I wish @Gamer magazine well, if just to give Game Informer some competition. It always ticked me off that Game Informer doesn't stand on its own merits. The only reason its numbers are so high is that GameStop hard sells it as part of the discount membership. Store clerks are even given a quota of how many to sell per week. Because the numbers are so artificially high, that's where advertisers are willing to go. I'll admit it's a brilliant business model but it is a bit of a cheat. Electronic Gaming Monthly, and other gaming magazines, were better but struggled like all other print magazines on newsstands today.

Cheapy, Wombat, and Shipwreck,

Quit with all the DLC complaining! When has DLC ever been legitimately good, or legitimately integral to the original retail game?

The Assassin's Creed 2 DLC stunk. The game proper would have been far worse had they included these 'missing' chapters. The Mass Effect 2 DLC isn't up to caliber either, and doesn't further the main storyline in anyway. The same can be said of Resident Evil 5 DLC, etc. DLC such as costumes in SSF4 in no way hurts the main game--it's just a foolish cosmetic add-on for crazed fans.

Regardless of at what point the DLC was developed, or even if it was 'cut' from the main game, I've yet to see DLC that felt as good as, or necessary, for the main game. Borderlands and Left4Dead2 are the only ones that have come close for me, and even those add-ons aren't needed to fully enjoy the respective game.

DLC is just an easy cash-in for companies who take advantage of fanboys with spare change.

It's not a big deal at all.

I followed the instructions at the end of the cagcast
i pooped, now wheres my stickers and gifts and stuff?

ClassAct can you PM me with your information for the Shred Nebula stuff.

Hey what happens to the people who pay for EA's Online Passes then EA shuts down the servers 18 months after the game came out like they've done with every sports game this generation?

Originally Posted by CheapyD However, the bottom line is this: I can't recall a single piece of DLC or DLC related tech that makes me glad the system was ever implemented.

I was actually thinking about this myself. The only example of good DLC I could come up with were the Fallout 3 expansion packs. The original game was certainly crammed with enough content to stand on its own, and all the expansions were released a while after the game came out, if I recall correctly. Plus the add-ons were all pretty fun and had a lot of enjoyable content.

But in 99% of the cases, I totally agree with you; it's just the companies nickel and diming the consumer to death or selling us content from the cutting room floor because this medium of entertainment makes it oh-so-easy for them to do so.

Originally Posted by TheFreshPrince Cheapy, Wombat, and Shipwreck, Quit with all the DLC complaining! When has DLC ever been legitimately good, or legitimately integral to the original retail game? The Assassin's Creed 2 DLC stunk. The game proper would have been far worse had they included these 'missing' chapters. The Mass Effect 2 DLC isn't up to caliber either, and doesn't further the main storyline in anyway. The same can be said of Resident Evil 5 DLC, etc. DLC such as costumes in SSF4 in no way hurts the main game--it's just a foolish cosmetic add-on for crazed fans. Regardless of at what point the DLC was developed, or even if it was 'cut' from the main game, I've yet to see DLC that felt as good as, or necessary, for the main game. Borderlands and Left4Dead2 are the only ones that have come close for me, and even those add-ons aren't needed to fully enjoy the respective game. DLC is just an easy cash-in for companies who take advantage of fanboys with spare change. It's not a big deal at all.

From a personal, short-term perspective, I am inclined to agree - you don't want the DLC, you don't have to pay for it. The only thing that worries me is that since it seems a lot of people are buying this content, it tells the game companies that their foray into this sort of business model is economically viable. I hate to use a "slippery slope" argument, but I feel like people buying all this DLC has led us to things like the EA Online Pass, and that it's only going to get worse from here on out. At that point, it finally might start affecting you.

Another hilarious show. Awesome song diddy by CheapyD at the end.

Originally Posted by Walt Jay Also agree on the people pirating the Humble Indie Bundle. What kind of ing asshole pirates a game being sold for charity, let alone one you can get for $1.00, heck, $0.01?

This was something I actually disagreed with them on. I may be misunderstanding the system in question, but doesn't "Pay what you want" mean "Pay what you WANT"? It's a dick move to not even toss a couple of bucks towards charity, but I don't see how that's considered pirating. It'd be like going to a museum that was free, but took donations and calling anyone who didn't donate a thief for seeing the attractions for free. If the bundle normally required you donate at least a cent and people were finding ways around even paying a cent, then I agree with what Cheapy et al were saying, but I assumed that with "Pay what you want" there was inherently the freedom to choose $0 as what you want to pay. I thought it was common knowledge that this sort of business model inherently had that risk associated with it.

Regarding EA: While I'm still ticked off with the decision it has more to do with my fears that if this move is successful it may very well establish a precedent in the gaming community. Even if you're not into sports games there has to be the realization that something like this could spread to other genres. I understand why it's being done and from a business perspective I can't really fault EA for doing it. I'm just incredulous about the belief that punitive measures work better than reward-based systems. I feel like encouraging new game purchases through worthwhile bonuses and other incentives would truly be a reward as opposed to penalizing those who are simply looking for the best value. Time will tell how successful it is, but I can't help but think of how other punitive measures in gaming and other electronic-based media have done nothing but make their respective organizations (be it the RIAA, MPAA or game publishers with crippling DRM) look like the bad guys.

