If you want a "solution" by the way... the correct way is already established content. Buy BC3 and get a free EA Steam game worth 15 dollars or less. Or get so many Ps3/360/wii points etc. It's not about feeling entitled... it's about fighting corporate BS to errode consumer rights.

This is just one of the many ways game developers are moving towards a system where you won't be able to truly own anything anymore. DLC and XBLA games that you can't refund or sell are just a stepping stone. The game devs eventually will be just like the crooks in software development where they require online authenticity checks so that you would have the privilege of even using the RETAIL software you bought. Meaning, used copies of Adobe and what are completely useless unless you get an illegal crack online. Eventually console gaming will be full-blown digital just like Steam and no one will own anything more. Instead you will have "licenses". What makes the software industry so special from anyone else to get away with eliminating ownership? Cars have intellectual property too. Someone designed the car model yes? That car design is intellectual property. But yet you are allowed to sell your car. Why should it be any different for games?

Also the whole exact replica argument doesn't fly. In the world of 1s and 0s, they can be exact replicas if the wear on the disc isn't enough to disrupt the game's ability to be read properly. But you don't have a warranty, your booklet has wear and tear, your case, the disc itself, etc. This is why used copies are worth less. If they were replicas, they'd be just as expensive (good as new right? So I'll sell it to you for $60? Wrong). But they are not.

Btw digital music and DVD video are 1s and 0s too and yet you don't see musicians and movie makers cry about used music CD and DVD sales. They cry about piracy. But not the used market.

So yeah, with the way game and software developers treat their base, I'm not about to cry them a river if they go out of business due to piracy. Software development workers who agree with DRM principles/philosopies deserve all the downsizing that comes their way.

For games that have day 1 DLC, it just means that they have been working on the DLC and could not release it by the time the game went gold and so it was not included on the disk. It was still for all intents and purposes meant to be an extra for the game that they are offering free to those who bought it.
When a game goes Gold, it means they have finalized the image and it is ready to be put on disk. At this time they ramp up manufacturing and press the images to the discs, package them up and create stock to be sold to retail outlets.
There is usually a couple month gap from when games go Gold to when the release date is, this is due to the fact that it takes a while to produce and ship the games to the retail outlets.
In this couple months DLC could easily be finished up and ready for market as well as bugs being found and patches created for the bugs. This is also why there is day1 patches.

The assumption that Day1 DLC is content that is take out of the original is crap logic IMO. If day1 DLC was put on disc instead, in the case I spoke about above, it would cause delays in the shipping and release date of their products.

Quit thinking with your emotions and try to think with your head damnit.

It all depends on how the development process went for these maps. All maps have to be complete well before testing and gold status is reached. These new maps could have been placed into development at a time where they could not be finished before release. Perhaps they were maps that needed some extra time to get right and could not make the deadline. These would be optimistic views though :)

loves2splooge said: This is just one of the many ways game developers are moving towards a system where you won't be able to truly own anything anymore. DLC and XBLA games that you can't refund or sell are just a stepping stone. The game devs eventually will be just like the crooks in software development where they require online authenticity checks so that you would have the privilege of even using the RETAIL software you bought. Meaning, used copies of Adobe and what are completely useless unless you get an illegal crack online. Eventually console gaming will be full-blown digital just like Steam and no one will own anything more. Instead you will have "licenses". What makes the software industry so special from anyone else to get away with eliminating ownership? Cars have intellectual property too. Someone designed the car model yes? That car design is intellectual property. But yet you are allowed to sell your car. Why should it be any different for games?

Like how Apple is getting sued back and forth over iTunes? Oh wait...

JaggedSac said: It all depends on how the development process went for these maps. All maps have to be complete well before testing and gold status is reached. These new maps could have been placed into development at a time where they could not be finished before release. Perhaps they were maps that needed some extra time to get right and could not make the deadline. These would be optimistic views though :)

Which is the issue, you never know. Which is why preexisting content is the only thing that makes sense. It's just as likely they had stuff done and didn't release it because they needed day 1 conetent. Or they had time to get it done, but decided to wait because they needed day 1 DLC and instead spent time working on other projects. Even EA probably couldn't tell you definitivly and that's the rub with DLC espeically DLC withing the first month. In fact the ony reason you wouldn't use prexisting games and things like MS points is infact the negative view that this was all planned from the outset and held back... afterall otherwise it makes so much more sense to use something that takes no additional effort.

