It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Makes me wish the original impression i had of DLC for the 360 was true... Mind you i have yet to buy any non-free DLC.

Patches - Free
Clothing/Avatar DLC - You spent earned gamer points saying you've been playing...
DLC - Small patches and addons, free
Expansions - Pay for it, adds at least 10 hours of content...
avatar
IanM: But they used to make a lot from the premium rate 'tip' lines that were an easy way to make money from chumps who didn't know where to get the cheat codes. The internet and sites like GameFAQs probably killed that premium rate business, so really the pay to cheat via microtransaction is just restoring a lost revenue stream.
avatar
rtcvb32: Reminds me of getting Batman Forever game for PC back in like 1995. There were basic moves in the instruction, then an odd entry in the back 'for help call' number. Infuriated me, i never got far in the game since it quickly got boring...
that game sucked horribly. I tried a ROM of it a while back, and had all the documentation and move guides and such, and found it to be not nearly as bad as I remembered. the controls were still hard to use though. still, way worse than its predecessor Batman Returns.
Post edited July 04, 2014 by johnnygoging
Ah... I still remember the good old days of "Expansion Pack"

the ones for Ultima 7

Quote "The player is rewarded with a powerful weapon, The Black Sword, during the test of Courage. The Avatar also gains maximum strength, intelligence, and dexterity in the course of the tests, and after completing the quest, Lord British grants the player double strength on top of that. The Golden Ankh contains many extra supplies and the Avatar can use it for the rest of the game, making it unnecessary to purchase deeds from shipwrights."

he he he... good old days...


and also Ultima 8 speech pack...
avatar
OlivawR: Does anyone in their right minds believe them?
There are a lot of people stupid enough to slurp up every DLC for their favorite game and beg for more. Not realizing that they are paying for the original game 10 times. Is it a majority of gamers, I hope not. But from the amount of people downloading and buying games on Uplay, Origin, Steam, etc I'm starting to believe it is.
avatar
johnnygoging: that game sucked horribly. I tried a ROM of it a while back, and had all the documentation and move guides and such, and found it to be not nearly as bad as I remembered. the controls were still hard to use though. still, way worse than its predecessor Batman Returns.
Graphically it looked okay, but would have done better as a SNES game. The biggest problem was it was trying to be like street fighter with special moves, and on a keyboard it's clunky at best, and horrible at worst.

Probably be a lot better today if you used a controller... As i recall the game was $4, so they probably were banking on making most of their money through calls and hidden fees...
I think Emperor Palpatine said it best

A larger sticking point, however, was PlayStation branding. SCEA hated the name and wanted to change it to PSX, a contraction of the project’s codename. “This was actually a huge internal battle, to the point where there was research done among consumer groups,” says Harrison, who, having seen various youth groups reacting badly to the name PlayStation, had his own fears about it. “I remember thinking, ‘Oh my God, the name is bombing and everyone is going to hate it’. I shared the information with Tokunaka-san, and he said, ‘Oh, that’s nothing, you should have heard what people said about Walkman’. And that pretty much ended the debate.” In Europe, at least: the US nevertheless went ahead with early trade promotion, calling it PSX...
http://www.edge-online.com/features/making-playstation/5/
avatar
VanishedOne:

At the Alexis Park Hotel in January 1995, where Sega held their CES party, Steve Race organised for every napkin to be printed with ‘PSX welcomes Sega to CES’!
http://www.edge-online.com/features/making-playstation/4/#null
avatar
VanishedOne: The PS2-derived PSX came later.
Is there any promotional stuff ever released to the public that actually called the PS1 PSX? Because if it was not released to the public, it doesn't hold any ground on calling the PS1 PSX. It's like saying the PlayStation is a Nintendo trademark because of its origins.
avatar
HijacK: Do you also slightly disagree with 2+2=4?
Downloadable content is something that is downloaded. Period. Just because small add-ons do not classify as expansions because they do not expand upon the game as much, they are both downloadable. there is no distinction between a 15 hour piece of content and a small extra map as long as they are both downloaded. There is the difference in size and quality, but not in the form they are accessed.
Tell me more about how Dishonored's 2 DLCs are rubbish since they are neither an expansion,nor classify as what you call "rubbish DLC".
avatar
lazydog.949: I am not denying how either may be accessed. But there is a huge distinction between content, size, quality AND relevance.

As for Dishonored, I cant say much-i know nothing of it. But if you have come with a new classification between expansion (alas, gone forever), DLC (get off your horse armour and drink your milk, pilgrim), then you should immediately market it, you may be onto a new winner for publishers darkest deeds.
And I agree. There is difference between the size of the content and technical quality. Distinctions that are objective, but classifying smaller content as DLC is like saying football is a sport due to its huge popularity across the world and everything else is its own thing, but not a sport, because they are not as popular.
What I'm advising here is to call every extra content that adds to the game more than 10 hours of gameplay an expansion pack (but this is up to your own preference) because it expands upon the game (though it should also be noted that expansion packs of old used to add new adventures outside of the main game story or in parallel to it, though this has not always been the case, thus making it an invalid criteria) and everything that is bellow 10 hours of content, even as small as an extra weapon, just call it add-on because it only adds to the game in a way it does not necessarily expand it, or expand it enough (again, this is entirely subjective of how much you see it).
But calling one DLC and the other expansion is just wrong. When you buy a game that has every extra content package on the disc, like I do to many of my games on consoles, the extra content should not be called DLC, because I don't download it, whether it is an expansion like Awakening, or small like the Golems of Amgarrak.
If you download it, it's DLC, if it is in physical form, it's extra content. What you see as expansion and add-on can be entirely subjective up to a limit that has been set by the consumers since extra content started appearing.
As for Dishonored, the game has 2 big extra content packs that tell the story of another assassin in parallel of the main story. They both add around 4 to 8 hours of content, if not more, depending on how you play and what difficulty you play on. You can consider both expansions or combine them and consider them a single expansion since they basically tell the entire story of an assassin but in 2 parts and what you do in the first part of the expansion has an impact on the second one (mostly on your abilities and other stuff). Each part also has its own ending, so your basically have 2 endings, like in a duology of movies, but only 1 definitive ending to the series. As you can see, extra content comes in many forms, but it has a very limited amount of ways in which you can access it.
Post edited July 04, 2014 by HijacK
For what it's worth - I've found the (potential) source comment for that "if the video game is a modern video game" masterpiece.

