First Borderlands DLC Announced

2K Games announces the first DLC for Borderlands, even though Gearbox Software's role-playing shooter isn't due until next week. The DLC called The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned is due for release by the end of this year. Here's word:
New York, NY - October 15, 2009 – 2K Games announced today that the first piece of downloadable content for Borderlands™, The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned, is planned for release later this year for all available platforms for $9.99 (800 Microsoft Points). The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned is in development at Gearbox Software and is the first in a series of downloadable expansions that will enhance the Borderlands mayhem in fun and exciting ways.

Tasked with keeping the workers of Jakobs Cove alive, Dr. Ned (who is not related to Dr. Zed from Fyrestone) does his job a little too well, creating zombies and other abominations that now run rampant in this region. Players will have to work alongside Dr. Ned as they embark on a quest to cure the inhabitants of Jakobs Cove in this full-fledged expansion filled with new enemies, new quests and rare loot drops.
View : : :
64 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older
64.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 22, 2009, 08:34
64.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 22, 2009, 08:34
Oct 22, 2009, 08:34
 
Borderlands preloads started last night on Steam, FYI.
Avatar 51617
63.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 18, 2009, 14:57
63.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 18, 2009, 14:57
Oct 18, 2009, 14:57
 
This is the post i meant to post in all those DLC announced topics that come before games are out, but specifically Dragon Age one. Consumers by definition want the most for the money. Now that i know DLC is announced, why should i buy the game on release? I just wait for the Goty edition with all the DLC and thats that. The company looses 90% profit and i save 90% money. Thats how consumers are supposed to behave anyway. Games aren't vital for life, they are a luxury and when waiting makes their value go up (DLC gets released) while reducing its price (GOTY includes all DLC), then they are shooting themselves in the foot.

If they'd do expansions (you know, Diablo 2 style) then that'd be an entirely different issue. I would gladly buy an expansion if it enhances the game, adds new game play elements, but i will never ever buy DLC - the amount is too small to warrant replaying so the only time i am ever going to see it is when i play the game for the first time, because i do not replay games (not always, not often).

Hence DLC devalues the first sale to 0 - and means that waiting for its price to fall and a compilation to come out is the WIN:WIN situation. I am surprised nobody spelled it out so far, apparently not many people here think beyond "want to play".

I can not even fathom how people are surprised that DLC causes massive bitching, because while i do want to play the game, i also don't want to replay it 60 times for 60 new DLC releases that at a mediocre amount of content each. I want to experience the game FULLY and FINAL. Except maybe games that base on skirmishes or multiplayer, there is just NO reason for SP RPG games getting DLC instead of expansions. Its retarded.

This comment was edited on Oct 18, 2009, 15:05.
Avatar 54727
62.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 17, 2009, 12:06
62.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 17, 2009, 12:06
Oct 17, 2009, 12:06
 
I miss something? Borderlands got pushed back another week?

Well, next week is the original release, so I don't know what you mean. The PC version got delayed to week after next.
Avatar 54622
61.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 17, 2009, 10:19
61.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 17, 2009, 10:19
Oct 17, 2009, 10:19
 
I miss something? Borderlands got pushed back another week?
60.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 21:17
Prez
 
60.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 21:17
Oct 16, 2009, 21:17
 Prez
 
Waiting and seeing how the launch goes and whether there are a lot of problems or not seems like the wise thing to do. I never pre-order games*. I like to wait and see how reality compares with the marketing that we've seen first. If all goes well, then the patching thing isn't an issue. If there are problems, then you can sit back and judge them on how well they handle those problems before deciding whether to buy or not. Jumping to conclusions at this early stage, as many here have done, is not warranted since they haven't actually done anything wrong. If they do cross a line, then I'll be here bashing them right alongside everyone else.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Personally I would rather go back to normal expansions... Shivering Isles was a lot more worthwhile than all the Fallout 3 DLC put together except for possibly Point Lookout. I'm just saying DLC is what we have now, for better or worse, and as long as the main game is quality and doesn't feel like it's missing anything, I'm good.

This, times 100.

This comment was edited on Oct 16, 2009, 21:18.
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Avatar 17185
59.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 18:30
59.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 18:30
Oct 16, 2009, 18:30
 
See that's interesting though. This is simply my theory but I think that companies have discovered DLC is much easier and more profitable than traditional expansion packs. Is it love or is it simply lack of choice? I guess time will tell. There's some great DLC out there that leads me one way on this argument and there's some terrible shit like game disc unlocks that scares me a bit as a consumer.

Well, make no mistake a lot of it has to do with consoles never really having expansions, so the idea of expanding your favorite game after release is new and exciting.

