Why, you are absolutely right. Planes never crash, ships never sink, trains never derail, cars never crash, wars and other acts of violence never break out, natural disasters never happen, crazed fans never harm or kill bystanders, no one ever ODs on drugs, etc. etc.

Good to know.

Pay attention to the Steam Sales. During the "Perils of Summer Sale", they had all 3 DLCs (at that time) for $9.99. I was stupid and didn't get them then when I bought the base game, because I didn't realize how much I'd end up liking the game.

I've actually bought each of the Borderlands DLCs at full price ($9.99 each), and for me they were worth the investment. Since I also got the base game for $9.99 during the sale, in all I haven't paid more than the GOTY edition.

The Borderlands DLCs are really good fun. I highly recommend getting them the next time they go on sale. I don't know if Gearbox will be willing to make all 4 available together for $9.99, but seriously, if you can get them all for $20 or less, it's a steal.

Heh... oops. Sorry, I forgot that. ^^;;

However, isn't that more Microsoft's doing than Valve's doing? As I understand things now for the future, Valve would rather gamers not buy Portal 2 for Xbox if they want to get the best possible experience playing it, mainly because of Microsoft's limitations on DLC and patches and such. Valve could never do for TF2 on XBox what they've done for TF2 on PC, and the only reason for this is because Microsoft won't allow it.

I highly agree, except I won't say it's the "only" good DLC. Despite costing money, I've really enjoyed the Borderlands DLC. Great side stories with great humor, some good game enhancements, and most importantly MORE GUNS! :D

They are largely moot now, as buying the GOTY edition gets you all of the DLC... but they do seem to be guilty of making you actually download the DLC rather than having on the physical disc when you buy retail. This doesn't affect me as I bought the game and its DLCs previously, on Steam.

But, yes, Valve with L4D(2) and TF2 are a fine example of great DLC systems. :D

Yeah, you pretty much summed up my feelings better than my long-winded response below.

Regarding "what is a 'complete' game?", though. I'd say, a game that at least has a full story arc. Incomplete and using DLC for money grubbing would be something like releasing the first game as, half the story, and then having to buy DLC to finish that story. i.e. it wouldn't be an extension of the game; it would be building to the completion of the game.

Though not quite DLC, this is kind of how I look at Valve with the HL2 episodes. Episodic content is annoying like that when you have to wait so long to get to the next chapter. Even more so when you are really enjoying the story. (and I love the HL2 story)

Like I said in my comment below, "Borderlands" *might* feel kind of like an incomplete game due to its weak story, BUT it's such a fun game that you do feel you got a complete game in the base game, and the DLC then extends and enhances, as DLC should.

Also, like I said in the post below, I have never bought an "incomplete" game in the sense of this post, and I never intend to.

While I agree with this in principle, I have not yet bought a game that I felt the base-game was incomplete and the DLC felt like a money-grubbing scam. The closest was maybe Borderlands, mainly because the base game storyline was pretty weak. BUT, it was still a damn fun game, even only in the base game. The DLC enhances and extends the game and makes it significantly better, to the extent one might argue that the DLC should have just been part of the original, but I don't fault them too much for it. I think GearBox did alright with their compromise between putting out a game within a reasonable timeframe and putting out a game with all possible content (including stuff you may not have thought of or developed yet).

A lot of people hate on Bioshock 2, especially for PC after the recent no-DLC-for-PC debacle. For my part, I was very disappointed that Minerva's Den DLC was not coming for PC, mainly because the console users said it was quite good. But, I'd already felt I bought a complete game, so even with this, it was a case of missing out on truly EXTRA content. (And, apparently, they've decided to port Minerva's Den after all... someday)

And, as for DLC done right, one only has to look at Valve and everything they've done for TF2, L4D, and L4D2. And, they release it for free!

I agree that I hate the idea of a developer releasing an incomplete game and releasing the story piece by piece, and I WILL NOT buy such a game. I'm keeping my eye on Bioshock Infinite, and if it is anything like that or in any way heavily DLC based, I will skip it. I play games on my computer, and I'm not going to buy an incomplete game that also includes the risk of not being able to get the complete content. If a company does go the incomplete game, bit by bit route, then, assuming it does look like a really good game, I'll just wait for a GOTY edition that bundles all of the DLC and main game into one (and probably save a ton of money, too).

So, I hear you about wanting a complete game. I agree that DLC *can* be a scam. However, in my experience, DLC has been a good thing, for the most part (or, at least not a hindrance, in the case of BS2). And my money will only go towards supporting games which, if they must have DLC, do DLC right.

Can I assume that you think the rating system for movies is equally pointless?

Wouldn't that be a reasonable indicator that whatever it is you are rating is quite possibly not the cause of the violence?

Hypothesis: We have X% of violence in children because Y is unregulated by age-restriction ratings.
Experiment: Regulate Y by age-restriction ratings.
Result: We still have X% of violence.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is rejected.

Tentative interpretation: Y is not the (most significant) cause of violence in children. Further study along these lines recommended.

If you don't automatically accept that violent video games lead to violent behavior, then a rating system with 100% compliance can be successful by simply allowing parents to have a reasonable, standardized assessment of whether or not the content of a game is age-appropriate for their child. It can also be argued to be successful, because it may show that access to violent content or not in games does not significantly correlate to violent behavior.

It doesn't have to be the biggest crater. Just big enough. An impact of that magnitude would have major catastrophic effects on the whole planet.

And, for what it's worth, I think pretty much the entire northern hemisphere of Mars wins any "I've seen bigger" contest. Link (and a PDF link for those without Nature access)

I am not an astronomer, but it is my understanding (mainly from Carl Sagan's "Pale Blue Dot") that the asteroids are more likely leftovers from the formation of the solar system that, when caught between the gravity of the sun and tidal forces from Jupiter never got the chance to accrete into a planet. So, rather than being a destroyed planet, they are a planet that never was.

I don't know if there has been any new data to confirm or refute that hypothesis, though.

Very late in my reply, but thanks for this. It looks interesting, and I'm definitely adding it to my reading list. :)

Not to discount the efforts of such companies, but I will be ready to get really excited about them and see the hope they offer when they actually put a person into orbit.

I'm sure it's coming, and I'm waiting, but I have a hard time getting excited about it until it happens. There won't be much, if any, profit from space for quite some time, and it's kind of hard to imagine modern corporations, with their short-sightedness and desire for immediate return, to actually commit and go through with such a huge investment.

If it happens, then GREAT. Seriously. But, for me, this is more of an "I'll believe it when I see it" situation. :-/

And a great many of us were not alive when this happened. Along with GPP, I'd like to see another man on the Moon. Yes, the United States did it. Yes, we Americans briefly touched greatness. Yes, we took our first baby steps out into the next great frontier and the only real long term future for humanity. And then, like frightened or chastised children, we fled back to the safety of our mother's skirt and have remained there ever since.

I am not discounting at all the greatness achieved by unmanned exploratory missions. I think they are some of the finest achievements of humankind (We've sent probes out of the solar system!). But, I can't help but feel a thrill that some humans somewhere on the planet are actively working towards once again stepping away from our mother. And I wouldn't be able to help feeling some measure of pride to see that happen again. And I would be even more proud to see humans take further steps out into the solar system.

And, I couldn't care less if they are speaking Chinese when they do it.

My pleasure. Happy to help. :)

If you do end up in Bangkok, then getting together for a drink or three is not out of the question. :)