Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

My DLC Idea

10 replies to this topic
ahmadjufri2013
  • ahmadjufri2013

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2013

#1

Posted 19 November 2013 - 08:21 AM

Start off with a mexican/hispanic Vagos protagonist.

New Characters.

New Weapons.

New Haircuts.

New Clothes.

New Cars.

A mission where you have to assassinate the governor. (Sue Marie/Jock Cranley)

GANG WARS  :cool:

New S&Fs.

New Weapon Customization.

- Laser Dot/Red Dot whatever u call it

- and some other cool customization......

New walking animation of course....................

New Fighting animation (improved)

Maybe a mission where you help Families take out some bitch-ass ballas's ass

80+ MISSIONS

New phone :D 

 


yonatan755
  • yonatan755

    Playa

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2012

#2

Posted 19 November 2013 - 08:36 AM

Gta : los vagos confirmed?

Drake1212
  • Drake1212

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Feb 2008

#3

Posted 19 November 2013 - 09:32 AM

f*ck, Rockstar should just fire their DLC department because you obviously know how things should be done.
This isn't really DLC "ideas", it's just some half-assed wishful thinking. If you really wanted it to be ideas, why not explain some of your features?
I mean, "IMPROVE FIGHTING!!!11" doesn't really mean anything, you have to explain how it should be improved.
And "NEW VAGOS PROTAGONIST!!" - why? please explain what his story is and why we should bother doing 80+ missions as him.

 

But why bother - this is just another useless thread from the 12-year old mind of ahmadjufri...


Bertanius
  • Bertanius

    Classic car fan

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2010
  • Australia

#4

Posted 19 November 2013 - 10:10 AM

I need explanation on why many users here find DLC acceptable. Why, in any way, would you find purchasing content you should already own fair? You own the game, you should get what was made for it, you shouldn't have to do this 'pick-and-pay' system where you 'build' the game. I know it's a clever marketing tactic to squeeze every cent from consumers, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with it, they should just add features to the game for free, they shouldn't force you to pay for virtual content, especially content already on the disc. Games are getting smaller, more poorly done, and are having more content cut and re-sold at higher and higher prices, who would find that acceptable?

 

As for your ideas, they are bland and have no explanation as to why they should be made, Rockstar first needs to fix all these single player bugs, but they refuse to do just that, they only care about the online mode... On the PC version, you could pretty much do everything you wanted using mods.


BuyMeTheMoon
  • BuyMeTheMoon

    Homie

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2013
  • Norway

#5

Posted 19 November 2013 - 10:14 AM Edited by BuyMeTheMoon, 19 November 2013 - 10:15 AM.

Red dot sights? In that case you would have to be in first person to look through the scope? 


Huffin-Puffin
  • Huffin-Puffin

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2013

#6

Posted 19 November 2013 - 10:43 AM

I need explanation on why many users here find DLC acceptable. Why, in any way, would you find purchasing content you should already own fair? You own the game, you should get what was made for it, you shouldn't have to do this 'pick-and-pay' system where you 'build' the game. I know it's a clever marketing tactic to squeeze every cent from consumers, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with it, they should just add features to the game for free, they shouldn't force you to pay for virtual content, especially content already on the disc. Games are getting smaller, more poorly done, and are having more content cut and re-sold at higher and higher prices, who would find that acceptable?


There are two types of DLC. The type that Capcom and Ubisoft create where they pull bits of a finished game to sell later and the Rockstar and Bethesda type where they finish the game and then create completely new, extra content for a price. The second type has been happening for years, it just used to be called an expansion pack.

Most people are happy about the second type because it gives them new stuff to do once they've finished the game. The developers have created it so they deserve paying for it and if the game was successful enough to warrant the creation of the additional content then there are likely to be people who want to buy more stuff for their favourite games. It also allows the developers to experiment with new content and address things which the fanbase wanted changed or added.

There are many people working in the industry, and some of them use DLC to try to scam cash out of their customers for stuff they already made. Other developers create fair content which is good value for money. Writing off the entire concept of DLC is retarded, especially as PC games have been doing this for years. By all means call out unfair practice when it occurs, and have a problem with pre-order incentives and AC2 style DLC, but attacking Rockstar for continuing to support a popular product with extra stuff, especially when historically the value they offered with things like EFLC and Undead Nightmare is so high and offered different gameplay.

If there's bugs in SP then find them and report them. You're constantly whining about Rockstar not doing exactly what you want, but they don't owe you exactly what you'd like. If the GTA series and the people who make it are so awful, go play something else.

