Bioshock forgot the DL in DLC

[Drayven]

apparently the new DLC for Bioshock 2 isn't DLC at all but is unlocking content already on the disc.

Trouble is brewing in Rapture. The recently released Sinclair Solutions (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3178063) multiplayer pack for BioShock 2 (http://www.1up.com/do/gameOverview?cId=3168489) is facing upset players over the revelation that the content is already on the disc, and the $5 premium is an unlock code. It started when users on the 2K Forums (http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63853) noticed that the content is incredibly small: 24KB on the PC, 103KB on the PlayStation 3, and 108KB on the Xbox 360. 2K Games responded (http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=719075&postcount=138) with a post explaining that the decision was made in order to keep the player base in tact, without splitting it between the haves and have-nots.

Source (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3178326)

[Gorvi]

Or they could just do like LBP does and patch in the costumes every so often so that everyone can see them on other players even if they can't use them.

[Drayven]

yeah, I'm all for DLC and think it adds life to games but there has to be a limit. At least lie to me and tell me the content wasn't done when the game went gold.

[Xydarc]

Shouldn't this be titled the "BioShock 2 Developers forgot the DL in DLC?"

[Drayven]

Probably, but I was worried about making the title too long

[roboninja]

Luckily, when I was harping about Day 1 DLC being a problem, I was assured multiple times that this type of thing would never happen. This must be a figment of my imagination.

[Purple Santa]

yeah, I'm all for DLC and think it adds life to games but there has to be a limit. At least lie to me and tell me the content wasn't done when the game went gold.
I can understand why they wouldn't say it in the beginning or try to hide it. Although at this point with other companies having done this and the outrage...you would think they just be honest.

Just vote with your wallet. It sucks that you might miss out but if there is enough people who say no to this, then they won't do it. I'm not horrorified that companies do it. The same old line: They need to make money. If the market doesn't accept those ways of making their money well they will find out when it doesn't make them money. It's their product. They can try to sell it to me as they see fit. Just like I have the choice to buy it or not.

[Shadowstorm]

Wooo 24KB of data for $5!

[Spectre-7]

Wooo 24KB of data for $5!

At that price, those bits must be fucking awesome.

[BigJonno]

At that price, those bits must be fucking awesome.

They are. They're kilo-awesome

[Hawkzombie]

They are. They're kilo-awesome

kilo-what.

[Mike Kelehan]

Wooo 24KB of data for $5!

I'll sell you 500GB of data for $20, if it'll make you feel better. It'll just be garbage data, but if that's how we're valuing DLC now...

[Chimpbot]

Or they could just do like LBP does and patch in the costumes every so often so that everyone can see them on other players even if they can't use them.

I initially thought of this too; on paper, it's a great idea that should work across the board. Unfortunately, anyone developing on the 360 can't count on folks having anything bigger than the standard 20gig HDD.

I have absolutely no problem downloading beefy patches onto the cavernous drive my PS3 has...but my old n' busted 20gig drive is starting to get a little full.
These guys are actually in a tight spot; they can either package this stuff on the disc or force people who may not want to buy the DLC to download it anyway in the form of a large title update and chew up more of their limited drive space. Without this update, they'd be entirely unable to play multiplayer...which would ultimately force them to download something they can't technically use until they purchase the exact same 108kb unlock key.

Media Molecule does this with LBP all the time; they force you to download all of the purchasable content before you even purchase it...and then charge you to actually be able to use it. It's almost like handing someone a cake, only to inform them that they have to pay $5 in order to eat the cake they're already holding in their hands.

I was initially okay with this sort of setup...but it's almost exactly like making people pay to unlock content already stored on the disc. I'm not sure if I'm okay with either setup!

[muddi900]

There's one problem with your analogy; None of that content is on the Disc, that you paid for. While media companies like to throw the "word" license a lot, fact is, you buy a disc, or any other physical media, all its contents are yours to use. So much so that even the gameplay unlockable stuff can be considered illegal in certain situations. Also, your argument may be true for the 360, but they are doing it for the PS3 and the PC.

I'll sell you 500GB of data for $20, if it'll make you feel better. It'll just be garbage data, but if that's how we're valuing DLC now...

Fact: People pay for packaging not content. That's why Hardcover editions cost more than the paperback edition of the same book.

[Narradisall]

Meh. I'd be concerned if I actually had any interest in the content. The MP was fun, but hardly something I'd keep coming back to play weeks from now.

[Gerbs]

Dirty pool. You'd think game companies would learn their lesson and inflate the download size with garbage data.

