Comments on: Killzone 2 DLC Recon Report (Rumor)

By: sickr

sickr — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:58:31 +0000

@John VanderSchuit

I think you misinterpreted what I was originally saying. DLC does benefit the consumer, and I have no qualms against purchasing it. What I do have an issue with is company’s issuing and dispatching large downloadable content mere weeks after the games release.

By: snow0937

snow0937 — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 23:07:27 +0000

MAN I WISH EVERY GAME DOES THIS I WISH THEY ADD NEW MAPS TO rR2 ALREADY AN HOPE THEY FIX THE BULLSEYE GUN

By: John VanderSchuit

John VanderSchuit — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:51:31 +0000

Sickr -

If you don’t want the DLC, then don’t buy it or download it. No reason to complain.

If you have a better release plan for GG to follow, then contact and educate them, and call them crazy while you’re at it.

By: Cort

Cort — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:48:17 +0000

Yeah, I mean how dare game makers create a business model based partly on DLC in the hope of making a healthy profit!

By: decimalator

decimalator — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:30:26 +0000

@sickr
Most, or at least much, DLC is designed and/or planned before a game ships. It wouldn’t surprise me if every bit of DLC was planned a year ago. Pieces of it may already be implemented, but there are always production decisions that prevent this or that from making it onto the main disc. If every bit of content were included on the initial disc, we would be seeing longer and longer delays. Plus it’s a good way to get more buzz going about a game, keeping it on the minds of people that for whatever reason didn’t pick up a copy right away.

I have no problem with paid DLC that doesn’t detract from gameplay if you don’t have it. Like Dead Space’s additional suits, or additional CoD maps or whatever. If I don’t feel like it’s worth the money I just won’t buy it. My view is that DLC is “bonus material”.

Oh, and of course I’m all for DLC as long as it doesn’t detract from fixing any bugs that may appear in a game. Case in point — Fallout 3.

By: Adam Wolfe

Adam Wolfe — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:17:21 +0000

Unfortunately this is how things go now a days. DLC is planned in advance and released soon there after. From what I understand is they have one department working on the main game and a whole separate one working on the DLC this is why the DLC isn’t included.

Plus then we would worry about it being delayed. If this stuff is planned a month or so after release that means it is not done which in turn would cause a delay.

By: sickr

sickr — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:24:50 +0000

I find it incredible (if true) that Guerilla has already formulated a plan for dispatching DLC only a couple of weeks after Killzone 2 ships to consumers. Why couldn’t they included all these additional extras in the finished game? It’d be understandable if they decided to do this 3 or 6 months after its release, but after a couple of weeks? That’s crazy.

By: Sneeches

Sneeches — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:08:00 +0000

DLC already talked about and the game isn’t even out holy shit lol.

By: nuclearwarfare

nuclearwarfare — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:51:39 +0000

KZ1 maps on KZ2 would be pretty awesome. I wish they would have done that for Resistance 2. The new weapons in R2 would have been really cool in a Capture The Flag contest at Somerset, but I digress. lol

I wish it were Feb. 27th right now.