PC users get DLC for free

[DrJustice]

...Also they never said there was NOT going to be dlc for the PC...

Actually they did. As Tireseas mentioned, SMS told in interviews prior to release that there wouldn't be DLC on the PC (even though the game is on Steam(!)). It was pretty well known in the community. E.g. Q&A here: "Just like before, DLC will be limited to PS3 and 360 only. The reason is feasibility: there’s no good way of supporting PC DLC from a marketing standpoint."

DJ
--

 

[Tireseas]

^yeah. if I'm not mistaken that was in the prerelease faq over on Speedhunters about the game.

 

[Vaxxtx]

Actually they did. As Tireseas mentioned, SMS told in interviews prior to release that there wouldn't be DLC on the PC (even though the game is on Steam(!)). It was pretty well known in the community. E.g. Q&A here: "Just like before, DLC will be limited to PS3 and 360 only. The reason is feasibility: there’s no good way of supporting PC DLC from a marketing standpoint."

DJ
--

I thought they said they didnt have a means of delivery, and "as of now" they were not planning a release of the DLC for PC. I could be totally wrong though. I dont want to go searching for it.

Either way....WHERE IS OUR PATCH!!!3434

 

[DrJustice]

^ No need to search, it was in the posting you just quoted I'll repeat: Q&A here: "Just like before, DLC will be limited to PS3 and 360 only....". There was several mentions of this at the time.

And yes, bring on the patch!

DJ
--

 

[sandboxgod]

Yay!!! So glad i didnt buy the PS3 version. Shift 2 PC has always ran like a champ with my t500rs wheel in full 1080p. I think ive only crashed like twice in the tons of hrs I've played this game

The only thing wrong with the PC version we lacked the DLCs. 👍

 

[Azuremen]

If anything, in my opinion, the PC platform deserves less than more because of this. And I don't know why the "same software" should be so much less for the PC (and FREE DLC's). I don't care if the answer is development costs. I haven't purchased the SpeedHunters DLC and now this give me another reason why I probably won't. It would be nice if SMS/EA would create a communication channel with the console crowd.

Yes, charge them and lose some of that customer base to piracy. Makes perfect sense

 

[NLxAROSA]

I don't mind PC users getting the DLC for free. As a matter of fact, it's a good incentive for me to get the PC version too, it doesn't suffer from the same issues as the PS3 version right?

 

[Luminis]

If anything, in my opinion, the PC platform deserves less than more because of this.

PC gamers already have to pay way more to keep their system up to snuff, so they might as well get a decent deal on the games they. Dunno, nothing unfair about that. If you want a console, which is quite cheap compared to a decent gaming PC and its plug-and-play-comfort, you ought to be prepared to shell out a few additional bucks for the games.

 

[tribolik]

PC gamers already have to pay way more to keep their system up to snuff, so they might as well get a decent deal on the games they. Dunno, nothing unfair about that. If you want a console, which is quite cheap compared to a decent gaming PC and its plug-and-play-comfort, you ought to be prepared to shell out a few additional bucks for the games.

If you call 500 Euros cheap

I have no problems with PC gamers getting whatever they get for free... But I did buy a console so that I could plug and play without problems, conflicts or bugs and that doesnt seem to be happening anymore... so I might as well just save the money I spend on games (over 1000 euros now just on PS3 games) and the money I spent on the console (500 euros) and buy a good rig and get my games for free or at a relativaly reduced cost

 

[DrJustice]

PC gamers already have to pay way more to keep their system up to snuff, so they might as well get a decent deal on the games they. Dunno, nothing unfair about that.

Wait... So if I buy myself a Ferrari, I should get a discount on gas and free oil changes

DJ
--

 

[bmwisme]

Yes, charge them and lose some of that customer base to piracy. Makes perfect sense

Then I hope someone cracks the PS3 or Xbox soon so publishers will give us console users cheaper or free software. Perfect sense...

