So Soon? Borderlands DLC Incoming

There’s still a week until the thing goes on sale, but seems Gearbox/2K are confident enough in their impending shooty-bang-bang/looty-grab-grab game that they’ve already confirmed its first DLC.

You’ll never guess what it’s about. I mean, it’s not like it could be zombies – that undead horse has already had a brutal flogging everywhere else.

It’s zombies.

2K Games announced today that the first piece of downloadable content for Borderlands™, The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned, is planned for release later this year for all available platforms for $9.99. The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned is in development at Gearbox Software and is the first in a series of downloadable expansions that will enhance the Borderlands mayhem in fun and exciting ways.

Tasked with keeping the workers of Jakobs Cove alive, Dr. Ned (who is not related to Dr. Zed from Fyrestone) does his job a little too well, creating zombies and other abominations that now run rampant in this region. Players will have to work alongside Dr. Ned as they embark on a quest to cure the inhabitants of Jakobs Cove in this full-fledged expansion filled with new enemies, new quests and rare loot drops.

So there you go. While I’m pretty zombied out of late, I am curious to see how Borderlands does its deadheads. Slow-moving enemies wouldn’t be much of a threat to the player, while the game (based on the Arid Badlands stretch I’m allowed to talk about) opts for reinforcements-spawn-from-nowhere enemies rather than massed on-screen hordes. So this does suggest it’ll be Borderlands trying something a little different to its norm. As it should, given this add-on is asking quite the pretty penny.

Addendum – zombie stuff seemed a lot less wearyingly omnipresent when it at least didn’t always include the word ‘zombie’ in its title. It’s a shame that even this last vestige of subtlety has been lost of late.


  1. realsch says:

    I’m really the curious how the reviews are going to come out for borderlands. From what I’ve seen, it seems like shooty-WoW kinda. And you can play on after you’ve finished it which makes it diablo-y. But how’s the story/ending? And do I want to get caught in an endless loot cycle once more :o

  2. Joseph says:

    Here I was making character builds and things… and they go and do this.

    Shouldn’t zombie DLC be more of an at-least-2-years-down-the-track-after-we’ve-run-out-of-original-ideas thing?

    Makes me wonder if I should be excited at all for this game.

    • Ansem says:

      Well if the inclusion of a particular enemy common to most videogames and fantasy universes puts you off so much what are you doing here? Fallout 3 shipped with Zombies and that wasn’t half bad.

    • Nick says:

      All this DLC ready before shipping smacks a bit of Johnny Long-Torso to me.

    • Flappybat says:

      I wasn’t expecting a MST3K gag.

    • Elyscape says:

      Blame Microsoft for that. One of their requirements for X360 games is that, if you intend to ever produce DLC for your game, you need to have at least one DLC thingamabob to be made available at the time of release.

  3. Baboonanza says:

    2009 – Year Of The Zombie!

    • Baboonanza says:

      Can we have 2010 – Year Of The Alien (TM) please? PLEASE?

    • Gorgeras says:

      It’s a neccessary measure to counter-act all the friggin vampires everywhere, even the fake vampires like the ones in Twilight.

    • Gutter says:

      Shut up about Vampires, you’ll give game designer ideas and then we’ll have to play our video games while our GF bitch that the vampires in our games don’t glow in the light!

  4. Jacques says:

    Zombies sappin’ my sentry!

  5. Pinbag says:

    Everytime I see a non-realesed game or just released game, where you have to buy some dlc’s for extra content or candy , I feel a litle bit robbed …

    I think its a very negative turn in the game world for the moment…

    • Joseph says:

      How can you feel robbed unless you think the content they’re going to release isn’t worth $10, and you can’t think that because you haven’t seen it. Unless you really hate zombies.

      If it’s a “they should include it in the original game” robbed feeling then you’re assuming that (A) They can afford to. and (B) They’ve already made it. Which neither of may be the case… so you’re just there feeling robbed for not much of a good reason is my point..

      Sorry I’m not good at english, but yes it’s my first language :(

    • aldo_14 says:

      I think (to Joseph) you can feel robbed in the knowledge that in less than a years time there will almost certainly be a pack with all the DLC, costing the same as the original game originally did on release. So you’d quite possibly look back and think “bugger, I should have waited and saved money”.

    • JKjoker says:

      They have the DLC ready before they release the game, there is no way to deny they withheld content from the main game, i feel robbed too

    • Alec Meer says:

      Hey, can you share your source/proof for that with us? It’d make a great news story here!

    • armlesscorps says:

      “The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned is in development at Gearbox Software”

      quote from the article^^

      @JK Joker. Suggests the content isnt finished yet. Wish people would read the article properly or at least name sources if your going to disagree with what it says and claim the DLC is already finished..
      Although id guess your just blindly stating something that uv no idea whether its true or not. If so keep your comments to yourself pls if they are fantasy..

