Why can't the DLC just be a standalone sequel?

[Xindictive]

They say it's an additional 100+ of footage of the future of indie developers after the movie... so... it's a sequel. Why not just make it a sequel? Why not just call it Indie Game: The Movie 2? WHY THE HELL IS IT CALLED "Special Edition DLC"!?!

Has any other movie based on games ever went and added a sequel, not put in cinemas, in the BlueRay release of the first movie and called it a "DLC"? This is basic movie knowledge 101. If you have made an hour and a half of new footage after your last movie, about things AFTER the movie, as an aftermath movie... THEN YOU MADE A SEQUEL! NOT ADDITIONAL CONTENT! MAKE IT A STANDALONE!

Does anyone agree with me because... this is so stupid that they would do this. I mean, sure the pricing is a bit high and such but screw that, WHY IS THIS NOT COUNTED AS A SEQUEL?!?

[WerWulf]

Its not a sequel though its a follow up and more interviews

[Xindictive]

Follow Up = Sequel. It's after the movie. The aftermath. SEQUEL!

[TITOMOSQUITO187]

It's for video games. DLC is absolutely an appropriate name for it.

It's the same "game" and it is additional content. DLC maakes the most sense, and it makes even more sense from a creative standpoint to call it DLC instead of a sequel.

[Xindictive]

Yes, it's for video games. But it's a documentary movie about indie developers and their games. THUS. It's a movie that's on Steam. The least you can do, if you don't WANT it to be standalone, is call it Indie Games: The Movie 2. Because, again, it's a sequel to the first movie. Calling it Special Edition DLC is like having a movie about something like Crash Bandicoot and then when the DVD comes out, there's another 100+ minutes of the aftermath of the movie that's only available in the DVD and it's called a Special Edition DLC and, for some stupid reason, not called a sequel when it obviously IS.

Course it's the same game, but it doesn't excuse being called a Special Edition DLC when it is obviously a sequel. Else, we might aswell call every sequel to every video game a DLC instead.

[TITOMOSQUITO187]

No no...the point of it is that because it's a video game documentary, calling it DLC is a creative choice. It is just using gaming terminology this way. It's not an entirely different game so it's not reallly like a sequel either.

The use of DLC is a creative decision and used as a way to keep with video game terminology. Doesn't matter if it feels like a sequel or not. It was an artistic choice to use the term DLC instead of calling it Indie Game The Movie 2.

[Xindictive]

Well it's still a sequel, but if they called it that just to sound fancy and stay with the way video games go by saying it's a "special edition DLC", then ok, i can roll with that, you want to stick with it being about video games by making the name sound video gamish with the whole DLC thing. But the least you can do is either say it's a sequel to the first movie in the description or give an indication that's it's a sequel but made to look like a DLC as a creative choice. This doesn't do that good a job of that.

[› A]

Just watched it.. It cant be standalone because this isnt movie, just bunch of clips/interviews. I still liked it though so its ur call

[ToasterOverlord]

It isn't a sequel in the least. Most of the footage was shot during the course of the main film, and much of it precedes it. I'd say a good third is about games that aren't featured in the movie, so calling it a sequel for that reason alone would be inappropriate. And some of the stuff were features left on the cutting room floor for the movie; they wouldn't be relevent or appropriate in a sequel.

Also, it is very common practice for movies to have special editions, and you mentioned how important it is to follow the precedents of current and past movie practices. I can't even begin to count the amount of DVDs I own that have a second disk just for that stuff, and that's just what this is. Just the digital equivalent. They planned to have a special edition for the longest time and I'm certain that if they had it done, it would have released the same day as the film last summer.

But if you're so dead set on there being an actual sequel (assuming you're not just ranting about the DLC, which seems to be so common), they said they haven't ruled out that possibility.

[Xindictive]

Thank you ToasterOverlord. You let me know that it isn't a sequel, but more a behind the scenes part of the movie of deleted scenes and such in good detail. And, to be perfectly honest, you explained it better than the description of the DLC. Thank you. This discussion has now been answered well.

BTW, if there would be a sequel, it would probably be years later, when there's new popular indie game devs to interview that would be as interesting as this one.

[Darknuke]

Why do people always have to complain about something? Who cares if it's a sequel vs. DLC?! So annoying sometimes -.-

[Sawta]

The topic and distrobution model of this movie is video games. In that context, "DLC" makes sense. It's a bit gimmicky, but I can see why they went with it. It's really not that big of a deal.

Also, packaging it this way probably makes it easier to find and purchase both at the same time. I imagine that labling it as "DLC" also gives the customer the chance to purchase it at a reduced cost to boot.