PC gamers already have to pay way more to keep their system up to snuff, so they might as well get a decent deal on the games they. Dunno, nothing unfair about that. If you want a console, which is quite cheap compared to a decent gaming PC and its plug-and-play-comfort, you ought to be prepared to shell out a few additional bucks for the games.

So with that logic, should you pay more for tires for you Hyundia than I for my BMW? Also, many use their computer for productivity so the cost for gaming is amortized over the total cost.

With this said, you both missed my point. I really don't care if the PC crowd gets the DLC's free as my preference is the PS3 - that was my choice. I was just commenting on the "logic" or "lack of" in giving the DLC's for free just becuase of the possibility of piracy (reward for lack of morality).

 

[bmwisme]

Wait... So if I buy myself a Ferrari, I should get a discount on gas and free oil changes

DJ
--

You beat me to it 👍

 

[boxox]

If you want to talk lack of logic, take a look at EA's excuse for there being no Ferrari/Exotic DLC for Shift 1:

The Exotics Racing Series DLC for Need for Speed SHIFT won't be released on the PC platform because of the tech and resources involved in developing the delivery of the DLC. During development of SHIFT, we chose to pursue exceptional game quality over implementing the systems required to support premium post-release content for every platform. Given the community ratings of Need for Speed SHIFT, as well as the accolades the game has received, we believe the right decision was made.

So the solution to this is ... rebrand the existing digital download service they already had when Shift 1 was released ... and then ... release the DLC for Shift 2 on it ... for free?

IMAGE REMOVED BY MODERATOR-- Graphic image shouldn't be necessary to get your message across.

 

[Luminis]

If you call 500 Euros cheap

I have no problems with PC gamers getting whatever they get for free... But I did buy a console so that I could plug and play without problems, conflicts or bugs and that doesnt seem to be happening anymore... so I might as well just save the money I spend on games (over 1000 euros now just on PS3 games) and the money I spent on the console (500 euros) and buy a good rig and get my games for free or at a relativaly reduced cost

Why are you still on a console, then, if console gamers get shafted all the time?
Until a week or so ago, Pc gamers were the ones crying foul, as they didn't get the DLC.

Wait... So if I buy myself a Ferrari, I should get a discount on gas and free oil changes

DJ
--

So with that logic, should you pay more for tires for you Hyundia than I for my BMW?

Both of you seem to fail to understand the difference between something mandatory like tyres and fuel and something that isn't mandatory, such as DLC and games in general. Don't want to buy fuel and tyres at that price becuase you're owning an expensive car? Fine, enjoy your car, if you can. Don't want to buy games and DLC because you have a (relatively) expensive PC? No sales for the company, then.

 

[DrJustice]

^ We understand. Your argument is getting a bit muddy now though... Sorry, you can't wriggle your way out of your initial broken logic

DJ
--

 

[Luminis]

^ We understand. Your argument is getting a bit muddy now though... Sorry, you can't wriggle your way out of your initial broken logic

DJ
--

Meh, simple matter of the fact is: They got the DLC late but they got it free, 'cause it wouldn't sell anyways and it was already developed anyways. That way, EA might at least get a few additional sales for the game. <- Simple logic, right?

And since their investment to get the hardware is higher (and, yeah, a PC for Shift 2 would've been more expensive than a console, if it was bought back when the console was 500$), so I think it's hardly unfair. <- Personal opinion.

 

[bmwisme]

Meh, simple matter of the fact is: They got the DLC late but they got it free, 'cause it wouldn't sell anyways and it was already developed anyways. That way, EA might at least get a few additional sales for the game. <- Simple logic, right?

Why they did it is ultimately unknown but EA can do as they please so your logic is as good as any.

And since their investment to get the hardware is higher (and, yeah, a PC for Shift 2 would've been more expensive than a console, if it was bought back when the console was 500$), so I think it's hardly unfair. <- Personal opinion.

For discussion sake, you will never convince me of this logic - it dosen't make any sense. What I or you have to pay for software, gas, tires, roofing shingles, or wizbang dodad should not be based on how much we paid for our PC, car, house, or whatchamacallit - most variables being equal. Your logic would support different software pricing for a top end Alienware PC or an eMachine.
Remember, this isn't a discussion to determine what criteria EA used in their decision to release the DLC's free - it is a discussion of it's fairness to the gaming community - PC and consoles.

