Batman: Arkham City - Part 9

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]367739[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]364083[/split]

 

[ProjectPat2280]

Well I'm glad u guys are using spoiler tags. That's awesome

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Oh, so catwoman won't be mandatory? I thought u switched during the game to control her?

Catwoman is still mandatory because she's part of the story, but if you don't activate the online pass, you miss out on like 4 missions, which Rocksteady says still holds nuggets and details of story stuff, as well as the challenge rooms. Basically, if you don't have the online pass because you bought pre-owned, you're missing the majority of the Catwoman campaign stuff.

 

[KALEL114]

Oh, so catwoman won't be mandatory? I thought u switched during the game to control her?

Yeah that is the problem a lot of people are having with this. RS hyped using Catwoman a lot and never one time did they say you would need to use a code/pass to unlock her. We had to find out from someone who got the game early. Comes off as being a bit shady.

 

[Havok83]

Oh, so catwoman won't be mandatory? I thought u switched during the game to control her?
awesome

Well that should make you happy

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Yeah that is the problem a lot of people are having with this. RS hyped using Catwoman a lot and never one time did they say you would need to use a code/pass to unlock her. We had to find out from someone who got the game early. Comes off as being a bit shady.

I don't know about you guys, but I read about this weeks ago. It's been on the Batman Arkham City community site for a while.

 

[SuperT]

So basically you have to buy the game new in order to get the Catwoman content? Not that big of a deal since I was going to buy it new anyway but I guess that sucks for the people that were planning on buying a cheap used version. lol

 

[Havok83]

I can understand the issues. Its one thing for this online pass thing to prevent people from accessing multiplayer functionality, but to cut portions of the story campaign if you dont have a pass? Thats lame no matter how you slice it. Im getting this game new as well but thats taking this whole online pass thing too far

 

[KALEL114]

Yeah. Not to mention those who do not have internet or have a really low bandwidth cap get screwed. The DL is 600mb.

 

[Havok83]

Yeah. Not to mention those who do not have internet or have a really low bandwidth cap get screwed. The DL is 600mb.

WTF, its a download? I thought it was on the disc and you just need the pass to unlock it.

 

[KALEL114]

Nope it's a download.

 

[Havok83]

Nope it's a download.

thats another thing I hate especially on the PS3 which has the storage space to have stuff like that on the disc. I hate when they make stuff downloads. I dont get it especially when developers have to pay for the bandwith for the content they put up there

 

[Wolvieboy17]

It's not a download, it's a pass key, like most online passes. The content is on disc and the pass just unlocks it. It is under the guise of a download, like the Bulletstorm pass or the Bad Company 2 pass, but it literally goes straight to 100 percent since it's just an unlock.

I believe you do still need the internet though for it, although I may be wrong.

I actually don't mind this practice because it's one thing to say "But what about the people who want it cheap?" but people are so easy to forget that Devs make zero money whatsoever on any pre-owned games. If it's incentive for people to not be cheapskates then go for it.

 

[Havok83]

Just bc someone plays a game used, doesnt make them a cheapskate.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

Well that should make you happy

More than happy. I rather save any of the side characters for after i beat the main game.

Just bc someone plays a game used, doesnt make them a cheapskate.

Yes it does. Waiting for a game to drop in price all so you can save a few extra bucks is cheap, not that theres anything wrong with that. I can understand it for an iffy title, but not one thats bringing in 10 outta 10's. Plus, i spent more money on the new game, i should get more content than someone who doesn't spend as much as i did. Bravo to RS.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Yes, but I imagine the only people who would be truly outraged by this practice because it affects them are the people who mainly only get games pre-owned. The fact of the matter is, this is simply the direction the industry needs to go in order to keep making money. People don't realise how much money goes into these bloody games.

You know Bulletstorm actually ended up costing Epic more money than they made? That's such a damn bloody shame, I mean, the industry is already so dominated by the big COD type series, independent games are going to be lucky if they don't get squashed out, and games like Arkham City still have potentially to be detrimentally affected by it, especially with such a heavy game release period like this. I imagine with all these Triple A titles, many people are waiting on certain games.

More than any other developer out there, I think Rocksteady most definitely deserves the full credit and recognition for the work they do and they most definitely deserve the money their product is worth.

Besides, buying the Catwoman online pass with a pre-owned game is still substantially cheaper than getting the game brand new on day 1 anyway, so it's no big deal. People just need to learn to accept this as the direction the industry is heading. Either that or willingly miss out on content.

 

[KALEL114]

I'm going by this:

If you buy the game second hand (pre-owned) you'll be asked to purchase the online pass (around 600mb); either from the PSN, or the Xbox LIVE marketplace. A price for this package has yet to be announced.

http://arkhamcity.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5829

And not to take this too of topic, but I hate this practice. No other industry does it, so what makes VG's so special? First Online and now SP content. When will it stop? CD keys? I see nothing good coming out of this from a consumer standpoint.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

More than happy. I rather save any of the side characters for after i beat the main game.

She's part of the main game dude. You need that code to access all of her main story missions in the actual single player campaign part.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

And not to take this too of topic, but I hate this practice. No other industry does it, so what makes VG's so special? First Online and now SP content. When will it stop? CD keys? I see nothing good coming out of this from a consumer standpoint.

The game industry being worried about the loss in money from pre-owned is no different from the music or film industry being worried about piracy.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

She's part of the main game dude. You need that code to access all of her main story missions in the actual single player campaign part.

Ah, well I'm gonna have the code anyway. Obviously her part isn't that big of a deal or they wouldn't of locked her out. IE, she's more of a side story than anything else, regardless if she's part of the main campaign.

 

[Havok83]

Yes it does. Waiting for a game to drop in price all so you can save a few extra bucks is cheap, not that theres anything wrong with that. I can understand it for an iffy title, but not one thats bringing in 10 outta 10's. Plus, i spent more money on the new game, i should get more content than someone who doesn't spend as much as i did. Bravo to RS.

We're talking about getting the game used here, not waiting for a price drop. So now its considered cheap to wait for games to drop in price instead of paying $60 on day one even if you are still buying said game new?

 

[Benstamania]

The game industry being worried about the loss in money from pre-owned is no different from the music or film industry being worried about piracy.

Only the video game industry already got money from the game due to the original purchase.

If game companies are so bloody worried about pre-owned they need to make games last longer or at least keep us coming back with timely DLC.

I can aaaalmost understand taking out a MP aspect (almost) but locking single player stuff is complete bull*****.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

We're talking about getting the game used here, not waiting for a price drop. So now its considered cheap to wait for games to drop in price instead of paying $60 on day one even if you are buying said game new?

Used is a price drop. Outside of locked content in some situations, a used game is the exact same as new game, only cheaper. Its cheap to wait for someone to trade in the game so you can purchase it for slightly less. Thats being cheap. Again, not that theres anything wrong with that, but its still cheap.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

Only the video game industry already got money from the game due to the original purchase.

If game companies are so bloody worried about pre-owned they need to make games last longer or at least keep us coming back with timely DLC.

I can aaaalmost understand taking out a MP aspect (almost) but locking single player stuff is complete bull*****.

They do JUST that and people STILL trade stuff in. Im sitting on a mountain of used CoD: Black Ops and that game has a large amount of DLC.