Fall of Cybertron: They've got my money now

[Shockwave]

For me, I rarely buy games for the pc because I'm better at console gaming. The controllers specifically lend themselves to gaming rather than having to type stuff. There are a few exceptions like the Diablo games and the Sims but that's about it. For any sort of 3D shooter I'd prefer to have the console. And I'd rather play video games on a screen that it was designed for (ie: a sizeable TV and not some dinky monitor). That way I can actually see what the hell I'm doing. Also, stemming off the conversation from the hauls thread, I'm pretty sure I'm the oldest one here at 36.

[BWprowl]

For me, I rarely buy games for the pc because I'm better at console gaming. The controllers specifically lend themselves to gaming rather than having to type stuff.

I don’t know if you can cite controls as an arguable reason for consoles over PC these days, considering you can plug any and all manner of controllers into a PC via USB. It makes it a pretty even playing field, or maybe even tilts it in PC’s favor, since if you like to use a mouse and keyboard to play shooters or RTSes, you’re pretty much SOL on a console.

I used to be diehard for consoles, but somehow along the way they’ve managed to remove almost all of the convenience that defined such platforms and made them an enjoyable alternative to PC gaming. I realized a while ago that I actually *hate* everything about console gaming these days. I hate data installations that make you wait before you can even play a new game you get, I hate software and hardware updates that stall you in the middle of gameplay and encourage developers to ship effectively unfinished products, I hate DLC that nickels-and-dimes you for the ‘full’ experience and results in people with the same game having uneven features across who they play with, I hate online-play accounts that take decades to set up and aren’t consistent across multiple games, resulting in headaches and uncertainty whenever you go to play something new online, I hate account sign-ins that lock you out of your save data if the wrong person presses start, forcing you to reboot the whole thing just to get at your unlocks and so forth, and I hate wireless controllers that get dodgy with console synching and cripple your ability to play if they aren’t charged or have dead batteries. This is all the type of thing I initially eschewed PC gaming to avoid, and now it’s all over consoles too. These days I find I enjoy playing games on my PC more, since at least I feel like I have more control and familiarity with the interface required to navigate all that aforementioned BS, and workarounds are easier to implement if necessary. The fact that the doujin fighters I spend most of my time on thrive on the PC works to my advantage here as well.

And I'd rather play video games on a screen that it was designed for (ie: a sizeable TV and not some dinky monitor). That way I can actually see what the hell I'm doing.

My monitor is actually larger and higher-definition than my TV, for what that’s worth.

[annhell]

I'm with Prowl when it comes to network gaming. I still love my PS3, but for games that I really want to play online, I stick to PC.

Guess I'm kinda lucky that PC components get here QUITE cheapply from Taiwan and are very accessible. I just re-built one after the old motherboard crapped shorted out every piece of hardware except the casing. A high-performance re-fit cost under a grand of local currency, even including the HDTV monitor which I also use for my PS3.

And, maybe I just plain suck at shooters, but I always found console controls not as responsive as a mouse when trying to align my targetting sights.

So anyway, if anyone here cares for a PC online game of this in future, just let me know.
Or, if there's enough of us on PS3, I could probably grab a 2nd hand copy of that for cheap eventually.

[Onslaught Six]

Prowl: I read your entire post in Gomess' voice for some reason. (As if I know what the man sounds like.) I know we don't need to have this argument but I'm going to do it anyway:

I hate data installations that make you wait before you can even play a new game you get,

I've never had to install a game to actually play it before. People claim that installing it to the hard drive will let it load faster, but I don't even have a hard drive. I have two flash drives that I keep XBLA games and saves on, and that's it. The only thing I've ever had to install for a game when I bought it were updates, and they were rarely, if ever, more than a meg.

I hate software and hardware updates that stall you in the middle of gameplay and encourage developers to ship effectively unfinished products,

I've never played an "effectively unfinished" game. Bugs happen! Sometimes they slip through. I guess it helps that I haven't played Fallout or anything, since apparently that's a really buggy game?

In fact, since getting my 360 for my birthday last year, I haven't really had *any* major glitches happen besides some dropped connections with 86--and I'm blaming my dodgy Verizon internet more than anything else. I've also never had a software update show up in the 'middle' of gameplay, only when I boot up my console or when I start a game.