Have a good day!

 

[///M-Spec]

The content was already paid for and produced. So EA could either...

1) Spend more money on a delivery system which did not make a business case for itself. High cost, high risk, questionable reward.

2) Keep it from PC users, which gains them nothing except the ire of a small but very vocal minority of customers. No gain and a cost in PR. Or..

3) Give it away in a rare gesture of goodwill. No cost. RP win. Customers happy, EA has nothing to lose.

Console owners have nothing to lose either. We already know that with most modern titles, PC users are effectively subsidized by console sales. DLCs are just another aspect of that. Since there is no cost effective way for EA to recoup (for producing the DLC) from PC users, there is no opportunity cost.


M

 

[DrJustice]

The content was already paid for and produced. So EA could either...

This is one set of viewpoints, I'll offer another:

1) Spend more money on a delivery system which did not make a business case for itself. High cost, high risk, questionable reward.

There's already Steam and Origin. No additional risk involved. If things were planned better the game would be launched with an equal DLC offer on all platforms.

2) Keep it from PC users, which gains them nothing except the ire of a small but very vocal minority of customers. No gain and a cost in PR. Or..

I don't think anybody argues that DLC should be kept from PC users. On the contrary.

3) Give it away in a rare gesture of goodwill. No cost. RP win. Customers happy, EA has nothing to lose.

Goodwill and PR win for a "small but very vocal minority of customers", as you say. No such goodwill for the rest of the customers, and consequently a PR blunder for the majority of customers. BTW, what EA had to lose money-wise was a few hundred thousand dollars (this amount being mentioned by Griff as the potential income from PC DLC).

Console owners have nothing to lose either. We already know that with most modern titles, PC users are effectively subsidized by console sales. DLCs are just another aspect of that. Since there is no cost effective way for EA to recoup (for producing the DLC) from PC users, there is no opportunity cost.

Yes, informed gamers understand that PC users are in practice subsidized. However, it does not normally place console users at disadvantage or cause any resentment, all other things being equal. Now, I'm not bothered with the personal cost aspect of this, but as a follower of the industry and community, I question the wisdom of the policies in this case. In my view this situation seems to be down to bad planning and a lack of judgment. As can be seen, it has caused a reaction in the gaming community, and at a guess a net negative PR effect, compounded by communication issues and the state of the software.

At least it's interesting to watch

DJ
--

 

[Vaxxtx]

I swear between DrJustice, and BMW, I feel stupid.

You guys really do make people sit back and think. At least for us smaller folks!

 

[Azuremen]

Then I hope someone cracks the PS3 or Xbox soon so publishers will give us console users cheaper or free software. Perfect sense...

If you weren't already aware, they have found ways to pirate games on consoles. 💡

I just requires you to install custom firmware generally, in which case you can't play online.

Honestly, arguing "fairness," which seems to be the whole point of what you are saying, is just silly and childish. Life isn't fair, get over it.

 

[bmwisme]

...
As can be seen, it has caused a reaction in the gaming community, and at a guess a net negative PR effect, compounded by communication issues and the state of the software.

At least it's interesting to watch

DJ
--

This is a good point... I don't think the PC crowd is experiencing the console freezing problem, has better graphics, and less control lag from what I hear yet they get the attention. The state of the software as released for the consoles and lack of a communication channel does not sit well. If it was the free DLCs alone I don't think there would be as much discussion.

PC - $40 + $0 (2 DLCs) = $40
Consoles: $60 + $20 = $80

SMS/EA - help us console gamers out and we can accept the extra cost.

If you weren't already aware, they have found ways to pirate games on consoles. 💡

Honestly, arguing "fairness," which seems to be the whole point of what you are saying, is just silly and childish. Life isn't fair, get over it.

They are pirating on the consoles? Your kidding, right? ... I am being facetious if you didn't catch it.