    • Pinbag says:

      @ Alec meer => I think you expressed what I was thinking about the bad feelings I get as a gamer about Some dlc’s. Its seems to be a trend who is becoming more and more standard => about cynically putting back in content. for an extra buck.

    • pepper says:

      JKoker, i disagree. They probably decided halfway through that they had so much more stuff that they wanted to put in that it warranted a addon. Nowadays with bigger dev teams these kind of expansions(DLC) are probably to happend a lot faster.

      Then again, Valve is to slow according to many, and now Gearbox is to fast, so development should just adjust to the speed people feel?…..

    • JKjoker says:

      they are artificially increasing the cost of the game, go, pay more than retail value for it, dont blame me when you start getting barebone games expecting you to fork 10+ extra bucks to add all the cool stuff soon

    • Ansem says:

      You make the assumption that the game will ship barebones without having even the slightest amount of hands-on time with it. Just because they are releasing a DLC does not mean the rest of the game is a 3-hour journey.

    • Chaz says:

      Take the recent Gears of War 2 DLC, Dark Corners, for example. Where they admitted quite openly that the single player portion of it was a piece that was cut from the original game. I found it astounding that they didn’t feel there was any problem with charging people for a bit of game that originally had ended up on the cutting room floor so to speak.

    • Flappybat says:

      it’s gone gold already so effectively there is nothing for them to work on until release except for patches.

    • JKjoker says:

      @Ansem: im talking about games in general, i havent played Borderlands yet, Alec says it doesnt feel like they cut anything from the game, *shrug*

    • ManaTree says:

      You make it sound like Borderlands is in that category. You IMMEDIATELY came to the conclusion that they had the DLC all done already.

      How is that NOT judging Borderlands?

    • Shalrath says:

      As someone who’s worked on DLC before, I can tell you, it’s not like this shit gets knocked off in two months. This stuff takes a long time, and every jackass who whines about how it should have been there in the first place, and you look at what you’ve been working at for 6 months or whatever, you want to stab them in the face.

      Announcing DLC does not mean it’s ready. Fuck, it might not even be out of pre-pro yet.

  6. teo says:

    Why don’t they learn?

  7. Alec Meer says:

    Having played much of the full game (but embargoed till next week), I can at least assure you this isn’t a case of holding back content for DLC – it’s genuinely adding on, not cynically putting back in.

    • Psychopomp says:

      Well, you’ve obviously been paid off by the developers to sing their praises, you corporate tool, you!
      /end sarcasm

    • Vinraith says:

      That’s good to hear from a reliable source. I think announcing this early was a bad PR move, because it can’t help but rile up the folks that believe DLC is always (or at least usually) withheld content. From their perspective, this is basically Gearbox admitting to as much.

      For my part I’d just like to know how many of these things there are going to be, what the distribution channel is going to be, and whether a compilation of them will eventually see boxed release.

  8. CMaster says:

    On the other hand, it does somewhat undermine the idea that the PC delay is for any work on the game rather than some kind of anti-piracy measure. Though it’s admittedly possible that the polishing is anticipated to only need coding/testing guys, while the DLC can get started with just artists.

  9. XM says:

    It’s good Gearbox are doing this to show there is more to do after the game is over. I feel the reviews are going to say not much to do after the game is over. Once you got your ultimate gun and level 50 there will be no incentive to keep replaying on your own or with friends.

    So I’m happy to see they are going to feed new content over the months ahead. Plus if you don’t like Zombies then wait for the next one you don’t have to buy it.

    • Jacques says:

      Of course there’ll be an incentive to keep playing. Trying new builds, trying to find an even better gun, etc.

    • XM says:

      I fear that there will be a need for new missions to keep people interested as you can only replay the same missions

      But like you say yes there is different ways to play and loot to keep you going for a bit.

    • Jacques says:

      People have stayed playing Diablo 2 for years, and there’s hardly been any new content for that.

    • Psychopomp says:

      More like they’ve been doing endless power leveling and Bhaal runs. No one actually plays the game itself, anymore :\

  10. Nero says:

    I remember the old days when DLC (I actually hate that word)/updates was something companies released as like a “thank you” for buying their game. Oh well, it’s another DLC I won’t buy.

    • Seth says:


      Was this before the invention of computers?

    • Doctor Doc says:

      No, it was when games were played on computers. Duuh.

    • Seth says:

      I think it’s more like “what fantasy-land do you people play games in.”

      If you don’t think getting free shit from developers has been the exception rather than the rule since gaming began, you’re delusional.

  11. Dan says:

    Just like there’s an unspoken rule about when people talk about inheritance (or make jokes about recently deceased people), there should be an unspoken rule that you don’t talk about paid DLC till people have been playing your game for a bit.

    • Hmm-Hmm. says:

      Or at least not to go beyond speculation about DLC in a somewhat distant future.

      But, yeah.

    • Marcin says:

      My gut agrees, but my head says it’s a deliberate move for many devs to show that hey, we’re not releasing and forgetting, we’re dedicated to extending the lifetime of your game and hope to take it to Game 1.5.

