Borderlands DLC 'The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned' Announced

135
Borderlands publisher 2K Games has announced the first batch of downloadable content for Gearbox's upcoming shooter-RPG, titled The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned.

"Tasked with keeping the workers of Jakobs Cove alive, Dr. Ned... does his job a little too well, creating zombies and other abominations that now run rampant in this region," 2K explains, describing it as a "full-fledged expansion." The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned will bring "new enemies, new quests and rare loot drops" for $10 (800 Microsoft Points).

In August, Gearbox CEO Randy Pitchford enthused "People are going to be surprised when they find out how quickly we're coming, and with what content we're coming."

Borderlands will hit Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 on October 20, with the PC version pushed back until October 26. The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned arrives "later this year."

From The Chatty
  • reply
    October 16, 2009 6:16 AM

    Congratulations, Gearbox, you just cemented my decision not to buy this game.

    "People are going to be surprised when they find out how quickly we're coming, and with what content we're coming"

    He's right. I gave them more credit than that-- I don't know why. This studio has failed to ever deliver an AAA title and this looks like it will be no different.

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 6:20 AM

      I also am completely turned off by this. DLC! Because 60 bucks is not enough for a game anymore. Keep it.

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 6:41 AM

        $60? poor console suckers...

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 6:42 AM

        You're probably the first in line for Modern Warfare 2 @ that price.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 7:20 AM

          What are trying to say, exactly? And how does it have anything to do with what were talking about. For the record I got MW for PC as I always do with competetive MP shooters.

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 9:58 AM

            COD:MW2 is $60 on the PC

            • reply
              October 16, 2009 10:18 AM

              Yeah, just another example of why Activision sucks a$$. I'll wait and get it cheap on some inevitable Steam sale. Easiest way to avoid getting ripped off by ActiSuck. ;)

              • reply
                October 16, 2009 10:24 AM

                It took like a year for COD4 to get a Steam sale, so I wouldn't hold my breath ;)

                • reply
                  October 17, 2009 6:44 PM

                  ::: shrug ::: So be it. I have plenty of games to play - I can win the waiting game. :)

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 6:58 AM

        How would you feel if they called it an expansion pack and charged $20 more?

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 7:16 AM

          If the game rocks, SOLD! Expansion packs have alot of content and are usually released after the originals legs are tired.

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 7:20 AM

            Releasing ~1/3 of the content, at ~1/3 of the price, and under a different name, is for some reason unacceptable?

            • reply
              October 16, 2009 7:35 AM

              Perfectly acceptable, but i'd personally be more receptive if it was announced later, closer to the release so it doesn't seem like such a money grab. At least wait a WEEK or two before announcing, then it looks like the game is doing well and it's worth supporting additional content, rather than additional content withheld to sell later.

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 6:21 AM

      Looks good to me.

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 6:27 AM

        yeah, I agree.. I'll be annoyed if it is short, but if it has a decent amount of content, I'll pick up the DLC for 10$ to keep the fun going.. Besides, every game seems to need zombies these days..

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 6:22 AM

      Judge it by what you get in the box, not what else you can optionally buy.

      If the game is short and lacking content then by all means complain about that, but so far nothing has indicated that.

      I presume you're using OS X or Linux as well since Windows was offensively released with multiple versions where you could pay to get more. And you've never bought a car that had optional extras or... I could go on.

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 6:28 AM

        What you can optionally buy should have gone into the box from day one if it was available from day one. Otherwise there is no reason to spend the development resources on it.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 6:31 AM

          Where do you read that it is available on day one? It says: Coming later this year.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 8:30 AM

          WAAAAAAAH I WANT MORE!!!!!!!

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 6:35 AM

        I agree that it should be judged by what's in the box. It's just a peeve of mine when DLC is announced before the game hits the shelves. Let people burn through the original content, and when they're craving more release it on all platforms not just 1 console.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 6:47 AM

          The game for the most part was done months ago.. What are the developers supposed to do while the game is in cert, scratch their asses?

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 7:10 AM

          You have to start the DLC early otherwise it comes out too late and isnt relelvant like the GTA DLC

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 7:13 AM

            I bet that irrelevant GTA DLC outsells this.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 7:59 AM

          I may be wrong, but I think this has only been announced because the images were leaked already.

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 8:30 AM

            That would actually work in favor of NOT announcing it. Those that are following the game closely can have hopes that more content will be introduced in the future. Those that get all pissy about DLC don't have anything to complain about.

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 6:28 AM

      Looks good to me. Other studios announce it 3 day after the game launched, but they worked on it before hand anyway.

