DmC DLC!!! (Play as Vergil)

You know, I think people need to approach this whole scenario a bit differently. Sure, Capcom has been doing this for what seems like forever. They did it with Street Fighter II back on SNES/Genesis, and yes, they've done it with DMC3 with DMC3SE. The thing is, why do they CONTINUE to do it? It's a bad practice, no matter how you try and justify it. Maybe the younger generation that played/purchased all of these Capcom re-releases didn't know any better because they were, you know, young and ignorant. I wasn't even thinking about business practices, consumer exploitation, etc. when Capcom did this back with Street Fighter II. Even more so, my parents probably bought me Super Street Fighter II Turbo or whatever for Christmas. I had no control over my support of these horrible practics. But now that I'm older and more mature I can choose not to support it because it's bullshit. Enough is enough, you know what I mean?
360 opens the pandora's box with charging not for the mp itself, but the opportunity to have mp.

Bethseda starts monetizing in game items. eg. Horse armor

Ubisoft cuts off the endings/prologues as dlc in games like PoP 2008 and Tomb Raider Underworld

Activision announces in advance that ~$60 of dlc will required for keeping up with the jones in CoD, in advance of the game release. The season pass goes mainstream.

That enough is enough/straw that broke the camel's back line got crossed a long time ago.
 
I really don't understand how some of you can compare DmC's Vergil DLC to DMC3SE. You are aware that every successful PS2 game eventually turned into a Greatest Hits version value priced at $20? They decided to add a bunch fo stuff to this Greatest Hits version for FREE. They rebalanced the game, added Turbo, Bloody Palace, and Vergil. They didn't have to do any of it because the Greatest Hits version was going to be released anyway.
Okay and instead of making a simple greatest hits for only people who never got the game, they put work into it in order to resell the game to pre-existing fans, greatly increasing the revenue they'd get from the greatest hits. It's not like they offered the GH benefits for free to people who already purchased the original.

The pros and cons between doing this and doing DLC is basically a wash
 

ezekial45

I have assigned to you one day for each year its punishment will last.
You know, I think people need to approach this whole scenario a bit differently. Sure, Capcom has been doing this for what seems like forever. They did it with Street Fighter II back on SNES/Genesis, and yes, they've done it with DMC3 with DMC3SE. The thing is, why do they CONTINUE to do it? It's a bad practice, no matter how you try and justify it. Maybe the younger generation that played/purchased all of these Capcom re-releases didn't know any better because they were, you know, young and ignorant. I wasn't even thinking about business practices, consumer exploitation, etc. when Capcom did this back with Street Fighter II. Even more so, my parents probably bought me Super Street Fighter II Turbo or whatever for Christmas. I had no control over my support of these horrible practics. But now that I'm older and more mature I can choose not to support it because it's bullshit. Enough is enough, you know what I mean?
Yes, I know exactly what you mean. But you and I both know that's not going to happen. Capcom and all these other companies have got the sweet taste of DLC profits, and they're not going to give that up. Ever. All they can do to calm people is to make things a bit more comfortable and easy for them to swallow.

Would I like to have the Vergil DLC a part of this main game as an unlockable? Absolutely. But they can't do that anymore. This content is separate from the main game, and feature some new areas, etc (as far as we know). They stand to make more money by doing it the DLC route. That's just how it is.
 

GuardianE

Santa May Claus
Okay and instead of making a simple greatest hits for only people who never got the game, they put work into it in order to resell the game to pre-existing fans, greatly increasing the revenue they'd get from the greatest hits. It's not like they offered the GH benefits for free to people who already purchased the original.

The pros and cons between doing this and doing DLC is basically a wash
DLC wasn't an option in the PS2 era. Who the hell would offer the GH version for free? No company has ever done that. They could have released a new version of DMC3:SE for $30 or $40 or even $60, but they did it as a free addition to the Greatest Hits.


But Vergil was only in the Special Edition of DMC3, which cost $30, didn't it? You still had to buy the "same" game twice if you were going to play as Vergil.
It was developed a year later. And it was $20. It was legitimate "DLC" in a world without DLC.
 
Okay and instead of making a simple greatest hits for only people who never got the game, they put work into it in order to resell the game to pre-existing fans, greatly increasing the revenue they'd get from the greatest hits. It's not like they offered the GH benefits for free to people who already purchased the original.