I hate DLC that nickels-and-dimes you for the ‘full’ experience and results in people with the same game having uneven features across who they play with

I've never really been fucked over with DLC. I don't have the War For Cybertron DLC, so I miss out on a few Escalation maps and that's about it. And hey, that stuff wasn't made when the game came out. The DLC expands the game. Without it, we would only have the two Escalation maps and that's it.

Besiding that, that feeling of being "nickeled and dimed" goes away pretty damn fast if you want several months to buy most new games like I do. (Then again, I preorder the stupidest shit. I preordered Metal Gear Solid HD Collection and you get a rousing bout of Fucking Nothing for doing so.)

I hate online-play accounts that take decades to set up and aren’t consistent across multiple games, resulting in headaches and uncertainty whenever you go to play something new online,

I don't play very many online games so this isn't much of an issue for me, and the games I do play are all easy about this. I've never had to create a seperate account for a console game.

I hate account sign-ins that lock you out of your save data if the wrong person presses start, forcing you to reboot the whole thing just to get at your unlocks and so forth, and I hate wireless controllers that get dodgy with console synching and cripple your ability to play if they aren’t charged or have dead batteries.

Use a wired controller; problem solved. Failing that, the dollar stores sell eight batteries for a dollar. I've also never really had a problem with this "data locking" thing you mention, but then I only ever have played with two people on my console at once, and we're both reasonably intelligent to know not to fuck around and push the wrong buttons.

So yeah, I think you're exaggerating a little.

[BWprowl]

I know we don't need to have this argument but I'm going to do it anyway:

Whatevs, let’s rumble.

I’m gonna preface this by admitting that I don’t actually own any current-gen consoles. I’ve experienced all these issues either playing with friends or borrowing consoles for a time to play particular games. Which may say either more or less about the prevalence of said issues.

I've never had to install a game to actually play it before. People claim that installing it to the hard drive will let it load faster, but I don't even have a hard drive. I have two flash drives that I keep XBLA games and saves on, and that's it. The only thing I've ever had to install for a game when I bought it were updates, and they were rarely, if ever, more than a meg.

MGS4 had those ridiculous wait times for data install between game portions. It was like a loading screen to the millionth power. That aside, this sentiment mainly came from my friends’ attempts to play MAG, which saw them buy the game, then spend over a day installing the data and then downloading patches and updates before they were even allowed to jump in and play.

I've never played an "effectively unfinished" game. Bugs happen! Sometimes they slip through. I guess it helps that I haven't played Fallout or anything, since apparently that's a really buggy game?

I’m more complaining about the updates rather than the bugs themselves. I was cruising along, enjoying myself on Heavy Rain a while back, when the game just *stops* me in the middle of my session and says “No, you can’t keep playing, we have to spend two hours downloading and installing an update for shit you probably wouldn’t have noticed anyway.” I didn’t even get a choice in the matter, it just kicked me out and told me to wait. Trying to get around the matter by going offline just resulted in the game telling me that it couldn’t play because it *knew* there was an update out there for it, and to get back online so it could get it.

I've never really been fucked over with DLC. I don't have the War For Cybertron DLC, so I miss out on a few Escalation maps and that's about it. And hey, that stuff wasn't made when the game came out. The DLC expands the game. Without it, we would only have the two Escalation maps and that's it.

Maps and such are kind of a whatever, but I’m mainly talking about stuff like fighting games like BlazBlue Continuum Shift or MvC3. Both put out DLC characters barely months after the games shipped. Of course I want all the characters in a fighting game, you assholes! That’s not ‘expanding the game’, that’s holding the full game hostage. I could’ve waited a few more months, if those characters weren’t ready for when the game was due to be released, then the game shouldn’t have been released before it was ready!

I don't play very many online games so this isn't much of an issue for me, and the games I do play are all easy about this. I've never had to create a seperate account for a console game.

See MAG again, and MGS4’s online mode, which required TWO accounts to be set up, and was a nightmare to navigate in general.

Use a wired controller; problem solved. Failing that, the dollar stores sell eight batteries for a dollar.

