Lightning Returns will have Lara Croft DLC at launch

Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII will have Lara Croft DLC at launch!

Attachment 51762

It was announced earlier today on Square Enix's YouTube channel as well as Tomb Raider's Facebook page that Lightning will have a new DLC outfit for launch! Fans of both iconic series will be able to enjoy playing as Lightning while she roams around in Lara Croft's outfit as seen most recently in Square Enix's newest release of Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition. Aside from the outfit itself, she also has the wear and tear appearance of someone who's been literally fighting for their life in the wild. Lightning's sword appears to be Lara's pick axe and she also wields a riot shield.

It will be a treat to see two of the gaming industries leading ladies put together in some fashion. It leads me to wonder, would you be interested in picking up the new Tomb Raider if it had Lightning DLC? Are you as excited about this outfit as I am? Do you plan on getting this DLC?

Sephiroth's Let's get sexy Edition:

SOLDIER 1st - check
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800...0/534/6q7o.jpg
Spira Summoner - check
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800...0/545/h4dk.jpg
Midgar Flower Girl
Lara Croft

"Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII - Tomb Raider DLC T..." - Videos - Viddler

I thought this meant we would actually be able to play as Lara Croft.

*leaves*

Don't forget we will also have the Japanese language voices as a launch DLC as well. For the first two weeks it will be free. So those that aren't getting the game in that time can still download that and get it for free in that time frame, before it becomes a paid DLC.

As for the Lara costume, this comes as no surprise to me though. We had that gimmicky N7 armor DLC for XIII-2 so I was expecting something similar in this game too. Square, quit with the costume DLC. Give us some story/sidequest DLC, and I'll eat that trout up. I don't care for costumes, I'm sorry.

I bet Square execs are literally drooling over all the money they will make from these downloadable outfits.

I don't see how it is any different than all the DLCs that contain guns or other equipment for other games. The gear does come with its own effects and stats, after all. It's not purely cosmetic.

That girl looks like she could use a good wash. I like how she's all grubby and dirty and then her pink hair is still glossy and perfectly styled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyblade

I don't see how it is any different than all the DLCs that contain guns or other equipment for other games. The gear does come with its own effects and stats, after all. It's not purely cosmetic.

---

You answered your own question. The cosmetic component of it is what makes it different, and, in my opinion a huge money maker for Square-Enix since it panders to two types of audiences (those who want functionality and those who want pretty outfits).

This is also the type of DLC that I fully support since it is clear these are extra things for those willing to pay for them, and not a carved-out section of the game reserved for 'future wallets use' (i.e., the XIII-2 battle arena).

Extra things? These costumes are already on the disc. You're basically reaching into your wallet, and paying to unlock it from its shackles. That is not good for business. It doesn't matter if it's $2 or $5, the point is it's already in the game. But because it's released individually as DLC, people are suckered into thinking that it's new content. The smurf it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psychotic

That girl looks like she could use a good wash. I like how she's all grubby and dirty and then her pink hair is still glossy and perfectly styled.

---

I was scratching my head trying to figure out what I found unnatural about the pic and you just hit the nail on the head. A lot of these costumes look unnatural on her so I have no reason to be surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noctis Caelum

Extra things? These costumes are already on the disc. You're basically reaching into your wallet, and paying to unlock it from its shackles. That is not good for business. It doesn't matter if it's $2 or $5, the point is it's already in the game. But because it's released individually as DLC, people are suckered into thinking that it's new content. The smurf it is.

---

Just when I thought I couldn't hate the concept of DLC any more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Murder

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyblade

I don't see how it is any different than all the DLCs that contain guns or other equipment for other games. The gear does come with its own effects and stats, after all. It's not purely cosmetic.

---

You answered your own question. The cosmetic component of it is what makes it different, and, in my opinion a huge money maker for Square-Enix since it panders to two types of audiences (those who want functionality and those who want pretty outfits).

---

The guns or armors DLC for Mass Effect 2 or Mass Effect 3 were both cosmetic and functional. Heck, most weapon DLCs I've seen do change the way weapons look, and character skins are already a huge DLC market that no one complains about (League of Legends, anyone?).

Quote:

---

This is also the type of DLC that I fully support since it is clear these are extra things for those willing to pay for them, and not a carved-out section of the game reserved for 'future wallets use' (i.e., the XIII-2 battle arena).

---

Agreed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noctis Calum

Extra things? These costumes are already on the disc. You're basically reaching into your wallet, and paying to unlock it from its shackles. That is not good for business. It doesn't matter if it's $2 or $5, the point is it's already in the game. But because it's released individually as DLC, people are suckered into thinking that it's new content. The smurf it is.

---

Actually, there are plenty of similar DLCs that are not included on the in-game content. Did you play Dissidia Duodecim? None of the rare DLC skins for pre-ordering (such as Tifa's Enforcer outfit) were included on the in-game code. Neither was Aeris as an assist character. Or the N7 Armor in Final Fantasy XIII-2.