The pros and cons between doing this and doing DLC is basically a wash
How would they be able to tell if a person was a previous owner?

Why does that matter now? We can hmm and haww over what Capcom should have or shouldn't have done, but with more accessible platforms, stuff like that is actually possible.
 
As long as the base game has enough content for the price, I've got no problem with DLC out of the gate. The people working on it would have nothing to do while waiting for the game to come out anyway.
 

ezekial45

I have assigned to you one day for each year its punishment will last.
I guess no one here is interested that Vergil has a Doppelganger style moveset...
I like his move set. You can see traces of all of the moves and styles of the previous games in Dante and Vergil. I dig it.

I'm glad that they didn't get rid of Doppelganger altogether. That was a lot of fun in DMC3.
 
I really don't understand how some of you can compare DmC's Vergil DLC to DMC3SE. You are aware that every successful PS2 game eventually turned into a Greatest Hits version value priced at $20? They decided to add a bunch fo stuff to this Greatest Hits version for FREE. They rebalanced the game, added Turbo, Bloody Palace, and Vergil. They didn't have to do any of it because the Greatest Hits version was going to be released anyway.
You seemed to have gotten the wrong impression from my post. Please, don't throw me in the same bus as those trying to defend/justify this! I wasn't trying to say that Capcom is doing the exact same thing with DmC as they did with DMC3SE. I was just trying to approach the argument/situation from a different perspective. Just looking for that middle ground, you know?
 
So now you're combining the two practices from this gen I hate the most, retailer exclusive DLC and day one DLC, into one tight package. Bravo Capcom, bravo.

I have this preordered at Newegg using one of their $15 off deals but I may just cancel altogether after this news and wait to see if the PC version is any good.
This game will sell way more than Bayo 2. Think about that for a minute :3.
So a game released for two consoles with a combined 150 million base plus PC outselling a game released during the first year (?) of a new console.

Are you sure you comfortable going out on that limb?
ITT i found out that the PC version will be 60fps and is handled by the peeps who handled SSF4AE which eases almos all my concerns when it comes to technical stuff. Now let's hope for Steamworks or at least no GFWL.

I'm not 100% feeling the game just yet but I'm open to a surprise.
Haha, good luck with that!
 
DLC wasn't an option in the PS2 era. Who the hell would offer the GH version for free? Nobody company has ever done that.
I'm not saying DLC was an option or that they would actually give the GH for free, what I'm saying is you acted like putting vergil in the GH was some kind of noble charity as opposed to the horror of this DLC, when in reality its basically the same thing. Add a new character to the game and charge people who want to play as that character.
 
And I'm calling that they'll be removed and sold as DLC day 1, what's so hard to understand about that?
The idea that a game's features are stripped at the end to be sold is a fallacy. DLC features are planned out early on. What's being sold is planned out because they balance the time ($) spent on it it with what they expect to make from it. They don't treat a potential income stream flippantly. They don't just tell developers to squeeze in all they can and then pick and choose what to pull out as DLC later because they want to plan it out to maximize their return.

While it may not be more comforting, it's more accurate to how projects are handled.
 
Anyone else think it's funny that the game's story is all anti-big corporation practices and not buying everything you see advertised, but yet, the DLC practice is pretty much that?
 
I noticed that Vergil has new moves/abilities that he never had (aside from the ones I mentioned).

It seems that he has a Doppelganger style variant. It works very different from Dante's Doppelganger. Also the Doppelganger is seen throwing Round Trip.

Nice.
Didn't notice that, could you please tell me at what time?
 
I'm not saying DLC was an option or that they would actually give the GH for free, what I'm saying is you acted like putting vergil in the GH was some kind of noble charity as opposed to the horror of this DLC, when in reality its basically the same thing. Add a new character to the game and charge people who want to play as that character.
So what should they have done if they wanted to add more content to DMC3SE?

What they did with DMC3SE was the best option they could've went with. Most other expansions at the time cost $30+ (like NGB or MGS3:S).

Didn't notice that, could you please tell me at what time?
http://youtu.be/VENdJgB_zI0?t=1m15s
 
Anyone else think it's funny that the game's story is all anti-big corporation practices and not buying everything you see advertised, but yet, the DLC practice is pretty much that?
MGS2 levels of meta.
So a game released for two consoles with a combined 150 million base plus PC outselling a game released during the first year (?) of a new console.

