Wait, don't they need to get the retail game out the door first?
Gearbox's loot-driven wasteland romp Borderlands ain't even on store shelves till next week--with a PC release following on Steam the week after that--but the developer is already spilling the beans about its post-release plans for downloadable content.
Described as "the first in a series" of add-ons, The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned will run you $10 on all three platforms. Here's a brief description of what's in there.
Tasked with keeping the workers of Jakobs Cove alive, Dr. Ned (who is not related to Dr. Zed from Fyrestone) does his job a little too well, creating zombies and other abominations that now run rampant in this region. Players will have to work alongside Dr. Ned as they embark on a quest to cure the inhabitants of Jakobs Cove in this full-fledged expansion filled with new enemies, new quests and rare loot drops.
More importantly, here's what it looks like.
The real question, of course, is exactly how much content and how big a landmass this pack entails. Jeff's closing in on the level cap in Borderlands right next to me, so we'll have a full review of the shipping game next week, and you can look for this DLC pack to hit "later this year."
" even if Gearbox is righteous in their Day-One DLC and actually had spare time to make it, if they help Day-One DLC become common then it opens the door for all kinds of asshole video game makers to actually take out original game stuff and sell it as DLC. "
Who the hell said it would be out on day one? "
oh it aint day one? i thought that was what everybody was complainin about. if this aint out day one then what the fack are the complaints about? i'm gonna take my argument over to the Dragon Age section then, those rat bastards.
"Can you guys please stop BITCHING!?!? Holy hell if you knew anything about the development of this game you would know that Gearbox announced that they started to work on DLC after the game went into certification. Meaning AFTER the point where additional content could be added to the game. They announced this a while ago. This is not a DLC scam...maybe if you guys understand how the development process works you wouldn't all be acting like whiny little bitches... "
Maybe you're right, but when you(as the dev)start to talk and show screens of DLC b4 the game even drops, you invite the criticism from gamers. And there's no way the stuff thery're touting was deved up after cert as this stuff takes time. It's obvious plans were made b4 release, and at some time during development, to hold some content for DLC and not include it in the game. Granted this is the state of business these days in the video games industry, but it still smells like rip-off to some, understandably. Most of the big devs are doing it ...and it's a standard now, unfortunately imo. Maybe not a smart one though. Gearbox(and other devs of course)could be smarter and hold the PR for DLC stuff 'till the game is out for a while and then share the details as the word grows about how good, and replayable the released game is and, subsequently, how DLC worthy the game is. Just seems stupid in a marketing sense to me. And I have no prob spending the xtra $ if the game itself is great; just don't treat the consumer(especially us core gamers)like a dunce because they're not. "
......They've shown all of 3 friggin' screenshots. You talk as if they've gave details on quests/items and shown footage or something. Either way, I can understand someone not buying the DLC because they think it is a rip-off and don't want to support it. I don't understand people that say they won't buy the game period because DLC was announced. Buying only the game =/= supporting the DLC.
"Can you guys please stop BITCHING!?!? Holy hell if you knew anything about the development of this game you would know that Gearbox announced that they started to work on DLC after the game went into certification. Meaning AFTER the point where additional content could be added to the game. They announced this a while ago. This is not a DLC scam...maybe if you guys understand how the development process works you wouldn't all be acting like whiny little bitches... "
Maybe you're right, but when you(as the dev)start to talk and show screens of DLC b4 the game even drops, you invite the criticism from gamers. And there's no way the stuff thery're touting was deved up after cert as this stuff takes time. It's obvious plans were made b4 release, and at some time during development, to hold some content for DLC and not include it in the game.
Granted this is the state of business these days in the video games industry, but it still smells like rip-off to some, understandably. Most of the big devs are doing it ...and it's a standard now, unfortunately imo. Maybe not a smart one though. Gearbox(and other devs of course)could be smarter and hold the PR for DLC stuff 'till the game is out for a while and then share the details as the word grows about how good, and replayable the released game is and, subsequently, how DLC worthy the game is. Just seems stupid in a marketing sense to me. And I have no prob spending the xtra $ if the game itself is great; just don't treat the consumer(especially us core gamers)like a dunce because they're not.
