Has it started now?

[Moustachio]

They just want to make more money selling the DLC...

I'm an xbox user and love it, but my only complaint about the xbox... is that the DLC is such a cynical rip-off; especially when it is clear that it was meant to be in the game originally... I'm thinking GOW 2, Borderlands and so on... I also hate the microsoft points system which is clearly set to make you think your not spending real money or to confuse you into how much you are spending...

other than that awesome console with awesome xbox only games. (but I appreciate the same can be said of the PS3)

[Ekona]

I also hate the microsoft points system which is clearly set to make you think your not spending real money or to confuse you into how much you are spending...

Actually, it was designed so that the item costs the same no matter where in the world you are, i.e. 200pts is always 200pts, and not £1.50 over here and then $.99 in the US and 1.34EU in France etc.

It may not be as clear as the Sony way, but it does make logical sense.

[Moustachio]

I appreciate that, but I'd appreciate a bit more if it was in £££ in this country and so on.

I just find it purposely decieiving.

[SamUK]

You think DLC is a bad thing?

Thats gotta be a first lol.

Borderlands was never planned to have so much DLC. It was a massive hit and the developer have continued to support it because of that.

Thats a good thing!!

Cant really gripe about gears either really. The original game had loads of maps and modes. DLC just adds to it and extends its life.


MS are apprently also looking at ditching the points system apparently.

[Moustachio]

I do, especially when its 800points for a tiny mission, or was obviously meant to be there in the first place (GOW2 for example, going stealth or all guns blazin' that was clearly meant to be an option in the original game). (don't mind added mulitplayer maps and that etc, I'm talking about campaign elements).

(I'll stop moaning now if everyone thinks that microsoft points are great and DLC always provide great value for money)

[Bender Unit]

You are basing it on your own opinion though sam, And also they've dropped the 360's resolution and cut back on the textures as well cos the 360 just couldn't handle it. And if it was a case of just hd cgi why not add another disc or 2?

Do you know that for a fact? Or could it be due to the fact that to reprogamme the game for the 360 would take up so much time it was easier to do a crap port from the 360 and strip stuff out. Just like when a game is developed for the 360 and then the PS3 gets a dire port with bugs and shoddy textures - its not because the system cant handle it, simply that its lazy programming.

I would suspect that the reason for Capcom developing lost planet 2 on the PS3 is because it sold better on that platform, despite being released 6 months after the 360! When it released on the 360 there were alot of big titles landing at the same time, unlike the PS3.

No fan boy comments but I fail to believe programmers have found the limits of either system, so whenever I see a developer claiming that X system couldnt cope then its probably that they didnt have the knowledge or time to make it happen.