Like I said, I’m mainly playing with my friends here, who all have wireless controllers that are in a perpetual state of powerlessness, letting us play that fun battery-pack juggling game as we desperately try to extend our play time. (Can I also add a side note here that the Xbox360’s controllers powered by disposable batteries is one of the dumbest fucking ideas I’ve encountered in a long time?)

I've also never really had a problem with this "data locking" thing you mention, but then I only ever have played with two people on my console at once, and we're both reasonably intelligent to know not to fuck around and push the wrong buttons.

This mainly comes from the 360, which’ll start on the home screen on my friend’s account with everything loaded and good, then we’ll pop in the game disc and hit play, then it’ll pop up and ask me if I want to sign in, and I think it’s just asking me if I want to sign in and it will, but SURPRISE it was actually asking if I wanted to be the primary-account-data-to-load-whatever for this particular game, and of course as a visiting Player 2 I don’t have any data, so we get in and nothing’s unlocked or available, so we have to back out and try again.

So yeah, I think you're exaggerating a little.

I admit that I am, but you know what? Look at all these little niggles and annoyances and inconveniences that I’ve just listed as experiencing. It’s hardly the portrait of convenience that used to define console gaming. The damn things are practically PCs themselves now. I just want to pop in a game and play it without having to put batteries in a controller, or having to synch it, or having to sign into an account, or install a disc, or download a patch, or realize that I’m playing a glorified demo disc because I don’t have all the DLC. All the “old” consoles were able to pull this off, why is it the new, more technologically advanced consoles are apparently incapable of doing so?

[Onslaught Six]

I know we don't need to have this argument but I'm going to do it anyway:

Whatevs, let’s rumble.

I’m gonna preface this by admitting that I don’t actually own any current-gen consoles. I’ve experienced all these issues either playing with friends or borrowing consoles for a time to play particular games. Which may say either more or less about the prevalence of said issues.

See, this is interesting, because I had a lot of these similar complaints before I ever actually owned my 360! It's more like these things are tiny niggling incidents in the overall larger picture.

MGS4 had those ridiculous wait times for data install between game portions. It was like a loading screen to the millionth power. That aside, this sentiment mainly came from my friends’ attempts to play MAG, which saw them buy the game, then spend over a day installing the data and then downloading patches and updates before they were even allowed to jump in and play.

Did MGS4 *require* you to install the game to the hard drive? Or did you optionally do this? Because like I said, I've never had a game that required me to install it to the hard drive beyond downloading some miniscule (we're talking 500k) updates, and I've basically seen the results of installing a game in action--it loads a teeny tiny bit faster. Striderneko has Left 4 Dead 2 installed on his hard drive, and we play it online semi-frequently--he gets about an extra second or two of time inside the safe room before mine loads. Woooo isn't that extra boost great? Besiding that, I don't even have a hard drive, just the flash drives, so I don't even think the boost would do that much.

FAKE EDIT: I lied. Halo 3 requires you to have a hard drive (not just flash drives, an actual Xbox 360 hard drive) to play online co-op. But even then, you can play the single player just fine.

I’m more complaining about the updates rather than the bugs themselves. I was cruising along, enjoying myself on Heavy Rain a while back, when the game just *stops* me in the middle of my session and says “No, you can’t keep playing, we have to spend two hours downloading and installing an update for shit you probably wouldn’t have noticed anyway.” I didn’t even get a choice in the matter, it just kicked me out and told me to wait. Trying to get around the matter by going offline just resulted in the game telling me that it couldn’t play because it *knew* there was an update out there for it, and to get back online so it could get it.

That's really weird! It must be a PS3 thing--my Xbox 360 has never done that, only ever asking me to update when I boot the console or a game. And even then, I can just decline and then continue to play the game normally. Also, how big are these updates man? I've never downloaded one that was more than a meg or two.

Maps and such are kind of a whatever, but I’m mainly talking about stuff like fighting games like BlazBlue Continuum Shift or MvC3. Both put out DLC characters barely months after the games shipped. Of course I want all the characters in a fighting game, you assholes! That’s not ‘expanding the game’, that’s holding the full game hostage. I could’ve waited a few more months, if those characters weren’t ready for when the game was due to be released, then the game shouldn’t have been released before it was ready!