" even if Gearbox is righteous in their Day-One DLC and actually had spare time to make it, if they help Day-One DLC become common then it opens the door for all kinds of asshole video game makers to actually take out original game stuff and sell it as DLC. "
even if Gearbox is righteous in their Day-One DLC and actually had spare time to make it, if they help Day-One DLC become common then it opens the door for all kinds of asshole video game makers to actually take out original game stuff and sell it as DLC.
@Ockman: They didn't develop the DLC during the game's development. The content on the disc would have been finalised months ago and Gearbox would have spent the last few months fixing bugs and polishing the game. It would be pretty irresponsible of them to have their development team sitting around the office doing nothing for a couple of months waiting until it was 'acceptable' to start working on DLC. You should be thankful that Gearbox and other studios are so dedicated that they begin immediately creating more content for their games, and if you don't feel that way then you don't have to buy it. You can still buy Borderlands and experience the game in full, it's not as if they cut out a chunk of the retail release so they could make more money.
I can see why people are not happy about the dlc being talked about before the game even comes out, Feels like I am buying a non-complete game! But if you don't like it then just simply don't buy! I on the other hand love the look of this game
Some people don't seem to understand the game development process..
This content isn't in the retail release of the game, because the game has likely been finished for months and months. They've just been cleaning things up and bug testing, but the actual designers and programmers would have finished work on the game a long time ago. And with the popularity of DLC these days, they would have moved on to creating new content they can sell seperatly as soon as possible, so it can be released as quickly as possible.
The content can't just be added into the game for release, do you expect them to keep delaying the game to add in more and more? Then we end up with Gran Turismo 5, were the game is never done because they just keep adding to it. This content was designed to be released seperatly as DLC and has been worked on seperatly from the actual game. While some developers have been evil with locking off or cutting out content to sell later on, I think it's made a lot of people very paranoid and ignorant to how the whole process works.
Would you rather they didn't work on content at all until after the game was released? That way we would have to wait months for it to be developed, by which point most people will have lost interest in the game.
I love the giant bomb forums, since though we get plenty of DLC whiners we ALSO get a good number of folks who understand how the game development process works. DLC released a month after the game releases is totally justified assuming it's being worked on throughout the final QA portion of the packaged game and enters its own gold-crunch after shipdate.
Also, just to preempt any arguments about why those guys aren't working on the main game: plenty of designers and artists and engineers are already working on new projects in a studio during a game's certifcation and final QA period. This is normal; why can't they be working on DLC too?
While the whole zombie thing is completely overplayed by now it's nice to see that they are continuing to work for the game. It's bad though that they are charging PC gamers for the DLC, they should only charge console users imo.
I'm glad to hear there is plans to support this game with DLC. I'd rather have this scenario than what we saw from Too Human. That game was released and poof ... nothing from Silicon Knights. Plus it looks bad ass - who doesn't want to blast away at zombies!!!
@FellOpenIan: It's not really "incomplete" just because more content is going to be released. That's like saying a game isn't complete until all its expansions and sequels are out. At some point, the developer has to lock the content and press the game, but with current gen consoles we have ways to offer people who want it extra content after release. Not put in things that "should have" been in the game, but offer extra stuff - for those who are interested in it.
" Here's what I'm thinking. How big is this game? Because if Jeff is on his second playthrough just to hit the level cap, wouldnt that make the game's story or lenght short as it is? Yes sure there is multiplayer and all and thats fine., but in the long run it doesn't seam like its not very lenghty to begin charging what they are?. Now you add in content that they could have been working on before certification. It seams like they could have given the fact it doesn't seam like there is enough content to begin with. The other problem is the how much they're charging. Now $10 is a bit for an area. If theyre adding in new shit ontop of that like guns and such then yea its worth the purchase. Both sides of the arguement have good valid points. Me? I'm buying the game anyway regardless cause it looks fun, but these are the things I'm wondering. *shrugs* "
Wtf duder! The game developers already said there is at least 100 hours of content. Probably Jeff has put in a straight 40 hours, if not more. We don't know how long he's had the game.
