-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
No Single-Player DLC for Tomb Raider.
- Thread starter Saty
- Start date
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
Yeah, what the fuck was up with those?? Mutant fireproof thorn bushes...
NullPointer
Member
I love single player/co-op DLC, when its quality and a good value for the price.
That said, 99% of the DLC out there is garbage, but the idea is still a good one in theory.
Premium multiplayer DLC needs to die in a fire though, or needs to be re-imagined from the ground up. Splitting the community and watering down playlists helps NOBODY. Multiplayer map packs should be free, and a cost of business for maintaining an engaged community.
That said, 99% of the DLC out there is garbage, but the idea is still a good one in theory.
Premium multiplayer DLC needs to die in a fire though, or needs to be re-imagined from the ground up. Splitting the community and watering down playlists helps NOBODY. Multiplayer map packs should be free, and a cost of business for maintaining an engaged community.
NoirVisage
Banned
Neh, to discuss why would require you to actually back up your words with valid points.
daninthemix
Member
Shame. Underworld had some rather good DLC.
Hated the controls for that game, but am thinking of giving it another go.
Is this the alternative? Why not have fully fleshed out DLC created after the initial campaign was released to give me a reason to keep/turn on/play the game after I've finished it?
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
Yeah, in my experience with single player DLC, unless I'm late to a game and pick up a game of the year edition, it's rarely worth going back to a finished game to play. Mass Effect 2 was particularly bad about this. "Oh great, a new squad member that I'll never use because I've already played this game three times". It's nice when it's a part of the game, like in a game of the year edition, but rarely worth either the time or the money after the fact. I like the idea of downloadable expansion packs better, but it seems publishers are too focused on nickel and diming these things into irrelevance.
Confused101
Member
I think what's confusing people are the different kinds of DLC. Well, maybe not different kinds, but different situations.
- Day 1 DLC is shitty. Include it with the damn game and stop trying to nickel and dime me.
- DLC that's developed after the release of the game can be awesome for someone that truly enjoyed the game and is looking to spend some more time with it. I fall into this camp. I loved the single player portion. Would I have liked some DLC? Sure, but I don't need it to make me feel like I got the full experience. I'm just saying it would've been nice and I think that's what most people are getting at in this thread.
Now when I say DLC, I'm talking about something substantial that I can sink my teeth into. If they said they were rolling out single player DLC and all it contained were a bunch of new, single puzzle tombs like the ones currently in the game, then I probably wouldn't re-rent it. I'm sure a bunch of people wouldn't re-install it just for that either.
But if we're talking about something like exploring the mansion, or maybe an entire new area that acts as an intro to the next game coming out, I'd be all about it.
- Day 1 DLC is shitty. Include it with the damn game and stop trying to nickel and dime me.
- DLC that's developed after the release of the game can be awesome for someone that truly enjoyed the game and is looking to spend some more time with it. I fall into this camp. I loved the single player portion. Would I have liked some DLC? Sure, but I don't need it to make me feel like I got the full experience. I'm just saying it would've been nice and I think that's what most people are getting at in this thread.
Now when I say DLC, I'm talking about something substantial that I can sink my teeth into. If they said they were rolling out single player DLC and all it contained were a bunch of new, single puzzle tombs like the ones currently in the game, then I probably wouldn't re-rent it. I'm sure a bunch of people wouldn't re-install it just for that either.
But if we're talking about something like exploring the mansion, or maybe an entire new area that acts as an intro to the next game coming out, I'd be all about it.
grosvenor_92
Member
As someone who hasn't picked up the game yet I was hoping there would be single player dlc. Maybe that will change but for now I'm still waiting for it to go on sale
CambriaRising
Member
Not sure what else they could do really after the ending.
They were hiding something, for sure... Maybe it's just straight-up cut content.
lucius
Member
Think they could and still might add something like new game+ or harder mode like Dragons Dogma did. Even on hard this game is not very tough say compared to something like Batman AC which was released like a year a half ago, on hard that game is about right and even that has new game+ that is even a bit more challenging than it's hard mode.
GravityMan
Member
Agreed, that was the way I interpreted his statement. Early DLC may be MP-based but I wouldn't yet rule out the possibility of SP DLC a bit later on. But with this generation winding down, I do think it's unlikely we'll see SP DLC. I think it's more likely that they'll announce a sequel for next-gen systems later this year or next year.
Aha! I wondered about those things- they were hiding the real tombs of the game.
robovanburen
Member
Aww. I wanted a Horde mode where Lara fought off waves of deer.
Yeah, that would be amazing. The battle in the chasm made me drool for more potential shootouts like that.
NullPointer
Member
How about a Boar'ed Mode?
Sure, why not have an entire development team sitting around twiddling their fingers for the several months between when a game goes gold and when gamers feel it's OK to release DLC, and pay their salary and health insurance at the same time?
Confused101
Member
Wait, what? Who said anything about them doing nothing after the game went gold? That's when they would be working on the DLC, no? I imagine it would take them a few months to make a worth while DLC and at that time would serve as a good reason to boot up the game again.
I didn't clarify a set time that gamers would feel it's okay to release DLC. I don't think there is one. All I said was "after the release of the game". The only clarification I made was that day 1 DLC is bullshit.
Well, the assumption with the 'day 1 dlc is bullshit' is that it's content that was cut from the game specifically to 'gouge the player for more money', when often times it's started on after the game has gone gold, and in some cases is finished and sent to approval before the game has shipped to retail. Approval of the main game usually takes a few months, so it's perfectly reasonable to see how some DLC content could be finished before the game hits retail.
So I don't really understand how day 1 dlc is considered shit, outside of a skewed perception of the timeline it was developed under (or if it actually is of shit quality), and folks wanting some arbitrary amount of time to elapse between initial release and when the DLC is released so they don't feel like they are getting screwed.
Confused101
Member
I think I see where you're coming from.
So is there really that much time between when a game goes gold and when it's in the hands of consumers? Even enough time to make some nice, solid DLC?
These are honest questions. I thought the game is able to be purchased pretty quickly after it goes gold. Maybe the examples that I'm remembering weren't necessarily the norm.
So is there really that much time between when a game goes gold and when it's in the hands of consumers? Even enough time to make some nice, solid DLC?
These are honest questions. I thought the game is able to be purchased pretty quickly after it goes gold. Maybe the examples that I'm remembering weren't necessarily the norm.
Mister_Bubbles
Member
I'm pretty sure they were the spawn points for wild boar, deer and such. The wildlife would run into them when on fire, and I noticed new ones would wander out of them every now and then.
Ah, I think I may have confused you a bit. I was talking about the certification process, not going gold. Sorry about that.
Most accounts I've heard put the certification process at around 3 months. So that's where that time for working on (possibly day 1) DLC comes in. At least as far as I understand it.
Going gold is after a game has been certified and is cleared to go to manufacturing, or is ready to be shipped to retailers.