Op Ed

Destructoid - Oh no, sixty dollars for eight hours? Just ... shut up. Thanks MG Admin.
I'm talking about the, "I'm not spending $60 for eight hours" crowd. Apparently, a game that lasts eight hours is now a failure, and not worth paying full price for, no matter how good it is. This new emphasis on length over quality smacks of middle school essay requirements, where your word count was more crucial than your writing ability.

View : : :
21.
 
Re: Op Ed
Feb 1, 2011, 13:04
21.
Re: Op Ed Feb 1, 2011, 13:04
Feb 1, 2011, 13:04
 
In this case I don't really see the loss

That wasn't what you said though. Here I'll quote you:

Beamer wrote on Feb 1, 2011, 12:18:
and I'd like you to give me examples of games where the DLC is already on the disc, because aside from Resident Evil 4's multiplayer (which isn't even wholly accurate) every accusation of this has proven false.

I gave you exactly what you asked for so /shrug. If you want to shift the goalposts then fine but I found it amusing you claimed the other guy was wrong when he was in fact correct.

Is there some kind of magic rule that DLC must be done after release, even if it's something small and done by a separate team in the final months of the game being made?

Nope. DLC has always been and will always be a case by case thing which is why people making blanket statements about all DLC being evil are silly and why people defending industry practices and DLC blindly look equally stupid. Regardless, there is shitty, greed inspired DLC out there and there will be in the future considering how profitable it is. That doesn't condemn all DLC but it does give the industry some incentives to make more of it and focus less on traditional product length. Some say that's already happening and others claim its natural industry evolution, I don't really have an opinion there myself.
Avatar 51617
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
3.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
33.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
2.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
4.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
5.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
6.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
7.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
11.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
   Re: Op Ed
13.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
    Re: Op Ed
14.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
     Re: Op Ed
16.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
      Re: Op Ed
23.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
       Re: Op Ed
18.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
     Re: Op Ed
20.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
      Re: Op Ed
 21.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
      Re: Op Ed
22.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
       Re: Op Ed
24.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
       Re: Op Ed
27.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
     Re: Op Ed
28.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
8.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
10.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
12.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
9.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
15.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
17.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
19.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
25.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
26.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
29.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
30.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
31.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
32.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
34.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
35.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
36.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
37.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
38.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
40.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
   Re: Op Ed
41.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
50.
Feb 2, 2011Feb 2 2011
51.
Feb 2, 2011Feb 2 2011
   Re: Op Ed
52.
Feb 2, 2011Feb 2 2011
    Re: Op Ed
39.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
42.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
44.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
46.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
43.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
45.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
47.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
48.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011
49.
Feb 1, 2011Feb 1 2011