I don't get it, though. It's like when they made Super Street Fighter 2 or whatever and added Deejay and T. Hawk and Cammy. They're just 'additional' characters. New ones that weren't done. Whereas back in the day you'd have to pay full price for that, now you just get them as DLC. Of course, Capcom doesn't understand this, so we get shit like Super Street Fighter 4 and Ultimate MVC3, so you end up paying $40-60 for the addition of, what, four new characters, rather than $15?

You could also just wait those few more months, pick the game up for far less money to begin with, and then pay for the DLC to make it even out. Nothing says you *have* to buy the latest game right now right now gotta go fast and buy it when it comes out; especially when we all have such huge backlogs anyway.

See MAG again, and MGS4’s online mode, which required TWO accounts to be set up, and was a nightmare to navigate in general.

I never played MAG, nor MGS4, so I can only really comment on my own experiences. From what I've heard though, things like this are the exception rather than the rule.

Like I said, I’m mainly playing with my friends here, who all have wireless controllers that are in a perpetual state of powerlessness, letting us play that fun battery-pack juggling game as we desperately try to extend our play time. (Can I also add a side note here that the Xbox360’s controllers powered by disposable batteries is one of the dumbest fucking ideas I’ve encountered in a long time?)

They are, but there also exist charge packs for the 360 controllers. Mostly a way to get more money out of you by having to buy that as well as a controller.

This mainly comes from the 360, which’ll start on the home screen on my friend’s account with everything loaded and good, then we’ll pop in the game disc and hit play, then it’ll pop up and ask me if I want to sign in, and I think it’s just asking me if I want to sign in and it will, but SURPRISE it was actually asking if I wanted to be the primary-account-data-to-load-whatever for this particular game, and of course as a visiting Player 2 I don’t have any data, so we get in and nothing’s unlocked or available, so we have to back out and try again.

Sign in on the guide screen before you load the game. Or don't turn the controller on until after the game is loaded. I do these and I never have a problem.

I admit that I am, but you know what? Look at all these little niggles and annoyances and inconveniences that I’ve just listed as experiencing. It’s hardly the portrait of convenience that used to define console gaming. The damn things are practically PCs themselves now. I just want to pop in a game and play it without having to put batteries in a controller, or having to synch it, or having to sign into an account, or install a disc, or download a patch, or realize that I’m playing a glorified demo disc because I don’t have all the DLC. All the “old” consoles were able to pull this off, why is it the new, more technologically advanced consoles are apparently incapable of doing so?

And I understand the concerns! I had them too. It's part of why I didn't buy a 360 (or Wii or PS3) when they first game out. Part of me was really let down by the Wii in general (diehard Nintendo fanboy here) and the original Xbox didn't exactly have the best reputation so I first started just waiting them out. Then I heard about all this general stuff. Then I went to college, started hanging out with my new college friends, played Left 4 Dead a couple times, and had pretty much all of them go "Get a 360, get a 360, get a 360 so we can play games, get a 360." (So of course I waited until I dropped out to get one.)

But once I had the console I realized most of my concerns weren't that bad, and only a handful of games 'ever' had problems like this, and when they did it was never all of the problems at once. I own something like 20 games and none of them has ever made me register a new account to do anything; it all just uses my Xbox Live account. (To be fair: This might be a PS3 issue more than a 360 one because the PS3 doesn't, or at least didn't until semi-recently, have a console-wide online architecture like the 360.) I've never had to wait more than a few seconds to download a miniscule ~500k update. And the DLC issue; I usually buy games several months later anyway so I can see if the DLC is even worth it or even wait for a price drop for it. (The War for Cybertron DLC is now $10 total, for example.) And on top of that, the DLC is usually not totally needed. I played through and beat both Mass Effect 2 and LA Noire without buying any of the DLC, for example, and don't feel as though I was gypped at all. I bought some of Resident Evil 5's DLC and was vastly disappointed; but it was an extra prequel side story to the main game and, as I've been playing through the main game, everything has been generally cool without worrying about it.

