Crackdown DLC Content Revealed

TheToE!

[H] Brewmaster
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
8,073
This is the reason I will not own a newer console. All these map packs, downloadable premium content. Yall can have it.
 

TheWanted_

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 19, 2001
Messages
85
This is the reason I will not own a newer console. All these map packs, downloadable premium content. Yall can have it.

Nobody is forcing you to purchase these add-ons. PC games have had expansion packs etc. for years. Isn't this just progression in the console arena?
 

Jerome36

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
4,021
Wow, all sorts of stuff! I'm borrowing the game from a friend, mainly for the Halo 3 Beta (he has another key for himself), and I haven't put the game in yet. I've tried the demo, but if I put some time into it, and see more of this DLC, I might have to go out and get my own full copy.
 

kelbear

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
1,579
Nifty! They're definitely fattening up a game that was thin on features.

Yeah, some of the free stuff should have been there at release. I would've been pissed if I had to pay to be able to reset gang bosses. I had to start an offline profile just so I could start from the beginning without losing my maxed character.

I'm more than satisfied now though. If DLC packs in enough content per dollar I don't mind paying more to get more. Like what that Michael Pachter guy said, DLC lives and dies on expectations. I don't want to pay extra for what I expect to be part of the main game, and I don't mind paying extra for what I didn't expect to get in the initial purchase.

It seems like they didn't get everything ready for release but just released anyway to avoid pissing people off with a delay, then adding the remaining non-critical stuff as a download pack so they could start making a return on their investment earlier. That boss-reset thing should've been considered a release requirement though.

This is really tricky ground, I'm not annoyed because I enjoyed the game I paid for, but I'm worried about the trend. What happened in this game didn't upset me, but the decisions regarding what goes into release and what doesn't could easily have gone the other way, and I'm sure some game later on will end up making the mistake that could've happened here.
 

TheToE!

[H] Brewmaster
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
8,073
This is nothing more than a way for them to charge more than 60.00 a game. If they tried to release the game with all these features for $80.00+ you would see folks go off the deep end. However, if they charge the standard price right out of the gate and then offer this DLC months after release most folks would jump on it. It is the trend of all this that worries me as well. Seems to be really picking up speed. I just hope we dont start seeing games being released with DLC as an option.
 

erwos

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
1,408
To be fair, even though the game felt a little short, it wasn't like it was the shortest game ever released or anything. Not every game is going to be an Oblivion-like epic, and development costs have to be in line with the actual number you think is going to sell.
 

xerus`

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
1,159
Nobody is forcing you to purchase these add-ons. PC games have had expansion packs etc. for years. Isn't this just progression in the console arena?

Nobody is forcing us to buy it, but why dont developers just include ALL the content in their god damn games when they ship them? Oh yeah, because they can make another 6 or 7 dollars by holding some shit back, and then releasing it as this super amazing downloadable content. Thanks, but no thanks.

Most of the DLC that's released isnt even worthy of a PC like expansion pack. Except if you're EA, and you charge 10 dollars for a new weapon and a map-- which is pathetic. A worthy expansion pack would be something like Opposing Force for Half Life, which was a load of new weapons, a completely new single player campaign, and all new multiplayer maps. Or maybe the Doom 3 expansion, which was a new single player campaign with some new goodies.

The bottom line is that I dont want to pay for this shit because I dont want to give developers the message that I'm willing to lay down and accept this bullshit. I want to pay 50 dollars for their ENTIRE game, like it was before. Not 50 dollars for the first 8 hours of gameplay, and then pay out the ass for the rest of the shit I need to actually get the whole game. Its ridiculous what theyre getting away with these days, and it needs to fucking stop.

=)
 

TheToE!

[H] Brewmaster
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
8,073
Nobody is forcing us to buy it, but why dont developers just include ALL the content in their god damn games when they ship them? Oh yeah, because they can make another 6 or 7 dollars by holding some shit back, and then releasing it as this super amazing downloadable content. Thanks, but no thanks.

Most of the DLC that's released isnt even worthy of a PC like expansion pack. Except if you're EA, and you charge 10 dollars for a new weapon and a map-- which is pathetic. A worthy expansion pack would be something like Opposing Force for Half Life, which was a load of new weapons, a completely new single player campaign, and all new multiplayer maps. Or maybe the Doom 3 expansion, which was a new single player campaign with some new goodies.

