Jump to content

 

2nd DLC Mr. Torgue's Campaign of Carnage


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I just like how before the first DLC was released, it seemed Gearbox could do no wrong, and now everyone and their skag are cynical about everything.

 

Gaming community. :adore:

 

Don't get me wrong, I like a good moan, but this U-turn of belief is so sudden I'm almost spewing like a Caustic Goliath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just like how before the first DLC was released, it seemed Gearbox could do no wrong, and now everyone and their skag are cynical about everything.

 

Gaming community. :adore:

 

Don't get me wrong, I like a good moan, but this U-turn of belief is so sudden I'm almost spewing like a Caustic Goliath.

 

Before the first DLC, Gearbox did no wrong. But they are getting the DLCs wrong now... seriously... 3 achievements?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since it was overlooked when I originally posted it in this thread:

 

http://www.xbox360achievements.org/forum/showthread.php?t=391816

 

I will try again:

 

 

Here's an idea... They could be releasing 2 DLC's before the end of the year. They changed the rules for achievements by allowing an extra 1000 over separate quarters. (250 per quarter) If this is the case, perhaps another DLC is gonna be released before January and will have the other 125.

 

(Gears of War 3 was the 1st under this new rule and released their DLC accordingly to utilize the extra 1000 gamerscore)

 

Some things to keep in mind:

1- Gearbox is only required to have 4 DLC's attached to the season pass

2- Gearbox is not required to have achievements attached to those DLC's

3- Gearbox is allowed to make as much DLC as they desire. They can continue making DLC long after season pass has run out. They could even sell a 2nd season pass for 4 more DLC's :eek:

4- Microsoft makes the rules. So yes they can change the rules again just as they've done numerous times before. It's M$ afterall. ;)

 

Anyone need further clarification?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to be the only one that remembers this article...

 

For the people "complaining" about how quickly the DLC is coming out:

 

Referring to the game’s add-ons Pitchford said, "The stuff we're planning and working on for the Campaign DLC Season Pass is big DLC stuff - more like Knoxx." The Secret Armory of General Knoxx was the original Borderlands’ largest add-on.

"We're extremely far along with the first campaign DLC. The second DLC is also in amazing shape. The third DLC is a little farther out and the fourth DLC is just in the pre-concept stages.

"We will have other, non-season pass related DLC,” continued Pitchford. "The additional character (Mechromancer) is one kind of example. The Borderlands 2 team is fired up at the moment. Customer love for the game is driving us wild - making us want to do more and more stuff.

"So, expect that there will be even more beyond the big Campaign DLC in the Season Pass and the additional character. We'll announce more stuff as soon as we are able to be confident in the commitment of the details we share."

(source)

 

 

 

So three days after the game launches, they said the first DLC was pretty much done and the second was close behind. A month later, the first DLC comes out and everyone is shocked. Then a couple days after that someone gets a hold of the title and the planned achievement names for the second one and some people are acting like it's coming out tomorrow.

 

They also said they're wanting to do more DLC outside of the Season Pass because the fan response to Borderlands 2 has been so positive... they planned 4 DLCs, they announce the season pass for those 4 DLCs. THEN, they get excited and start coming up with other ideas and plans outside of the initial 4 planned and some people are complaining and calling the devs money-hungry assholes *smh*

 

edit: Grifter gets it =)

Edited by xXthefragileXx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to be the only one that remembers this article...

 

For the people "complaining" about how quickly the DLC is coming out:

 

(source)

 

So three days after the game launches, they said the first DLC was pretty much done and the second was close behind. A month later, the first DLC comes out and everyone is shocked. Then a couple days after that someone gets a hold of the title and the planned achievement names for the second one and some people are acting like it's coming out tomorrow.