Personally I would rather go back to normal expansions... Shivering Isles was a lot more worthwhile than all the Fallout 3 DLC put together except for possibly Point Lookout. I'm just saying DLC is what we have now, for better or worse, and as long as the main game is quality and doesn't feel like it's missing anything, I'm good.
Avatar 54622
58.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 17:54
58.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 17:54
Oct 16, 2009, 17:54
 
See that's interesting though. This is simply my theory but I think that companies have discovered DLC is much easier and more profitable than traditional expansion packs. Is it love or is it simply lack of choice?

Speaking for myself only here, I love DLC if it's timely. I agree with everyone here who thought release day DLC is the wrong way to go (like Bioware announced for Dragon Age), but two weeks or a month after release is great. Few games take longer than to finish for me, so having additional content available while the game is still fresh is great.

Mass Effect, to pick on Bioware again, was kind of the wrong way to do it. One DLC pack well after the game's release, and then another just recently that was so far behind that most people seem to just be waiting for the sequel instead...

They can probably make more money than they would with an expansion pack, but I think this approach has more to do with these games being featured on consoles rather than PC-based. The old PC-style expansion pack doesn't really work as well on a console as it does on a PC, so these DLC packs just work with the content and available storage media better.
57.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 15:27
57.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 15:27
Oct 16, 2009, 15:27
 
Good argument and well presented, you changed my mind on this game.
Avatar 51617
56.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 14:38
56.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 14:38
Oct 16, 2009, 14:38
 
I simply do not trust a company to properly distinguish between them when they can more easily serve their own interests. There's nothing wrong or conspiratorial with that, that's their purpose - to make money. It doesn't however serve mine so I prefer to be cautious and weary as the gaming industry in general has had a rocky history with patching.

Waiting and seeing how the launch goes and whether there are a lot of problems or not seems like the wise thing to do. I never pre-order games*. I like to wait and see how reality compares with the marketing that we've seen first. If all goes well, then the patching thing isn't an issue. If there are problems, then you can sit back and judge them on how well they handle those problems before deciding whether to buy or not. Jumping to conclusions at this early stage, as many here have done, is not warranted since they haven't actually done anything wrong. If they do cross a line, then I'll be here bashing them right alongside everyone else.

* With the exception of Elemental, but that's kind of a different animal and I had different reasons for wanting to pre-order that one a year or so before it's scheduled to be released.
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Avatar 9540
55.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 14:22
55.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 14:22
Oct 16, 2009, 14:22
 
Thing is, a ton of customers have shown that DLC a month or two after release is a good thing as far as they are concerned. It is an exciting thing that extends the game past the week or so it takes to beat it.

I think it's far too broad to sum it all up like that personally, there's plenty of terrible post-release DLC that pops up at varying times from day 1 to day 100. I understand your point though that the mass consumer has largely embraced DLC and I agree.

Why? Because people love DLC, that's why...

See that's interesting though. This is simply my theory but I think that companies have discovered DLC is much easier and more profitable than traditional expansion packs. Is it love or is it simply lack of choice? I guess time will tell. There's some great DLC out there that leads me one way on this argument and there's some terrible shit like game disc unlocks that scares me a bit as a consumer.

If the game sucks or is buggy, then nobody's gonna hang around for the DLC anyway.

wowbagger, you made a bunch of other fair points but I didn't want my posts to get enormous so I'm just quoting this particular part, I certainly didn't ignore the rest though and I will think about it. My problem with the above quote is the fine line separating patches, DLC and expansions. I simply do not trust a company to properly distinguish between them when they can more easily serve their own interests. There's nothing wrong or conspiratorial with that, that's their purpose - to make money. It doesn't however serve mine so I prefer to be cautious and weary as the gaming industry in general has had a rocky history with patching.
Avatar 51617
54.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 14:14
54.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 14:14
Oct 16, 2009, 14:14
 
Many companies view DLC as their method of combating piracy and used games sales, guess who gets caught up in that battle? Yes, you and I. Big companies are talking about having DLC code unlocks just to see endings, how soon until they make the jump to charging us for bits and pieces of the game? Forced episodic gaming isn't something I would look forward to personally, especially with the incredibly disparate regional pricing issues.
If they start pulling that kind of crap, then hell no I won't be buying those games. But that's a far cry from complaining about them announcing that DLC will be released within a couple months after the game hits the shelves. That seems like a good thing to me. It's completely optional stuff, so I really don't see how it could be a problem. It certainly doesn't excuse them from being quick to patch any problems from the game, but we haven't seen the game yet, so it's way too soon to hit them with that. Only if they blow it and don't fix things within a reasonable amount of time would there be any reason to bash them for it. What some "some companies" may or may not be doing with other games makes no difference here. I don't see anything wrong with them releasing DLC a month or two after the game, and I certainly don't see any problem with announcing it before the game ships. In fact, I'd prefer to know ahead of time. If the game sucks or is buggy, then nobody's gonna hang around for the DLC anyway.