      This I can optionally get so why not?

      Also the game was 30 dollar in the four pack.

      • Zek
        reply
        October 16, 2009 6:30 AM

        Why should any developer be working on DLC before the game is released?

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 6:32 AM

          Because it takes time to get DLC ready.

          Work on the PC version of GTA 4 started before the console version was finished. Same with WOW expansions. The work on the next one starts before the first one is finished

          • Zek
            reply
            October 16, 2009 6:45 AM

            I can understand starting it after the game goes gold. But their statement that this is a lot of content coming out shortly after launch is proof that they diverted employees away from the retail package to work on DLC that would cost extra money instead. When did this become acceptable?

            • reply
              October 16, 2009 6:51 AM

              I think the only difference is that other companies just didn't announce it. I'm fairly sure they all do it like that because you don't just come out with a concept and all the stuff you need in a week. If they want to provide DLC a month after launch or so, they have to start early.

            • reply
              October 16, 2009 6:51 AM

              The game was done months ago, and the art was probably done well before that.

            • reply
              October 16, 2009 6:56 AM

              again, talking like you work there and have any clue what their dev teams do...

              • reply
                October 16, 2009 4:21 PM

                I worked on the game. I helped finish Borderlands. When the cert process began, the majority of the artists and designers took some much needed time away. When certification was wrapping up a lot of the artists and designers were begging to get started on some kind of DLC. The devs (on the ground floor) were begging to create DLC before it was even a possibility. Why? Because we actually enjoy the game and wanted to continue working on it in some way. We didn't want to move on. The people working on this DLC are very passionate about their work and wanted to provide something more. DLC is not recycled content that was cut from the game. It's all new stuff that was conceptualized post certification of Borderlands.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 6:33 AM

          The MS certification process is pretty long iirc so they need to plan pretty well in advance if they want to release content say, 1 month after launch.

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 6:42 AM

            I've seen PS3 cert take even longer, but it varies from title to title. Even with work still going on bug fixes and cert issues, by that point much of the team has rolled off onto other things. Assume a game is "done" 2-3 months before ship in some cases, the rest is just cert/gold and manufacturing.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 6:44 AM

          because the game has been gold for 2 weeks and they aren't working on it anymore?

          • Zek
            reply
            October 16, 2009 6:48 AM

            If they actually started working on it 2 weeks ago and it's as much content as he makes it out to be then no way would it be ready by the end of the year. I doubt they would announce it so soon either.

            • reply
              October 16, 2009 6:55 AM

              how do you know... anything you just said?

              do you work there?
              are they in constant contact with your about their development times?

              • Zek
                reply
                October 16, 2009 7:04 AM

                I don't, but it's more likely than not and saying otherwise is pretty naive. Development takes time and they would be very very lucky to have any significant amount of employees completely free before the game goes gold.

                • reply
                  October 16, 2009 7:07 AM

                  I hate being on the same side as BC420, as I remember us having at it sometime in the past, but I have to agree, you have no idea what you are talking about. Testing, Certification, Production, it takes -months- after the game is all finished actual development. You have no idea of the process, dreg.

                  • Zek
                    reply
                    October 16, 2009 7:12 AM

                    And you don't think any sort of work continues after testing starts? From what I've heard about the bugs in the final game I should certainly hope they've been working on patches for before the game goes gold and after.

                  • reply
                    October 16, 2009 10:41 AM

                    hey i don't hold a grudge :) i'm sure whatever you were wrong about is irrelevant at this point. :p

                • reply
                  October 16, 2009 7:13 AM

                  I hate to be an ass, but you should look up what you're criticizing..

                  "And though the game's not out until October, it needs to be completed much sooner than that due to the need for testing. "You can subtract two and a half to three months for certification time," he says. "Subtract three months off of October and you're...now."

                  http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=1159

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 6:46 AM

          The game has been finished for a month, at least, for production. It's not like the put down the paper the day before and go "HUZZAH" and a billion copies of their game magically appear on store-shelves.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 8:22 AM

          Trivia: most expansion packs are started long before the game ships, some are even done (outside of polish) before the main game is done. If the game doesn't sell then the expansion gets canceled (though some of its contents may make it into patches as "bonuses")

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 10:21 AM

          I think Zek raises a more-than-fair question here in light of Nick's concerns about buggy AI. Sounds like they rushed the completion of this potentially cool game and are too worried about the DLC to get patches sorted out. Yikes. This game has definitely fallen from a must-own to a very serious wait-and-see. I do hope it's great but I'm starting to worry that it's only going to be so-so, at best. :(

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 6:30 AM

      Also: Coming later this year. I don't see any reason why this should be negative. Fallout 3 got DLC as well.