      At least that’s how I’d feel if I just spent a few years of my life working on a game, especially one I still have ideas for.

  12. pignoli says:

    This is just the same as the Dragon Age release DLC issue as far as I can tell. I'm pretty sure the same arguments Bioware made can be applied here as well, especially considering Alecs comment.

    • armlesscorps says:

      Dragon Age has DLC day one though, its kinda obvious they could probably have put it in the box, this is different because they say they are still working on it and it could be a while before its released..

    • qrter says:

      As far as I can see at least 2 of the 3 announced DLC packs for Dragon Age are included with all retail and digital copies.

    • Wooly says:

      What qrter said. I’m pretty sure that the DA DLC isn’t an EA plot to steal more consumers money as fast as possible, but rather an EA plot to reduce the amount of people who buy Dragon Age used (which I’ve heard is a big problem on consoles) so that money that could go to the devs instead goes to Gamestop or whoever.

    • Shalrath says:

      “Dragon Age has DLC day one though, its kinda obvious they could probably have put it in the box…”

      Yeah, they could just go back in time to when the game was physically shipped, and put the content in.

    • Shalrath says:

      And by shipped to, I mean from developer to publisher.

  13. Danny says:

    I’m gettin’ this game fo sure.

  14. The Fanciest of Pants says:

    I for one could never suffer from zombie burnout. More zombies. MORE I SAY.

  15. Pinbag says:

    @ pignoli

    I can also find myself in Alec meer’s comment

  16. The Sombrero Kid says:

    i don’t generally like DLC after being stung by fallout 3 and mass effect but i have a level of tollerance for it with games i’m paying £20 for.

  17. bill says:

    I wonder about the business wisdom of announcing DLC before a release. On the one hand, it’s when the game has the most attention and potential buyers… but on the other hand, comments threads are always full of people complaining that it “should have been in the main game”.

    Of course, it seems to sell pretty well, and one should be wary of taking “comment thread public opinon” as representing real public opinion.

    Personally I’ve never bought any DLC, and i’m not really tempted to. But i have no particular grudge about it, and i don’t really feel as if i’ve been cheated by not having it. I’ve never seen any DLC that truely seemed CORE to the experience. I don’t feel that games should have everything crammed into them. At some point they have to settle on a realistic set of features and get it out the door.

    I’m a completionist at heart, which means i always try to do everything in the game. But I also have a job, family, etc.. so that means that i rarely finish games. So i actually kind of like the idea of having some of the extra side content available only for those that have the time/money/inclination to do it. It allows me to finish the game and feel successful, but allows them to do more with the extra time they have.

  18. MrTest says:

    Announcing the DLC does seem particularly dumb in this instance. But who knows, maybe it’ll be a welcome addition to a full game. There’s literally no way to tell.

  19. Surgeon says:

    Please can we have the happy internet people back on RPS?
    Can someone take away all the moaners and have them shot.

    • JKjoker says:

      you want to turn RPS into a Bethesta o Bioware forum ?, i love how tolerant you are

    • The Fanciest of Pants says:

      The man has a point, RPS comments are full of whiners these days.

    • JKjoker says:

      So, instead of thinking : “hmm, why do ppl seem more angry lately ? whats going on?” you just shut them up ?

      maybe they come after being kicked out of the fanboy forums who knows

      i like that this site allows both sides of an argument, i wouldnt have it any other way

    • Ansem says:

      The problem is when there are far too many whiners with little reason to back their claims. People need to have a little more faith in developers these days. Too many people judge the game before it’s come out and that is just disappointing.

    • dingo says:

      There isn’t much fun to be a PC gamer these days with all the butt-fu*** going on of DRM, DLC, delayed releases, Games for Windows Live etc.

    • The Fanciest of Pants says:

      @JKjoker: There’s a world of difference between silencing all discontent and thinning out whiners.

      The problem is, especially this year, these comments threads are full of nay-sayers and ill thought out rants against things that haven’t even happened yet. 2009 has been “the year of idiots with a sense of entitlement” from where I’m standing.

      Never before have I seen so many people thinking it’s perfectly logical to moan on and on about a sequel, add-on, patch or whathaveyou before they’ve even so much as played a demo of it.

      How about playing Borderlands before whining that it has no content/they are wasting time developing this instead of finishing the game(which has gone gold, if you haven’t cared to notice). It’s unfounded and frankly very ignorant.

      And don’t get all first-amendment on me about all this whining. I’m exercising MY right to free speech by telling you lot that I’m tired of your childish interweb tantrums.

    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      people have genuine concerns about dlc, there isn’t a single piece of dlc out there that rivals an equivalent addon pack, laughably with the exception of vavles free tf2 updates, this is a worry, it’d be great if dlc was treated with the same respect and price point an addon pack has but they are not, and this is what people are concerned about and rightfully so. like i said before I’m prepared to pay upto the cost of a game for content that feels like it should’ve been in the release version which is why at the very least i’d be prepared to pay at £15 for borderlands updates since i’m getting such a good deal on the frontend!