 

They also said they're wanting to do more DLC outside of the Season Pass because the fan response to Borderlands 2 has been so positive... they planned 4 DLCs, they announce the season pass for those 4 DLCs. THEN, they get excited and start coming up with other ideas and plans outside of the initial 4 planned and some people are complaining and calling the devs money-hungry assholes *smh*

 

edit: Grifter gets it =)

 

Believe it or not, I actually somehow missed that article. :)

 

But that does go hand in hand with my "logic" so thanks for posting it. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this is an "achievement hunting" site and all... but seriously? Since when does the number of achievements a DLC has dictate that the devs are "getting it wrong"?

 

Even worse, Achievements dictate the value of peoples DLC purchases. That's just not what gaming is about. You base your purchase on your experience with the ENTIRE game. Not the once-per-50+ satisfaction of a little bleep bloop of an award that really doesn't pay off.

And this is coming from a former achievement whore. I would buy games based on their achievement involvement. I soon realized my gaming was feeling stale and unsatisfactory. I took about 2 weeks in lulling on it and didn't pay attention to achievements. It was like finding my niche all over again.

Not saying they are completely useless, but they shouldn't be your basis for purchase or overall enjoyment. They should not factor into a games value as gaming was a success WAY before achievements/trophies came along.

 

 

Let's put it this way? How valuable are achievements? The new XBL Rewards Program will be offering a reward for players having over 25k in Gamerscore as the highest honor of Legend. I have over 100k. What will I recieve? And I quote - "A reward on your birthday month...valued at $0.25"

 

'nuff said

Edited by Flibbity Floid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Originally Posted by Gearbox Gunning for More Borderlands 2 Classes - September 21st, 2012

Referring to the game’s add-ons Pitchford said, "The stuff we're planning and working on for the Campaign DLC Season Pass is big DLC stuff - more like Knoxx." The Secret Armory of General Knoxx was the original Borderlands’ largest add-on.

"We're extremely far along with the first campaign DLC. The second DLC is also in amazing shape. The third DLC is a little farther out and the fourth DLC is just in the pre-concept stages.

"We will have other, non-season pass related DLC,” continued Pitchford. "The additional character (Mechromancer) is one kind of example. The Borderlands 2 team is fired up at the moment. Customer love for the game is driving us wild - making us want to do more and more stuff.

"So, expect that there will be even more beyond the big Campaign DLC in the Season Pass and the additional character. We'll announce more stuff as soon as we are able to be confident in the commitment of the details we share."

 

(source)

 

I would just like to highlight from that quote the part about the Season Pass DLC being 'big stuff'. I have in no way experienced it yet, but people are coming across with the view that the first one is anything but, at least it is nowhere near on par with Knoxx... :p

 

But whatever, I stick by what I said originally and that is the side of the fence I'm sitting on, if there is any side to choose.

 

I would have also said something about YiazmatXII's reply to my original post, but that has been done for me. However I would have been more like "3 achievements = doing DLC wrong. Alert the media!!" instead of putting thought as to why I disagree. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't played the Pirate one yet either, but from what I hear it's about 6-8 hours from start to finish, not including the two "raid" bosses, which is on par with Knoxx. People are complaining about "only 3 achievements"... the GS added from this one is 125, same as Moxxi and Knoxx from BL1... they just spread them out over 5 achievements instead of 3. But yeah... my enjoyment/purchase of a game is NEVER based on how many achievements there are or how easy it'll be to get 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't played the Pirate one yet either, but from what I hear it's about 6-8 hours from start to finish, not including the two "raid" bosses, which is on par with Knoxx. People are complaining about "only 3 achievements"... the GS added from this one is 125, same as Moxxi and Knoxx from BL1... they just spread them out over 5 achievements instead of 3. But yeah... my enjoyment/purchase of a game is NEVER based on how many achievements there are or how easy it'll be to get 100%

 

 

So full of win and logic. Probably why it gets overlooked :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would just like to highlight from that quote the part about the Season Pass DLC being 'big stuff'. I have in no way experienced it yet, but people are coming across with the view that the first one is anything but, at least it is nowhere near on par with Knoxx... :p

 

But whatever, I stick by what I said originally and that is the side of the fence I'm sitting on, if there is any side to choose.

