Confirmed: BioShock 2 DLC Already On Disc

[hal]

The rumour is true as 2K Community Manager, 2K Elizabeth confirms: the recently released $5 cosmetic Downloadable Content for BioShock 2 is already on the game disc. Ponying up the cash simply unlocks the extras. (thanks Evil Avatar)

I noticed there was a bit of confusion about our Sinclair Solutions Tester Pack file size, and I wanted to clear things up for you. The way our engine and game structure works is that people need to have the exact same content for people to play together. One of the challenges with post launch content for MP is that it can split the player base, and we want to avoid that whenever possible. For this content, creating the DLC package the way we did allowed for us to not split the player base - so whether you purchase the new content or not, you can still play with your friends.

I know some of you have strong beliefs about DLC, and I'm not here to sway your opinion or convince you to buy our stuff - if you like what we're offering, I hope you get it and enjoy it. If it's not your speed, enjoy BioShock 2 as we released it.

I want to let you know that DLC is not interfering with our patching capabilities, which are a top priority and are still being actively worked on. We're committed to supporting you and making BioShock 2 the best experience possible.

I hope this clears up a lot of the questions and confusion in this thread!

Calling it DLC might have lead to that confusion.

 

[Firefly]

So let me get this straight.

You buy the disc then have to spend more to use everything that's on it.

That's like buying a car then being charged a fee for the key.
rip off

 

[Ma3a*]

Wow, I'm well gobsmacked.

I'm not sure what to say but SCAMMERS!

 

[Jackal]

**** like this makes me really not want to buy the game.

I really liked Bioshock and haven't picked up Bioshock 2 yet because I've just been to busy with work.

I'm actually thinking about NOT buying it at all now. I'm not going to download it either. It's really bad for companies to do this type of bs. That car senario is a perfect example of this type of behavior.

And their excuse is really bad too. "We did it so everyone could play our crappy MP". It's already on the disc, which means I've already paid for it once. Now you're making us pay more for the same content?

Not happy

 

[ambershee]

Big quotation of bull****ting clarifies nothing.

 

[Bi()ha2arD]

No, I won't be buying this game. Thanks for making my decision even easier.

 

[Fuzzle]

It depends on whether the DLC could only be developed as an extra paid addon or if it was included in the main development budget, but this is something nobody will ever truthfully divulge so it's impossible to say.

Kinda like how if you buy Company of Heroes or Dawn of War 2 today and patch it, you technically own the expansions. You still need to purchase the unlock which let's you play the expansion content. This is fair since obviously the expansions could only be made with the intention of being sold. Whether this type of content is already available at launch or not I think is irrelevant - what matters is whether it would not exist if it had to be free.
In the car example, kinda like how you can buy a better stereo or genuine leather interior. It wouldn't make sense to produce these things with the intention of being free. Only if you are planning on selling them are you able to offer it.


Overall I'm for DLC, I think it's a great opportunity as a user be able to get more out of a title if I really like it. That said, I definitely feel most of it seems like cash grab shovelware. I've never bought any DLC as of yet even though I think the concept of it is a great idea.

 

[Plumb_Drumb]

dude, it's on the disc. you think the dev's are just going to pony up free stuff if it's not in the budget?

The publishers would never let that happen, so, it was already paid for, you just pay for it a second time.

 

[Fuzzle]

dude, it's on the disc. you think the dev's are just going to pony up free stuff if it's not in the budget?

Lemme try this way:

Publisher: Have 10 million to make a game.
Developer: Okay.
Publisher: You can have 2 million more if you make some DLC.
Developer: Sure.

The 10 million game would come without DLC offered. The 12 million game would come with optional DLC. If they were to give it away included in the original game's price, it would never have been made in the first place.

Like I said though, this is an ideal situation and there's no way of knowing whether this is the case (and it doubtfully is). I'm just saying that it's an example of where it would make sense to have launch DLC.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

I can understand this coming from the DLC budget, but it makes no sense that it is on the disc that went gold.

