PDA

View Full Version : DLC For Tomb Raider Meant to be in Original Game



LORD BLACKFIRE
12th Jan 2009, 23:55
Many of us have commented in the past about both the lack of DLC for BS:Midway and that some of those units for the only map released as DLC appeared in early screenshots or videos for the game, leading some of us to think that the map was held back from the retail version to be sold later for more cash. In other words, it wasn't created after the game was finished but rather just cut from what was intended to be the full version.

Sort of like advertising a 1/3 pound hamburger, tearing off a chunk of raw meat making it actually 1/4 pound, selling the now reduced burger as a 1/3 pound burger, and then selling the meat you tore off as an appetizer to get more cash.

That scenario would explain why there was only ONE DLC package offered for BS: Midway - they had cooked and sold the "1/3" pound burger and couldn't tear anymore off once it was out the door.


And now this bit of news from another of Eidos' properties. Sort of makes you wonder what's going to happen with Battlestations: Pacific.
http://kotaku.com/5129215/tomb-raider-underword-dlc-was-meant-to-be-in-original-game-and-other-nasty-secrets

Two apparently disgruntled former Crystal Dynamics employees have confirmed the rumored lay-offs at the studio and dished a little inside information about the development of Tomb Raider Underworld, including how the DLC came to be.

A poster who says he is Eric Lindstrom, the creative director for the game, said that the downloadable content coming exclusively to the Xbox 360 was in fact a level removed from the original game.

"The content of DLC was absolutely not held back from Underworld for the purpose of selling later down the road."

"I needed to find a way to cut enough days from the schedule in a manner that would not rip a hole in the game that would take time to sew up."

"Even if I was told on that day that we would never ever make a downloabable level, I still would have had to cut it."

Lindstrom went on to say that he doesn't know if the deal will ever expire to allow Eidos to bring the content to the PS3 or Wii.

Another, anonymous, former Crystal Dynamics employee posting in the forums claims that the decision to cut the content was made specifically to use it later in DLC.
"Ask anyone who is part of it and if they are honest they will tell you around 40% of the DLC was meant to be in the game itself, originally. But it was decided later on to take out those parts because they were expecting most sales on the 360 and the DLC the way it looked at the time was looking to be a bit 'thin'. So we were asked to cut some parts out to be used in the DLC."



Does that last part sound like the way Battlestations: Midway's DLC was handled or what?

Before TR even released Eidos' marketing team was promoting the DLC. That was back in October. Tomb Raider released last November and the DLC is coming out this month.

Wait and see. If BS:P comes out at the end of April, assuming that Eidos uses the same time frame, we should see the 1st and ONLY DLC for BS:P in late June-July.

Polarshark
13th Jan 2009, 02:13
Many of us have commented in the past about both the lack of DLC for BS:Midway and that some of those units for the only map released as DLC appeared in early screenshots or videos for the game, leading some of us to think that the map was held back from the retail version to be sold later for more cash. In other words, it wasn't created after the game was finished but rather just cut from what was intended to be the full version.

Sort of like advertising a 1/3 pound hamburger, tearing off a chunk of raw meat making it actually 1/4 pound, selling the now reduced burger as a 1/3 pound burger, and then selling the meat you tore off as an appetizer to get more cash.

That scenario would explain why there was only ONE DLC package offered for BS: Midway - they had cooked and sold the "1/3" pound burger and couldn't tear anymore off once it was out the door.


And now this bit of news from another of Eidos' properties. Sort of makes you wonder what's going to happen with Battlestations: Pacific.
http://kotaku.com/5129215/tomb-raider-underword-dlc-was-meant-to-be-in-original-game-and-other-nasty-secrets


Does that last part sound like the way Battlestations: Midway's DLC was handled or what?

Before TR even released Eidos' marketing team was promoting the DLC. That was back in October. Tomb Raider released last November and the DLC is coming out this month.

Wait and see. If BS:P comes out at the end of April, assuming that Eidos uses the same time frame, we should see the 1st and ONLY DLC for BS:P in late June-July.
what's wrong with only 1 DLC?

and besides that DLC

might contain two or three times the iowa mission pack

LORD BLACKFIRE
13th Jan 2009, 02:34
Did you read the article?

We suspected that Eidos might have pulled Sibuyan Sea off of the disk to sell it as DLC later. That would explain why there was only ONE DLC. They didn't pull off anything else to sell later as DLC and were too cheap to commission the dev team to do anything else on top of what was originally intended to be part of the retail disk.

Last October Eidos was trumpting DLC for TR weeks before the game's release. Major gaming websites and podcasts voiced suspicions at the time that this might be a case of fake DLC (fake DLC: content that was meant to be on the disk but taken out to be sold later as DLC).

Now we've got members of the dev team saying that this was the case.

What this means for us is that right now Eidos may be looking over the maps planned for BS:P and saying "Hey guys. Cut that map out. We're going to sell it later as DLC."

I'm not attacking our dev. team. Hell, I'm sticking up for them in the sense that Eidos should PAY them for NEW DLC, not shaft them and us by splitting up the game into pieces and selling each for more than the original sum was planned for.

And besides that, were you happy with the ONE DLC for Midway? We got ONE multiplayer map?

Why not several maps over the last two years?

I'll tell you why. Because Eidos couldn't pull that many maps off the retail disk without it looking more obvious and it was too cheap to pay the dev team to make new ones. Hell, they wouldn't even pay to fix the bug in the one map they pulled off that caused it to crash on display settings over 720 P.

Polarshark
13th Jan 2009, 02:50
Did you read the article?

We suspected that Eidos might have pulled Sibuyan Sea off of the disk to sell it as DLC later. That would explain why there was only ONE DLC. They didn't pull off anything else to sell later as DLC and were too cheap to commission the dev team to do anything else on top of what was originally intended to be part of the retail disk.

Last October Eidos was trumpting DLC for TR weeks before the game's release. Major gaming websites and podcasts voiced suspicions at the time that this might be a case of fake DLC (fake DLC: content that was meant to be on the disk but taken out to be sold later as DLC).

Now we've got members of the dev team saying that this was the case.

What this means for us is that right now Eidos may be looking over the maps planned for BS:P and saying "Hey guys. Cut that map out. We're going to sell it later as DLC."

I'm not attacking our dev. team. Hell, I'm sticking up for them in the sense that Eidos should PAY them for NEW DLC, not shaft them and us by splitting up the game into pieces and selling each for more than the original sum was planned for.

And besides that, were you happy with the ONE DLC for Midway? We got ONE multiplayer map?

Why not several maps over the last two years?

I'll tell you why. Because Eidos couldn't pull that many maps off the retail disk without it looking more obvious and it was too cheap to pay the dev team to make new ones. Hell, they wouldn't even pay to fix the bug in the one map they pulled off that caused it to crash on display settings over 720 P.

wow now i get it

but it was for free for PC players

i stand up to lord's blackfire's statement

meaning i support him ( in some sense)