    • futage says:

      @Fanciest of Pants,

      While I agree with your general point (too much unfounded whining) I don’t think the devs/publishers should get it both ways. They put out marketing material (trailers, dev diaries, whatever) in order to try to communicate to us what a game is like without us having played that game. To expect people to not interpret and try to draw conclusions from that material (to judge the game based on it, given that it is all the information we have and it was given to us by those who made the game) is asking for a very one sided relationship and one which a consumer would have to be very naive to accept.

      I think these whines represent a failure of marketing (whether particular or systemic) rather than a deficiency on the part of its audience.

    • Psychopomp says:

      What Fancy Pants said.

      The comments threads around here are quickly turning into 4chan’s /v/

    • The Fanciest of Pants says:

      @The Sombrero Kid: That’s all well and good, but I don’t recall any of these developers pumping out dev diaries and what not ever saying “we want you to judge us by these materials so we can change it to what you want” either explicitly or otherwise.

      I don’t see why just because we have new types of updates and media regarding unreleased games that we as prospective buyers should feel more entitled to judging it the we did 5 years ago with only screenshots and the occasional trailer to go by.

      To me it’s no different, these are marketing devices to keep you interested in the game before it’s released, it’s not an invitation to co-develop the game.

    • The Fanciest of Pants says:

      Blast, that was @futage not Sombrero kid. Carry on.

    • futage says:

      I dunno, I think it kind of is. The material is put out to create an impression of the game, if the impression created is incorrect, that’s a failure of the media (even if it’s due to the stupidity of the audience) and to expect that process to be one sided and not lead anywhere is represents a misunderstanding of people and language and stuff.

      If you exhibit something in a public space then you’re inviting comment/criticism, any other arrangement would be unhealthy. This material is special in that it’s not the actual cultural object, it’s a thing constructed to describe that object. But as such it’s open to criticism and anything it can reasonably be claimed to have said about its object is, also.

      RPS present these things (promotional materials and stuff) to us pretty much uncritically, which is I think the right thing to do. They, for the most part, give things the benefit of the doubt and maintain optimism. Which is good, that’s part of what this place is about, I think. In that role they’re mediating between the producers of this material and us as consumers of the objects about which the material speaks. But we, as consumers, are invited to form opinions about these games based on that material – should we not speak of it at all if those opinions are negative?

      Like I say, I agree with you overall, there’s too much whinging. If I don’t like the look of an upcoming game or watever I’ll just leave it alone, not bang on about it endlessly. although there’s certainly stuff to be learned where people have legitimate gripes and sometimes they do.

    • The Fanciest of Pants says:

      @Futage: I see where you’re coming from and respect it. I think we’re on the same page here over what my actual complaint is.

      I’ve nothing against forming a preemptive opinion on something; it’s frankly natural to do so. I’m solely against the rabid sense of entitlement flying around. By all means decide you won’t like a game, but don’t jump up and down like you somehow deserve a better game just because you aren’t happy with what your preconceived idea of what the game is like.

      The whole L4D2 nonesense is a perfect example(NO ONE TAKE THAT AS A BLOODY CUE TO START ON THAT AGAIN THANKYOU).

      I would still argue that devs are not asking us to participate in the development process however, I think all these podcasts/dev diaries/behind the scenes things are marketing toys to make us feel more involved. But that’s a whole other chestnut.

    • futage says:

      Haha, that’s totally going to be a cue.

      And aye, agreed. That sense of entitlement is a horribly ugly thing. I do think, though the sort of marketing we have now (and late 20th and early 21st century culture in general) is partly to blame for that sense of entitlement people develop. Constantly being told you’ll have THIS and THIS and THIS and this game will satisfy all your desires and be better than infinity dinosaur-kittens or whatever. It builds expectation, y’know.

      But aye, it’s ugly.

    • ManaTree says:

      I have to agree…it’s sort of tragic, really. So many people dismiss things based on misconceptions, miscommunication and their own failings that it just bothers me. It makes the douches no better than petulant 10 year olds. Seriously, take things with a god damned scientific eye for once. Gamers definitely have this serious problem.

      I want a game with dinosaur kittens. I want to ride one.

  20. Hoshi says:

    The zombie is a spy!

  21. LeFishy says:

    Because Borderlands certainly looks to be lacking in content?

    And lets be honest we already have a case of bare bones games being sold at retail with all the good stuff missing. Lumines on the Xbox springs to mind.

    From what I have seen Borderlands does have a lot of content and this really is what it says. An Add-on.

  22. Reginald says:

    I don’t get the whole problem people have with DLC.

    They are expansion packs, by another name. More game, for the most part. Obviously little trinkets like in-game items (Horse Armour!!) are not worth your money, so don’t buy them. Otherwise, it is no different from, say, Half-Life: Opposing Force. Or the zillion other add-on packs of yore.