 

I would have also said something about YiazmatXII's reply to my original post, but that has been done for me. However I would have been more like "3 achievements = doing DLC wrong. Alert the media!!" instead of putting thought as to why I disagree. :p

 

At what level and on which playthrough did you play the new DLC? If you ran through on normal mode with a level 50, of course it took no time to play it and it seemed like there wasn't much there... I am playing through it starting at a level 38 and the enemies are easy kills, yes, but it still takes time to play through because I am not one-shotting each enemy with my overleveled weapon of choice. The game is what you make of it. I am throughly enjoying the DLC, you may not, but regardless, it is about the same size as Knoxx when you play it at the level that best scales to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At what level and on which playthrough did you play the new DLC? If you ran through on normal mode with a level 50, of course it took no time to play it and it seemed like there wasn't much there... I am playing through it starting at a level 38 and the enemies are easy kills, yes, but it still takes time to play through because I am not one-shotting each enemy with my overleveled weapon of choice. The game is what you make of it. I am throughly enjoying the DLC, you may not, but regardless, it is about the same size as Knoxx when you play it at the level that best scales to you.

 

I dunno what you were doing, but I'm level 38 and I'm basically 1-shotting everything (as a melee-deception skill-based Zer0). Although I AM going for critical hits (for the badass ranks) so my view might be a tad skewed... and most of the weapons I've been using I've picked up from just post-firehawk missions in TVHM...

 

I'm really liking the length of the DLC though. The added levels actually feel large, the new enemies (mostly the anchor-men) are interesting, and side missions just as hilarious ("if only DRM could shoot the user in the face... ah well a robot can dream"). Of course I'd love it if the add-on was 15+ hours, but it's definitely enjoyable and IMO worth $10

 

OT: I didn't really get the whole "Underdome" feel from the achievement names. I REALLY don't think theres a person on the internet who doesn't know how much us players hated that DLC. Plus, just look at the creature slaughter (and all the other) dome - those were done really well, and not the same XP-less, monotonous, drawn out wave/round trash...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even worse, Achievements dictate the value of peoples DLC purchases. That's just not what gaming is about. You base your purchase on your experience with the ENTIRE game. Not the once-per-50+ satisfaction of a little bleep bloop of an award that really doesn't pay off.

And this is coming from a former achievement whore. I would buy games based on their achievement involvement. I soon realized my gaming was feeling stale and unsatisfactory. I took about 2 weeks in lulling on it and didn't pay attention to achievements. It was like finding my niche all over again.

Not saying they are completely useless, but they shouldn't be your basis for purchase or overall enjoyment. They should not factor into a games value as gaming was a success WAY before achievements/trophies came along.

 

 

I see both sides of this argument. On one hand, simply put, it's more Borderlands...so how bad can that be as long as it isn't another "Moxxi"...right? I feel like Gearbox has probably heard enough from the fans to not duplicate that mistake again. I can also understand that money issue. Given the achievement rules laid out by MS, and the track record that Gearbox has, and the evolution of what a Season Pass is and does...there seems to be the idea that any developer who issues one will also follow EPIC's lead and make each DLC worth 250 Gscore. Now for alot of us on this site, that makes the most sense but what is becoming more apparent is that devs understand achievements...but they don't really understand achievements.

 

In my mind, 800 MS points for DLC should = 250 Gscore. Once you look across the DLC releases as a whole though, we quickly see that to devs, 800 MS = $10 more. Look at what Ubisoft has done with the 2 Ghost Recon packs. They're both 800 pts, and I think they don't even combine for 100 Gscore. ( I may be wrong but its something like that.)

 

The thing that bothers me the most with devs is that we are 7 years into this lifecycyle and things like this aren't just automated. Any significant DLC released should just simply cost 800 pts...and also include 250 Gscore. Simple as that. If it were this way it would please those who just want to play more of whatever the title is...and it would give the achievement folks the 250 Gscore value that they feel is warranted and deserved given the price they just paid. Everybody would win and there would be far less complaining. Obviously this is just my thoughts and opinion here, but if Microsoft is going to establish "rules" on DLC and achievements...then they should simply mandate 250 Gscore be REQUIRED by developers if they are releasing significant DLC. This of course wouldn't apply to a gun pack...or some new costumes.

