Toys R Us that would unlock a quarter of the levels.

 

And to call it Complete Edition is just rubbing my face in the matter. Why not just call it "Haha, you bought the incomplete POS edition, now give us more cash" edition.

 

I've put up with this for some time, and as most DLC centered around either multi player or optional additional content like clothes packs, it never really effected me... a gamer who is largely a single player only gamer. But this is the last straw. It's sad because the game is very well done, and I like it quite a bit. But I refuse to buy another of these games new if this is what they'll be doing from now on. It's sad I actually have to now do research before buying a game to see if the game includes all the damned "story" mode.

 

It seriously feels like it's getting to the point where they might as well just sell me a 60 dollar disc that goes through the dev logos and then to the main title screen after an intro movie, and then prompts a message that says "well, that's all you get, but for an additional 60 dollars, you can get the game!".

[atarilovesyou]

Is this really what's going on in the modern scene nowadays?...pathetic! The last time I gave modern gaming a chance, I found out that lots of new games required you to login to something like Steam to play Modern Warefare 2...for playing the SINGLE PLAYER GAME!...under the assumption of combating piracy?...please.

 

Who would actually pay money for a product that doesn't give you the FULL game?

[DaytonaUSA]

Yeah, it's getting pathetic. And people are buying into it. Like the online passes for instance. They said the reason why they make you pay 10 bucks is because you are straining the servers and since you didn't pay to be able to play online by buying the game brand new from them, they're paying to maintain the server for you to play on for free. But riddle me this: How are you taxing the server if you have the game the previous owner bought that HE paid the company for? He left, you joined. That's 1:1 trade right there! It's BS!

 

But like I said, I'm from a different era. An era where playing with friends meant they were on the same sofa as you, or at least in the same room. I don't much like playing online, and if I do it's on something like GT5 or Forza 4 where more mature people are at. But now it's creeping into single player? This is worse than Diablo III making you sign onto Blizzard servers to play single player mode. Now the damned single player mode isn't even complete.

 

This is where games are. And they will KEEP taking more liberties until, like I said above, the damned game is nothing but a title screen prompting for another 60 dollar payment to play the actual game! There's not much more they can take away before we get to that point.

Edited May 28, 2012 by DaytonaUSA

[Mord]

Well, it's certainly annoying, but unfortunately the reality is it's been getting more common and it's something most games have now... single player required DLC to truly finish the game. So whatever, maybe I'll buy the DLC down the road....

 

Congrats. You've shown how the game industry was able to reach the state it's currently in. Unfortunately, it's what a lot of gamers do.

[Rex Dart]

Well, this is why you don't shell out $60 at launch.

[SoulBlazer]

Well, it's certainly annoying, but unfortunately the reality is it's been getting more common and it's something most games have now... single player required DLC to truly finish the game. So whatever, maybe I'll buy the DLC down the road....

 

Congrats. You've shown how the game industry was able to reach the state it's currently in. Unfortunately, it's what a lot of gamers do.

 

Do you ever have ANYTHING to say positive or nice, Mord? Honestly, while I agree with you some of the time, every single post I read from you sounds like a six year old having a bitch fest. It's almost gotten to the point where I'm thinking of blocking you, not cause I don't like you as a person, cause your notes are such a downer to read. Try saying something positive for a change, you might feel better.

 

To the OP: I agree that's a lot of shit. Let's hope that's the exception. I don't mind buying DLC if it's additional missions and contents to enhance the main game, but that's assuming the main game is complete and playable!

[DaytonaUSA]

Thank you for saying that. Every time he replies to me it almost seems like a damned personal attack. He needs to take a chill pill.

[Mord]

Well, it's certainly annoying, but unfortunately the reality is it's been getting more common and it's something most games have now... single player required DLC to truly finish the game. So whatever, maybe I'll buy the DLC down the road....

 

Congrats. You've shown how the game industry was able to reach the state it's currently in. Unfortunately, it's what a lot of gamers do.

 

Do you ever have ANYTHING to say positive or nice, Mord? Honestly, while I agree with you some of the time, every single post I read from you sounds like a six year old having a bitch fest. It's almost gotten to the point where I'm thinking of blocking you, not cause I don't like you as a person, cause your notes are such a downer to read. Try saying something positive for a change, you might feel better.

 

To the OP: I agree that's a lot of shit. Let's hope that's the exception. I don't mind buying DLC if it's additional missions and contents to enhance the main game, but that's assuming the main game is complete and playable!

 

I agree with you that my post wasn't very nice. It was a lot nicer and a LOT shorter than what I was about to post in it's place however.

