Capcom Swears There Is No Locked On-Disc DLC For DMC

On one hand it makes sense as it would bring in the developer more money without the need for a user to wait for the download.

On the other hand, if it's on the disk it should be made playable straight away.

Capcom are really shooting themselves in the foot this generation with this and the quality of their games.

5 up, 0 down

If you guys have time to make DLC before the release of a game, why don't you guys use those time to polish the game?

8 up, 0 down

They say that, but we will see how big the Vergil DLC is. I'm softening to these annoying nickel and diming techniques as it seems to just be a way to pay for these huge productions, but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth when a company doesn't even bother to manage the optics of their DLC rollout. They should be selling us on why these are good, not withholding content and demanding a ransom.

4 up, 0 down

This far in the console cycle development costs can't be as high as they are saying, or they are spending money where it isn't needed. Games on much lower budgets on the PC have just as much polish and in some cases excellent voice acting as well.

I'm not saying games don't cost a lot to make, but seeing as what indie devs can do both on the PC and on Consoles big publishers aren't going to be able to get away with nickel and diming for much longer.

I hate that I got way more content and in a lot of ways more polish with my PS2 games than I have gotten in games lately. I liked when companies had to say okay we have ONE disc and we have to cram as much content in their as possible to make people see worth in paying 60 bucks.

Now it seems the opposite, how much can they withhold and sell back to the consumer while making the game "appear" to be a complete experience.

I'm glad that there are small devs bringing out polished quality titles on the PSN and Steam. Hopefully it will push the big guys to rethink the DLC model.

1 up, 0 down

I don't think DLC is going anywhere. I do think there has got to be some waste going on in game development these days, but either way it's a tight business when you have to sell millions of copies to even stay open for business.

1 up, 0 down

I can't recall the last time I beat a game and didn't feel like it was a complete experience, like the developer held something crucial back and gimped the game.

I guess I'm just not that spoiled.

1 up, 2 down

But needing to sell millions is more a problem with the corporate aspect of a lot of these big publishers and not the industry as a whole. Smaller devs are coming out with quality titles and doing just fine only selling half a million units.

The Witcher 2 only sold 1 million and the deves were plenty happy with that. So I'm just wondering why something of that quality in which they made their own engine can be profitable when something that is using UE3 is somehow struggling to make profit without selling 5 million.

Spoiled? Ah right I'm spoiled because I remember the PS2 and PS1 era of games where they tried to cram as much content on disc as possible. When we didn't have to buy costumes for 5 bucks but could unlock them through gameplay, and fighting games released with ALL the characters.

1 up, 0 down

It's a very easy argument to go, "Oh, all the games were complete back then because they didn't have the option of DLC." One could just as easily say we're getting more out of our games today because developers are allowed to keep working on already released games. But we can't do that because that's pro-big business. And clearly, as we all know, big business is always wrong.

It can't just be that game makers made some extra content for a game, so as to increase our enjoyment of the product. It has to be that they all schemed to steal our money by withholding that content. I'm sure it has been done before; I'm also sure that isn't the case every single time. In fact, I'll bet good money that this is RARELY the case.

And yet, the immediate response to extra content these days is automatic- "That should've been in the game in the first place." That will ALWAYS be the reaction. And given the fact that we've got a ton of spoiled brats in this country right now, it's hardly surprising. They don't have any interest in knowing the whys and hows behind it, they just figure they should've gotten it first and that's that.

It's a lose-lose for developers. Why? We all know why.

Bottom line- I don't finish a game and wonder what might be missing because I'm pre-programmed to suppose the developers have tried to rip me off. Obviously, you are. If the game feels incomplete, then I'll notice. If it doesn't - and it really never has this entire generation - and extra content comes out later, I'm really not going to get all huffy. That'd be correctly labeled hypocrisy.

---

Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 1/3/2013 7:04:20 PM

0 up, 0 down

XIII-2 felt incomplete though.

2 up, 0 down

The problem isn't that there is added content, and that it is downloadable. The problem is that expansions and standalone updates like Crysis Warhead are far less common than the tiny micro payment DLC which companies push. The Mass Effect Series included an alien which was crucial to the lore of the series and made you pay on top of the full game price to be able to play with him. That's the kind of DLC I have an issue with. If the company were concerned primarily with giving a complete experience then they wouldn't have all that content ready at release, and then charge separately for it.

3 up, 0 down

When you have on disc character DLC for fighting games Ben how can that NOT be put there solely for the purpose of getting extra money? Why are characters costumes being sold for 5 bucks, when a decade ago you could unlock these for free through in game achievements? Certainly THAT isn't put in place for the gamers benefit is it?

---

Last edited by xenris on 1/3/2013 7:57:16 PM

5 up, 0 down

'sigh' I don't know. I just know there's always a reason to whine.

I have finished quite a few games this generation. Not once did I feel like I had paid for an incomplete product. Neither would anyone else if they never even noticed the DLC.

1 up, 0 down

I agree with you Ben. I also haven't played many games and thought that they weren't complete or were some how gimped because of the missing DLC. I was more talking about the micro transactions we pay for now that we used to be able to unlock through game play, this mostly applies to fighting games, one of my favourite genres.

Literally the list of games where I felt the DLC added was a little sketchy is very very small. AC2 is one of them. The game functioned fine without it but there was DLC for a missing chapter 2/3rds through the game. I also heard it was really awesome and fleshed out the narrative. However I can't say the game was broken because of this just that the principal of a dev doing that is kind of lame.

Also map packs should be free. Lightbox Interactive got this mega right with Starhawk, it keeps the community together.

I have played some wonderful DLC from Bethesda and Gearbox and I tend to think they do it the best. If ten bucks can get me 5-10 hours of gameplay then I'm down for it and not against it at all.

You have a point that the whining would probably not happen if no one noticed the DLC was even an option. Its often in retrospect or once a game of the year edition comes out that people are like why didn't I get all of that with my first purchase?

---

Last edited by xenris on 1/4/2013 9:53:35 AM

0 up, 0 down

Not that it makes much of a difference.

0 up, 0 down

Sure Capcom, we all believe you.

0 up, 0 down

LOL, its so funny now every crapcom game comes out this is now peoples first question.
eh, maybe thats a good thing, maybe crapcom have learned their lesson and wont be doing it anymore.
now if they could learn all their other lessons and stop trying to turn traditionally japanese games into western mindless hack and slashers!

2 up, 0 down