There's also the multi-national release thing to think about. Some of these bonuses could have been released, as paid DLC, in the original Japanese release. Just because the localized version came out six months later, we should get everything that came out in between the two for free? Sure, it's added on the disc, the data is tiny and there is plenty of extra room. That doesn't mean that it was created specifically to be held back.

Even then, most people don't complain about cosmetic things being locked to a disc. It's when core content such as extra characters, levels, and story sections are put in that it gets to be a problem. This is clearly bonus content meant to cross-promote the games, it is not a core part of the game. Who cares?

I can't wait for this. I will be getting any and all DLCs for this game that I can, cause I can. LOL

Instead of offering just outfits they should full on have that person (Lara Croft, Aeris, Cloud!) replace Lightning as DLC. I guarantee that'd be a lot more popular, particularly if you changed the voice too. Lightning's voice grates on me, she just sounds either permanently tired or like she's clenching her teeth.

When I bought the collector's edition I also bout the HD Tomb Raider trilogy in the same order, so as luck would have it I'll be spending time with both these ladies in the future :smug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psychotic

Instead of offering just outfits they should full on have that person (Lara Croft, Aeris, Cloud!) replace Lightning as DLC. I guarantee that'd be a lot more popular, particularly if you changed the voice too. Lightning's voice grates on me, she just sounds either permanently tired or like she's clenching her teeth.

---

Of course Psychotic says it. FYI. That'd be weird. Which idea is better? Lara or Cloud saying all of the same lines Lightning was supposed to say or each having their own individual take on the story..?

Saints Row style would be best. Usually the same lines but their own little deviations every now and then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psychotic

Instead of offering just outfits they should full on have that person (Lara Croft, Aeris, Cloud!) replace Lightning as DLC. I guarantee that'd be a lot more popular, particularly if you changed the voice too. Lightning's voice grates on me, she just sounds either permanently tired or like she's clenching her teeth.

---

Not only would doing this make me willing to buy a game I have no intention of playing, but I would also purchase as much of the DLC as I possibly could. This would be amazing. xD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToriJ

Just when I thought I couldn't hate the concept of DLC any more.

---

You seriously didn't know? This thing has been around since like 2008.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToriJ

Just when I thought I couldn't hate the concept of DLC any more.

---

You seriously didn't know? This thing has been around since like 2008.

---

The rock I live under is of reinforced steel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToriJ

Just when I thought I couldn't hate the concept of DLC any more.

---

Not all DLC is like this. It's very easy to tell when something is though. If it's a costume or something, and it's less than 20MB, then it's just a dead giveaway. Or Day 1 DLC in general is an absolute dead giveaway, no matter what the size is. (Unless it's too big that they just couldn't fit it on the disc, but even then it should be free if you already bought the game.)

There are legit DLCs out there. But I think that varies person to person. A lot of people like cosmic appearance DLCs. And I'm not gonna judge them for that. However I just simply cannot justify spending money on outfits in a game. If it's a large collection for a cheap price, I might be willing, but it is really rare. The stuff that I normally am suckered into is story based DLC, especially if it adds at least 5 hours to the game. Achievements are a nice little bonus too but not necessary.

Trust me, not all DLC is bad. It's just, 90% of it (and that's being generous) is a developer just taking out a knife and gouging out your eyesockets until you bleed out more money. It wasn't long ago that "EXPANSION PACKS" were legitimate. But then DLC rolled around along with the next gen (at the time) and just exploited everything. The worst bit just happens to be this Day 1 DLC bulltrout. Hands down.

If you want an example of legitimate DLC, check out the Skyrim DLCs. I'm not even a fan of Skyrim, but those DLCs add like 20 hours of gameplay. Easily the best DLC I've ever seen for a game and worth the price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noctis Caelum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToriJ

Just when I thought I couldn't hate the concept of DLC any more.

---

Not all DLC is like this. It's very easy to tell when something is though. If it's a costume or something, and it's less than 20MB, then it's just a dead giveaway. Or Day 1 DLC in general is an absolute dead giveaway, no matter what the size is. (Unless it's too big that they just couldn't fit it on the disc, but even then it should be free if you already bought the game.)

There are legit DLCs out there. But I think that varies person to person. A lot of people like cosmic appearance DLCs. And I'm not gonna judge them for that. However I just simply cannot justify spending money on outfits in a game. If it's a large collection for a cheap price, I might be willing, but it is really rare. The stuff that I normally am suckered into is story based DLC, especially if it adds at least 5 hours to the game. Achievements are a nice little bonus too but not necessary.

---

You can't justify spending money on outfits. That's great. Then don't. That doesn't mean that there is anything at all wrong with a company offering cosmetic looks for DLC. Even on day 1.