 

I've been watching the video game industry go down the toilet for the last 5 years in just about the exact manner I've predicted it would - the only things that surprise me is that it's happening even faster than I thought it would. I'm actually quite apathetic to it all compared to what I use to be, but probably my biggest pet peeve is watching people rail against all the shit happening - while at the same time showing how they'll legitimize it by buying into it. If you hate it, DON'T BUY INTO IT. When you do, it adds fuel for them to do it to more games, more genres, with more extreme measures. That's how we got here from buying damned ineffective armor for horses.

 

If you want to see me say something positive, you'll have to catch me in other forums where there are things to be optimistic about.

[CGQuarterly]

Well, this is why you don't shell out $60 at launch.

 

EXACTLY. Wait until the GOTY or "complete" or whatever version comes out, and then buy that. If those versions outsell the launch version, then that will send a message.

 

Stuff like this is precisely why I've almost completely turned my back on modern gaming. Game companies are aiming at the lowest common denominator. Most people are dumb enough to play into the hands of these companies, and the rest of us have to live with the consequences.

 

Chris

[Atariboy]

Well, this is why you don't shell out $60 at launch.

 

This is what I've learned to do.

 

In fact I just started Dirt 3 after buying it a few weeks ago for this exact reason. It was clear it was going to be heavy on the DLC even before release, so I planned to wait in the hopes a complete edition would arrive (Which it did) or at least come down significantly in price so it wouldn't end up being a $90 game when all was said and done.

[The Usotsuki]

Reason he had nothing positive to say was no doubt because there WAS nothing positive to say. It's just about double-dipping, turning full priced payware into demos and making a killing off charging $200 to buy a game by making it appear to only cost $60. So people think it's a more reasonable purchase than it turns out to be.

[MagitekAngel]

Coming soon: Game: The Done Edition.

[VW]

I am outraged at this and I got this game for $17 on a Steam sale last year. I have to agree with Mord that this entire industry is going to hell quickly and keeps treating its customers worse and worse. The stance I am taking is that if the industry is going to be like this, I will buy nothing for full price. $20 is my new sweet spot and most games get to that within a year of release, if not lower. Steam sales are gamers' best friends now where most top titles can be found for under $20 within a year and many times under $10.

[iswitt]

Come on guys, you're acting like this is a problem. I for one enjoy allowing people to abuse my rights and crap all over the industry I once admired .

[DaytonaUSA]

I am outraged at this and I got this game for $17 on a Steam sale last year. I have to agree with Mord that this entire industry is going to hell quickly and keeps treating its customers worse and worse. The stance I am taking is that if the industry is going to be like this, I will buy nothing for full price. $20 is my new sweet spot and most games get to that within a year of release, if not lower. Steam sales are gamers' best friends now where most top titles can be found for under $20 within a year and many times under $10.

 

And that's just it. If I do buy new, under 20 is my requirement as well now. It sucks to wait, but at the same time, these incomplete games are NOT worth full retail. If they want to have at least a complete single player mode from the start then I'll pay more. Otherwise, for part of a game, I'll pay part of the MSRP.

[godslabrat]

The more I hear stuff like this, the more I'm hanging on to Nintendo's blurb a few weeks back, wherein Iwata said that "We do not intend to offer any products that the consumers deem incomplete." For most of the last two generations, I've had trouble buying Nintendo's games, because they were nortoriously always $50, slightly beyond my impulse-buy range. But, if Iwata sticks to his guns and every other publisher is trying to sell their games for $100 (spread out over $10 increments) then I will have NO PROBLEM dropping fifty bucks on a Nintendo game, knowing I'm walking out the door with the whole thing in my hands.

 

I don't think I'm a reflection of the whole market, but at the same time, I'm thinking I won't be alone either. The WiiU might just be the only next-gen system that wants me as a customer.

[MagitekAngel]

You know, you hit the nail right on the head with Nintendo. The big N is the grumpy old man on the gaming block: it's set in its ways to the point of irritation, but it possesses a certain sense of integrity that the newer faces can't match. Nintendo releases a game when it's done. Even if it takes years of delays. When it's done, it's done.

[DaytonaUSA]

The problem is, that while Nintendo has a positive in that respect by being the "old man" on the block, there are a lot of negatives that come with that as well. We'll now be two systems in a row where graphics are terribly behind the competitors, Wii U most likely being even further behind than the Wii was. Their online is horrid, and their "defiant" stance unfortunately extends into their poor friend code system which they seem reluctant to get rid of.