You can't condemn the modern consoles for this; you can only condemn individual games. I can condemn RE5 for having shitty DLC that I paid too much for, but I can't do the same for any other game without knowing what the DLC is--and there's several games whose DLC were entirely worth their price, like the Scott Pilgrim DLC which was a whole $2 for Knives Chau and a few extra bonus modes.

And I know you're thinking, "Well if all the characters weren't done, why even release it?" Because I had a bunch of fun just with the original four characters and fifth unlockable (Nega Scott)--in fact, I didn't even unlock Nega Scott until after Knives came out. Plus, the game *was* rushed so it could meet the theater deadline for the movie--TONS of stuff was cut from it. But I enjoyed the game just fine *without* the extra character; so paying the extra $2 to extend the life of my game a little was fine.

Fact is, games have deadlines, and DLC actually allows them to extend the life of the game and give us some of that extra stuff that, previously, would just get cut. For example, let's look at Metroid Prime. Did you know Kraid was going to be in it? He was, for real. But they didn't have enough time to finish him and his area, so they cut it. If Metroid Prime was released on a console now (let's pretend the Wii has DLC), then they might have been able to have, like, "Kraid's Lair" DLC, giving you a whole new area of cut content to explore. You might say, "Why not just delay the game until Kraid was done?" Because you can only delay a game for so long. LA Noire was in development since at least 2004--that's over 'seven years' of development, and the game still had things cut from it. You can't just infinitely work on a game, because developing games is a business, and if you don't deliver product on a decent enough timetable, you lose money. Team Bondi developed LA Noire for seven years, and the costs of developing it over that amount of time were so great that even with the massive financial success of that game, they had to go bankrupt and close down the studio. You can't just work on a game forever--at some point, somebody has to say, Okay, that's enough, no more. DLC lets us get some of that stuff that wasn't finished.

REAL EDIT: Some of this sounds more inflammatory than it's supposed to be. I think I'm in a mood today; I just got into an argument with someone else over something unrelated on Twitter. I think the main thing here is that I'm hearing you bring up things that are directly counter to my own experiences. It's a bit of Matrix shock, you know, someone whose opinion I trust telling me that the sky really is green when all this time I've thought it was blue. So I'm rather violently going "The fuck it is!"

[Shockwave]

Ah.. this is an amusing debate. Sorry Prowl, I'm with O6 on this one. In the 3+ years that I've had my 360 I haven't had any of the problems you've mentioned. I can't help wondering what you were playing and on what platform? I know you mentioned MGS4 but I haven't played that one and I know that some of the previous generation systems attempted online gaming with mixed results. The process didn't seem to get refined until the 360, which all of my experiences have been pretty good. I remember when the SNES and Genesis had X-Band and that was on dial-up and it was a good attempt at the time for what was available but it had certainly had it's issues. I also remember that the PS2 at one point had some sort of add on for online play but I seem to recall that it failed epically as well. So yeah, online play had a lot of problems in the beginning but really those issues should all be a thing of the past.

As for DLC, I can actually see both sides of this. I don't really mind DLC as long as it's worth it. Extra Characters in fighting games, to me would determine what type of characters they are. Like on Mortal Kombat the PS3 had Kratos while the 360 has Freddy. I don't feel like I've missed out by not having either of those characters because they're not generally part of the MK mythos. For WFC I certainly felt like it was worth the extra money to have the extra battle maps and the character models. In that case it added a lot to the game, but the game never felt incomplete without it. My only real problem with DLC is that it's now mandatory on games. We can't have games without DLCs now because otherwise Microsoft wouldn't be able to make a ton of money off of the game in addition to the developer making a ton of money off of sales of the game. It just feels like such an obvious money grab that it is a little off putting in that respect, but I can see the benefits of it as a gamer. Like O6 said, it extends the playable life of the game and keeps it from getting stale too quickly.

Shockwave
-My tv is a 52" flatscreen. My computer is a 15" monitor. Which do you think I want to play games on more?

[138 Scourge]

Extra Characters in fighting games, to me would determine what type of characters they are. Like on Mortal Kombat the PS3 had Kratos while the 360 has Freddy.