[menage]

There's one problem with your analogy; None of that content is on the Disc, that you paid for. While media companies like to throw the "word" license a lot, fact is, you buy a disc, or any other physical media, all its contents are yours to use.

I still don't get this idea.

First off let me say that the way the handled this is pretty rotten (I mean, it was obviously finished by the time to release so fuck you), and I won't buy it because of it (that and it freezes in the MP), but...

So one thing that would make it okay is that it should be downloaded from a server even though it's the exact same content as is on the disc now? I mean, wouldn't something that you had to download because of an update and was on your hardrive also not belong to you? It's still your hardrive after all. You bought the game, game forces you to download stuff, so it's yours?

Also, you didn't get the unlock key with it, so you pay 5 bucks for that, cause that wasn't on the disc. Screw that the other content is there, Hot Coffee was as well, but they never meant for you to see it. Your entitled to that as well then??

How about source code, it's yours??? Music tracks? Hell, why not give me all my weapons and complete the game for me from the start. I paid for a full game, do I actually have to unlock shit to see the ending? Screw that, I paid for my shotgun upgrade, give it to me. I can skip ahead in a dvd all I want, but games, no sir, not games, Stupid media.

[J Arcane]

Screw that the other content is there, Hot Coffee was as well, but they never meant for you to see it. Your entitled to that as well then??

Sure. I can't count the number of PC games I've seen or played with mods that opened up and finished otherwise unused content. I never did the Hot Coffee thing in GTA, but there's stuff like the fan patch for Vampire Bloodlines that re-enables character backgrounds and quests that were left off by default, or the KOTOR2 mod that rewrites the whole blasted game.

How about source code, it's yours???

The full source code to a game is rarely available on disc, so this is a rather silly accusation. But the scripting code is usually present, and it's a pretty important component to being able to mod games.

Music tracks?

Sure. Why would I pay an extra $15 for a soundtrack CD that may not even be available when I could just listen to the files already sitting on my HDD? I've done this with a lot of PC games over the years, it's how I got my Battlefield: Vietnam tracks, the WoW soundtrack, the NWN1 soundtrack, and God knows how many others. Then there's all those older games for PC and PS1 where the soundtracks are right on the CD as audio tracks, which my friends and I all certainly took advantage of.

Hell, why not give me all my weapons and complete the game for me from the start. I paid for a full game, do I actually have to unlock shit to see the ending? Screw that, I paid for my shotgun upgrade, give it to me.

Are you seriously not familiar with the concept of a cheat code? And for certain types of games, you can damn sure bet I unlock that shit right from the get go. It was months with Rock Band before I finally got around to doing the SP campaign and unlocking the songs, because me and my friends just wanted to play the damn game we just got, so we just used an "unlock all songs" code. I paid for the content, it should damn well be up to me how I access it, and with mods and cheats and things on the PC in particular, this is generally a trivial matter to accomplish.

You're acting like these are all bizarre and ridiculous concepts but the truth is gamers, especially PC gamers, do this stuff every day.

And furthermore, it's a smokescreen for the real issue anyway. At issue is not necessarily the physical location of the data (which I'm sure will be easily circumvented on PC now that gamers know it's there), but with the fact that its presence is undeniable proof that this content was ready to go well before launch, and was deliberately concealed from the buyer to try and resell it to him later. It is EXACTLY what people have been saying they were concerned would happen back when the greedy marketing types first hit on this whole "DLC" idea in the first place. And here it is, happening. Surprised? Really?

[BigJonno]

Hell, why not give me all my weapons and complete the game for me from the start. I paid for a full game, do I actually have to unlock shit to see the ending? Screw that, I paid for my shotgun upgrade, give it to me. I can skip ahead in a dvd all I want, but games, no sir, not games, Stupid media.

I'm assuming from the tone of your post that you're being sarcastic, but there are plenty of people who think you should have access to everything up front (if you want it) and be able to skip ahead (if you need to.) Sure, the sense of achievement from completing a level or unlocking a new weapon is great; it's certainly a big part of the experience for me. Does that give me the right to deny other people the right to play their games the way that they want to? Hell no.

If you're stuck on a game, why shouldn't you be able to skip to the next level? You've paid for all of those maps, why shouldn't you be able to play them from the start? Would you be happy if you bought a movie, only to find that you could only watch from beginning to end in one chunk? No pause, rewind, fast forward or scene selection. No ability to re-watch your favourite scene or to show off your awesome TV with a particularly cool SFX sequence.