    DLC is the same, just more convenient.

    Day 1 DLC exists because there is a certain amount of time between finalising the contents of physical copies and actual release. This time is often used for extra QA, leading to (near) release day patches, which I am sure we have all experienced.

    Of course, there are instances where content has been cut from a game to make a DLC. However, do you really believe this never happened before, with old-fashioned physical expansions? Really?

  23. Tei says:

    If expansions are made prior to release, It will only make sense to sell different versions of games. “Normal version” with the minimal stuff. “Epic Origin” with the minimal, plus some bonuses, and some character unlocked. “Superepic Founder Edition Delux”, with all the expansions, all the unlocked characters from the Origin version. Poor people can play the Normal version, rich childrens the Origin version, and superrich people can buy the Founder Edition. With luck, you can get some people to buy the Normal edition, consume all his 3 installs because of Virus, and sell again your game as Epic Origin edition.

    This is what the bussines type of guys want to do. If the gamers let then do it.

  24. groovychainsaw says:

    I think the reason for the DLC announce is 2-fold. One, it tries to get people planning to pirate the game on day 1 to stop and think – hmmm, maybe I’ll buy the game so the DLC will work with it (not that the DLC usually isn’t cracked, but still…). 2. It provides a second revenue stream for the developer – money from pirates or pre-owned copies of the game still pay back to the developer. Admittedly, this logic applies more to the console releases than the PC, which is why often the console DLC is given away for free on the PC – you can’t get preowned PC games so easily, and the DLC is much easier to crack than on the consoles.

    Does that make any sense?

  25. Dodo says:

    Hopefully Aliens colonial marines and alien breed will make it next year.

  26. Po0py says:

    This has just got me wondering now… Does anyone know if this game is dependant on DLC as a means to prolong it’s lifespan? I mean, what is the endgame like here? Borderlands is designed for multiple playthroughs, obviously. But at what point do you see everything that needs to be seen and acquire everything that you can acquire? How long will that take me? Four or five playthroughs before I’m done and waiting for DLC?

    Also, I just wish more people would go the same route the Critereon guys went with Burnout Paradise. A commitment of free DLC over the period of six to twelve months would really nail some customers down. It’s surprising that more people aren’t going that route considering the amount of success Critereon have had.

  27. Frankie The Patrician[PF] says:

    DLCs and expansions are the cost of not having to have a monthly subscription fee/ points store

  28. autogunner says:

    why is the cocking review embargo so cocking late? let me know how it is so I can preorder it!

  29. Hug_dealer says:

    a question for you.

    would you rather wait a year or more for an expansion for $30. Or would you rather get it faster and in $10 increments.

    Anonymous Coward said:
    people have genuine concerns about dlc, there isn’t a single piece of dlc out there that rivals an equivalent addon pack, laughably with the exception of vavles free tf2 updates, this is a worry, it’d be great if dlc was treated with the same respect and price point an addon pack has but they are not, and this is what people are concerned about and rightfully so. like i said before I’m prepared to pay upto the cost of a game for content that feels like it should’ve been in the release version which is why at the very least i’d be prepared to pay at £15 for borderlands updates since i’m getting such a good deal on the frontend!

    really dude. really…………….. Have you even played alot of the DLC out there. Fallout 3 the pitt was easily worth the money. so was mothership zeta. For GTA, the lost and the damned was freaking awesome, and the ballad of gay tony coming out soon looks badass.

    The fact is that companies realize they can make addons faster by selling them in smaller parts so they can move more. By doing that they are able to sell more because people are still interested in thier product, rather than 12-18 months later when tons of people have moved on, and dont care about extra content.

    Frankly i find it appalling that companies can release with no content(left 4 dead), and people say its cool they are giving us all this free stuff(they didnt, 1 campaign, and a gimmick gametype that took them all of about 4 days to create, but they claimed they put all this work into it honing, it and making it awesome.)

    But when companies put out a fantastic product, that has tons of content, even randomized content, and plans to support it post release with more fantastic content, people get thier panties in a bunch. Get over it.

    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      oblivion and fallout 3 addons are good examples, they are quite good, but when compared to the scale and quality of morrowind addons, they pale in comparison.

  30. Markoff Chaney says:

    I’m somewhat sad that the free content we used to sometimes get with Patches, with things like The Witcher or Two Worlds being the exception to the new rule, be considered DLC now, but I have no problem with it as long as the core game isn’t hampered or neutered in any way. Adding more guns/baddies/land mass isn’t a bad thing, unless they significantly imbalance things and make those that only own the core content get the shaft (from the online community) after 2 months. If I’m so obsessive I must play all content in a game, then I can buy it. If I’m not, no one is forcing me to pay for something that is optional.