Bertanius
  • Bertanius

    Classic car fan

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2010
  • Australia

#7

Posted 19 November 2013 - 10:56 AM

 

I need explanation on why many users here find DLC acceptable. Why, in any way, would you find purchasing content you should already own fair? You own the game, you should get what was made for it, you shouldn't have to do this 'pick-and-pay' system where you 'build' the game. I know it's a clever marketing tactic to squeeze every cent from consumers, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with it, they should just add features to the game for free, they shouldn't force you to pay for virtual content, especially content already on the disc. Games are getting smaller, more poorly done, and are having more content cut and re-sold at higher and higher prices, who would find that acceptable?


There are two types of DLC. The type that Capcom and Ubisoft create where they pull bits of a finished game to sell later and the Rockstar and Bethesda type where they finish the game and then create completely new, extra content for a price. The second type has been happening for years, it just used to be called an expansion pack.

Most people are happy about the second type because it gives them new stuff to do once they've finished the game. The developers have created it so they deserve paying for it and if the game was successful enough to warrant the creation of the additional content then there are likely to be people who want to buy more stuff for their favourite games. It also allows the developers to experiment with new content and address things which the fanbase wanted changed or added.

There are many people working in the industry, and some of them use DLC to try to scam cash out of their customers for stuff they already made. Other developers create fair content which is good value for money. Writing off the entire concept of DLC is retarded, especially as PC games have been doing this for years. By all means call out unfair practice when it occurs, and have a problem with pre-order incentives and AC2 style DLC, but attacking Rockstar for continuing to support a popular product with extra stuff, especially when historically the value they offered with things like EFLC and Undead Nightmare is so high and offered different gameplay.

If there's bugs in SP then find them and report them. You're constantly whining about Rockstar not doing exactly what you want, but they don't owe you exactly what you'd like. If the GTA series and the people who make it are so awful, go play something else.

 

Sorry, but that's not how it works, expansion packs are completely different to DLC, expansion packs add an entire new storyline to the game, and add many new features and things to do, DLC just adds small snippets of content. Why should a company thank its consumers by saying "here, have this one vehicle for $15,99. Buy it now!"? It's unfair and just pure greed. When it comes to bugs, you should realise reporting single player bugs won't do anything, Rockstar couldn't care less about single player gamers, why fix something if it won't make them money? They only care about online, there's plenty of bugs they're aware of, but they don't do anything about it. No matter the form, DLC is greedy, no matter which company makes it, paying for content you should already have in the first place isn't something that should be accepted. The gaming industry is turning into one of those make-your-own ice-cream places, you have to pay for everything and anything.

 

It's not about what I want, but what gamers want, it's just most of them fail to see how much of a scam DLC is, that's why they ask for it, and why they get it. I will play something else, and have been, GTA is like a light bulb that doesn't turn on, it's there, but doesn't work.


quechus13
  • quechus13

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2008
  • None

#8

Posted 19 November 2013 - 11:02 AM

 

 

I need explanation on why many users here find DLC acceptable. Why, in any way, would you find purchasing content you should already own fair? You own the game, you should get what was made for it, you shouldn't have to do this 'pick-and-pay' system where you 'build' the game. I know it's a clever marketing tactic to squeeze every cent from consumers, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with it, they should just add features to the game for free, they shouldn't force you to pay for virtual content, especially content already on the disc. Games are getting smaller, more poorly done, and are having more content cut and re-sold at higher and higher prices, who would find that acceptable?


There are two types of DLC. The type that Capcom and Ubisoft create where they pull bits of a finished game to sell later and the Rockstar and Bethesda type where they finish the game and then create completely new, extra content for a price. The second type has been happening for years, it just used to be called an expansion pack.

Most people are happy about the second type because it gives them new stuff to do once they've finished the game. The developers have created it so they deserve paying for it and if the game was successful enough to warrant the creation of the additional content then there are likely to be people who want to buy more stuff for their favourite games. It also allows the developers to experiment with new content and address things which the fanbase wanted changed or added.

There are many people working in the industry, and some of them use DLC to try to scam cash out of their customers for stuff they already made. Other developers create fair content which is good value for money. Writing off the entire concept of DLC is retarded, especially as PC games have been doing this for years. By all means call out unfair practice when it occurs, and have a problem with pre-order incentives and AC2 style DLC, but attacking Rockstar for continuing to support a popular product with extra stuff, especially when historically the value they offered with things like EFLC and Undead Nightmare is so high and offered different gameplay.