[menage]

Sure. I can't count the number of PC games I've seen or played with mods that opened up and finished otherwise unused content. I never did the Hot Coffee thing in GTA, but there's stuff like the fan patch for Vampire Bloodlines that re-enables character backgrounds and quests that were left off by default, or the KOTOR2 mod that rewrites the whole blasted game. The full source code to a game is rarely available on disc, so this is a rather silly accusation. But the scripting code is usually present, and it's a pretty important component to being able to mod games

And console games? I know PC games work in another way, but technically because I can drive on the wrong side off the road it doesn't mean I always should. Some devs support it, but they can just as well close the door.

you seriously not familiar with the concept of a cheat code? And for certain types of games, you can damn sure bet I unlock that shit right from the get go. It was months with Rock Band before I finally got around to doing the SP campaign and unlocking the songs, because me and my friends just wanted to play the damn game we just got, so we just used an "unlock all songs" code. I paid for the content, it should damn well be up to me how I access it, and with mods and cheats and things on the PC in particular, this is generally a trivial matter to accomplish. You're acting like these are all bizarre and ridiculous concepts but the truth is gamers, especially PC gamers, do this stuff every day.

Well duh, like Jonno said I was being sarcastic.

I think you kinda missed the point. Not all games have cheatcodes for example, certainly not on consoles nowdays with achievements and such. Sure if the dev likes to put them in it's great for a couple of us. But the point was that if I want to start at level 12 right away I can't out of the box. And I paid for the freaking thing so why can't I just go at it my own way form the getgo.

To be very clear, I DO NOT WANT THIS, I was responding to the it's my freaking data on the disc and I want to use it like I want to use it remark.

furthermore, it's a smokescreen for the real issue anyway. At issue is not necessarily the physical location of the data (which I'm sure will be easily circumvented on PC now that gamers know it's there), but with the fact that its presence is undeniable proof that this content was ready to go well before launch, and was deliberately concealed from the buyer to try and resell it to him later. It is EXACTLY what people have been saying they were concerned would happen back when the greedy marketing types first hit on this whole "DLC" idea in the first place. And here it is, happening. Surprised? Really?

Hey, I agree totally.

I just don't think "it's on the disc" is a logical way of thinking with software. Games coudln't even be made if anyone could use the content of a disc they bought in any which way they wanted. Cause then I could reproduce it as well. What';s stopping me from doing that if it's my disc? You have to put a line somewhere. And there's always people who will disagree with the line.

EDIT:To be sure:p. I'm not defending DLC scams like these. I think EA's buy new scheme is a much better and transparant one for exmaple than this crap. But I just disagree with the it's on the disc it's mine sentiment. Sure I can play the game when I want and how I want. But there's just boundaries to where you can take crap like that if it's about the actual data and access to it. Not perfect for sure, but what is.

[Narradisall]

Next stop, the 'higher resolutions' downloadable content. :D

[J Arcane]

And console games? I know PC games work in another way, but technically because I can drive on the wrong side off the road it doesn't mean I always should. Some devs support it, but they can just as well close the door.

I don't like consoles. I have a PS3, but I rarely play it. This kind of thing is one of the reasons why.

Devs are welcome to treat the PC platform as their personal domain where only they rule, but they are unlikely to succeed, and such attitudes are usually taken as a challenge.

I am a firm supporter of openness in all computer platforms. I think the closed nature of consoles at this stage in the game is antiquated and unnecessary and driven largely by greed, and that console makers should be encouraging things like the homebrew scenes instead of seeking to crush them under their heel.

Well duh, like Jonno said I was being sarcastic.

I think you kinda missed the point. Not all games have cheatcodes for example, certainly not on consoles nowdays with achievements and such. Sure if the dev likes to put them in it's great for a couple of us. But the point was that if I want to start at level 12 right away I can't out of the box. And I paid for the freaking thing so why can't I just go at it my own way form the getgo.

Well, why can't you? What is actually wrong with being able to do this? Sure, some developers don't make cheat codes available, but as far as I'm concerned, that's their fault, and if some enterprising soul mods a game to allow a level skip or a content unlock, or uploads a completed save, it's the consumers right to take advantage. The contents' the content no matter what order it's experienced in as far as I'm concerned, what the fuck does it even matter?

To date, I have never progressed more than a couple hours into the stories of any of the GTA games, because I find the single player missions to be useless bollocks. I just download or borrow completed saves, and run about the sandbox to my hearts content.

To be very clear, I DO NOT WANT THIS, I was responding to the it's my freaking data on the disc and I want to use it like I want to use it remark.

And I'm just saying it's a perfectly legitimate complaint, albeit one that misses the larger issue.

Hey, I agree totally.