    I don’t feel I am owed continual content on any title, or that I am owed anything outside of what is in the box other than to fix actual bugs, unless the developers/publishers themselves promise it to me. On one hand, I’m glad they don’t feel the need to be working hard on a Day 1 patch that fixes their broken game that shouldn’t have shipped in the state it did. That’s always horrible and we should be well past that now. On another hand, I wish they would wait a little bit (at least a week or two after the ship date seems reasonable) before telling me I have the choice to spend more money on the product On a third Beeblebroxian hand I’m glad they are committed to improving and expanding the experience of the game as well.

    Hellgates’ business model had serious issues and I think it helped kill the game and, as the game progressed, I think there would have been even greater disparities that became evident and possibly game-breaking. I’d much rather pay 10 dollars for a nice chunk of content that I’ve licensed per life (I’ve given up on the concept of ownership in this climate) than pay 10 dollars a month for access to that same content. My biggest concern would be that if I do buy that new content I can take that gun I found on an Island to a friends’ server who doesn’t have the DLC and I can still use it while enjoying the game with them.

  31. Heliosicle says:

    I’ve pre ordered it since I love the look of it, but this kind of thing annoys me.

  32. Hermit says:

    The DLC isn’t actually ready though, it’s “In Development”. This pretty much reads as a “We’re working on extra content for the game, so go buy it on release day!” bit of marketing.

    That said, it’ll need to justify the pricetag with some new ideas – not sure too many PC types will shell out the cash for another 2 hours of gameplay if they’ve not finished with the original content by the time it comes out.

  33. Dave says:

    I’m surprised zombies aren’t part of the initial game content. No zombies and presumably no nazis. Surely there must be skeleton archers or sewers full of rats, then?

  34. Jim Rossignol says:

    I’m always a bit mystified that people compare DLC to patches with free stuff in. I really don’t ever remember getting loads of free stuff in the past. I remember getting expansion packs. DLC seems to me to have arrived as a very efficient way of replacing the expansion pack. In the past the content team would have got cracking on a full-blown expansion right away, so they weren’t idle while design and programming got on with another sequel. DLC can also be smaller and cheaper than traditional expansion packs because the cost of a boxed release doesn’t enter the equation.

    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      traditionally smaller, not cheaper.

    • Po0py says:

      I just think that the way Critereon did it with Burnout Paradise makes sense in that it nails down the consumer. He keeps the game, doesn’t offload it to to a high street game store or ebay. When that happens, thats a lost sale no matter what way you look at it. Burnout Paradise gave people a reason to hold on to the game because the knew there was awesome free content on the way. They got loads of publicity everytime they did in update because it was free and it was awesome.

      Having said that. Dragon Age DLC is looking nice. I like how it’s just one to two hour stories within the Dragon Age world. It’s easier to digest and cheap enough to get a lot of people’s attention. Apparently the got two years worth of DLC planned for that game.

      Borderlands and zombies. Hmm… I’m just gonna have to wait and see.

    • Markoff Chaney says:

      I’m thinking of it in terms of what this game primarily is: a FPS I play with other people. I used two RPG examples to show that it’s not limited to FPSes, but I did limit my examples to RPGs, in a poor way of trying to show what I was talking about. I think more often than not, when a major Battlefield patch came out, we might get an extra map or two. Or a major Quake or UT patch came with a new game mode and a handful of maps. I can understand the need to monetize product, but I really seem to remember getting more from patches in years prior, as far as my shooty shoot shoot with friends went. I think it’s probably just rose tinted remembrance…

      DLC (non Horse Armor, at least) is a near perfect balance as far as cost and development time and also allows for quicker development times. It means that our shorter attention span may have us still playing the game a month later and the developers may recoup more monies, which is always a good thing.

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      Not cheaper? Really? I guess it might end up being more by the hour.

    • Vinraith says:

      I think the analogy is apt, but also highlights why some people have problems with DLC. Expansions packs usually contained a certain amount of substance, enough to justify their $20-$30 price tag, and when they didn’t they got reamed by reviewers. No one seems to have quite figured out what amount of content is appropriate for a $10 DLC pack, so there’s a lot more flexibility. I know in many cases there have been three $10 DLC’s that were well reviewed, but if you’d added them together they’d have been a pretty sparse expansion pack.

      Because there’s no physical release, DLC can’t help but feel more ephemeral, and since it’s usually sold direct or through only one digital download channel it feels more proprietary. Often it requires creating yet another new account, just to get expansion content for a game you already own (often through some OTHER service), so it seems like a bit of a burden, and like something you might easily some day lose.

      Finally, the usual expectation was one or two expansions, but no one really knows what to expect with DLC yet. With Borderlands already announcing one, I think it’s reasonable to anticipate a lot. I know that, personally, that encourages me to wait for a compilation before getting started on the game at all, so I can play the “whole thing” without getting “nickled and dimed.” And I say all that without believing that Gearbox has been withholding content or anything of the sort, it’s just my gut response to this announcement.

      Hopefully, with time, these things will get a bit more standardized, the customer base will get more used to them, and a sensible equilibrium will be reached. Until then, I fear they’re bound to be a source of controversy.