" So, Gearbox, you've already started designing this stuff, eh? Tell me then... Why is this not in the box of the actual game? *Cough* micro-transactions... *Cough* I'm not disappointed to see it, certainly looks great: I'm just disappointed to see such a blatant marketing strategy at work. "
You could answer this yourself: the code goes gold & has been tested. It's done. Packed & shipped to a distribution center. You can't just call them up & say, stop everything, we need to include this new content we just created. The product would never get out the door if they did that.
What IS happening is that they are probably seeing a massive build-up of pre-orders & since that is instant profit, they're going off to create DLC with the profit they made. My only question is: how much DLC will there be & will it come out later on disk (for us console users) or if they'll create a GOTY edition (assuming it gets GOTY).
" always drives me nuts when people complain about companies offering DLC.....guess what people, these companies are not operating a charity....if you dont like it, dont buy it, and if enough people follow suit they will be forced to change their practices. obviously, there is demand for these products. "
always drives me nuts when people complain about child rapists.....guess what people, rapists need sex....if you dont like it, dont have kids, and if enough people follow suit child molestors will be forced to change their practices. obviously, raping children is hot.
always drives me nuts when people complain about companies offering DLC.....guess what people, these companies are not operating a charity....if you dont like it, dont buy it, and if enough people follow suit they will be forced to change their practices. obviously, there is demand for these products.
I'll just wait a year for the GotY/Super/Ultimate/Mega/All of the content is actually in this box edition which gets released at a lower price point.
There's no reason to jump in on day 01 only to pay twice the price for half the content. Bethesda and Capcom have taught me to wait for the final version while the early adopters finish beta testing their games.
i think this is a new trend we are going to start seeing as games are released. i really dont mind dropping a little extra coin on the dlc - probably after i complete the original game and find that i hunger for more! but i can definitely see that the timing of this announcement was a little too early.
@TheGunhaver: That wasn't the point I was trying to make. I have no problem with them working on new content once the full game goes gold (which didn't happen until within the last few weeks, which is why I'm so surprised they already have a DLC ready to announce and show pics of), but I don't want them to shove 1-3 hour pieces of "DLC" at me for $10. If they instead craft something substantial (20-30 hours for an RPG, maybe 8-10 for an FPS, so somewhere in the middle for this game) for $20-30 or so I'd be interested. I'm not "bitching", I'm just choosing not to buy the game if the post launch support is short and overpriced (unless the PC version has a level editor, which I'm not sure if it does so if someone knows I'd appreciate the info). Take Fallout 3, for example. They throw out 5 DLC that are each around 3-5 hours long that add up to $50 and about 15-25 hours. All this "DLC" is double the price for half the content Bethesda offered in proper expansion packs for Morrowind.
There was a very good interview that Mikey Neumann, creative director at Gearbox, did a while ago that talks about DLC and how it fits into our production schedule. Here's a snippet of the relevant bit, but the whole article is a good read:
"Shack: Can you explain why, even though you're coming up with this stuff now while the game is still in development, you can't incorporate it into the retail release?
Mikey Neumann: We're shooting for October 2009, so you can subtract two and a half to three months for certification time. Certification is what you go through with Microsoft and Sony, and to a lesser degree your publisher.
Certification is to make sure the games are bug free and shippable. Without certification, you'd have games that crash and not work.
Subtract three months off of October and you're, you know, now.
What happens a lot of the time is you finish your game and it's time for cert, and during cert a lot of bugs crop up that you have to fix, and a lot of them are really, really big bugs. You are certainly not adding any content to the game at all. A level? No way.
But, during cert, if you have a lot of level designers who have nothing to do--which is pretty common, you pull level design and art off first--they're gonna be making cool shit and want to make cool shit. That cool shit, that tends to be what DLC ends up being. It's the stuff we couldn't add to the game because we're making it during cert, which is impossible to get into the [retail] game."
