I want to vomit. Like really my stomach hurts.
.... then again I just ate a whole pizza.
Getting the GOTY Edition for sure though.
I still have to finish FF13 anyway.
If it behooves a developer to release a complete experience for $60, they do not deserve my money.
The way GTA IV and Skyrim have gone about it is the right way - proper expansions.
I bought a SQEX game last year, and I enjoyed it a lot. It was called Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Maybe you heard of it? Pretty sure it had DLC.
So when I look for my JRPG fix, I look not to Squeenix but elsewhere.
What I take issue with is Chris' opener saying they don't even remember what it's like to have extra content, which is bullshit. SQEX had no DLC this entire time when everyone trashed them and praised Bethesda and Bioware. What did people expect them to do?
And Bethesda has been a mixture of good and bad with DLC. They do expansions now, but they actually were the first ones pushing shit as well with the horse armor. Then they did little $10 episodes. Now they're doing expansions again for Skyrim, which we haven't seen yet.
Hopefully SQEX also gets better at this over time.
Don't be that guy Chris Carter. I think its fair to call out questionable DLC models, but no shit stuff from back then doesn't compare to today.
Besides games like DX, I'm honestly done wiht SqEnix. The glory days are long gone. I haven't enjoyed a FF since 10, and even that tended to be something of a guilty pleasure. No new Chrono sequels, shoddy-and-expensive mobile ports, no new Tactics games (although the PSP remake of Tactics Ogre was quite good), and just a complete shift away from everything that made Square and Enix, separately, awesome companies 15 years ago.
DX had DLC, but it was largely of the frivolous weapon pack variety and one add-on that gave more content for its price than most add-ons do, but the story was nothing essential, just some added perspective.
And that's fine, but had it been on disc that would be a different story.
DX didn't really cross the line on DLC.
Never before has there been a game less deserving of a "game of the year" edition.
(Yes, I know it doesn't actually mean it won any GOTY awards.)
Hey, no problem Shinta. I also enjoyed your overzealous (and factually incorrect) defense of a multi-national corporation. Thank the Gods you're here! Otherwise, people might think poorly of Square Enix!
The DLC for FFXIII-2 is ridiculous, it all should have been included in the damn game. What a rip-off.
In any case, I'm curious why you responded so negatively to that particular post. The DX DLC post was directed at you, but the follow-up pretty much had nothing to do with you. Just embarrassed by being wrong? Or does every slight against Square-Enix, even ones not having to do with DLC, require some sort of snarky response?
If you don't want to read about nostalgia glasses or the murmurings of aging nerds, I suggest you find another hobby.
it was squaresoft and it was awesome :(
That's prolly because they haven't released a final fantasy game in about 7 years.
Have I understood this correctly? If so, that's really an ass move. How the mighty have fallen.
but yeah i actually like XIII-2, but DLC like this should have been in the game as unlockable in the first place and such.
all in all i just hope square focuses on Versus XIII this time.
It's true. The twenties are essentially the nineties to the internet.
Old man Killias. Remembering the 90's and all that. Pretty soon I'll be watching Jay Leno and living off of Social Security.
I'd like to see it implemented better in the future, way better, but Square have been getting a lot of random hate. I think a lot of it was off the silly rumor the gigantic cliffhanger ending would be wrapped up in DLC (which as anyone who completed it would know, that ending was way too huge and game-changing that it could be summed up to a satisfactory level through DLC)
I'm not praising the DLC - but it's not the worst.
Just doing simple math. I asked if you were being a dumb fanboyish prick. It's like asking if you were being a good helper around the house, it's basically a descriptor. You then corrected me by saying you weren't a fanboy, but omitted not being dumb or a prick. The impression I'm left with is that you don't believe yourself to be a fanboy, but do believe yourself to be dumb and/or prickish. I mean, why else wouldn't you have said "I'm not a dumb fanboy prick?"
"you're an old man and no one really cares about what old men think. Fuck off."
Oh. Right.

surf dtoid with 

Rising (10+)
People you follow

































follow