    • TheSombreroKid says:


      yeah that’s kinda what i’m saying, i spent more on half the fallout dlc than i did on batman, which i got day 1.

  35. Hug_dealer says:

    Anonymous Coward said:
    oblivion and fallout 3 addons are good examples, they are quite good, but when compared to the scale and quality of morrowind addons, they pale in comparison.

    let me get this straight. you are going to compare full scale expansions to smaller and cheaper add ons. Of course they have more content, because they cost more.

    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      ehh the packs of 2 fallout 3 dlc retail for as much as, usually more than the morrowind addons cost at launch, i personally paid even more because i bought them as they came out. none of these have as much content.

  36. Hug_dealer says:

    since when did you ever buy an expansion for less than $30, most of the time they are 40.

  37. Tei says:

    Vegetarians are Vegetals
    Carnivors ate Vegetarians
    Humans ate Carnivors
    Zombies ate Humans.

    If theres somehone to blame here, is Vegetarians, these guys have started it all.

  38. CMaster says:

    I’m going along with Jim (sorta) in saying that I find it odd that a lot of (PC at least) gamers react so negatively to the mere mention of DLC, like it’s some sort of dirty word. Really, it’s more of the game that you can buy if you are a fan so far. (Day zero DLC is something different mind – that’s basically selling a cut down version of the game – which may or may not still be good value – with a “premium” full version available). Most people probably won’t get DLC, just like most people didn’t use to buy expansions. Why there mere existenece of more content for a game angers so many (save stuff like Horse Armour and unlock everything) confuses me.

    Although as I said above, there has to be some doubt about the PC delay being for anything other than anti piracy, effective or not now.

    • Tei says:

      To me is a dirty word. I don’t want that word. The PC world already have better and more world to describe this stuff. Something is a expansion pack, extra levels, patchs, free maps, etc… It has existed for ages, now Microsoft is here, and is “monetizing” everything, I have ear that to play multiplayer you HAVE TO PAY on the XBox. Imagine, paying montly to play Counter-Strike.
      It seems there are people that have not problem paying for stuff that used to be free here, on the PC, but I think is people that Is acustomed to pay for these stuff on a console.

      DLC is another process to convert stuff that used to be free, to payed stuff. We all remenber the horrible problems with studios fighting with microsoft for the right to release free stuff. We all remenber the problems with L4D and patchs. Because of these problems the Xbox version of L4D lag behind in fixed and content. Is a *BAD* system. It impose artificial limits on what the dev’s can do. And now, that stupid culture is tryiing to come here, to the PC, and impose his stupid limits here.

      I don’t want to see the word DLC in my monitor. Hell yea, Is a dirty word to me.

    • Psychopomp says:

      “DLC is another process to convert stuff that used to be free, to payed stuff.”

      Since when has extra content being free *ever* been the norm?

    • Tei says:

      Could we stop using stupid marketdroids words like “content”. Marketing people use words like “content” because for these people is the same thing to sell dead fish, computers, games, coca cola or condoms. Thats why these people call it “content”, because have not idea what are selling, only that have to smiley to be able to sell it.

      Is maps, new models. and yes, since forever we have downloaded new maps for free. Not expansion maps, but yea small stuff.

      Or maybe I am from a different universe?

      On my universe small crap like maps and a single new weapon is the work of modders and other non-professional people. The devs make worthwhile stuff like whole new episodes.

      Maybe I sould check fileplanet, and see how much big patch (over 20 MB) contains new maps?

  39. Weylund says:

    Oh, shits. There’s going to be zombies now, some months down the line?

    Why do they toy with me! Who can choose between skill trees and zombies!?

    Oh, wait. It’ll probably be on weekend sale before the DLC comes out, right?

    You know what’re really fun to play? Infocom games. Just started playing Hitchhiker’s Guide for the umpteenth time. I wish Steam would start selling *those*. Or GOG.

  40. Butler` says:

    I hate zombies, and I hate DLC that’s pretty much out there before the game is even released.


  41. Vinraith says:

    I was geared up to buy this one on day one, but I think I may wait a bit now. I’m sure I’ll still get Borderlands and the DLC, but now I’d like to know how many DLC there will be, how much they’ll cost, and whether there will eventually be a way to get a physical copy of them. Until I have clear answers to those questions, or until there’s enough of a price drop that I care less about them, I think I’ll hold off.

    Basically I’ve learned from my experience with Fallout 3. It was bought back last fall, played and thoroughly enjoyed, but in order to get a physical copy of all the DLC I find myself having to buy the GOTY edition and ending up paying for another copy of the base game for no good reason. I don’t intend to make that error again if I can avoid it.

    • Psychopomp says:

      Why the hell…

      It’s not like you have to buy the DLC at any point.

      I’ll never understand why people refuse to by the vanilla game, because there’s some optional stuff they can buy.

    • Vinraith says:

      How do you get “refuse to buy the vanilla game” from me saying I’ll wait awhile?