If there's bugs in SP then find them and report them. You're constantly whining about Rockstar not doing exactly what you want, but they don't owe you exactly what you'd like. If the GTA series and the people who make it are so awful, go play something else.

 

Sorry, but that's not how it works, expansion packs are completely different to DLC, expansion packs add an entire new storyline to the game, and add many new features and things to do, DLC just adds small snippets of content. Why should a company thank its consumers by saying "here, have this one vehicle for $15,99. Buy it now!"? It's unfair and just pure greed. When it comes to bugs, you should realise reporting single player bugs won't do anything, Rockstar couldn't care less about single player gamers, why fix something if it won't make them money? They only care about online, there's plenty of bugs they're aware of, but they don't do anything about it. No matter the form, DLC is greedy, no matter which company makes it, paying for content you should already have in the first place isn't something that should be accepted. The gaming industry is turning into one of those make-your-own ice-cream places, you have to pay for everything and anything.

 

It's not about what I want, but what gamers want, it's just most of them fail to see how much of a scam DLC is, that's why they ask for it, and why they get it. I will play something else, and have been, GTA is like a light bulb that doesn't turn on, it's there, but doesn't work.

 

 

 

A DLC means Downloadable Content which means an Expansion Pack is DLC.


Bertanius
  • Bertanius

    Classic car fan

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2010
  • Australia

#9

Posted 19 November 2013 - 11:07 AM

 

 

 

I need explanation on why many users here find DLC acceptable. Why, in any way, would you find purchasing content you should already own fair? You own the game, you should get what was made for it, you shouldn't have to do this 'pick-and-pay' system where you 'build' the game. I know it's a clever marketing tactic to squeeze every cent from consumers, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with it, they should just add features to the game for free, they shouldn't force you to pay for virtual content, especially content already on the disc. Games are getting smaller, more poorly done, and are having more content cut and re-sold at higher and higher prices, who would find that acceptable?


There are two types of DLC. The type that Capcom and Ubisoft create where they pull bits of a finished game to sell later and the Rockstar and Bethesda type where they finish the game and then create completely new, extra content for a price. The second type has been happening for years, it just used to be called an expansion pack.

Most people are happy about the second type because it gives them new stuff to do once they've finished the game. The developers have created it so they deserve paying for it and if the game was successful enough to warrant the creation of the additional content then there are likely to be people who want to buy more stuff for their favourite games. It also allows the developers to experiment with new content and address things which the fanbase wanted changed or added.

There are many people working in the industry, and some of them use DLC to try to scam cash out of their customers for stuff they already made. Other developers create fair content which is good value for money. Writing off the entire concept of DLC is retarded, especially as PC games have been doing this for years. By all means call out unfair practice when it occurs, and have a problem with pre-order incentives and AC2 style DLC, but attacking Rockstar for continuing to support a popular product with extra stuff, especially when historically the value they offered with things like EFLC and Undead Nightmare is so high and offered different gameplay.

If there's bugs in SP then find them and report them. You're constantly whining about Rockstar not doing exactly what you want, but they don't owe you exactly what you'd like. If the GTA series and the people who make it are so awful, go play something else.

 

Sorry, but that's not how it works, expansion packs are completely different to DLC, expansion packs add an entire new storyline to the game, and add many new features and things to do, DLC just adds small snippets of content. Why should a company thank its consumers by saying "here, have this one vehicle for $15,99. Buy it now!"? It's unfair and just pure greed. When it comes to bugs, you should realise reporting single player bugs won't do anything, Rockstar couldn't care less about single player gamers, why fix something if it won't make them money? They only care about online, there's plenty of bugs they're aware of, but they don't do anything about it. No matter the form, DLC is greedy, no matter which company makes it, paying for content you should already have in the first place isn't something that should be accepted. The gaming industry is turning into one of those make-your-own ice-cream places, you have to pay for everything and anything.

 

It's not about what I want, but what gamers want, it's just most of them fail to see how much of a scam DLC is, that's why they ask for it, and why they get it. I will play something else, and have been, GTA is like a light bulb that doesn't turn on, it's there, but doesn't work.

 

 

 

A DLC means Downloadable Content which means an Expansion Pack is DLC.

 

It's logically thinking, not technically, expansion packs in a logical term are different to DLC, even though both can be downloaded, mainly because expansion packs were only released on disc back when downloading content from the Internet wasn't used, while DLC is downloaded online...