This comment was edited on Oct 16, 2009, 14:15.
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Avatar 9540
53.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 14:02
53.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 14:02
Oct 16, 2009, 14:02
 
I don't think people assume all DLC is nickle and diming. It's a perception issue as previously pointed out and also a trust issue. Some people trust companies. Other people view companies as existing solely to make money and to not always have the best intentions for their customers. Both views are technically correct in their own ways. We've seen many examples of businesses that operate by appealing to consumer's sense of fairness. We've seen plenty of companies who operate without giving the slightest care in the world about their customers. There's no right or wrong here, just differing views.

Thing is, a ton of customers have shown that DLC a month or two after release is a good thing as far as they are concerned. It is an exciting thing that extends the game past the week or so it takes to beat it.

That was my whole point 10 posts ago, a certain portion of the population seems to act like the publishers and developers are in the wrong for announcing this DLC when in fact they are doing this because consumers demand it. If you watch an interview with a dev pre-release now on gametrailers or something they always ask "and DLC after release?" Why? Because people love DLC, that's why...
Avatar 54622
52.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 13:39
52.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 13:39
Oct 16, 2009, 13:39
 
Right, you canceled your pre-order because you're not upset. Then you didn't bitch and moan about it? You're deluded.

I canceled my preorder because I don't like supporting a precedent I don't agree with. It would be pretty hypocritical to knock a company like Valve for one thing and say its fine on the other hand here. It has nothing to do with emotional state, it's called logic and opinion.

Who cares if you have the game yet?

People care. I am one of those people, others in this thread have posted they care too. You apparently don't. The wonders of life, people having different opinions.

Someone below complained that they should have waited until after the release to announce that they intended to nickel and dime us. WTF?

I don't think people assume all DLC is nickle and diming. It's a perception issue as previously pointed out and also a trust issue. Some people trust companies. Other people view companies as existing solely to make money and to not always have the best intentions for their customers. Both views are technically correct in their own ways. We've seen many examples of businesses that operate by appealing to consumer's sense of fairness. We've seen plenty of companies who operate without giving the slightest care in the world about their customers. There's no right or wrong here, just differing views.

How does that make any goddamn sense either? You'd rather they wait until you buy the game until they tell you there's going to be DLC? Isn't it better to know in advance so that you can get your panties in a bunch ahead of time and not buy the game to begin with?

You're making the wrong argument. A better one would be "wouldn't you like to know the game will be supported after release in advance?" and that is a fair point. I think everyones view of what "support" consists of is the problem with that. But yes generally I would like to play the game, have the game patched and whatnot before I think about DLC.

No one is forcing me to buy DLC, correct. That doesn't change the fact that some companies are purposely abusing the definition of DLC and it's very hard to put your trust in a company when it's announced before you even own the game.

Many companies view DLC as their method of combating piracy and used games sales, guess who gets caught up in that battle? Yes, you and I. Big companies are talking about having DLC code unlocks just to see endings, how soon until they make the jump to charging us for bits and pieces of the game? Forced episodic gaming isn't something I would look forward to personally, especially with the incredibly disparate regional pricing issues.

Think about those and get back to me, I'm interested in your responses.

This comment was edited on Oct 16, 2009, 13:43.
Avatar 51617
51.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 13:27
51.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 13:27
Oct 16, 2009, 13:27
 
The only one pissing and moaning here is you, the rest of us are discussing things quite civilly. The first thing I do as a consumer is vote with my wallet by the way, nothing unreasonable about that.
Right, you canceled your pre-order because you're not upset. Then you didn't bitch and moan about it? You're deluded.

Some people have trouble getting worked up over "exciting new content" when they don't even have the original game in hand yet. It's not hard to understand, you just don't want to. Why are you even assuming the DLC is great and exciting? You haven't even played any of these games themselves. You dismiss it but perception is pretty important in the industry. I'd rather get my games released, play them and get fixes for the bugs before I start worrying about EXCITING NEW CONTENT.

Who cares if you have the game yet? Nobody is making you buy anything. If you don't want the DLC, don't buy it. You canceled your pre-order, you voted with your wallet. Then you come here to bitch about it. You don't make a bit of goddamn sense. You don't know shit about the game yet, so how can you complain about DLC that won't be out for another month or two at least? What difference does it make if they announce it now or later?