Quote:

---

Trust me, not all DLC is bad. It's just, 90% of it (and that's being generous) is a developer just taking out a knife and gouging out your eyesockets until you bleed out more money. It wasn't long ago that "EXPANSION PACKS" were legitimate. But then DLC rolled around along with the next gen (at the time) and just exploited everything. The worst bit just happens to be this Day 1 DLC bulltrout. Hands down.

---

Actually, about 90% of DLC comes out months after the game does. Only one of XIII-2's Coliseum fights was already in existence on launch day, and only two of the outfits (If I am remembering correctly). All the others were made, developed, and sold afterward. If you need some further evidence of this, look to Mass Effect 3, where development of the Leviathan DLC was brought to a complete standstill as all the resources were switched over into creating the Extended Cut DLC, to appease the angry fans.

I can't think of a single game where all over even the majority of the DLC was actually created prior to launch.

What's more, cosmetic DLCs, even if finished before the launch of game, are rarely completed before game finalization, which is usually close to a month long process that gives the artistic team (who are the primary ones who work on cosmetic DLC) plenty of time to flesh out some add-ons.

Quote:

---

If you want an example of legitimate DLC, check out the Skyrim DLCs. I'm not even a fan of Skyrim, but those DLCs add like 20 hours of gameplay. Easily the best DLC I've ever seen for a game and worth the price.

---

Or look at most of the DLC for the Mass Effect series. Or the DLC scenarios for Final Fantasy XIII-2. Or most of the DLC scenarios for the Dragon Age series. Or any of the DLC for Fire Emblem Awakening. Or any of hundreds of others.

DLC is fine (how nice of you to forgive a game that you're a fan of while criticizing others). And there is absolutely nothing wrong with cosmetic DLC being offered at any point, even launch day. It's cosmetic, it affects almost nothing except how things look, and it's completely optional.

The problem is when story-content is being cut to be put on DLC, and that is far, far rarer than you make it out to be (with the worst offender I can remember being the From the Ashes DLC from Mass Effect 3).

Whether the DLC is on disc or not is really not important. Most day-one DLC is either on disc or so small that it would have been unproblematic to put it on the disc if they had wanted to. What you need to ask yourself is "if DLC was not technologically possible, would this have been in the game from the beginning of?" If you feel confident that the answer to this is yes for whichever DLC you're considering, then it's bad DLC and you shouldn't give them their money just to make a point.

Technically, it is fully possible for day-one DLC to be developed in the time between the developers sent the game off to the disc printing press, delivered copies to rating companies, and so forth, and before the game was available in stores. They *could* have spent this time developing more stuff for the game, and then we enter a sort of gray area.

Personally, I especially notice a reduction in stuff such as costumes in game series that used to have a ton of them, only to push these through DLC later. This example is specific to certain game series, but to me a pretty obvious case of spending less time developing the game and charging the same for it, for so to make some extra bucks later, and it's not just a little bit of extra bucks either. If a game usually has 4 costumes per character, but now suddenly only have two included and two as DLC, the DLC will probably put those costumes at 1-2 dollars for each costume, making the extra cost to get the same amount as pre-DLC about 12-24 dollars. Suddenly, a game with the same amount of extra stuff as you're used to costs 80 bucks instead of 60.

To add to this, extra costumes usually take a pretty miniscule amount of time compared to the total development of the game. Many only add a few details and change a few colors to existing skins, and I bet many of them are in reality discarded main design ideas. Charging two dollars for each little costume is in most cases nothing but a ripoff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

Whether the DLC is on disc or not is really not important. Most day-one DLC is either on disc or so small that it would have been unproblematic to put it on the disc if they had wanted to. What you need to ask yourself is "if DLC was not technologically possible, would this have been in the game from the beginning of?" If you feel confident that the answer to this is yes for whichever DLC you're considering, then it's bad DLC and you shouldn't give them their money just to make a point.

Technically, it is fully possible for day-one DLC to be developed in the time between the developers sent the game off to the disc printing press, delivered copies to rating companies, and so forth, and before the game was available in stores. They *could* have spent this time developing more stuff for the game, and then we enter a sort of gray area.

Personally, I especially notice a reduction in stuff such as costumes in game series that used to have a ton of them, only to push these through DLC later. This example is specific to certain game series, but to me a pretty obvious case of spending less time developing the game and charging the same for it, for so to make some extra bucks later, and it's not just a little bit of extra bucks either. If a game usually has 4 costumes per character, but now suddenly only have two included and two as DLC, the DLC will probably put those costumes at 1-2 dollars for each costume, making the extra cost to get the same amount as pre-DLC about 12-24 dollars. Suddenly, a game with the same amount of extra stuff as you're used to costs 80 bucks instead of 60.