I just don't think "it's on the disc" is a logical way of thinking with software. Games coudln't even be made if anyone could use the content of a disc they bought in any which way they wanted. Cause then I could reproduce it as well. What';s stopping me from doing that if it's my disc? You have to put a line somewhere. And there's always people who will disagree with the line.

I can reproduce copies of my games for my own use under the principle of fair use. As far as I'm concerned, the DMCA is a bad piece of legislation that illegally prevents access to a basic consumer right and should've been shut down by the courts, and as such I ignore it as I do any unjust law.

Should I attempt to sell those reproductions the existing copyright and patent laws already cover such eventualities, and I would deserve the full consequence of the law should I attempt such a thing.

However I wish to also note that it was at one time a fairly common site for PC gamers to see and purchase CD-ROMS loaded with mods for the popular games of the day, particularly Doom. This practice has largely fallen by the wayside, but not for legal reasons; the prevalence of the internet made CD houses like Walnut Creek largely obsolete.

On the balance, as long as it's for my own personal use and does not contravene restrictions on the resale of copyrighted materials, it is absolutely my right as far as I'm concerned to exercise my fair use in doing whatever the bleeding hell I want with what's on that disc, just as it's my right to install whatever modifications I might desire to my car, or cut tracks together from CDs I own to make mix tapes or theme disks.

[menage]

I can't believe I'm actually defending this, I'm not really a rulenazi, just wanted to get this out of the way.

Greed. I will admit stuff like this DLC is part of that, and sure there are numerous story's out there that are clear cut examples of that greed as well. However, playing the piracy card for a moment. It's not like all big evil coorporations are the only problem here. A company has to defend itself somehow against people who think copyright law is unjust as well in their opinion. Your view on an unjust law may be right, doesn't make it justifiable to break it. Maybe you know where you draw the line, thousand of people draw the line at unjust somewhere else. And copy and paste to their hearts content. In their view the law about that is also unjust, so I see no difference on a basic level.

On another level. It's also a bit difficult see a clear cut difference between the actual data and disc (tangible) and the experience & game itself here for me. You can't really separate them like black and white. Sure you can see your game as a car. In that way I agree, but if you see it as an experience you get something else. Sports for example. You don't go breaking rules in sports either (only when everyone agrees, but then there are new rules). A soccerplayer doesn't whack the ball in the back of the goal with his hands because he thinks it's better that way or that rules are meant to be broken. The word game itself says it, a game has to have rules. Otherwise you are left with chaos. At least that's how they're designed most of the time. Sure you can break apart a car, but breaking apart rules in sports takes the fun right out most of the time (some more than others I will admit)

A lot of people will see a game like a car, I see it like sports. I don't really care about physical data or what's on the disc. I do care that I get quality and an experience worth my 60 bucks. Bioshock 2 gave me that for me. If I find out there's more on the disc in the end it doesn't devaluate my experience. Only thing I'm peeved about is the obvious scam here, but I'll vote with the wallet.

Sorry if it's a bit vague, pretty hard discussion for me since I'm not English speaking by nature.

[J Arcane]

I can't believe I'm actually defending this, I'm not really a rulenazi, just wanted to get this out of the way.

Greed. I will admit stuff like this DLC is part of that, and sure there are numerous story's out there that are clear cut examples of that greed as well. However, playing the piracy card for a moment. It's not like all big evil coorporations are the only problem here. A company has to defend itself somehow against people who think copyright law is unjust as well in their opinion. Your view on an unjust law may be right, doesn't make it justifiable to break it. Maybe you know where you draw the line, thousand of people draw the line at unjust somewhere else. And copy and paste to their hearts content. In their view the law about that is also unjust, so I see no difference on a basic level.

You see no difference between piracy and fair use? I'm afraid I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here.


A lot of people will see a game like a car, I see it like sports. I don't really care about physical data or what's on the disc. I do care that I get quality and an experience worth my 60 bucks. Bioshock 2 gave me that for me. If I find out there's more on the disc in the end it doesn't devaluate my experience. Only thing I'm peeved about is the obvious scam here, but I'll vote with the wallet.

Sorry if it's a bit vague, pretty hard discussion for me since I'm not English speaking by nature.

Sports are multiplayer games. They have rules to ensure everyone has a fun time, instead of just one player. If everyone in the game agrees to a change of rules because they think it would be more fun, then more power to them, just as in many multiplayer servers online players have installed mods to the game that change the game experience, and by playing on that server you're agreeing to that change in rules.

If one person on the other hand, changes the rules for himself by hacking the server and cheating the game, that would not be fair and would not be fun for the rest of the players, and so such behavior should be sanctioned, just as a player in a soccer game would be if he picked up the ball and rushed the goalie.

