"Off-Disc-Content" (ODC)

[Treble]

Brats - FF:CC is unplayable without the GBAs to link to. You have to manage your inventory on-the-fly, which is done often in mid-battle. All the other members of your four-man party are doing the same thing at the same time (changing spells, equipping items etc.). Without the use of the extra screens, it'd be such a stop-start experience as to be unfeasible.

[mid]

Patches for online play is the one area I'm perfectly fine with them doing this.

If you're not playing on Live (or the equivalent for other platforms), then slow netcode isn't an issue, and neither is cheating - you're either playing against the computer, where 'cheating' is on your own conscience, or against mates on the local machine or LAN, where cheaters will get sworn at.

Basically, if the single-player game is impaired by not having a Live-distributed add-on, then something is wrong. But some online things only come to light once you've let the conniving little kids try to break it, and I'd rather those fixed than not.

[Lebowski]

odc done the nintendo way i have really mixed feelings about, on the + side i like being able to play nes games on my sp. Excitebike works really well on the train for a quick blast, and i like the bonus of haveing it there to play whenever i want and for free.

On the down side Crystal Cronicals, Four swords+ and pac man vs insitance on haveing to use gbas to get the most out of them means i'll never really play these games the way they were intended and this really anoys me as im a massive zelda and ff fan.

A problem that could of been solved if nintendo would sort itself out and get its machine online proaperley, as both these games would proably work online very well.

On to live i think that a lot of the downloadable content is just there to justify the price tag and price is a big issue, its one of the reasons that the ps2 has genrally more players on socom one and two than most of xboxs live games put together.

Its happend on the pc and its happening on the xbox patches are becoming more and more widespread but i dont see this as a problem for online games as long as its only there to stop cheats or fix flaws with the game online.

[Brats]

Brats - FF:CC is unplayable without the GBAs to link to. You have to manage your inventory on-the-fly, which is done often in mid-battle. All the other members of your four-man party are doing the same thing at the same time (changing spells, equipping items etc.). Without the use of the extra screens, it'd be such a stop-start experience as to be unfeasible.

But there are loads of games that let you change inventory on the fly, like BG&E for instance. The difference here is that the inventory is kept on the very edge of the main screen, rather than on a seperate screen. Why wouldn't this work with FF:CC?

[Brats]

On to live i think that a lot of the downloadable content is just there to justify the price tag and price is a big issue, its one of the reasons that the ps2 has genrally more players on socom one and two than most of xboxs live games put together.

I think the PS2's online success has more to do with the size of its installed userbase. As a proportion of users, the sell through of Live is far greater than the PS2 online service.

Its happend on the pc and its happening on the xbox patches are becoming more and more widespread but i dont see this as a problem for online games as long as its only there to stop cheats or fix flaws with the game online.

As mid mentioned too, for online content I can't see how anyone can argue. Developers can't properly test for netplay before the games release, so the chances of bugs creeping through are that much greater.

[Lebowski]

I think the PS2's online success has more to do with the size of its installed userbase. As a proportion of users, the sell through of Live is far greater than the PS2 online service.

but you could argue that live works out of the box were as sonys machine needs a quite hefty investment to get started.

As mid mentioned too, for online content I can't see how anyone can argue. Developers can't properly test for netplay before the games release, so the chances of bugs creeping through are that much greater.

but they can sony have currentley implemented a network beta trial to test major release's for network faults and server loads before they release them to the public. This may not be the cheepest way of doing things but the ps2s lack of a harddrive as standard means that it has to get its releases right.

Compare this with the patching ethos and it makes you realise that microsoft proably use the same guidelines for makeing online games as it does for its pc software, if i dont work right we can always fix it later, and if it has problems people will upgrade to newer better games.

[Brats]

but you could argue that live works out of the box were as sonys machine needs a quite hefty investment to get started.

Pricewise, the PS2 option is slightly cheaper. And if it was more expensive, doesn't that counteract your initial argument .

but they can sony have currentley implemented a network beta trial to test major release's for network faults and server loads before they release them to the public. This may not be the cheepest way of doing things but the ps2s lack of a harddrive as standard means that it has to get its releases right.

But online betas are notoriously ineffective at getting rid of all bugs. Witness the issues with SB:LOC, FFXI and Star Wars Galaxies upon initial retail release after beta tests.

Compare this with the patching ethos and it makes you realise that microsoft proably use the same guidelines for makeing online games as it does for its pc software, if i dont work right we can always fix it later, and if it has problems people will upgrade to newer better games.

You don't really believe that, do you?

[Treble]

But there are loads of games that let you change inventory on the fly, like BG&E for instance. The difference here is that the inventory is kept on the very edge of the main screen, rather than on a seperate screen. Why wouldn't this work with FF:CC?

But that's a single-player game. The screen in FF:CC already contains a lot of action and info (HUD etc.) - having four lots of inventory screens running at the same time would be nigh-on impossible. It'd be too confusing. Either that or, if you made them tiny as not to interfere with play, they'd be too miniscule to see >_<

I don't think Square Enix put a foot wrong with the system, tbh, and I don't think it's a gimmick. Shame the game isn't particularly innovative or exciting in terms of plot and action, however. It's a disappointment

[Brats]

I'll take your word for it then . I agree, it did seem very limited even from the short play I had.

[Ady]

<hijack>

Yeah, it'll never win awards for innovation (few FF games would...) and it is essentially Gaultlet with a plot as someone said once, but it is a lot of fun.

</hijack>

[Magnakai]

Magnakai is the best person EVAR!!!!

*glows*

[Darwock]

I agree with Otaku, and can't be bothered reading the whole thread to see if my point has been made but it started with Samba de Amigo.

I was a late-comer to the Samba party, in fact - it was after the online services had shut down. No extra songs for me then, even though they are on the disc. What's more, my DC was of the HK variety (no modem), so even if the updates had still been available I couldn't have got them. I was able to get them on a VMU, but now I live in fear of that VMU being scrubbed.

This shouldn't be the way things are.

[Sketcz]

lets dissect this ODC which is corrupting the gaming industry by using a single game as an example

How dare Ubisoft charge me 20 english pounds for a game (Ghost Recon Island Thunder) and then (ramble edited)

the fact that a game gets updates which exceed its shelf life by many months - most updates are released when attention in the title is (edited, more ramble)

Well Camps, Darwock just blew your entire argument out of the water.
Quite cleanly as well, I must admit, nicely done Darwock!

While its all well and good, extending the shelf life, even if it is free, will I still be able to get those maps in 5 years?
Probably not.

Actually, you only gave one example that actually backed up the concept of ODC. There will always be good points, but plenty of people can see through the mists and see the real dangers involved here for gaming.


I should think by now, that enough people have posted not only agreeing with me, but also posting some of best damned examples Ive seen, to show that not only is my point valid, but there are certainly enough people out there who are worried about this trend too.

May have to go and count up the supporters.

So yes camps, how dare Ubisoft indeed!


Ladies and gentlemen, I think it stands:
ODC is a valid topic of discussion
and is NOT stupid as someone tried to call it. There have been ample examples given, and plenty of support going against it.

Not to mention, it has sparked some excellent debate on the nature of games, the displays used, and fun gameplay mechanics.


Anyway, I do enjoy playing devils advocate, so let me give an example of GOOD ODC:
Pacman VS

* its free when bought with certain software
* Only needs ONE GBA
* Contains AI even if you lack the needed ammount of friends
* You will still be able to play it in 10 years time unlike the Samba songs
* is actually damned fun


See? Im not as blinkered as you may think. Viva la Pacman VS!