I have bigger fish to fry IRL - if you had read the whole thread you would have understood that my participation is simply for discussion.

 

[DrJustice]

Honestly, arguing "fairness," which seems to be the whole point of what you are saying, is just silly and childish. Life isn't fair, get over it.

I know that was not addressed to me, but I can't help but to comment, regardless of the DLC discussion.

Arguing that fairness is a silly and childish concept is not a good position. Fairness is pretty much the opposite of childishness and a good few other not so flattering characteristics. Relevant definitions of fairness from established dictionaries include:

- Marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism
- Consistent with rules, logic, or ethics
- In a proper or legal manner

These are some of the very concepts that makes for a better, and dare I say, more fair world. The fact that life isn't always fair does not mean that it isn't one of the nobler and most meaningful pursuits of mankind to try and make it so.

Sorry for the distraction, back to topic!

DJ
--

 

[Azuremen]

They are pirating on the consoles? Your kidding, right? ... I am being facetious if you didn't catch it.

I have bigger fish to fry IRL - if you had read the whole thread you would have understood that my participation is simply for discussion.

You really need to work on that sarcasm for the Internet.

I've read the thread, your participation revolved around it not seeming "just" that DLC was free for PC users. But if you want to change it to just wanting to discuss things, that is fine. And good to know you have things to do in real life; I think we all do.

Arguing that fairness is a silly and childish concept is not a good position. Fairness is pretty much the opposite of childishness and a good few other not so flattering characteristics. Relevant definitions of fairness from established dictionaries include:

Oh boy, here we go.

- Marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism

Genetics play to this - some people are less likely to get sick, others more likely. I'm a super candidate for cancer, that sure doesn't seem fair.

- Consistent with rules, logic, or ethics

Implying people are logical, and ethics vary depending on who you are talking to. Rules vary based on culture and society.

- In a proper or legal manner

If you've ever gone through legal channels, you'd hardly find them fair or without prejudice. And proper again depends on the culture, the people, and personal experiences.

These are some of the very concepts that makes for a better, and dare I say, more fair world. The fact that life isn't always fair does not mean that it isn't one of the nobler and most meaningful pursuits of mankind to try and make it so.

Minus the fact it is impossible because of things outside of man's control. You have disease, death, natural events, and so on. Then you have genetics, which lead to people not even being equal, and I don't mean racially, but rather intelligence, looks, health, genetic faults and so on.

If you were to generate a fair world, it would extremely artificial. Such as in The Giver.

 

[DrJustice]

^ Of course various factors play in to it, that's a given. The definitions don't determine the state of it
But never mind, who want to strive for fairness anyway, it's just silly and childish.

Regarding the attempt at contesting the dictionary defintions of fairness, I think it's worth adding that although e.g. being predisposed for cancer "doesn't seem fair" (runs in my family too), that is a figure of speech and has nothing to do with the cited definitions, which deal with fairness as something which is up to people, not genetics, natural events and so on. Those are unfortunate things, not unfair.

DJ
--

 

[Azuremen]

^ Of course various factors play in to it, that's a given. The definitions don't determine the state of it
But never mind, who want to strive for fairness anyway, it's just silly and childish.

DJ
--

Sorry, I can't agree with an argument built on idealism. My bad.

 

[DrJustice]

^ No Sir, that's my bad. I should have known better than appealing to the virtues of man. BTW, you don't have to agree.

Right, that's enough about that.

DJ
--

 

[Azuremen]

^ No Sir, that's my bad. I should have known better than appealing to the virtues of man. BTW, you don't have to agree.

Right, that's enough about that.

DJ
--

Because that worked so well with Communism?

 

[arvore]

Come here thinking I was gonna read about PC DLC for S2U!
Wrong thread, it's about Communism after all...why am I not surprised?

 

[DrJustice]

Because that worked so well with Communism?

What?!? Now, this is just argumentative and out of line. I only highlighted that fairness is not about silliness and childishness, as you used that against your discussion partners. If you want to discuss politics, please take it to a politics forum.

Again, I apologize to the forum for the distraction

DJ
--