(http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=1159 for whole thing)
When DLC like this became possible on home consoles people started bitching at company's that didn't announce DLC. The companies assumed people must really want DLC, so they began to start working on DLC and announce it right when they finish development on the game(like what happened here with Borderlands), but surprise, people bitch about that too. If they didn't announce the DLC, people would bitch.....If they did what these people seem to want and delay the game for six or so months just to put the DLC content into the actual game, people would bitch.
@Jayzilla:@moocow21: Here's a little something from your friendly neighborhood game developer. Content for games gets finished weeks or even months in advance of the game coming out. After this "content lockdown" the game goes through an intensive technical process called "certification", to iron out any bugs that would cause problems with the platforms its being released for. Content people (art, audio, animation, level design, game design) can't do ANYTHING else to the game for this period. The game is already "done".
So if Gearbox took some of its content people to keep creating more content while the code people finished up "cert" on the actual game, guess what? That ADDITIONAL content is not "should've been in the box", it's extra DLC. This isn't horse armor here, it's a completely new environment created after the game was completed. Wash the sand out of your vagina and quit bitching.
" I'll take solace in the fact that knowledge is bliss in this case. And knowing that this was never intended for the full game (how weird would it be for Gearbox to say, "oh, by the way, there's now franken-zombies in Borderlands native story mode"?) makes me happier that it can be part of my Borderlands instance if I want to pony up the $10 support for support."
Amen to this comment. It seems to be me that the sticking point for a lot of people on this thread is that Gearbox announced the dlc before the release and not after. I'm confused about why this is such a big problem. Are people really that ignorant about the development process? Of course they had the dlc in the pipeline. I have no doubt that they probably planned on producing this content from the outset of making the main game itself. That's what good companies do. They plan ahead and execute. I just really don't get why people would like to remain in the dark and not know this information.
Like it or not folks, with quality "triple AAA" titles like Borderlands that are based on a brand new ip companies are going to look to maximize their profits. Look at the quality of this game!
I think they should just release DLC the day the game comes out so they can make $70-90 right off the bat. The code should also be on the ship disc, but we should have to pay to unlock it. I HATE how this is just becoming ingrained into us that this is somehow OK for them to do! It's not, and it suck, and I don't buy the stuff because of it.
This looks like a cool addition. I can't see myself exhausting the content on disc quickly (don't have a ton of time to play games) so it's not a must-buy for me, but I'm glad support is coming so that if I create characters other than my main, I can buy some new levels to play.
@Zlatko: It will probably take you at least two play-throughs to hit the level cap if what Jeff was saying in the quick look was accurate. So don't worry about hitting an artificially low level cap like in Fallout 3.
Kinda interesting that the Gearbox team started working on this DLC during certification, points to there not being another Brothers in Arms game yet.
Mark my words if this game turns out to be a sales turd thats the end of Gearbox as in shuttered. That being said i'm cautiously optimistic but they are putting all there eggs into one basket.
What's the level cap in Borderlands anyway? Fallout 3's level cap was easily reached before finishing the main quest and all the side quests. It made the last third of the game somewhat boring knowing I was so tricked out against what enemies there were.
Borderlands really reminds me of Fallout for whatever reason, and I'm just hoping reaching the max level in it will still leave the game difficult or at least when you reach the max level you are 80%+ done with the games content.
Man, this is a bad business decision on gearbox's part. If they are going to bring out DLC so early at least wait until the game is out. This would be less shady if they announced it a week before the DLC would come out because then all this talk about "OMG Games not out yet how can DLC be ready" would be circumvented by "Sick the accounced DLC and its coming out so soon. Gearbox is aweomse."
I'll tell you EXACTLY why this isn't included in the full game. Because by the time you reach a release date artists, designers and coders have had some down time whilst the marketing guys and certification guys do thier job. Which leaves them time to come up with ideas on what they want to do next.
If you wanted this lot in the final release then you'd likely have to wait til Christmas for the game... and to include the next DLC you'd have to wait til march and to include all the other DLCs that might come out for this game you'd be waiting forever because GBX would go bust in the meantime.