Disagreed with some stuff, but it was still a great show.

Originally Posted by tenma If the bundle normally required you donate at least a cent and people were finding ways around even paying a cent.

An article I read alluded that they were subverting the donation system all together and just direct downloading the bundle. That is piracy.


On the show:

Great show guys. I really enjoyed the poop song and the discussion on Capcom/Lost Planet 2.

man, you guys (cheapy and wombat) have a thing for poop, farts and ass-washing!
great show guys.

Originally Posted by reddjoey An article I read alluded that they were subverting the donation system all together and just direct downloading the bundle. That is piracy.

But is there ultimately a difference in the real, tangible sense of the word between going through a website, choosing "$0" and downloading the title versus direct downloading it? I agree that it's unfortunate that people who may otherwise have been willing to donate for the title otherwise didn't because whichever website they got the link from never mentioned they had that option. But in the end, both methods - going through the legitimate website, donating nothing and downloading it for free vs. skipping those first two steps - still yields the same end profit for that particular transaction. I guess I can see how, in the literal sense, it's considered piracy but I suppose knowing that the openly available option of getting it for free without the work-around already existed anyway just makes me hard for me to feel that angry about it.

Good podcast as usual.

And oh yeah, the EA online pass is lame for obvious reasons

I think this is the first cagcast where the material for the "title" was toward the last few minutes.

also Cheapy, and chance you read my suggestion about the contest (having more winners by distributing the monies out?)

Thank you for re-mentioning the Justin McElleroy voice comments from a few casts ago. I rarely read the show comments, i'm just a podcast fan, but thank god I checked them out.

I also started listening to Justins new podcast as a result of his appearance.

I think the comments should be aired, and I think Justin would gain much entertainment from that event.

I mean come on, you're gonna sing poop songs, discuss drugs and sex, and offend races around the world; but you're above airing some hilarious comments for guarenteed amusement?

Originally Posted by tenma But is there ultimately a difference in the real, tangible sense of the word between going through a website, choosing "$0" and downloading the title versus direct downloading it? I agree that it's unfortunate that people who may otherwise have been willing to donate for the title otherwise didn't because whichever website they got the link from never mentioned they had that option. But in the end, both methods - going through the legitimate website, donating nothing and downloading it for free vs. skipping those first two steps - still yields the same end profit for that particular transaction. I guess I can see how, in the literal sense, it's considered piracy but I suppose knowing that the openly available option of getting it for free without the work-around already existed anyway just makes me hard for me to feel that angry about it.

You cant choose to pay $0
It's pay what you want, not pay if you want.

Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Wombat,

Although I do appreciate the effort you made in avoiding the r-word, couldn't you just call the guy a moron, idiot, dope, or similar word. As someone who is on the autism spectrum, I am offended to be lumped in with this moron/idiot/dope.

Keep up the otherwise good work.

Originally Posted by volt1up You cant choose to pay $0 It's pay what you want, not pay if you want.

See, this is what I didn't know. This model has been used elsewhere online - Radiohead's "In Rainbows" release is one of the bigger examples - and every other time I'd seen it there was always the option to pay $0. If this wasn't the case here then I agree with what everyone else has said so far.

I didn't see anyone else respond to your comments about the coming Fallout CE (forgive me if this has already been said).

Wombat, you ignorant slut.

Do you have any idea how much a fair set of poker chips cost? Even an ultra cheap set of chips at walmart or target cost $20. Do you have any idea what a typical quantity is for a "set" of poker chips (300-500)? Do you have any idea how much this friggin' CE box would weigh if they included a whole set? Do you realize that as production quantities go down, the cost (per chip) increases?

If they did include a whole "set" of chips, they would probably be so light weight and crappy that you'd then proceed to bitch about the quality of the chips. If the CE chips included end up being crap, then you're argument has a little bit of validation - just a little.

As for the cards, again these are custom made. They may end up being crap, but they're not going to be that cheap to produce.

Assuming that all of the CE items are of fair quality, I think the extras would easily sell for about $20 on their own ($10 for the book, $5 for the cards, $5 for the chips).

Also, the damn game is Vegas-themed. What else would you have them include in the CE? Some fake crystal meth and a bottle of fake whiskey? Oh, I'm sorry, you would complain about the meth and the whiskey not being real....

Seriously, great show as always. Thanks for all the work you guys put into the CAGcast and the website (even you Wombat).

I was thrilled to hear my show feedback on this week's CAGcast. I still think you guys are a little too suspicious about what is intentionally held back from retail copies of games, and what wouldn't have been made in the first place without DLC as an option. That being said, I like Wombat's take on the ice cream analogy-- something about "getting ice cream with all the toppings for 10 years, and then being told you have to pay for toppings."

Keep up the great work, and those Jean Snow references!