EA boss proudly refuses to publish single-player only games

Pages

Or you could have clicked on the names listed in the Steam list, read what they actually are, and gone "I don't want that", not bought it, and we wouldn't have had this entire conversation.

But reading is hard, apparently, so here we are, trying to figure out how evil Square Enix made you buy the game.

Which is funny, because I didn't.

"I wanted some peanuts, but there was a big jar of mixed nuts on sale, so I bought that instead. There were Brazil nuts in it, though, and I'm allergic to Brazil nuts! Sure, it was marked on the package, but Brazil nuts should be called out with big bright letters, because some people might not want Brazil nuts and who has time to read all those words? That devious store and its consumer-unfriendly policies!"

Really?

Are you guys serious? Sheeesh lay off the guy. The whole "We need to cake on 7 layers of smart-ass with every response" shtick gets old. Granted he MAY have been able to take steps to ensure he was completely satisfied with is purchase, but lets all be adults here. He is entitled to his opinion and shouldn't have to worry about people attacking him for it. He hasn't (as far as I'm aware) done anything to insult your intelligence, so do him a solid and treat him the same way. You realize you can constructively state your opinion and then move right along right?

To put another angle on this monster of a discussion, it would be kind of nice if steam and/or games had a way to disable DLC, however I can see that it could cause problems with games needing to handle stuff disappearing.

Scratched wrote:

To put another angle on this monster of a discussion, it would be kind of nice if steam and/or games had a way to disable DLC, however I can see that it could cause problems with games needing to handle stuff disappearing.

I know that many Paradox games have a pre-load screen where you can select DLC on or off before you begin the game.

Alright, let's be adults about this.

How is it Square's fault that Malor bought their game and DLC and forced him to play the game?

It's not, in any way, shape, or form. It's not Square's fault that he bought the game. It's certainly not Square's fault that he bought the DLC. It's Square's fault that the DLC contains content that could skip some regular game content, but that is easily rectified by, you know, reading what's in the DLC and not buying it.

In fact, the entire claim is so ludicrous that sarcasm is really the only way I am capable of responding to this entire situation. Because "I got screwed after getting an 85% discount" just kinda rings false, you know?

There is nothing defensible about that argument. To accept that argument is to accept that we, as consumers have no responsibility for our actions. Which is totally wrong.

Scratched wrote:

To put another angle on this monster of a discussion, it would be kind of nice if steam and/or games had a way to disable DLC, however I can see that it could cause problems with games needing to handle stuff disappearing.

I think the discussion of how DLC ruined Sleeping Dogs kind of went off the rails. It doesn't really matter whether Malkor should have known better, or if the DLC was marked clearly enough. the DLC still altered the game in a negative way. That was the original question. Telling Malor he shouldn't have bought the gam misses the point.

Jayhawker wrote:
Scratched wrote:

To put another angle on this monster of a discussion, it would be kind of nice if steam and/or games had a way to disable DLC, however I can see that it could cause problems with games needing to handle stuff disappearing.

I think the discussion of how DLC ruined Sleeping Dogs kind of went off the rails. It doesn't really matter whether Malkor should have known better, or if the DLC was marked clearly enough. the DLC still altered the game in a negative way. That was the original question. Telling Malor he shouldn't have bought the gam misses the point.

Or altered it positively, if you enjoy the experience of tearing through the world as an overpowered agent.

Jayhawker wrote:

I think the discussion of how DLC ruined Sleeping Dogs kind of went off the rails. It doesn't really matter whether Malkor should have known better, or if the DLC was marked clearly enough. the DLC still altered the game in a negative way. That was the original question. Telling Malor he shouldn't have bought the gam misses the point.

Not really.

The DLC is pretty clearly marked as containing boosts and powerups. Malor's problem is that the boosts and powerups broke the game because they boosted his character's power and allowed him to break the curve.

Which is the point of the DLC. And unless I'm missing something, there's no reason that he absolutely needed to use the DLC content anyway. He could have just not equipped it and gone on his way.

Tanglebones wrote:
Scratched wrote:

To put another angle on this monster of a discussion, it would be kind of nice if steam and/or games had a way to disable DLC, however I can see that it could cause problems with games needing to handle stuff disappearing.

I know that many Paradox games have a pre-load screen where you can select DLC on or off before you begin the game.

Yeah, I concur that it should always be possible to toggle DLC on/off after you've bought it. Part of the reason I haven't bought certain DLC for, e.g., Saints' Row 3 is that I'm not sure whether it lets you choose not to use it.

If the "complete package" for a game includes DLC that significantly changes the game balance and no option to play the game without them, then that's a problem.

cube wrote:

Which is the point of the DLC. And unless I'm missing something, there's no reason that he absolutely needed to use the DLC content anyway. He could have just not equipped it and gone on his way.

A problem I can see is that DLC is supposed to make a game better, to add onto it, etc. I can see the thought process that if you want the best experience of GameX, you want all the DLC. How many times in one of the many sale threads have you seen someone say something along the lines of "I grabbed it and all the DLC".

But really, less pedantry and nit-picking on one case, more meaningful discussion generally please.

In the meanwhile, EA just held a panel on the LGBT in gaming:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/07/e...

Tanglebones wrote:

In the meanwhile, EA just held a panel on the LGBT in gaming:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/07/e...

How much is the QUIA DLC?

CheezePavilion wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:

In the meanwhile, EA just held a panel on the LGBT in gaming:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/07/e...

How much is the QUIA DLC?

What is QUIA?

NSMike wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:

In the meanwhile, EA just held a panel on the LGBT in gaming:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/07/e...

How much is the QUIA DLC?

What is QUIA?

QUILTBAG - LGBT = QUIA

Tanglebones wrote:

In the meanwhile, EA just held a panel on the LGBT in gaming:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/07/e...

Yes, but they continue to charge money for products! So, it's a wash.

Ok, EA deserves to be criticized for this awful launch, and every awful launch before and after this.

Let's not crucify them for doing something right.

Scratched wrote:

A problem I can see is that DLC is supposed to make a game better, to add onto it, etc. I can see the thought process that if you want the best experience of GameX, you want all the DLC.

At that point, the issue becomes one of perception. As NSMike alluded to, what makes a game better for some people makes it worse for others. That's why things have descriptions, so that you can decide which things will up your fun-factor and skip those that won't.

Of course, having disable-able DLC is the best solution for that.

Pages