The bottom line is that I dont want to pay for this shit because I dont want to give developers the message that I'm willing to lay down and accept this bullshit. I want to pay 50 dollars for their ENTIRE game, like it was before. Not 50 dollars for the first 8 hours of gameplay, and then pay out the ass for the rest of the shit I need to actually get the whole game. Its ridiculous what theyre getting away with these days, and it needs to fucking stop.

=)

Good God! QFFT! Brother!
 

Kahnvex

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
3,297
You know, I'm really of two minds with DLC, usually. I find this to be of more value than the four Gears maps, or the GH2 - GH1 song re-releases.

Trying to pin it down and put a finger on it, I'd say it's probably because Crackdown is pure virtual Cocaine, and they are adding up to 350 extra acheivments (100 for free) and more ways to have fun getting the ones you don't already have.

I'd like to give a nod to the people who are wondering aloud why the games with DLC don't have the additional features added on... it's the same answer everytime.

Money. It's better to ship a product and get people buying it, then patch in/offer up more/better functionality at a later date. It's the same reason any PC game comes out and needs a patch the day it launches.

The only problem is that future content is becoming (or already is) a planned affair on consoles with the advent and growth of Marketplace on 360.

I personally was not mad about the perceived value for my money with Crackdown, nor with Gears, nor with GH2. So any extras offered simply have to meet the ambigous internal dollar value/worth ratio I create in my head for each game. Everyone is different, obviously.

Personally, I feel like Dad dumped a new box of toys in my Sandbox.
 

Defective

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 5, 2002
Messages
1,911
I have no problem with downloadable content for a fee as long as the game was full featured for its price at launch.

For Crackdown, its good that they are including some things at no charge and not bundling the whole thing up and charging for it. However, it does seem that many of the features that they are charging for, are not "expansion pack" type features. They are just neat options that used to be included in games at launch. Now, if Crackdown was cheaper, I wouldn't have a problem paying for more content. But, if they are going to to charge $60 for a game and then add normal features to it later, it better be free.

Expansion packs for PC games typically run about $30. However, with that expansion pack, you get almost an entire other game. You get more levels, places to explore, etc. Map packs for FPS games are generally free. The crap that we are getting fleeced for now on XBL is crap that would have been free on any PC game (Oblivion excepted, Bethesda charges for all the little crap they make for it now.)

I have a huge problem with Gear of War. That game has a rediculously short single player game for a full $60 game and its multiplayer component, while fun, needed more maps. For the price of the game, we should be getting map packs for free. I certainly didn't pay for the map pack and the fact that they did that, completely killed the online game for me. I don't play it anymore online. I feel like I payed $60 for what should have been a $40 game.
 

Diakiaoshinsama

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
424
I look at it this way. You pay the initial $60 for the game they spent X amount of time and money making. Then they put more time, money, and effort into creating these extras. But theyr'e not shoving it down your throat. I agree that a half made game should not have the rest of it ransomed off after the fact. But this game I had an absolute BLAST playing and to have more of the same.... WITHOUT waiting 2 years or so for a sequel, they've got my money! Plus they did implement some things that SHOULD have been in the original release, such as reseting the boss's. Which is in the free pack. And yes back in the day games had most of this stuff included, but they HAD to do that then. Here they let you vote with your wallet. On principle I only purchase movies and music I truly enjoy. I LOVE Mythbusters for instance. But currently Discovery is only selling them 3 episodes at a time, for like $20 a pop. When I KNOW they could sell a whole season for $30 or so. So I'm not buying. I'll buy when they get off their high horse. The market should more or less self regulate. If something is WAY overpriced and generally worthless, few will buy. For a huge update like this, with a large majority of it free? Man people, buy it so they know theyr'e doing right!
 

kelbear

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
1,579
Haha, good god that was fun, just blew 3 hours laughing my ass off with a random stranger going through new stuff for the first time. Rocket Tag was the most fun, but the rockets hit too hard, after a tag the Shai-gen rockets kept killing the new hunter before he could even get up.

Heh co-op isn't quite the word for Crackdown multiplayer, we just ransacked the city, if any crime was stopped, I assure you, it was purely coincidental.
 

Kahnvex

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
3,297
Downloaded the expansions and my buddy has been on for 4 hours, laughing and causing mayhem with one of my XBL buddies.