Words Of Wisdom said: Kasz216 said: Akvod said: Davey1983 said: Sorry, but this is a jerk thing to do. This is not a reward for dedicated fans-- this is an attempt to screw over a portion of the fan base. $15 for two maps if I buy used? Ridiculous. How many people who buy used are going to actually know about this-- I'd bet not many. Most people will probably buy the game and later realize that EA has held back content. This will only upset customers. The dedicated fans already pre-ordered the Limited Edition. $70 used ($15 DLC-5 discount) vs $60 new. And it's not held back content, as it was never on the disc. It's DLC, it's something completely extra.   Would you simply be happy if EA made it so that everyone had to pay $15 for the DLC? Way to try to drag everyone down with you, since you're too cheap to buy a game new and support DICE.   It's a GIFT, that they're giving to those who aren't willing to stuff Gamestop's coffers so that they can give "Power to the player". That's a completely meaningless distinction. For all you know it could of been held off the disc to be DLC. Exactly. If you ask for a chicken sandwich I give you a chicken sandwich without the chicken and then turn around to give you the chicken fillet on the side then am I giving you a gift or what you should have gotten in the first place?

that's the most ridiculous argument I've ever read and lacks any semblance of logic or intelligence. a chicken sandwhich inherently requires chicken, so it can't be a chicken sandwhich if you do not provide it at all, whereas a video game is still a game specific additional content. 

 

the intelligent example is offering additional chicken on the side for the sandwhich at an extra price, which most places do.  subway calls it double meat.  but the sandwhch still contains the approved portion of meat to begin with, which is what you should get to begin with.  the extra meat, like extra video game content, does not fall into that criteria, even if it is additionally withheld for DLC later.  the official game is only what is released, not every idea that was conceived in development.

 

you really should be embarrased for not grasping that simple difference.  I mean, it would be hysterical if it wasn't so sad that you don't.  

loves2splooge said: This is just one of the many ways game developers are moving towards a system where you won't be able to truly own anything anymore. DLC and XBLA games that you can't refund or sell are just a stepping stone. The game devs eventually will be just like the crooks in software development where they require online authenticity checks so that you would have the privilege of even using the RETAIL software you bought. Meaning, used copies of Adobe and what are completely useless unless you get an illegal crack online. Eventually console gaming will be full-blown digital just like Steam and no one will own anything more. Instead you will have "licenses". What makes the software industry so special from anyone else to get away with eliminating ownership? Cars have intellectual property too. Someone designed the car model yes? That car design is intellectual property. But yet you are allowed to sell your car. Why should it be any different for games? Also the whole exact replica argument doesn't fly. In the world of 1s and 0s, they can be exact replicas if the wear on the disc isn't enough to disrupt the game's ability to be read properly. But you don't have a warranty, your booklet has wear and tear, your case, the disc itself, etc. This is why used copies are worth less. If they were replicas, they'd be just as expensive (good as new right? So I'll sell it to you for $60? Wrong). But they are not. Btw digital music and DVD video are 1s and 0s too and yet you don't see musicians and movie makers cry about used music CD and DVD sales. They cry about piracy. But not the used market. So yeah, with the way game and software developers treat their base, I'm not about to cry them a river if they go out of business due to piracy. Software development workers who agree with DRM principles/philosopies deserve all the downsizing that comes their way.

you know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about.  you never own the intellectual property of anything that you buy.  when you buy a car, you don't own the brand -- the IP, you simply own the physical car. 

with veido games, you never own the IP -- you only have a right to play the game.  sure, you own the physical disc, but you don't own the content.  the courts have ruled on this concept long ago, you really should do some research and grasp the dynamics you are trying to dispute, unless you aren't interested in being right but simply looking smart to the people who are too dumb to know better. 

but for the rest of us that do, everything you said is simply downright stupid and doesn't reflect the realty of the scenario you are attempting to comment on.  logic, it won;t kill you, don't be afraid to use it.

 

you are allowed to sell your copy of the game, nobody is preventing that.  how are you confused about that? 

Kasz216 said: JaggedSac said: It all depends on how the development process went for these maps. All maps have to be complete well before testing and gold status is reached. These new maps could have been placed into development at a time where they could not be finished before release. Perhaps they were maps that needed some extra time to get right and could not make the deadline. These would be optimistic views though :) Which is the issue, you never know. Which is why preexisting content is the only thing that makes sense. It's just as likely they had stuff done and didn't release it because they needed day 1 conetent. Or they had time to get it done, but decided to wait because they needed day 1 DLC and instead spent time working on other projects. Even EA probably couldn't tell you definitivly and that's the rub with DLC espeically DLC withing the first month. In fact the ony reason you wouldn't use prexisting games and things like MS points is infact the negative view that this was all planned from the outset and held back... afterall otherwise it makes so much more sense to use something that takes no additional effort.

Even if the content is pre-existing. Its still up to them what content they include in the final package. You pay for the content they offer and not for the content they have. There are many games where they have extra content not delivered in the original game, for example expansion packs on PC are a prime example of things which were cut (for whatever reason) and then released later as extra content.

Lets see,  Person who can afford it NEW buys and gets extra xtras.  Cool!!  Person who cant afford it New and normally buys it used or waits till price is dropped or rents, Hmmm.  Lost/losses a customer/s for future games in that genere  cause of some "Don't treat all the same" lame code.  I say,  "Let 'em pay let 'em play"  New or used.