Dag, I'd sort of like to play as Freddy, but given the choice between those two I'd pick Kratos any day. Now, if Xbox had Jason as a dowloadable character, that'd be a different thing.

This whole thing is making me start to rethink my whole "pick up a PS3 next month" plan. Hmm.

[BWprowl]

Did MGS4 *require* you to install the game to the hard drive? Or did you optionally do this? Because like I said, I've never had a game that required me to install it to the hard drive beyond downloading some miniscule (we're talking 500k) updates, and I've basically seen the results of installing a game in action--it loads a teeny tiny bit faster. Striderneko has Left 4 Dead 2 installed on his hard drive, and we play it online semi-frequently--he gets about an extra second or two of time inside the safe room before mine loads. Woooo isn't that extra boost great? Besiding that, I don't even have a hard drive, just the flash drives, so I don't even think the boost would do that much.

MGS4 makes you do 'data installations' after each chapter/portion of the game. This basically involves having the game stop on you and watching a progress meter for fifteen or so minutes while Snake smokes and little tips/info tidbits pop up. This is not optional. Wheee....

FAKE EDIT: I lied. Halo 3 requires you to have a hard drive (not just flash drives, an actual Xbox 360 hard drive) to play online co-op. But even then, you can play the single player just fine.

For the record, who the hell buys a shooter to play the single player?

That's really weird! It must be a PS3 thing--my Xbox 360 has never done that, only ever asking me to update when I boot the console or a game. And even then, I can just decline and then continue to play the game normally. Also, how big are these updates man? I've never downloaded one that was more than a meg or two.

Hey, it happened on the PS3, so it may be a PS3 thing. That said, the length of the procedure on my end may be attributed to the fact that I was downloading the update via a neighbor's wi-fi, since I don't have wireless internet here. I'll make a point of that later on.

I don't get it, though. It's like when they made Super Street Fighter 2 or whatever and added Deejay and T. Hawk and Cammy. They're just 'additional' characters. New ones that weren't done. Whereas back in the day you'd have to pay full price for that, now you just get them as DLC. Of course, Capcom doesn't understand this, so we get shit like Super Street Fighter 4 and Ultimate MVC3, so you end up paying $40-60 for the addition of, what, four new characters, rather than $15?

The thing to understand about Capcom's now-infamous game updates is that there's more to them than just new characters. Generally, the game undergoes some reworking with each new release, with existing characters getting new moves, old moves getting new properties, and the whole thing getting rejiggered for different play options and balance issues. Often new levels and story elements get put in as well. It's a new, reworked product, not just the old one with some new stuff stuck in. For comparison, Ultimate MvC3 features twelve new characters, and multiple new modes, including that Heroes vs. Heralds thing that A) acts almost like a completely different game and B) is actually coming out as DLC because they're rushing an unfinished product to market. Jill and Shuma-Gorath on the other hand, were just two additional characters that got released for purchase less than a month after the original game came out. People could've waited an extra month for them to stick the last two characters in.

You could also just wait those few more months, pick the game up for far less money to begin with, and then pay for the DLC to make it even out. Nothing says you *have* to buy the latest game right now right now gotta go fast and buy it when it comes out; especially when we all have such huge backlogs anyway.

In regards to buying things used after they come out, I'm generally against that practice, since I'd prefer that Capcom or Atlus or whoever get my money for their product, not Gamestop.

They are, but there also exist charge packs for the 360 controllers. Mostly a way to get more money out of you by having to buy that as well as a controller.

So you at least admit that there's an issue here.

And I know you're thinking, "Well if all the characters weren't done, why even release it?" Because I had a bunch of fun just with the original four characters and fifth unlockable (Nega Scott)--in fact, I didn't even unlock Nega Scott until after Knives came out. Plus, the game *was* rushed so it could meet the theater deadline for the movie--TONS of stuff was cut from it. But I enjoyed the game just fine *without* the extra character; so paying the extra $2 to extend the life of my game a little was fine.