I love that they recreated the APC from Aliens, it's not exact, but I know what they are doing. Same as the supercar looking suspiciously like the Batmobile.

I love these guys, more games from them please!
 

erwos

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
1,408
The bottom line is that I dont want to pay for this shit because I dont want to give developers the message that I'm willing to lay down and accept this bullshit. I want to pay 50 dollars for their ENTIRE game, like it was before. Not 50 dollars for the first 8 hours of gameplay, and then pay out the ass for the rest of the shit I need to actually get the whole game. Its ridiculous what theyre getting away with these days, and it needs to fucking stop.
You're really exaggerating the situation. Crackdown was short, but it certainly wasn't 8 hours long, at least if you actually made the attempt to explore the entire gamespace. Indeed, the "8 hour game made to sell DLC" doesn't actually exist, and there's no indication it's being made. Developers are not absolute morons, and even the publishers know there's some ugly backlash to be had if they go too far.

The other half of this is that you're ignoring the times that DLC does work nicely. Oblivion comes to mind, for example. Are you really complaining that they're making you pay up $10 for Knights of the Nine? If the DLC _is_ worthwhile, you want to encourage that by buying it. Boycotting the entire system just screws the people who play nicely along with the ones who don't. The "nuke from orbit" strategy is a poor one, IMHO.

There's this bizarre vibe amonst some people that all DLC should have been included in the base game, and that all DLC is a scam. That's just not realistic, and is at least as much of the problem as idiots like EA.
 

Occidio

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 17, 2005
Messages
1,497
I think its a lil different in the scope of Crackdown. The majority of the DLC was under the idea that the developers wanted to know what people were wanting to do in the game after they were done with it. They watched youtube videos and watched the forums to see what people were saying and doing. I think they did an excellent job with the entire game.
 

tirminyl

Gawd
Joined
Jan 9, 2007
Messages
638
I think its a lil different in the scope of Crackdown. The majority of the DLC was under the idea that the developers wanted to know what people were wanting to do in the game after they were done with it. They watched youtube videos and watched the forums to see what people were saying and doing. I think they did an excellent job with the entire game.

+1. I just have an issue when the DLC that requires payment prevents you from co-op or multi-player online play. Ex; Halo 2. I decided to play for the first time in over a year. I downloaded the free maps but ran into problems when we could not play ranked games. They told me to downloaded the $4.00 map. Of course I refused because I was now being forced to pay money to play with my friends. Especially when the maps will be free 2 days later (exaggeration).
 

erwos

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
1,408
+1. I just have an issue when the DLC that requires payment prevents you from co-op or multi-player online play. Ex; Halo 2. I decided to play for the first time in over a year. I downloaded the free maps but ran into problems when we could not play ranked games. They told me to downloaded the $4.00 map. Of course I refused because I was now being forced to pay money to play with my friends. Especially when the maps will be free 2 days later (exaggeration).
But you're not considering that the maps cost money to make. Is it really fair to the devs for all future multiplayer content to be free of cost?
 

tirminyl

Gawd
Joined
Jan 9, 2007
Messages
638
But you're not considering that the maps cost money to make. Is it really fair to the devs for all future multiplayer content to be free of cost?

No, thats fine. BUT I should not be refused to play games for a map (that I don't even want) that will most likely never pull during my time playing.
 

erwos

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
1,408
No, thats fine. BUT I should not be refused to play games for a map (that I don't even want) that will most likely never pull during my time playing.
I don't understand what they're supposed to do to fix your problem. A map comes up that you didn't pay for - you get tossed off the server. Maybe they ought to warn you ahead of time that the map is in the rotation, but I don't see how they're going to make it a worthwhile map purchase if you can play on the maps without buying them.
 

tirminyl

Gawd
Joined
Jan 9, 2007
Messages
638
I don't understand what they're supposed to do to fix your problem. A map comes up that you didn't pay for - you get tossed off the server. Maybe they ought to warn you ahead of time that the map is in the rotation, but I don't see how they're going to make it a worthwhile map purchase if you can play on the maps without buying them.

Doesn't work like that. You simply cannot play any ranked games at all. Meaning you can only select two games to play. Team Big Battle and Team Training. Thats it. Not a big issue but rather annoying.
 
Top