Also - sorites paradox.
These articles are so tl;dr it's no even funny! xD
avatar
HijacK: Is there any promotional stuff ever released to the public that actually called the PS1 PSX? Because if it was not released to the public, it doesn't hold any ground on calling the PS1 PSX. It's like saying the PlayStation is a Nintendo trademark because of its origins.
Sony's official list of trademarks includes neither PSX nor PS1 (nor PS, strictly speaking, although that's the basis of the logo). PSX was picked up by the press for reasons you now know about, and PS1 came into fashion once there was a PS2 to contrast it with (and after the PSone appeared). If you want to follow official usage, you're best off saying PlayStation.
avatar
Johnathanamz: DLC's are destroying the video game industry. I wish the good old days like in the 1990's and early 2000's of expansion packs being released for sale come back.
avatar
JMich: Please remove rose-tinted glasses. Good and bad add-on content exists from the 80s. But the bad add-ons of old have been lost to memory, since we don't like to recall them.

Yes, I too would prefer to have huge expansion packs, but depending on the game, I may prefer bite sized add-ons that are released every 2-3 months (UT Bonus Packs) than huge epic meals released every year (Civ V: G&K, Civ V: BNW).
Like I told Fenixp. This argument will continue for years from me.

I know there was add-on content from the 1980's.

I said I wish we went back to the good old days of the 1990's and early 2000's where we got nice big expansion packs released for sale.

The Unreal Tournament bonus packs were released for free you know. At least I don't remember paying for them only getting them added for free I patches. As I explained before I want DLC's added for free in patches and expansion packs sold only.
avatar
Johnathanamz: Expansion Packs add a lot of new stuff DownLoadable Content (DLC) adds only like 5 maps or 1 new gun skin or 1 new clothing skin or 10 new quests or 10 new vehicles, Stuff like that is DLC's.
avatar
HijacK: Downloadable Content is content that is downloaded. The size of it is irrelevant. Expansion Packs are nowadays downloadable, but you seem to forget they were in physical form even a few years ago, like Dragon Age: Awakening.
As long as they are downloadable, they are considered DLC.
I really don't care that DownLoadable Content (DLC) is downloadable from the internet.

If it's the content is about the same size as the main video game itself, the same size as the main video game itself or bigger than the main video game itself then it's a expansion pack.

I know that expansion packs were sold in physical boxed for at least the PC versions of video games because I have been playing PC versions of video games on PC since the 1990's.

The only reason I said I want video games to have expansion packs sold again since the 1990's to the early 2000's is because those were the best years ever for expansion packs to be sold.

Bethesda Games Studios sold 1 expansion pack for The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Shivering Isles. Then again for The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. Dawnguard and Dragonborn. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim released for sale in 2011.
Post edited July 04, 2014 by Johnathanamz
avatar
Johnathanamz: snip
Just read what I posted above to another user. Maybe then you'll understand that 2+2=4 in Aritmetic and Algebric math and not 5 like obviously you're arguing it is.
Expansions pack and add-on are related to size. DLC and extra content are related to the way they are accessed, so do yourself a favor and stop arguing that the world is flat just because you want it to be.
avatar
HijacK: Is there any promotional stuff ever released to the public that actually called the PS1 PSX? Because if it was not released to the public, it doesn't hold any ground on calling the PS1 PSX. It's like saying the PlayStation is a Nintendo trademark because of its origins.
avatar
VanishedOne: Sony's official list of trademarks includes neither PSX nor PS1 (nor PS, strictly speaking, although that's the basis of the logo). PSX was picked up by the press for reasons you now know about, and PS1 came into fashion once there was a PS2 to contrast it with (and after the PSone appeared). If you want to follow official usage, you're best off saying PlayStation.
What you're saying is basically true, except there is official branding of PSone on PSN, but nothing related to PSX outside of the Japan exclusive console. Yes, PS1 didn't exist until there was a PS2 to be in contrast with, but since there is a PS2 now and some type of official brand for the name, even a logo, I argue that is way more accurate than PSX.
Post edited July 04, 2014 by HijacK
avatar
lazydog.949: I disagree slightly. The size of it is relevant, I believe this is why historical expansions were able to be sold retail in the first place. As you have mentioned, dragonage:awakening is a good example of this. To throw another one in, so is the first call of duty expansion, united offensive.
Plenty of pre-internet extra game content wasn't available in retail stores; often enough the means of distribution was via mail order from the developer or publisher. Charging extra for stuff that isn't content-rich enough on its own isn't a new thing, even if digital distribution has lowered the barriers. (Though I'd argue the barrier the internet has lowered the most isn't even on the distribution, but rather on the payments.)
Wow. I mean, sure, they are free to release this shit for a price, but the philosophy of it is so against me (this shit should come free with the game and be toggable in the options or present in NG+ or something like that) that it only reinforces my unwillingness to buy UPlay games. Not to mention the a) made up numbers of "12 guys" and b) the obvious disdain for the customers ("12 guys somewhere"; "whatever")