Because it at least preserves the illusion that it is indeed a rip-off in DLC form and not just a regular rip-off.Why is that keeping it on a server for the same amount of time before releasing it, even when it could have gone on the printed discs, makes it acceptable?
To me it seems more like buying a car with a V8 in it and it only runs 6 cylinders until you pay a fee for the last 2That's like buying a car then being charged a fee for the key.
rip off
No, all the bonus maps and characters were already on the disc. You only downloaded some .ini-files that unlocked the content. And there was a patch, yeah, but it didn't fix anything related to the DLC specifically.As I recall, the bonus content for UC2 was released after a patch that fixed some issues in them. Plus it was all free. Plus they also released some maps or something that weren't on the disc.
Because... if it's already on the disc, why not make it available from the start? Bonus content should be additional content, that was made after the release of the game to improve the game. If I paid for the disc, I want to use every feature on it without additional payments.I'm surprised no-one has mentioned that putting the DLC on the game disc reduces distribution costs, which then reduces development overhead. If space exists on the disc to store the initial DLC content, why not do so? Why is that keeping it on a server for the same amount of time before releasing it, even when it could have gone on the printed discs, makes it acceptable?
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 squeeze a little more cash from them?
To me it seems more like buying a car with a V8 in it and it only runs 6 cylinders until you pay a fee for the last 2
Because... if it's already on the disc, why not make it available from the start?
Thing is they released it with that content! Also, somehow Gears, Borderlands and Section 8 all had DLC which was an actual DLC and did not prevent people from playing with each other.If it's not your speed, enjoy BioShock 2 as we released it.
That's exactly what it is. Nothing more, nothing less.Another tactic to try to decrease the used market.
It's odd that nobody has mentioned this yet...
Just because it's fair doesn't mean it's ethical, though. I don't like this either.
It's a brilliant concept, but the ethics are questionable, and something that doesn't sit right with me.
Might want to check your lawsIt's odd that nobody has mentioned this yet, but technically they aren't screwing you out of anything. You didn't buy the content when you bought your copy of the game. Read the end user license agreement on something for once. You only bought a license to play the game. The disc is just a distribution platform. Think of discs like digital distribution; instead of a download, you're getting a disc.
You aren't buying the content itself, but a license to use the content. There's nothing unfair here because they simply decided to sell the license for the main game and this "DLC" content separately. They also happened to use the same distribution media for both. That the "DLC" was already on the disc is irrelevant.
Just because it's fair doesn't mean it's ethical, though. I don't like this either.