 

I guess I just expect more thought and logic at this point in the console lifecycle. I'm sure there are meetings and pie charts that basically proves DLC sells better when 250 Gscore is tied to it...and how devs miss this at this point...I will never know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't really warrant me replying as it's probably just an overlook, but...

 

At what level and on which playthrough did you play the new DLC? If you ran through on normal mode with a level 50, of course it took no time to play it and it seemed like there wasn't much there...

 

Look at the bold text:

 

I would just like to highlight from that quote the part about the Season Pass DLC being 'big stuff'. I have in no way experienced it yet, but people are coming across with the view that the first one is anything but, at least it is nowhere near on par with Knoxx...

 

I'm not one to bitch about something like this without playing a few minutes at least. :p I was just bringing up what I've heard others say.

 

But the way I worded things in my post probably wasn't made clear. So no harm done.

 

Going back to the original topic; my knowledge of the 'lore' of this game isn't top notch, but isn't Torgue the firm who has the checkered style custom outfits? If my thinking is correct, I think it would be call if this DLC was something similar or had some part of it at least a little similar to Carmageddon or Vigilante 8 or something. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be fine with another Moxxi-ish DLC as long as the enemies gave experience, dropped loot, and maybe a raid boss run involved. The only thing bad about the first one is that there was no reason to sit through them for five hours other than the achievements. Despite all the hatred for it, it was worth it for the bank alone at the time. I wouldn't want it to be one of the four story-based DLC's but I wouldn't mind a replayable horde mode in Borderlands 2.

Edited by WalterWhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see both sides of this argument. On one hand, simply put, it's more Borderlands...so how bad can that be as long as it isn't another "Moxxi"...right? I feel like Gearbox has probably heard enough from the fans to not duplicate that mistake again. I can also understand that money issue. Given the achievement rules laid out by MS, and the track record that Gearbox has, and the evolution of what a Season Pass is and does...there seems to be the idea that any developer who issues one will also follow EPIC's lead and make each DLC worth 250 Gscore. Now for alot of us on this site, that makes the most sense but what is becoming more apparent is that devs understand achievements...but they don't really understand achievements.

 

In my mind, 800 MS points for DLC should = 250 Gscore. Once you look across the DLC releases as a whole though, we quickly see that to devs, 800 MS = $10 more. Look at what Ubisoft has done with the 2 Ghost Recon packs. They're both 800 pts, and I think they don't even combine for 100 Gscore. ( I may be wrong but its something like that.)

 

The thing that bothers me the most with devs is that we are 7 years into this lifecycyle and things like this aren't just automated. Any significant DLC released should just simply cost 800 pts...and also include 250 Gscore. Simple as that. If it were this way it would please those who just want to play more of whatever the title is...and it would give the achievement folks the 250 Gscore value that they feel is warranted and deserved given the price they just paid. Everybody would win and there would be far less complaining. Obviously this is just my thoughts and opinion here, but if Microsoft is going to establish "rules" on DLC and achievements...then they should simply mandate 250 Gscore be REQUIRED by developers if they are releasing significant DLC. This of course wouldn't apply to a gun pack...or some new costumes.

 

I guess I just expect more thought and logic at this point in the console lifecycle. I'm sure there are meetings and pie charts that basically proves DLC sells better when 250 Gscore is tied to it...and how devs miss this at this point...I will never know.

 

 

I'm sure it just seems like I'm trying to simplify it but which do you enjoy more? The game itself or the achievements?

 

I know people that have passed up FREE stuff simply b/c it didn't have achievements. That's just weaksauce values.

I feel like now, games won't be as good as they were without achievements. As if removing them would destroy the plot, gameplay and mechanics of an entire game/series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
  • Create New...