But in a single-player experience, where is the harm? Where is the other player being affected by skipping ahead a level, or giving himself a better weapon? The only player whose fun matters is the one doing the change and he seems to be enjoying himself, so whose right is it to tell him he shouldn't do so? You may not enjoy it, and thus you're welcome not to take advantage of cheats or mods, but that doesn't seem like a good excuse to prevent some other guy from doing so. Was your enjoyment of the GTA series affected by my downloading a completed save so I could just run around stealing cars?

[menage]

You see no difference between piracy and fair use? I'm afraid I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here.

Oh sorry, too vague perhaps indeed.

I didn't mean that. I meant you said

I can reproduce copies of my games for my own use under the principle of fair use. As far as I'm concerned, the DMCA is a bad piece of legislation that illegally prevents access to a basic consumer right and should've been shut down by the courts, and as such I ignore it as I do any unjust law.

See, I don't have a problem with that view. But you ignoring a law because it's unjust doesn't make it the right thing to do. Pirates probably have other morals and act on those as well. You can justify anything with "I think it's unjust". Not placing you on the same level. But on a basic level people filling in their own version of just and unjust is slippy terroitory if it's about rights and laws.

Sports are multiplayer games. They have rules to ensure everyone has a fun time, instead of just one player. If everyone in the game agrees to a change of rules because they think it would be more fun, then more power to them, just as in many multiplayer servers online players have installed mods to the game that change the game experience, and by playing on that server you're agreeing to that change in rules.

If one person on the other hand, changes the rules for himself by hacking the server and cheating the game, that would not be fair and would not be fun for the rest of the players, and so such behavior should be sanctioned, just as a player in a soccer game would be if he picked up the ball and rushed the goalie.

But in a single-player experience, where is the harm? Where is the other player being affected by skipping ahead a level, or giving himself a better weapon? The only player whose fun matters is the one doing the change and he seems to be enjoying himself, so whose right is it to tell him he shouldn't do so? You may not enjoy it, and thus you're welcome not to take advantage of cheats or mods, but that doesn't seem like a good excuse to prevent some other guy from doing so. Was your enjoyment of the GTA series affected by my downloading a completed save so I could just run around stealing cars?

Damn we're on different levels man:D

No of course you're right in that regard. But as a dev and I put my heart and soul into creating a game you have a certain view of how it''s meant to be played. Chess for example, you can play that against the machine as well. Solo. But if you change the way chess works it wouldn't be chess anymore now would it, it would become another game. Something that looks like chess, but isn't anymore.

Now anyone can play chess the way they freaking want for all I care. But I can see the creator having a certain view they want to enforce because it's their "idea". It may be a solo activity most of the time, but i see it as engaging the dev within the parameters he set for me. I'm gaming against the dev so to say.

That doesn'make it something you have to abide by. I just like things the way they were meant to be. If people want to trancend that ruleset, fine. I don't think devs really mind you fucking around with mods most of the time. But when that tampering results in getting access to stuff you weren't meant to see at all is where things get tricky. If it's on the disc it doesn't mean you can jank it out and to whatever. Somebody actually sued RS for Hot Coffee right? Sure they could have pulled it out. But I hardly think the dev is responible anymore for people taking a property and running with it. And some people do that, so devs have to enforce stuff, otherwise they get sued by people who think they're smart as well. Ah fuck it, I can't get it into words properly. I hope it's not a total wreck of a post.

Wasn't this about a mappack anyway:D

[jeffbax]

Media Molecule does this with LBP all the time; they force you to download all of the purchasable content before you even purchase it...and then charge you to actually be able to use it. It's almost like handing someone a cake, only to inform them that they have to pay $5 in order to eat the cake they're already holding in their hands.

I was initially okay with this sort of setup...but it's almost exactly like making people pay to unlock content already stored on the disc. I'm not sure if I'm okay with either setup!

How is that at all the same? Media Molecule is developing NEW content. Thus the download. You download it anyway so you can see other players WITH the content in your game. This is an entirely different situation to already having had built the content from day one.

[Widgetcraft]

Luckily, when I was harping about Day 1 DLC being a problem, I was assured multiple times that this type of thing would never happen. This must be a figment of my imagination.

The explanation these days is, "It would have never been made if they weren't going to get paid for it!" Sort of like the new skins in God of War 3. In God of War 2 there were seven unlockable skins. In God of War 3 there is one unlockable skin, along with four pre-order exclusives, a 7-11 exclusive (requiring the buyer to purchase ten slurpees) and an exclusive for the Ultimate Edition. Of course, these skins never would have been made if they couldn't be used as marketing tie-ins.