Until less than a week ago: "This game looks good, soooo hype. But I wish it had X character in it."
Now: "Augh DLC characters, and on disc, too?! I'm not paying for this incomplete game AUUUUGH!"
Obviously, there are legit reasons to hate DLC. Especially on-disc DLC. But when I see the exact same people who wanted the game a week ago suddenly bawling because they found out about extra stuff they have to pay for... Dude, get over it. If you were fine with buying the game as it was before, don't suddenly say it's incomplete and whine.
-- SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996 Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif
Or do. I mean, I'm still getting it (for 45 bucks), but I am annoyed that I can't play as Elena and stuff. Sure this DLC bull is unavoidable, but we can and will complain about it because it keeps us sane.
-- One Piece: Pirates with style! -= Metal Gear Solid: Tactical Espionage Action =-
I've softened my stance on it a bit. I realize on-disc DLC sucks, and I'm not gonna defend it.
I just still don't get the people that are like "I'm so buying this" and then suddenly "This incomplete bulls*** sucks" when they find out there's DLC. It's like... Nothing changed except that you found out there's MORE... And you don't get it for free. Those people just come off too entitled.
-- SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996 Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif
Have you been to the boards, though? It's less "voting with their dollars" and more... Being whiny/spoiled. There are a lot of people that are more or less fitting the following scenario:
Before a few days ago: "Is ____ in the game?" "No." "Aww, that sucks! Oh well, I'm still getting it." The last few days: "___ is DLC." "F*** THIS S*** THIS GAME IS SO TERRIBLE THIS IS A RIPOFF DON'T SELL ME THIS INCOMPLETE S*** YOU F***."
Seriously. It's like that almost exactly there.
-- SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996 Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif
Eh...imo it's more of people making the connection that if they buy the game, they would be somehow supporting their DLC practices, regardless if they get the DLC or not.
Doesn't mean I don't want the product. I just don't want them to make money off it and somehow think that what they're doing is okay.
Psycho_Kenshin posted... I'd say we should fault them at least to an extent, since that's good for us the customer. If this trend leads to like a third of a fighting game's roster being DLC, well then that's a game I would not buy. Hopefully if people make it known that's it's not liked, we can keep the money hounds at bay to some degree.
I'd agree with this if the game had some tiny roster or something and then had 12 characters of DLC.
But it has 38 characters before the DLC.
That's a lot as is.
-- SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996 Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif
saveus_Maria posted... eh, they're going to charge what they think people will pay for it. and guess what, most of the time they are right enough that they make a profit.
can't fault them for being good at business. if they weren't, their companies would've gone bankrupt and we wouldn't have nice games at all.
I'd say we should fault them at least to an extent, since that's good for us the customer. If this trend leads to like a third of a fighting game's roster being DLC, well then that's a game I would not buy. Hopefully if people make it known that's it's not liked, we can keep the money hounds at bay to some degree.
I mean, they can crank out a fighting game a lot faster than it takes for some AAA action games for example. Kojima takes three or more years for each MGS game, and he doesn't charge us any freakin' DLC to get the full game.
A fighting game with a full roster for 60 bucks already almost feels like too much. Four more characters or something for free just makes it feel like less of a rip-off, paying for those extra characters isn't something I'd consider.
-- One Piece: Pirates with style! -= Metal Gear Solid: Tactical Espionage Action =-
Sure, I'm not saying a third of this game's roster is DLC, and I do think this game will still be worth buying (but not at full price). But the trend is certainly lame.
-- One Piece: Pirates with style! -= Metal Gear Solid: Tactical Espionage Action =-
It sucks that things like this are DLC. At the same time, no one is forcing you to buy the game right away. If you really care about your money that much, find something else to do until the game drops in price and the DLC hits.
I can see why people take issue with on-disc DLC, and I sympathize. But to me and my weak willpower, principle can suck it I just want this game now and I will probably buy all of the DLC characters regardless of how much they cost, barring something utterly outrageous.
I don't find the complaining annoying, though. What bothers me is when people outright denounce the company for its practices and dramatically state that they will never support it again...and then two days later come back asking for combo help. If you're going to complain and stick to your cause, more power to you. But if you're gonna b**** and moan for nothing at all, f*** you and go die.
A lot of the same people claiming they "Ran out and canceled my preorder" in the last two days are either lying and buying the game anyway, or actually did but... It doesn't matter, because Capcom already got the money, anyway.
-- SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996 Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif
Also characters should never be DLC. Costumes, music, other purely cosmetic things are fine since it's more of a treat/fanservice and there are people who don't give a **** about things like that but characters are just too big a part of the game.
blindhobo13 posted... Also characters should never be DLC. Costumes, music, other purely cosmetic things are fine since it's more of a treat/fanservice and there are people who don't give a **** about things like that but characters are just too big a part of the game.
Characters should never be Day 1/on-disc DLC, I agree.
But saying characters should NEVER be DLC is kinda dumb.
-- SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996 Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif
Why wouldn't they be upset to find out that the game they were excited for has content hidden behind an invisible wall that can only be breached with more money, and even then not for an indeterminate amount of time?
Also why do you care so much that other people don't want the game now?
-- Ace Detective in Sir Chris' Police http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/3984/tumblrle5rxjm27j1qcrr8a.gif
Rad Link 5 posted... Why wouldn't they be upset to find out that the game they were excited for has content hidden behind an invisible wall that can only be breached with more money, and even then not for an indeterminate amount of time?
Because it's EXTRA content that they didn't know they had a possibility of getting and were 100% fine with buying the game before they found out. Getting pissed over something EXTRA and optional when you liked it before is kinda dumb, imho.
And it only bothers me because you can't post a single topic on those boards, and won't be able to for weeks, without people coming in to call you an idiot for buying the game.
-- SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996 Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif
From: StealThisSheen | #018 Because it's EXTRA content that they didn't know they had a possibility of getting and were 100% fine with buying the game before they found out. Getting pissed over something EXTRA and optional when you liked it before is kinda dumb, imho.
First, characters can't be "extra" content in a fighting game unless you're a casual player, and the casual players will probably be done with the game before the characters actually go on sale.
Second, they're not actually suddenly not interested in the game. They're angry at the company for jerking them around, and have decided to respond by either not giving said company their money, or complaining loudly because they still want the game too much to withhold their money.
Third, it's the internet. People are going to call you an idiot no matter what you do. They call you an idiot for buying the game, you call them an idiot for calling you an idiot, it's an endless cycle. Just ignore idiots who call other idiots idiots.
-- Ace Detective in Sir Chris' Police http://i40.tinypic.com/avgffm.jpg
From: StealThisSheen | #016 Characters should never be Day 1/on-disc DLC, I agree.
But saying characters should NEVER be DLC is kinda dumb.
Personally sometimes I think I would rather have a character not be in the game at all than have them be DLC. It's cool when they decide to put a new character as a way of continuing to support the game long after its release but that's not always the case. It's more of a 'let's withdraw essential content' so people (especially serious tourney players) are more or less forced to buy them because they're such a huge part of the game.
It just messes with s*** and it's more convenient to just not include them at all (or preferably, include them at the beginning!).
From a personal selfish note I haven't cared much about character DLC these past games because it hasn't affected me as much as there really hasn't been a character I wanted/liked. But there are actually some DLC characters in SFxT that I actually want and if I end up getting the game, I hate thinking that I might end up buying them.
From: blindhobo13 | #021 Personally sometimes I think I would rather have a character not be in the game at all than have them be DLC. It's cool when they decide to put a new character as a way of continuing to support the game long after its release but that's not always the case. It's more of a 'let's withdraw essential content' so people (especially serious tourney players) are more or less forced to buy them because they're such a huge part of the game.
It just messes with s*** and it's more convenient to just not include them at all (or preferably, include them at the beginning!).
From a personal selfish note I haven't cared much about character DLC these past games because it hasn't affected me as much as there really hasn't been a character I wanted/liked. But there are actually some DLC characters in SFxT that I actually want and if I end up getting the game, I hate thinking that I might end up buying them.
Hey hobo, do you know how development works? Because if not I think I can find a pretty neat explanation on this whole thing, think it was by Mike Z, the guy behind Skullgirls. Just so we're on the level here, Skullgirls is basically the wet dream of hardcore fightan fans, to boot, so if Mike Z does this, it might be because there's reasons for it beyond 'make load$ of ca$h money', since the game is going to sell to three people if that.
Rad Link 5 posted... First, characters can't be "extra" content in a fighting game unless you're a casual player, and the casual players will probably be done with the game before the characters actually go on sale.
...Wait, what. If anything, it's the exact opposite. Most serious players don't use DLC/tournaments don't allow it, so to them it's just "extra." The casuals tend to be the ones that want want want now now now.
And either way, how can characters not be extra in a fighting game? Especially in a game that already has 38 to begin with. And didn't fool people by saying they were available from the start or anything.
-- SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996 Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif
From: KanzarisKelshen | #022 Hey hobo, do you know how development works? Because if not I think I can find a pretty neat explanation on this whole thing, think it was by Mike Z, the guy behind Skullgirls. Just so we're on the level here, Skullgirls is basically the wet dream of hardcore fightan fans, to boot, so if Mike Z does this, it might be because there's reasons for it beyond 'make load$ of ca$h money', since the game is going to sell to three people if that.
I'll admit that I base some of my DLC views on my idealistic expectations of perfection from the get-go but Skullgirls isn't comparable to what's being done in SFxT where it's pretty much an abuse of the whole DLC system. Skullgirls is obviously a smaller game and I guess you could say it's more 'understanding' or 'forgivable' if they do DLC because they have less resources, the game costs less, etc. But the main issue with SFxT character DLC is that they appear pretty much complete and they didn't need to be added as DLC and it's just Capcom blatantly making a cash grab.
I've already said about some DLC that I would rather have them not exist because I'm personally being anal about organization/convenience so I'm not really counting them as valid points against DLC or anything.
From: StealThisSheen | #023 Most serious players don't use DLC/tournaments don't allow it, so to them it's just "extra." The casuals tend to be the ones that want want want now now now.
Tournaments do allow DLC because of the justification that if it's in the game, you can't ban it unless it's broken or otherwise harmful to the metagame. It's why there was the initial uproar about DLC gems because tourney organizers were wondering if they had to buy every single gem because it's a part of the game. Also why things that may have been added just for casuals e.g. Star Wars characters in SCIV have to be dealt with in tournament. Casuals may want it but tourney players also have to deal with it, even if they don't want to.
blindhobo13 posted... Tournaments do allow DLC because of the justification that if it's in the game, you can't ban it unless it's broken or otherwise harmful to the metagame. It's why there was the initial uproar about DLC gems because tourney organizers were wondering if they had to buy every single gem because it's a part of the game. Also why things that may have been added just for casuals e.g. Star Wars characters in SCIV have to be dealt with in tournament. Casuals may want it but tourney players also have to deal with it, even if they don't want to.
Are you sure? Star Wars characters were banned from tournaments for SCIV, though that may have been because of exclusivity.
I thought DLC characters were banned unless it was a full-out update, like AE for SF4. Wasn't the problem with gems a matter of "If we don't ban them outright, do we allow all of them?"
-- SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996 Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif
From: StealThisSheen | #026 Are you sure? Star Wars characters were banned from tournaments for SCIV, though that may have been because of exclusivity.
I thought DLC characters were banned unless it was a full-out update, like AE for SF4. Wasn't the problem with gems a matter of "If we don't ban them outright, do we allow all of them?"
They were banned for exclusivity. And then they were made DLC available on both consoles for the character they didn't have (i.e. 360 could get Vader and PS3 could get Yoda via DLC). Since they were both made available, exclusivity was thrown out and there was no grounds for banning them.
Of course it's still ultimately up to tournament organizers what their rulesets are (e.g. France still banned them IIRC). But DLC isn't valid grounds for banning anymore (Jill/Shuma allowed in Marvel 3, Kenshi/Rain/Skarlet allowed in MK9 but Kratos banned because he's PS3 exclusive, etc.). Makoto (DLC character) was actually considered the best in BlazBlue so it was definitely a factor if you went to tournaments.
I can't speak with complete authority on gems but it was mainly a logistical issue from what I could tell. Not only would it take up a lot of time but if there were DLC gems, tourney organizers would have to make an effort to procure all of them because that's the 'fair thing to do' or other reasons... They're not going to ban them outright without even testing them. That was a big issue some members of the FGC had with the Smash community for instance (banning items in competitive play because some thought it was 'a part of the game' and had no grounds for banning because it wasn't broken).
One thing that should help speed it up after people have gotten familiar with the game and their own strategy is that since gems are numbered, you just need to memorize which numbers you want to use and go straight to them rather than remembering specific names and scrolling until you find it.
What would really help speed things up was if the full gem select screen and the button configuration screen could be accessed by both players at the same time. In the game currently only one person can do anything at a time. Hopefully they can find a way to patch that in, though it would be quite a substantial change to the UI
that reminds me, Capcom's UI decisions bother me sometimes
of all their recent releases, only 3S:OE has gotten the button config screen right. the rest of the UI design choices in OE (make both players go through a Rematch/Character Select/Save Replay screen for instance) are not so good. SFxT appears like it could use some work as you mentioned as well.
They get stuff right some of the time. I just wish it was universal! Take 3S's "push what button you want light punch to be" button setup, combine with SF4's rematch/character select setup and costume/color selector, make sure both players can do all these things at the same time, and I think it'll be all good.