As gamers, what is it about downloadable content that makes our mouths water and eyes widen? DLC packages provide gamers with a proverbial teat from which we can milk out every ounce of entertainment within a game we have come to know and love. By downloading new content into seasoned games we make our games new again...effectively creating a novel experience within a comfortable environment. However, does that want of content and unbridled love of gaming give developers the right to milk our wallets for every ounce of greenery as well?
Battlefield 3's former Lead Designer has revealed that there were two cut missions from the main campaign
Get rid of campaigns, move the game to mobile, and try to compete with warzone. They would save time and money.
Free for Playstation owners
Players are using hacks to gain an advantage in the game, such as aimbots and wall hacks. The first gives a player superhuman aiming abilities, while a wall hack lets you see through walls to gauge where other players are.
“These hacks are typically used by PC players, but those playing on PC via Xbox Game Pass are identified as Xbox players in multiplayer lobbies.”
This is pretty dumb to say the least.
That's a WTF, they suppose to be labeled as pc users even if its on PC game pass. They mess that up big time.
If AI keeps getting better (and it will) it's just a matter of time before there's more sophisticated cheats even for consoles, and they wouldn't even need to be running on it, I have little doubt about that.
Don't Gamepass online games have anti-cheat systems?
If not, that's pretty dumb. Microsoft need to fix that asap.
They won't ever fix this problem, unless they (developers, publishers, Sony and MS) go after the cheat providers directly. You no longer need to hack consoles to use hacks. During the ps360 days, they were going after cheat devices, but it was a cat and mouse game. These cheating methods were around during those days, it's nothing new, but they kept it under control. Since the PS4/Xbox one generation, they stopped going after these cheating devices and it became widespread. Which I find odd, since they started charging for online play (PS4).
Possibly, this is because the companies were going after cheats because the same cheats were being used to pirate the games, whereas today, the companies use online verification to prevent piracy, thus eliminating the need to go after people who cheat only to gain an advantage in the game. As long as the cheater remains below the radar, and does not completely break the game, the companies look the other way as their wallets are not threatened by it. (that is my completely Uneducated opinion on the matter)
I mean, COD games was always filled with hackers, nothing new. I can’t blame MS on this. Activision had years to try and fix this. Might take MS some time to make some change.
It all depends…
Microsoft’s guidance on how to handle gamepass on pc and their love to force crossplay with pc seems like a them issue.
And they own activision, so it is still a them issue.
This is getting rediculus. By now, everyone should know that most DLC is made between the time when the game goes gold and te realease date. That time is sometimes as long as a few months. In that time programmers are still working on the game (in a very small scale) to find any bugs and other irregularities that may have been missed. Often the rest of the development team (if they haven't found other jobs) are just sitting around doing nothing for the developer, and that is very expensive. Unless there is another game already in development or about to be started what are these people supposed to do in that time? That's right, make the DLC.
But how does the DLC get done at the same time as the game is released you ask? Simple, except for making the new mission (for example) all the core mechanics are already done (control scheme, physics, and other mechanics), the programmers just need to write up a new script and get everything in motion again. This is made faster now that DLC is being planned from the begining.
But why can't the DLC be made available on the disc, you ask? Two things: 1, more often than not it is and you are paying for a key to unlock it. This is acceptable when what you are unlocking has no real impact on the game itself, such as costumes. It is already on the disc so that others can see it. Imagine the costs of having to run separate servers for all the combinations of DLC purchased at any given point. For example, my games has three sets of DLC for purchase and all are sold separately. Not everyone is going to buy even one of those and not everyone is going to buy all of them. That means that I am going to need a server for the people who bought nothing, the people who bough only 1,2, or three and then for the people who have all of them. If I don't have that set up you will run into people you can see because your disc doesnt have to code to "see" the costumes that they are wearing. This leads us into the second reason. Saving money on servers. I have the DLC but you don't, no problem. We can still play together and you can see my pretty little outfit and (hopefully) get jealous enough to buy it yourself.
Hopefully this clears everything up and I never have to hear such entitled nonsense again. But who am I kidding, this is the Internet and everyone has an "opinion".
P.S. sorry for the heavy reading.
I like how the article compares the 2 then says "This isn't about MW3's subscription service."
Guess what, its money you spend after you purchased the "full game" DLC / Subscription are just ways for developers to get more money from you. Now the difference "I" see if BF3 is giving you Free DLC, MW3 keeps dodging the issue with "well no, BUT, we offer blah blah blah for $$"
rule 1: see rockstar games.