M2 Wiki displays removed content
- Topic Archived
- Topic Archived
5 years ago#1
Interesting find. I knew there was content removed from the finished game, but not this much...wow. I traded my copy on Goozex a few days ago after receiving no help from tech support on a game stopping bug.
Some cut features/missions
00_70_00_0100: Missing In Action
This site also has some info on an entire job system for the player...there is quite a bit there:
5 years ago#2
Damn, thats quite of chunk of stuff there. I knew they removed things but had no idea it was this much and I still enjoy the game its just I wish it was more complete.
5 years ago#3
With all this news of stuff axed from the game and their half-assed DLC, Mafia 2 will be the last game I purchase from 2k.
5 years ago#4
People always jump the gun and make quick assumptions when it comes down to this. Have you stopped to think that all of this content may have been their initial goal for the game but they had to remove it for any number of reasons? Time constraints, they couldn't get it to work as they planned, anything. Just having names of stuff means pretty much nothing.
We already waited 9 years for the game, I know for sure I wouldn't have wanted to wait another 2-5 because of some content that they were having problems with.
Besides that list is mostly just mission names.. It could be as simple as their first plans for missions/mission structure which again just didn't fit so they scrapped them.
XBL & PSN: OMGFather
5 years ago#5
Eh. I know plenty have and will continue freaking out about this, but honestly, those who do really don't know better. Features get cut all the time in the development process and often there's plenty of little leftover tidbits people can find. What many can't seem to grasp is why these features were cut. Perhaps they were glitchy, not well done, outright boring or even replaced by something with a different name. Hell, perhaps they were simply scrapped cutscenes for story ideas they ultimately felt didn't fit into the game for whatever reason.
5 years ago#6
Right... Im sorry, but no. The game was in development for OVER 3 years. The devs just like Ubisoft, cut content from the game, finished and not finished, so they could kick it in just weeks and months after release for extra bucks. **** them! Not buying another one of their games, not buying their DLC, and basically not buying their BS!
Its funny too because I KNEW this was gonna happen 3 years ago. I professed on all the topics about DLC when people would say stuff like "Whats wrong with continued support" or "They're just trying to make money."
Eventually, the devs would come down to cutting content so that a game that would be 100% 10 years ago is now more like 80% Im sure that number will keep reducing too. There's no regulation on what devs sell to us which essentially could be worth ****. Crackdown 2, Mafia 2, Assassins Creed 2, Dragon Age(ridiculous prices for DLC), Red Dead Revolver, and a few others I cant think of off the top of my head.
Valve and blizzard are really the only 2 companies I trust to make a worthwhile game and not try and **** their consumers with it. The free range modding capabilities of their games, the whole sale content from the start, and the tech support in general blows other out of the water. Relic isnt bad either, the DoW and CoH games are all amazing and are worth the content per dollar ratio. Whereas Dragon Age having a lot of content in the game ALMOST equal to an elder scrolls game, but then charges like $9 for DLC that takes 45 mins to play through. That $9 is 1/5 of the game and the game certainly took longer and had more content than ~4hrs and 1-2 unique item sets.
There needs to be a regulation, a company that can't be bought out, that sets the price for the content of the game, possibly federal. Length of game, replay value, graphics, voice over. All that needs to be accounted for in determining a price. Instead we get crackdown 2, which is a rehash, low replay value, NO STORY, repetitive gameplay, with DLC announced 2 days after its release...
Normal was defined by an arrogant or closed minded man who knew too little.
5 years ago#7
Posted 10/9/2010 2:39:16 PM
Right... Im sorry, but no. The game was in development for OVER 3 years. The devs just like Ubisoft, cut content from the game, finished and not finished, so they could kick it in just weeks and months after release for extra bucks.
Yes, where is all this restored content they've cut from the game? If they have so much of it intended for release to nickle and dime customers they should be able to put it out on a pretty consistent basis. Instead we have all of one piece of cut content that was released early and an upcoming DLC which, last I saw, has a TBA release date.
Rebel against the power! Anger is good! You know everything about everything and use this grand knowledge to write big paragraphs about boycotting! Derp!
5 years ago#8
Length of game, replay value, graphics, voice over. All that needs to be accounted for in determining a price.
So an RPG is going to cost many times more than a racing game?
This pricing system isn't necessarily going to save us any money. How do we know they won't start the price range at what it is now and only go up from there? So we'll still be paying the same amount for games of little technical content, but end up spending a lot more for others.
In an ideal world something like that could work for our benefit, but in the real world we know companies will just end up manipulating that to their advantage anyways.
You can't apply a step by step universal standard to entertainment. It's far too subjective and unreliable. Your proposed pricing method is based on your PERSONAL opinions of those games. Why should you set the standard? How about the guy that thought Dragon Age and Mafia 2 were awesome? Or the guy who thinks Dragon Age was awesome but Mafia 2 sucked? Or that Dragon Age sucked but Mafia 2 was awesome?
Maybe with clearly defined technical features (or lack thereof), like say multiplayer, it should affect the price. However once you go into details like dialogue, replay value, graphics, etc, it's impossible (and entirely unfit for judging quality over quantity) to find one solid measurement to apply to every game. Portal has less dialogue than your average RPG but it had more personality and memorable dialogue than most.
5 years ago#9
I've seen this a while ago, i was suprized how much i got jipped out of...I definately won't be buying their should-have-been-in-the-game-but-we're-going-to-milk-you-for-another-$100 DLC garbage.
(Topic Creator)5 years ago#10
You make some valid points, but if you go digging through the content, from scripts to textures, will find that the amount of time that they must have spent on the cut content was rather large. The game was in development for 6 years (I believe) and a large portion of that could very likely have been hell in one way or another (who knows). With that said I doubt anyone who has played the game can deny that the developers at the very least held back in certain areas. Now as to whether this was done to recoup profits through DLC, which would make sense - as I understand the game is not likely to make a profit, or if the exclusion was due to the game development veering off into vaporware territory....again who knows. They got a lot of things right but then neglected to expand on them creating a rather shallow and boring experience. This game could have been huge.