Fact is, games have deadlines, and DLC actually allows them to extend the life of the game and give us some of that extra stuff that, previously, would just get cut. For example, let's look at Metroid Prime. Did you know Kraid was going to be in it? He was, for real. But they didn't have enough time to finish him and his area, so they cut it. If Metroid Prime was released on a console now (let's pretend the Wii has DLC), then they might have been able to have, like, "Kraid's Lair" DLC, giving you a whole new area of cut content to explore. You might say, "Why not just delay the game until Kraid was done?" Because you can only delay a game for so long. LA Noire was in development since at least 2004--that's over 'seven years' of development, and the game still had things cut from it. You can't just infinitely work on a game, because developing games is a business, and if you don't deliver product on a decent enough timetable, you lose money. Team Bondi developed LA Noire for seven years, and the costs of developing it over that amount of time were so great that even with the massive financial success of that game, they had to go bankrupt and close down the studio. You can't just work on a game forever--at some point, somebody has to say, Okay, that's enough, no more. DLC lets us get some of that stuff that wasn't finished.

I guess it depends on how you play games. Remember that I'm a fighting game diehard, and you fucking *need* to have all the characters in those because dammit, that's how competitive play works. Scott Pilgrim is a blast, but no one plays it seriously/competitively so you don't need everything on hand. If your friend comes over to play and whines that you don't have Knives you just say 'Shut the hell up and play Steven Stills like a real man'. But if he comes over and wants to use Platinum on BBCS because that's his fucking main, and I don't have her because whatever, then we're going to have an issue. It's like not having all the guns in a shooter, because some were DLC (has any series done that, actually? I'm not sure. I know one of the Gran Turismos pulled that shit with a bunch of the cars).

REAL EDIT: Some of this sounds more inflammatory than it's supposed to be. I think I'm in a mood today; I just got into an argument with someone else over something unrelated on Twitter. I think the main thing here is that I'm hearing you bring up things that are directly counter to my own experiences. It's a bit of Matrix shock, you know, someone whose opinion I trust telling me that the sky really is green when all this time I've thought it was blue. So I'm rather violently going "The fuck it is!"

Dude, it's cool, you're not offending me or anything. Just realize that I've apparently had different experiences with video games than you have. We're clearly different sorts of gamers, so some disparity is to be expected. It's an interesting discussion, anyway. I honestly hope *I'm* not coming off as too inflammatory.

Ah.. this is an amusing debate. Sorry Prowl, I'm with O6 on this one. In the 3+ years that I've had my 360 I haven't had any of the problems you've mentioned. I can't help wondering what you were playing and on what platform? I know you mentioned MGS4 but I haven't played that one and I know that some of the previous generation systems attempted online gaming with mixed results. The process didn't seem to get refined until the 360, which all of my experiences have been pretty good. I remember when the SNES and Genesis had X-Band and that was on dial-up and it was a good attempt at the time for what was available but it had certainly had it's issues. I also remember that the PS2 at one point had some sort of add on for online play but I seem to recall that it failed epically as well. So yeah, online play had a lot of problems in the beginning but really those issues should all be a thing of the past.

See, and this is one of the cores of my issue: Online is too goddamn integrated into gaming now. What with DLC and updates and online-only multiplayer, this means that if I actually want to buy a current-gen console and get the Full Experience, I'm gonna have to drop $100+ dollars on a router as well (currently my internets plug directly into my computer, like in Amish country), plus money for their extra-premium-gold online service so I can actually play their games online. Sheesh.

Look, I like PC gaming, but if I want that experience I'll goddamn play some PC games. Maybe I'm getting too old, but I yearn for the days when I could just plug a Box into my TV, put another Box in that, and video games would come out without any goofy complications. *Looks over at DLC-capable, firmware-updating 3DS* Christ, I can't even get that experience out of portables anymore...

[annhell]

For the record, who the hell buys a shooter to play the single player?

Me. Coz I plain suck at competitive gaming.

It's like not having all the guns in a shooter, because some were DLC (has any series done that, actually? I'm not sure. I know one of the Gran Turismos pulled that shit with a bunch of the cars).

Well, if you consider Mass Effect 2 as a shooter, then yes, a shooter has made some weapons DLC-only. It's strictly single-player though, so you're not going to feel disadvantaged against other players or some such. On the other hand, ME3 is supposed to have online modes, so I don't know how significant this practice of DLC weapons is gonna be.