First Borderlands DLC Involves, Yep, Zombies

2K Games today announced the first DLC package for Borderlands, Gearbox's open-world "role-playing shooter" due to hit the PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 on Tuesday. "The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned" is the DLC's title.

A 2K release describes the pack's story thusly:

Tasked with keeping the workers of Jakobs Cove alive, Dr. Ned (who is not related to Dr. Zed from Fyrestone) does his job a little too well, creating zombies and other abominations that now run rampant in this region. Players will have to work alongside Dr. Ned as they embark on a quest to cure the inhabitants of Jakobs Cove in this full-fledged expansion filled with new enemies, new quests and rare loot drops.

The same release said only that "The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned" is "planned for release later this year." Price will be $US9.99 on PSN and for PC, 800 Microsoft points for the Xbox.

"The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned is in development at Gearbox Software and is the first in a series of downloadable expansions that will enhance the Borderlands mayhem in fun and exciting ways," says 2K.

WATCH MORE: Gaming News


Comments

    I remember the good ol' days when developers would release games whole, we didn't need to buy them in instalments.

      the game is whole. before people come in and start complaining that "they just want our money. this should have been in the game etc etc" pay attention to a games development.

      The game was finished months ago. Since then they spend time ironing out bugs and play testing etc etc. People seem to not realise this and think that the development process goes on until the game goes gold so they could just keep adding extra content until a week before the game hits shelves.

      Borderlands already looks to be massive. Im keen as for this DLC. If the game plays as good as it looks ill be losing quite some time with it

        Hear, hear!

        Also, isn't it reassuring to buy a game in the knowledge that it will be supported with new content post-release?

        Gearbox announced that Borderlands only went gold on the 10th of October, less then a week ago so this does just seem greedy to me.

        Yes it is great to see that they will be supporting the game after its release but since they aren't saying the DLC will be available 2weeks or a month after the game is released why announce it at all yet.

        People are already waiting for this game to come out, wanting to play it, I don't care yet that DLC is coming sometime this year and I won't do until after I buy Borderlands on the 20th of October.

        As long as they patch it separately from the DLC. Having to buy the latest DLC just to get the latest game patch/bug fixes, does not make good post release support, extra content or not...
        (Note: I've never bought DLC, but given the buggy state that some games are released in now, and the increasing prevalence of DLC, I assume they could bundle bug fixes with the DLC if they didn't care about their reputation)

      Sometimes good, sometimes bad.

      The LBP costumes...it would be less of an insult if they just spat in my face.

      Fallout 3...Amazing amount of additional content. I'd say the map size doubled, if not more.

    I also am getting pissed off with these damned game-monkeys selling us more content even before the game gets released. That's just plain insulting! Yeah, we'll sell you the full game, but wait, for $10 more we have this extra!

    At least with Fallout it was worth it, this is still unreleased. I'm almost wishing these guys crash and burn badly with this game, but at the same time I'm buying it and gunna play... dammit!

    It's optional mate, no one is forcing you to buy DLC.

    The problem with DLC is that in the future, you know that its going to end up being bundled with the game in a "Game of the Year" Edition, so early adaptors of the DLC are actually losing out due to them buying the game and DLC separately.

    This takes into account the games price dropping after a couple of months of being a new release title. Just look at Fable 2 and Fallout 3; your better off buying those games with their GOTY editions now, then going back when they were released and buying all the DLC that came with it.

      The difference is, buying now vs waiting for cheaper is exactly that... A waiting game.

      You can buy a game on release day for $100AUD, or you can wait 6-7 months and buy it for $30... But do you really want to wait 6-7 months for a game you're excited about?... hell no.

      Would you wait for a movie you really want to see to come out on DVD because it will have the special features, no, you'll see it at the Cinema.

      If you don't like DLC, don't buy it. I bought the Prince of Persia DLC the other day, that extended my gameplay by 2 hours. It only cost me like $8. I bought the Red Faction multiplayer Map pack... that cost me $8 as well, and I haven't been able to use the bloody thing. Cause with the map pack, you need other people to have bought it as well. It obviously didn't sell very well.

      DLC for popular multiplayer games, or good extensions of single player games is totally worth it. $10 for an extra 2-3 hours of a game that you bought for $100 on release day and finished in 12 hours... better money's worth than the game itself.

    The idea that irks me more is that i don't really see this as supporting the game. Look at a game like Frontlines. A really good game after it was patched up, it got constant support. The idea that now for a game to be supported you have to pay for it is ludicrous. It is a money grab, true support is to release the patches and updates for free.

    Classic example in point is Mirrors Edge. Had the DLC been free the game would have sold far more than it did. But considering it was pay for it sold much less.

    Many of the customers I see come through my store do not consider DLC supporting the game. If a company wants to sell DLC they should be able to expect that the initial price is substantially lower than what it will inevitably retail for. $99 for a game that will require you to spend more money on it should retail at closer to the $69 mark. (this is where i <3 pc)

    I suppose what Í am saying is that DLC =/= support (you shouldnt have to pay to have your game supported), DLC = money grab. Patches = support

      Well that's why they don't call it support. Support and DLC are completely different. Support, obviously, is for fixing a broken game; you get something that you HAVE ALREADY PAID for. Eg. you pay for a working game, the developers attempts to make it work better. DLC is paying for something EXTRA. The company is NOT obligated to make additional content, therefore if you want them to make it you need to pay them.

      People say that DLC is a good indication of 'supporting the game' post-release. This is a poor word to use, but its an indication that the developers are committed to extending the longevity of a game, rather than just 'polishing' it with patches for a few weeks then leaving it alone forever.

      And for the record, I've never seen a game which made you pay for game-fixing patches, so you can hardly claim that game companies are 'charging' for post-release support.

      @JasonH
      "At least with Fallout it was worth it, this is still unreleased. I’m almost wishing these guys crash and burn badly with this game, but at the same time I’m buying it and gunna play… dammit!"

      Fallout 3's DLC was announced, detailed and given a release window BEFORE Fallout 3 hit the shelves. And people bought it; and loved it. You can't say that this is an insult if you like Fallout 3's DLC; this is the same situation. Also it appears to be a similar sized piece of content.

    Lacking creativity? Add zombies..

    They add new content to make the game have that re-playabilty value that you usually pay for. Keep it interesting and different if they wanna mix things up a little. So that your game isn't played for a month and then left on the shelf or traded in.

    It also gives the dev's a job to do!

    If people wanna complain about paying for it after already paying for the game, well wait a year and get a GOTY edition cause i'm sure this game will earn at least one GOTY award from some publication.

    Anyway i'm anxious just to play the retail version alone! DLC made my day really but i won't buy until i've had a good play through. Sometimes i think DLC can be released too soon (unless its FPS map packs etc..) but i'm glad its later this year. Late Nov or Dec is perfect.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now