Question: Does it say the DLC is out the week after release? Does it? No, it doesn't. Which means GBX know what they WANT to do but haven't necessarily done and finished it yet - which is also why this won't be in the initial release. 'But there are three screenshots there which means it must be complete already!' <- Don't be an idiot. How long do you think it took to put three screenshots together??
GBX also has the gearbuilder system in place so generating extra loot is now a case of adding extra, custom, weapon parts and not crafting entirely new weapons. Things like this make designing DLC faster, surely?
Do you know why ppl like bungie take a few months after release to start talking about extra maps and the like? It's because the team break thier nuts until D-Day and then all take a 1 month holiday after release. Nothing gets done for a while after release and this is what we have gotten used to, that's why it's acceptable. This is why so many ppl think they smell a rat when DLC is announced soon after release.
Instead of complaining here go and scream bloody murder on Activisions boards who are hiking the price of the most hyped game in the last few years (MW2) whilst claiming that "This is an industry where things cost a lot to develop and it’s a risky business" - sure, releasing MW2 was a massive risk. I mean who in thier right mind would buy it?
Be happy that Borderlands will more than likely provide it's money's worth and that if the press hands-on reports that are coming back do it justice it may well be the most original title this year.
In the end, I see no wrong with the company making money off a franchise that they have worked hard on for so long. If they have PLANS for DLC before the game hits the shelves then that's fine. If they were to chase down every piece of content that might make the first release then nothing would ever hit the shelves.
I remember the days when expansion packs were greeted with joy and excitement. Sure, all DLC could be put in the retail package but the game would never be released. They will have finished working on the main retail release a while back. Production of discs and boxes takes time, as does distribution. During that time, these guys have been working to make the game experience longer lived. Like all of us, they have food to buy, you want them to work for free? Grow. The fuck. Up.
The release is 'later this year'. Now, bearing in mind that DLC takes little or no disc-pressing or distribution shipping time, that gives them about 2 more months to work on the DLC from where it is now. This will mainly be art and mission development as well as extensive testing.
Announcing it early is not an indication that they are trying to suck you dry, but confirmation of their commitment to the game and community in the long run. We all hate it when support for a game is dropped. The retail package looks pretty good value to me.
Developers (good ones anyway) ALWAYS have more cool ideas than they can realistically fit into a realistic development cycle and a retail package. Remember that a longer development cycle means longer paying your staff and overheads without any company income to rebalance the books. A line has to be drawn, a deadline must be set.
DLC is an efficient way to release additional content developed at an appropriate speed rather than rushed to meet a deadline and left flawed. I'd rather get extra content later than loads of buggy content sooner with a hasty patch to fix it. Sometimes DLC is abused, but maybe you guys could all just wait until the release (or a review anyway) and then make an informed and rational decision on the value on offer and whether or not to buy. But hey, this is the internet, I guess I shouldn't expect informed and rational opinions.
" @Branthog: don't expect this to be any differant from the original game just because it's zombies now instead of skags. chances are if you don't like shooting "wolf dogs" as you put it, you will not enjoy shooting zombies. personally i'm extremely hyped about this game and dlc. the setting, which i might add isn't actually meant to be post-apocalyptic (i remember you mentioning that in a previous post) but rather otherworldly, really speaks to me. also, skags and bandits are not the only enemies in the game. "
It all remains to be seen what the actual overall gameplay mechanic is (which is astonishingly still kind of vague?). I don't expect the illustrations representing this DLC to overcome any problems there might be in the original title -- only that if the original game turns out to be decent, this DLC looks like it might be very cool. I'm really tired of zombie games, but the style looks var more lively (pardon the pun) than what I've seen, so far.
" ehhh, I'm sorry, but this kind of DLC announcement is what I dislike. Something like this could've been put in the actual game, but instead they're trying to milk the consumer. Not saying the content is bad or anything, and heck, it would be ok even if it was announced after the game came out by a few months, but the game isn't even in stores yet. And yet they already got stuff in finished for this. It would sit well with me if they actually worked on it AFTER the game was released, not during the game's actual development. "
Have you seen anything about this game? It's not like it's lacking in content. If you object to it then don't buy it.
271 Comments