Someone below complained that they should have waited until after the release to announce that they intended to nickel and dime us. WTF? How does that make any goddamn sense either? You'd rather they wait until you buy the game until they tell you there's going to be DLC? Isn't it better to know in advance so that you can get your panties in a bunch ahead of time and not buy the game to begin with?

Morons will complain about anything...
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Avatar 9540
50.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 12:56
50.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 12:56
Oct 16, 2009, 12:56
 
So you're not upset Verno, yet your first reaction to the news post was to cancle your preorder and piss and moan about DLC.

The only one pissing and moaning here is you, the rest of us are discussing things quite civilly. The first thing I do as a consumer is vote with my wallet by the way, nothing unreasonable about that.

Ok then don't get pissy when you're labeled and dumped into the "I expect addtional content for free" crowd because thats pretty much how you come off in any news item relating to DLC for a game.

Somehow I will manage to sleep just fine regardless of how you label or insult me on internet forums. All you've done is have your aggression refuted, sorry but you're going to have to make a point otherwise you make it fairly easy to tear your posts down. Read Beamers posts for an example of how to respond like a human being, take others points into consideration while still offering a unique viewpoint of your own.
Avatar 51617
49.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 12:48
49.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 12:48
Oct 16, 2009, 12:48
 
So you're not upset Verno, yet your first reaction to the news post was to cancle your preorder and piss and moan about DLC. Ok then don't get pissy when you're labeled and dumped into the "I expect addtional content for free" crowd because thats pretty much how you come off in any news item relating to DLC for a game.
48.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 12:34
48.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 12:34
Oct 16, 2009, 12:34
 
It's a comment born of frustration, and there are very simple reasons why. If you are a gamer, why are you not excited about new, awesome game content? It's really that simple.

Some people have trouble getting worked up over "exciting new content" when they don't even have the original game in hand yet. It's not hard to understand, you just don't want to. Why are you even assuming the DLC is great and exciting? You haven't even played any of these games themselves. You dismiss it but perception is pretty important in the industry. I'd rather get my games released, play them and get fixes for the bugs before I start worrying about EXCITING NEW CONTENT.
Avatar 51617
47.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 12:04
47.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 12:04
Oct 16, 2009, 12:04
 
Meh, I suppose it is touchy to announce DLC ahead of release but the game is gold and this is going to be out well after release...

Once the game goes gold the team would essentially sit idle otherwise right? Might as well have them working on something, and I think this is great, DLC that arrives 3 months after release doesn't work out in my opinion, you need to have something out within a month or so I'd say. Maybe less. I think this is just the reality of development. It takes time so you can't afford to wait and see if people like the game before you decide if you want to make DLC, just start making it.

And I don't feel this is scraps of content that didn't make the final cut...it could be I suppose but I'll play the full game and if the DLC sounds interesting maybe I'll play it. I'd rather have it this way than play through the game (presuming the DLC would have never made it into the final game anyway) and then when I'm finished have nothing new to look forward to... (This was how I felt at the end of Dead Space, I wanted more!, and they really had nothing to offer, some different colored suits and cosmetic things...bleh)

I look forward to DLC for this game, that might change once I play the game but either way I don't feel like it hurts me if they are making DLC right now.

This comment was edited on Oct 16, 2009, 12:06.
46.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC
Oct 16, 2009, 12:03
46.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Oct 16, 2009, 12:03
Oct 16, 2009, 12:03
 
The tired old tale is the general assumption that all gamers are the same, whether it be console or PC gamers. This entire comment is a waste of time, why did you even make it other than to antagonize people? Is there a point somewhere hidden in it or did you just want to seem clever by calling people lazy cheapskates without actually using the words?

It's a comment born of frustration, and there are very simple reasons why. If you are a gamer, why are you not excited about new, awesome game content? It's really that simple.

Left 4 Dead 2, Borderlands, Dragon Age, the list goes on and on... awesome new games with great new content but instead of getting excited about it some gamers just seem eager to be mad and angry. How DARE you release new awesome looking content for what appears to be a great game! BASTARDS!

The whole thing just baffles me.
Avatar 54622
45.
 
Re: First Borderlands DLC Announced
Oct 16, 2009, 12:02
45.
Re: First Borderlands DLC Announced Oct 16, 2009, 12:02
Oct 16, 2009, 12:02
 
For some people this is a bad thing. Those are the people that think DLC = half the game on the disc.

For some people this is a great thing. DLC = more content as time goes on, dev support guaranteed, and the world will continue after the closing credits.

I fall in the latter if anything. At this point DLC is pretty much a given, so it's no longer the selling point some studios think it is. We just expect it for certain types of games these days. But I don't see it as a bad thing. Half-assed DLC doesn't sell and you're seeing less of it. And devs aren't leaving anything off the disc, they know that'll hurt future sales.
64 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older