Drake1212
  • Drake1212

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Feb 2008

#10

Posted 19 November 2013 - 12:25 PM

 

 

 

 

I need explanation on why many users here find DLC acceptable. Why, in any way, would you find purchasing content you should already own fair? You own the game, you should get what was made for it, you shouldn't have to do this 'pick-and-pay' system where you 'build' the game. I know it's a clever marketing tactic to squeeze every cent from consumers, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with it, they should just add features to the game for free, they shouldn't force you to pay for virtual content, especially content already on the disc. Games are getting smaller, more poorly done, and are having more content cut and re-sold at higher and higher prices, who would find that acceptable?


There are two types of DLC. The type that Capcom and Ubisoft create where they pull bits of a finished game to sell later and the Rockstar and Bethesda type where they finish the game and then create completely new, extra content for a price. The second type has been happening for years, it just used to be called an expansion pack.

Most people are happy about the second type because it gives them new stuff to do once they've finished the game. The developers have created it so they deserve paying for it and if the game was successful enough to warrant the creation of the additional content then there are likely to be people who want to buy more stuff for their favourite games. It also allows the developers to experiment with new content and address things which the fanbase wanted changed or added.

There are many people working in the industry, and some of them use DLC to try to scam cash out of their customers for stuff they already made. Other developers create fair content which is good value for money. Writing off the entire concept of DLC is retarded, especially as PC games have been doing this for years. By all means call out unfair practice when it occurs, and have a problem with pre-order incentives and AC2 style DLC, but attacking Rockstar for continuing to support a popular product with extra stuff, especially when historically the value they offered with things like EFLC and Undead Nightmare is so high and offered different gameplay.

If there's bugs in SP then find them and report them. You're constantly whining about Rockstar not doing exactly what you want, but they don't owe you exactly what you'd like. If the GTA series and the people who make it are so awful, go play something else.

 

Sorry, but that's not how it works, expansion packs are completely different to DLC, expansion packs add an entire new storyline to the game, and add many new features and things to do, DLC just adds small snippets of content. Why should a company thank its consumers by saying "here, have this one vehicle for $15,99. Buy it now!"? It's unfair and just pure greed. When it comes to bugs, you should realise reporting single player bugs won't do anything, Rockstar couldn't care less about single player gamers, why fix something if it won't make them money? They only care about online, there's plenty of bugs they're aware of, but they don't do anything about it. No matter the form, DLC is greedy, no matter which company makes it, paying for content you should already have in the first place isn't something that should be accepted. The gaming industry is turning into one of those make-your-own ice-cream places, you have to pay for everything and anything.

 

It's not about what I want, but what gamers want, it's just most of them fail to see how much of a scam DLC is, that's why they ask for it, and why they get it. I will play something else, and have been, GTA is like a light bulb that doesn't turn on, it's there, but doesn't work.

 

 

 

A DLC means Downloadable Content which means an Expansion Pack is DLC.

 

It's logically thinking, not technically, expansion packs in a logical term are different to DLC, even though both can be downloaded, mainly because expansion packs were only released on disc back when downloading content from the Internet wasn't used, while DLC is downloaded online...

 

 

The only difference between expansion packs and DLCs are how the marketing team decides to market the content to the consumers.
As Queschus13 says: Content wich is downloadable is DownLoadable Content (DLC). If you download an expansion pack it is a DLC since its contents were downloaded. Simple. DLC and expansion packs aren't necessarily a measure of how big they are.

However, you got to remember that before Steam, PSN and xboxlive the only way to add more content to a game was through a physical disc.
Since making the disc, making the case for the disc and shipping the thing cost quite a lot of money, so developers made sure that there was enough new content to actually be worth for the consumer to buy it (otherwise people wouldn't buy it and the company didn't make any money).

 

But with Steam, PSN and xboxlive the developers can send out expansions to their games through download for a much smaller price.
This has given the DLCs as we know them today a very episodic form where the price is low and the new features are few. This may seem outrageous, but think of it this way:
With DLCs game companies can afford to continuously add new content to any game (before the game had to VERY succesful). This keeps the community hooked for longer and will increase the odds of expanding the community. And while DLCs are not as big as they could be, there will be more of them (at small prices) which in the end will give the same result.

 

The bad news is that the DLC system is very easily exploitable. This has created such horrible phenomenons as "pay2win" and "day1 DLC".
This is not how DLCs should be. If a company releases day1 DLC, then it is obvious that these things were could easily have been included in the final game. However, this is not where Rockstar is at.


kvic
  • kvic

    Grand PooBar

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2008
  • United-States

#11

Posted 19 November 2013 - 12:33 PM

Haven't you given enough money to Rockstar ,if you want to throw some away send it to me.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users