Are you sure you comfortable going out on that limb?
Hey I'm confident this will outsell Bayo 1 by console versions alone. Just rubbing salt on wounds mate :3.
 
DLC revealed 3 months before game's release date, here is the future of gaming.

Capcom just keeps giving me more reasons to not try this game, so really no tears shed from me over this. (hope that the game is good though for the DMC fans still looking to give it a chance)
 
So what should they have done if they wanted to add more content to DMC3SE?

What they did with DMC3SE was the best option they could've went with. Most other expansions at the time cost $30+ (like NGB or MGS3:S).


http://youtu.be/VENdJgB_zI0?t=1m15s
I'm not saying they should have done anything other than what they did. I am saying what they did was charge the fans extra money to play as an extra character and that this method isn't much better or worse than having DLC that you can either choose to pay for, not pay for, or even get for free under some pretty easy circumstances
 
To be fair Bayonetta's characters were not even close to a DMC character when it come to how unique they are. In Bayonetta they were pretty much skins, which DmC will also have, and so did DMC3.
True, but honestly, Bayonetta subscribed to the "Viewtiful Joe" model of extra characters (wherein the characters still had enough to distinguish them from Bayonetta). And while that's all fine and good, they still were free. If circumstances were any different, you know they would have been DLC, along with the likes of the Secret Boss fight and the various extra weapons.

After all, such definitely didn't stop Konami...
Gray Fox skin as a Limited Edition DLC
But whatever, this is par the course for Capcom, especially for their western output. And yet another reason for me to not support this release.
 
There are things to complain about when it comes to DLC, but this isn't one of those things.
Well, if you don't buy at Gamestop, you don't get it for free, even if you have it pre-ordered somewhere else. Limiting access like that seems like a fair complaint. At least let everyone have a chance at their most accessible retailer.
 
I'm not saying they should have done anything other than what they did. I am saying what they did was charge the fans extra money to play as an extra character and that this method isn't much better or worse than having DLC that you can either choose to pay for, not pay for, or even get for free under some pretty easy circumstances
Well for one the "easy circumstances" should actually be made easier. What if you don't live near a Gamestop store? Or what if you are in a different country? That's not equal opportunity.
 

GuardianE

Santa May Claus
You seemed to have gotten the wrong impression from my post. Please, don't throw me in the same bus as those trying to defend/justify this! I wasn't trying to say that Capcom is doing the exact same thing with DmC as they did with DMC3SE. I was just trying to approach the argument/situation from a different perspective. Just looking for that middle ground, you know?
No, I hear you. I was just replying to you because you were the last post in that tangetial conversation.


I'm not saying they should have done anything other than what they did. I am saying what they did was charge the fans extra money to play as an extra character and that this method isn't much better or worse than having DLC that you can either choose to pay for, not pay for, or even get for free under some pretty easy circumstances
The difference might be that you get the full game with DMC3:SE and can trade your old copy back for it. They didn't have to include it in the Greatest Hits release. As DahBomb mentioned, NGB didn't do that.
 
Well for one the "easy circumstances" should actually be made easier. What if you don't live near a Gamestop store? Or what if you are in a different country? That's not equal opportunity.
You are now arguing about things that have nothing to do with my point. Sure, the circumstances could be easier. I don't understand the logic of not living near a gamestop as you have the chance to preorder online, as well as other countries having other stores offering the bonus. I also don't understand why it has to be equal opportunity. I also agree that it should be easier and don't like DLC in general and wish we were back in the days of unlocking stuff, but then again back in the day, we may have just not gotten extra vergil levels at all then.
 
No, I hear you. I was just replying to you because you were the last post in that tangetial conversation.




The difference might be that you get the full game with DMC3:SE and can trade your old copy back for it. They didn't have to include it in the Greatest Hits release. As DahBomb mentioned, NGB didn't do that.
And they didn't HAVE to offer you an opportunity to get this DLC for free at all either, your point?
 
Capcom, how can you expect me to keep defending you if your gonna pull shit like this?

I can say RE6 is an acquired taste, but how the hell can DLC announcements over 2 months before release be justified?

:/
Like it or not, that's nothing unique to Capcom though.
You know what other game has DLC planned months before release?

Every game.

Was there even a game (besides smaller indie stuff) in 2012 that didn't have DLC planned from the start?
Pretty much the only difference is some don't announce it until later, but it's always planned way before.