If they had made a patch available that contained all the content but locked and you bought a key to unlock it, I'd see that as a bit different. As it stands, everyone HAS the DLC on their disc, they just can't use it.

 

[Capt.Toilet]

Resident Evil 5 did the same thing with its multiplayer mode.

 

[Plumb_Drumb]

Lemme try this way:

Publisher: Have 10 million to make a game.
Developer: Okay.
Publisher: You can have 2 million more if you make some DLC.
Developer: Sure.

The 10 million game would come without DLC offered. The 12 million game would come with optional DLC. If they were to give it away included in the original game's price, it would never have been made in the first place.

Like I said though, this is an ideal situation and there's no way of knowing whether this is the case (and it doubtfully is). I'm just saying that it's an example of where it would make sense to have launch DLC.

any one who buys the disc has already paid for the DLC.
They just want them to pay to unlock it. Duh

This is a case where letting people know something they probably shouldn't know, is something the people probably shouldn't have been let know.
or something.

 

[Fuzzle]

I suppose I just don't agree that just because it's on the disc means you own it. I don't consider it to be any more mine than a file somewhere on teh interwebs. I can download heaps of games for free, but I can't play them unless I unlock them.

Torchlight's demo is the full game just with the content locked off. I kinda see that as the same thing. Having the files doesn't make the game mine.

In the end though, I agree that there's a definite distinction between cash grab DLC bordering on ripoffs and worthwhile, proper DLC. I just feel that it's fine to have launch dlc as long as it's genuinely worthwhile (which it rarely/never is), and as long as it's launched along with the game, I don't see the harm in putting it on the disc.

 

[Plumb_Drumb]

I don't agree either. If they would have held it off, and made it an actual download later on I probably wouldn't be bitching.

The fact that they made it, put it on the disk and we paid for it, then locked it out, and let me know about it, is a whole different matter.

I'm sure there's some kinda crack for this stuff.

 

[Mister_Prophet]

Resident Evil 5 did the same thing with its multiplayer mode.

Yeah, but nobody I know was dumb enough to think RE deathmatch was a good idea.

As for this thing, I'm sure someone will figure out a hack...just like they did for GTA: SA's hot coffee thing. I was gonna get around to buying the game anyway, but I rarely buy sequels that look like mission packs for full price...so some waiting is in order. On the other hand I just spent five bucks buying Point Lookout for Fallout 3 and already had a wicked jolt when one of the mutant hicks bum-rushed me out of nowhere by a polluted beach. Worth it.

 

[Majik]

So let me get this straight.

You buy the disc then have to spend more to use everything that's on it.

That's like buying a car then being charged a fee for the key.
rip off

On top of that, people that pay for this will get an advantage over those who don't.

I reached the pre-dlc level cap earlier today and now I feel that I'm pretty much done with this game. I'm sure as hell not paying for this and I don't feel like playing against people using weapon upgrades etc. that I can't get access to.

 

[Wulff]

I just started playing multiplayer, I do like it, but this is just silly.

 

[CyMek]

I guess my question is: Why make it DLC if you have it finished and ready for launch? Do you dislike your playerbase that much that you won't give them a little extra content because you can squeeeze a little more cash from them?

 

[ambershee]

Kinda like how if you buy Company of Heroes or Dawn of War 2 today and patch it, you technically own the expansions. You still need to purchase the unlock which let's you play the expansion content.

No, because you don't get the singleplayer campaigns in the patches.

 

[Renegade Retard]

I'm really not liking this new trend in the industry. Used to be that DLC or Expansion Packs were material that was created after the original game was played. This was either in response to community feedback, or to add content that couldn't be completed before the production deadline.

Now, they are making content well within the timeline, but flagging certain pieces as a way to milk more money out of the consumer. So, they are getting consumers hooked on the electronic heroine of the stripped down game, then satisfying the fix by making them pay for something they've had all along.

It's a brilliant concept, but the ethics are questionable, and something that doesn't sit right with me.