      If I don't want the DLC I don't buy it. No reason not to enjoy the game.

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 6:33 AM

      I will judge the standalone game but I understand the issue folks have with especially Day 1 DLC. Though no where does this article say Day 1 DLC.

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 6:34 AM

      Uhoh! They lost one sale!

      TIME TO CALL THE WAAAAAAAAAAAAAHMBULANCE

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 6:36 AM

        Never heard that one before!

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 6:37 AM

          Yeah, because some pimply neckbeard taking the time away from stuffing his face with cheetos to say "HURF DURF I AIN'T GONNA BUY DIS GAME CAUSE'A DLC HURRRR" is such an original thought.

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 7:27 AM

            Sucks when you get excited for a game, then read the news and learn if you want to see all it has to offer you have to buy it for xbox. That's how it turned out for GTA IV, which stinks.. but at least the game itself is awesome and has boatloads of content. Not everygame sells like GTA though.

            • reply
              October 16, 2009 7:34 AM

              All three platforms are getting the same DLC, and it's stuff that wouldn't have ever made it into the game in the first place. It's additional. It's secondary. It's something you don't need, and only have to buy if you -want-. There is nothing to bitch about.

              • reply
                October 16, 2009 7:36 AM

                You must be awful busy playing bitch police around here. LOL

                • reply
                  October 16, 2009 7:37 AM

                  Naaahhh. For most games I let it slide. But sometimes I just gotta stick my neck out. Especially about games that are NOT EVEN RELEASED YET.

                  • reply
                    October 16, 2009 7:48 AM

                    Don't you mean sticking your pimply neckbeard out? Sorry, had to. Some people actually appreciate the knee jerk reactions more than the internet tough talkers that try to make them feel stupid for posting how they feel.

                    • reply
                      October 16, 2009 7:50 AM

                      I'm not an internet tough guy. In fact I'm not any of those three things except internet. Just because I get annoyed when whiny little boys complain about something they don't even want, doesn't make me an ITG. It makes me someone with a couple hours before they head into work and a sense of humour.

                      • reply
                        October 16, 2009 7:55 AM

                        No, it makes you a derisive, predictable, unwanted internet troll.

                        • reply
                          October 16, 2009 7:56 AM

                          A troll is someone who makes ignorant comments willfully in an attempt to annoy others.

                          Are you saying I'm a troll just because I disagree with you? That's pretty juvenile.

                          • reply
                            October 16, 2009 7:58 AM

                            Simply saying something is juvenile does not make it such. You're the one who introduced the pimply neckbeard thing into the thread. How about use an actual argument?

                            Here's one for you to chew on: Attractive girls would never know what a pimply neckbeard is. Knowing the phrase alone means you associate with such. Enjoy your day, fatty internet troll bitch.

                            • reply
                              October 16, 2009 8:00 AM

                              Haha, and what is your argument? That you are angry that a company is making extended content and selling their time for a premium? You are mad because they are making money from their hard work? You don't even have to buy it. No one is putting a gun to your head. You are crying for the sake of crying. But I'm done with this WZ, I've gotten banned once before, I'm not letting this be my second strike.

                        • reply
                          October 16, 2009 7:58 AM

                          Also, just for your reference mister Pneum0, Wayne Z is an actual ITG

                        • reply
                          October 16, 2009 5:13 PM

                          What does that make you then?

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 6:44 AM

      Annnd what's wrong with DLC again? Options = bad?

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 6:45 AM

        i'm boycotting their planned support for their product.

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 7:36 AM

        Maybe they should've diverted those resources to advertising, since nobody I've told about this game has heard of it. It's flown completely under the radar.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 8:40 AM

          Divert what resources? You mean the game programmers and artists? Or you mean money wise.. I guess they could just lay off a few devs..

          Or they could just let 2K take care of that since it's their job.

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 8:42 AM

            Don't expect Wayne Z to understand something so complex.

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 7:34 AM

      Not to mention there has been 0 AI displayed in any performance of this game, ever. Unrelated, but that's my main non-buying point.

      I have never purchased DLC and never will. In the golden age of PC gaming it was the mod community's job to expand games, and we did a better job overall than DLC has done in its history. Now games aren't moddable.

      Diablo-like games inherently have huge replay value. Pretty sure D2 never needed DLC and it's still going strong almost ten years later.