To add to this, extra costumes usually take a pretty miniscule amount of time compared to the total development of the game. Many only add a few details and change a few colors to existing skins, and I bet many of them are in reality discarded main design ideas. Charging two dollars for each little costume is in most cases nothing but a ripoff.

---

What games do you remember having tons of costumes? I never remember having that many outfit choices in any game I played.

I agree with you that the "if it would normally be a part of the game", but I find very few DLCs where that is actually the case.

Most of the "tales of" games, star ocean, at least the third.

DLC's I buy tend to be related to adding to a game in the form on content. I do not find that extra costumes for games add anything to the gameplay, so iI tend to avoid them. League of legends is pretty bad for it, as mos of the additonal content you can pay for with real cash is costumes that don't affect the game at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

Most of the "tales of" games, star ocean, at least the third.

---

Now compare this to the dozens of games which now have costume DLC which never had costume choices before. Like Final Fantasy.

Why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

Why?

---

Because you're grouping most of the industry together based on a practice that 99% of them never followed.

Before the rise of DLC, changeable costumes in games were rare. If they existed at all, they were usually a result of gear that changed your appearance, with each piece having it's own look, and even that was uncommon.

It was almost completely unheard of for games to feature anything more than that, especially bonus outfits that recreate characters from other games.

As you said, "consider if it would be in the game if DLC wasn't an option". Well, let's consider that. How many cosmetic options did we get in Final Fantasy games before DLC? We had Dress-spheres in X-2, and that was it. And if there was a "Lara Croft" Dress-sphere, I missed it.

I said personally, and i also specified which game series I was referring to. Maybe I play these games a lot more than you do, and that's why I noticed it. It was also just one example.

However, day one DLC is another example, and there's a lot of that too, even if some of it possibly is developed after the normal development period is over. Then we also have timed console exclusives that users of the other console needs to pay extra to get when the time exclusivity is over, even if this content was obviously developed before the game was released. Don't even get me started on preorder exclusives and retailer exclusives that the rest of the customers can pay extra to get later. I loathe those too.

They need to launch a DLC that allows you to play as Morgan Freeman instead of Lightning. They do that, I'm in.

I still find the idea of Lightning not wearing combat suitable clothes distasteful, but insofar as the effect of these kinds of DLC, I can tolerate it. Final Fantasy never had changeable costumes, and these are not just aesthetic effects, so fine. I still find their inclusion has an impact on the characterisation but look it's the third Final Fantasy XIII game and god willing it will be the last so I'm happy to look the other way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jiro

I still find the idea of Lightning not wearing combat suitable clothes distasteful

---

Curious: Why? She's never worn combat suitable clothes. In I'd guess around 90% of Final Fantasy characters never wore combat suitable clothes. There are undoubtedbly some Knights or something that can make up the other 10% xD

I don't care much for DLC, but in this case it makes sense to not include it in the game. I think she looks pretty great in the outfit, though. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loony BoB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jiro

I still find the idea of Lightning not wearing combat suitable clothes distasteful

---

Curious: Why? She's never worn combat suitable clothes. In I'd guess around 90% of Final Fantasy characters never wore combat suitable clothes. There are undoubtedbly some Knights or something that can make up the other 10% xD

---

Heh. I actually read an article which was interviewing an armorer/armor historian about video game armor, and how effective it would be in combat. You'd be surprised how few characters, even who wear full armor, are actually geared for combat in video games. The Warrior of Light's armor from Dissidia was ruined by the horns which, in addition to being heavy, also provide great leverage for anyone trying to break your neck. But Kain's Dragoon armor was actually one of the more effective armor sets reviewed.

Quote:

---

I don't care much for DLC, but in this case it makes sense to not include it in the game. I think she looks pretty great in the outfit, though. ;)

---

I agree, the outfit works well on her.

I would love to see that article, if you know where it is!

Seconded. That article seems very interesting! Me want!

Here you go.

I hope that works right. That sort of article is always a little finicky.

"Plays game set in a fantasy world, can't suspend disbelief for inconvenient outfits"

:roll:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyblade

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loony BoB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jiro

I still find the idea of Lightning not wearing combat suitable clothes distasteful

---

Curious: Why? She's never worn combat suitable clothes. In I'd guess around 90% of Final Fantasy characters never wore combat suitable clothes. There are undoubtedbly some Knights or something that can make up the other 10% xD

---

Heh. I actually read an article which was interviewing an armorer/armor historian about video game armor, and how effective it would be in combat. You'd be surprised how few characters, even who wear full armor, are actually geared for combat in video games. The Warrior of Light's armor from Dissidia was ruined by the horns which, in addition to being heavy, also provide great leverage for anyone trying to break your neck. But Kain's Dragoon armor was actually one of the more effective armor sets reviewed.

---

I'd like them to review FF11 armor. A lot of that stuff actually looks like it would work pretty well.