      I want to buy the DLC, I intend to buy the DLC, so I might as well wait and get it all together at a better price if possible.

  42. Hug_dealer says:


    you know that there is nothing keeping you from buying the game an enjoying it without ever buying the expansions, or just getting them when they come out in a package deal later.

    You can buy all the fallout 3 DLC in a single package, they dont force you to buy the game again.

    I really think you need to update yourself to the state of the world. Your physical media era fetish is coming to an end man. Cd's dont even last as long as your account on steam, or other digital stores.

    The really weird thing is that you can back up your digital copies onto a cd or dvd.

    • Vinraith says:

      “or just getting them when they come out in a package deal later.”

      My point is that there have been a number of cases lately where that hasn’t happened.

      “You can buy all the fallout 3 DLC in a single package, they dont force you to buy the game again.”

      Actually no, you can’t, at least not in North America as far as I can tell.

      “Cd’s dont even last as long as your account on steam, or other digital stores.”

      I’d place real money I’ll still have CD’s from the 90’s when Steam is nothing more than a memory. I still back up any digital purchase on disc precisely because of that fact.

      “The really weird thing is that you can back up your digital copies onto a cd or dvd.”

      Yes, but there’s no guarantee that you can unlock them down the road, plus it’s something of a pain.

      What’s funny is that you seem to think I don’t buy stuff on digital download services, in truth I buy a ton of them. I dislike having those purchases excessively “scattered” though, so part of the issue will be what channel Borderlands distributes its DLC through. If, like a lot of games lately, it’s through GfWL or direct from the developer/publisher, that’s one more account to manage and I’d prefer to avoid that. I doubt it’ll be through Steam, as you seem to anticipate, since Borderlands doesn’t require Steam. We’ll see, which is of course yet another reason to wait.

  43. BabelFish says:

    I’m honestly not sure why people dislike early-announced DLC.

    At some point in game development you have to say “this is it, we’re content complete, nothing new goes in the game” or you will never get around to actually SHIPPING your product. Once that point is reached, it’s not like the content creators pack up and go home.

    While the testing and finalization of the game gets done by other members of the team, the content creators start creating assets for the next project. Sometimes that’s additional content for the current game to be released later, and by the time the actual game is ready to ship the later content is polished enough to announce.

  44. Hug_dealer says:

    you do get to play the whole thing without getting nickled and dimed. You buy the entire game. you basically want to wait for games to release thier expansion pack and then wait for them to do a bundle down the road. Nothing wrong with that, you are frugle.

    Others of us arent, and we feel our money is well spent on something we enjoy, and $10 for hours of entertainment is quite cheap compared to anything else you can do with your money.

    I'm glad you are happy with your physical media, but my original copy of fallout 2 is no longer readable, makes me extremely sad. Had i bought it through digital distrubution i would 90% likely be able to download and play it today.

  45. The Pink Ninja says:

    On an unrelated note I just got my APB beta invite

    • DarkNoghri says:

      I never even got a response email from the Beta App I put in. I find myself wondering if they just didn’t respond, or if it got lost in spam, or what.

  46. Vinraith says:

    “Others of us arent, and we feel our money is well spent on something we enjoy, and $10 for hours of entertainment is quite cheap compared to anything else you can do with your money.”

    And that’s fine. I’m not trying to tell anyone else what to do, Hug_dealer, I’m just saying what I’m doing and why.

  47. Torgen says:

    I’m boycotting RPS comments threads until the know-nothing, self-entitled whiners are patched with better AI.

  48. Hug_dealer says:

    Keep in mind, that the people that supported the developers by buying thier products are the reason you get all those extra DLC.

    If everyone acted as vinraith does, fallout 3 would have had 1 DLC, beth would have seen it as a failure, and just moved on to something else.

    Now having said that, there is nothing wrong with waiting to get a good deal, but you should want to support your developers, because if you dont, bad things can happen and perhaps your favorite developer doesnt survive.

    I am also not saying that every game needs to be purchased immediately. But initial sales make a huge impact on what the developers are going to do next. Gearbox is going out on a limb here and making sure people know that they will be adding more content to the game and support it.

    • Vinraith says:

      Actually I bought Fallout 3 brand new precisely because I wanted to support the developers and keep the game going. I did, however, wait until they put out the GECK. If they hadn't done that, I'd have held off for a good sale.

  49. Joseph says:

    @ Arsem RE: I don’t like the idea of adding zombies so soon:

    I think to me it just seems like a bit of a cop out for lack of originality, but it still may work well and be fun and yada yada yada. Also, I personally don’t like fallout 3, so you can’t tell me “it was a good game with zombies in”. I do however like left 4 dead, but that’s all about zombies. I don’t know. Who cares. Zombies zombies zombies.

  50. Hug_dealer says:

    these are gonna be crazy zombies. if you look at the borderlands world, it is anything but normal. so expect some crazy shit if i were you.