 

I was a huge Nintendo fan. It's all I had through till the GC days. But they really need to wake up. Not to derail my own thread here, but as much as I appreciate what they might think in terms of releasing a full experience (and they do). I just wish their full experiences they delivered were more than the rehashes they seem to only produce recently, or the super casual focused titles they pushed during the Wii's 2nd and 3rd year primarily. They aren't bad games, but I've played Zelda, Animal Crossing, Mario Kart, Mario Party, Paper Mario, Mario Strikers, Mario Sluggers, Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, Mario Drinks a Lemonade, Mario takes a Car Trip, Mario Looks to the Left... we get it. The few times they bothered taking a chance outside this rehash session this gen, they often failed (at least in my eyes): Metroid other M, New Super Mario Bros Wii, Wii Music, Wario Land Shake It, Punch Out....

 

Yet the two franchises I bought the Wii specifically for, F-Zero and Starfox... never came. And the original games in the beginning like Project HAMMER and Disaster never came. Sometimes I honestly just felt like I was rebuying GC games for the "pleasure" of being able to play them with Wii controls. In fact, that's pretty much what happened for most of their 1st party games.

Edited May 29, 2012 by DaytonaUSA

[Rex Dart]

The problem is, that while Nintendo has a positive in that respect by being the "old man" on the block, there are a lot of negatives that come with that as well. We'll now be two systems in a row where graphics are terribly behind the competitors, Wii U most likely being even further behind than the Wii was.

 

You don't know that, though, and if any of the rumors about the new Microsoft & Sony consoles have any truth to them, they'll all be fairly underwhelming.

[DaytonaUSA]

The problem is, that while Nintendo has a positive in that respect by being the "old man" on the block, there are a lot of negatives that come with that as well. We'll now be two systems in a row where graphics are terribly behind the competitors, Wii U most likely being even further behind than the Wii was.

 

You don't know that, though, and if any of the rumors about the new Microsoft & Sony consoles have any truth to them, they'll all be fairly underwhelming.

 

If you compare the specs of the rumored NXbox and PS4 to their predecessor's, they are significantly more powerful, I'm sorry! Just because they wouldn't make the best gaming PC, doesn't mean they wouldn't produce graphics far more impressive than said PC could deliver, since it's not running a huge operating system like Windows, that power goes straight to the game. It's why very "weak" "computers" like the Xbox 360 can still produce respectable graphics, while a PC with the same specs wouldn't be able to play most modern games even on the lowest settings.

 

So far the Wii U is set to basically catch up.... to 7 year old hardware. That's not terribly exciting. And most importantly, until I see Nintendo try harder with original IPs and original ideas for their "core" console games, I'm going to be hesitant. That and 3rd party support really... REALLY needs to be back up to snuff. We haven't seen good 3rd party support from the N since the SNES.

Edited May 29, 2012 by DaytonaUSA

[Rex Dart]

I know how consoles work , and the Wii U is still a decently impressive one. None of the upcoming systems' specs blow me away, but all are pretty capable.

 

edit: I totally agree about 3rd party support. Hopefully, having a near-gig of RAM will entice those third parties to consider the Wii U. Hopefully.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Rex Dart

[Mendon]

I totally agree about 3rd party support. Hopefully, having a near-gig of RAM will entice those third parties to consider the Wii U. Hopefully.

 

I don't disagree with your RAM theory, but what I think will really entice 3rd party support to the Wii-U will be a robust online capability and the $$$$ that comes with it. If 3rd parties can sell their DLC.... map packs, car's, characters, clothing, guns-bullets, levels, etc-etc-etc.... on the Wii-U the way they sell it on the Xbox and PS3, they will develop for it.

 

After all, why bring a game like Dirt 3 to the Wii (or Wii-U) if they can't sell additional cars, tracks, drivers, decals, scenery, engines, and tires?

 

 

Mendon

[Rex Dart]

Well... maybe we don't want your dirt, insertpublishersnamehere.

[HatefulGravey]

The DLC movement in modern gaming is not going to ruin gaming as seems to be the popular thought process. People are stupid and will keep buying in to it. We are the gamers that see the BS and don't need it, but the masses don't even think about it, they just go with the flow. It might ruin modern gaming for those of us that are into the hobby at the level required to be a member of a forum like this, but it surely wont hurt gaming for the 14 year old with mom's credit card, and that is who these games are really made for.

 

I just waint and pick up the GOTY, or "Complete Edition" at the pawn shop after the original owner gets sick of it. I still get to enjoy all the content without paying for it all at retial or in parts over time. Still waiting for Fallout New Vegas with the DLC on disc to make its way to a pawn shop, then I'm in business .

[Numan]

 

I just waint and pick up the GOTY, or "Complete Edition" at the pawn shop after the original owner gets sick of it. I still get to enjoy all the content without paying for it all at retial or in parts over time. Still waiting for Fallout New Vegas with the DLC on disc to make its way to a pawn shop, then I'm in business .

 

I picked up Fallout New Vegas regular edition when it was dirt cheap and having enjoyed it, am now waiting like you for the complete edition at a cheap price.