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 7:35 AM

        Not moddable to the extent they once were, I should add.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 7:39 AM

          you should try left 4 dead, tons of mods for that

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 7:43 AM

            Hate the game, think it's boring and the player base is lacking :\

            • reply
              October 16, 2009 10:59 AM

              18k is lacking?

              Wait... that's the PC versions number.

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 7:38 AM

        *cough* LoD
        *cough* Patches
        *Cough cough*

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 7:42 AM

          Patches are free improvements to a game.

          Free. Improvements.

          LOD was an expansion pack that fundamentally changed game mechanics, added new characters, thousands of new items, and properties. Balancing a game like D2 is a nightmare; more work went into LOD than goes into some entire games. Low-level game systems had to be completely rewritten in order to accomodate higher resolution, for instance.

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 7:45 AM

            And LoD cost five times what this costs. You get what you pay for, my dear friend.

            • reply
              October 16, 2009 7:48 AM

              It was $30, if I recall. For the hundreds of hours of gameplay it provided, there's no way some lame borderlands DLC can equal it.

              The game isn't even out, how could they know what players desired to see more of?

              • reply
                October 16, 2009 7:49 AM

                I don't know. They don't even know if anyone will buy there game. But at least they are supporting it. So the few of us faggots who -do- like the game, and -don't mind- paying for the DLC can have it.

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 7:44 AM

        There are tons of videos that show off the AI.

        Games weren't nearly as complex in the "golden age of PC gaming".

        There was no such thing as 'DLC', as we know it today, during D2's prime time. Instead D2 had the expansion pack "Lord of Destruction".

        Games have evolved; we expect a lot more from them than we did in the past, which is reflected in both their development costs and complexity.

        • reply
          October 16, 2009 7:47 AM

          They show the AI doing what? Running around in circles? Running straight toward the player? Those are the two AI behaviors I have seen in Borderlands. I would love to see more, but to my knowldge I've watched nearly every available gameplay video.

          Games weren't nearly as complex? You have no idea. Gaming hasn't become any more complex; if anything, it's been dumbed down.

          Like the other guy, you fail to see the difference between an expansion and DLC. They are not one and the same. I can't educate you if you've never educated yourself, or weren't around to play video games before all of them featured regenerating health.

          • reply
            October 16, 2009 8:01 AM

            Running around in circles? I have seen skags chase after players, leaping and scratching, even jumping onto a vantage point to get what seemed like a better attack angle. Looked good to me.

            Yes, games weren't nearly as complex. Saying otherwise, honestly, makes you look like a complete moron.

            Reasonable comparison between an old FPS, and a new FPS.
            http://www.sector808.org/wiki/_media/quake_1_screenshot_320x200_e1m3.png
            http://z.about.com/d/compactiongames/1/0/y/2/1/crysis_020.jpg

            DLC is a pretty broad term in comparison to "expansion pack". DLC could be the equivalent of an expansion pack. Or it could be a single new dress in The Sims for 50 cents..

            And please, how do you think I came across Scary's website




            • reply
              October 16, 2009 11:00 AM

              something tells me this guy has no idea who sCary is

              • reply
                October 16, 2009 6:36 PM

                Yeah, it just on the top of my head :D

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 10:45 AM

        Actually, you are wrong. DLC was called by another name back then - Expansion Packs.

      • reply
        October 18, 2009 6:27 AM

        Seems like AI isn't required to make a game people enjoy these days. Just look at Fallout 3. Theres nothing in that game you could really call AI. None of the enemies do anything interesting or tricky, but people still lap that shit up.

        • reply
          October 18, 2009 6:50 PM

          That might be because it is -awesome-.

          • reply
            October 19, 2009 7:52 AM

            yeah nothing in that game is alive long enough to make an intelligent decision anyway

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 7:47 AM

      IAWTP, I was kinda on the fence, now I'm sold.

      • reply
        October 16, 2009 8:31 AM

        oh wait, I read this wrong. I don't agree with this post at all. I'm the opposite in fact.

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 8:28 AM

      Your decision was cemented last week too.
      Dumbass troll.

    • reply
      October 16, 2009 4:31 PM

      Folks are already skeptical of Gearbox, their new game and the "RPS" genre... Frankly they just need to deliver a mind exploding experience with excellent execution on the PC (think L4D).

      I don't know if they've focused on that... All I've heard is "bazillion weapons." And funny clips of Claptrap. Deliver the goods and do it well. The rest of the marketing will follow.

      BTW whoever is behind marketing Borderlands needs to be fired.

Hello, Meet Lola