Callin' for a DLC boycott.

[Aris Khandr]

Unlocking stuff already on the disc doesn't bother me. Especially when it comes to things like the alternate costumes in Street Fighter IV. They were included on the disc because the costumers were already finished and part of the arcade title in Japan. So who would it benefit to force you to actually download them? The same argument could be made for anything. Let's be realistic, they're not going to change the planned DLC to free content. So you can either download the data when you buy it (making it true DLC), or you can save yourself time and HD space and have it on the disc. Having it on the disc makes it a far better choice for everyone.

 

[Corpse XxX]

I have never bought a DLC, and i probably never will..

And DLC's that they have announced before release of actual game, and DLC unlockables, makes me wanna puke in the devs faces..

I can understand extra content that comes out months and months after release..

 

[Lizmichi]

I have to say while there are some DLC that I think are worth paying for, like Lair of the Shadow Broker for ME2 and many others, I still feel allot of DLC's are well crap or just a way to get more money. Like Feast Day for Dragon Age, weapon and armor packs and so on. It's annoying and I'd love for EA to allow devs like BioWare let us have them for free.

Content packs I'm ok with if they add to the story but not shit like a gun you should of had from the start. I'm not happy with how many weapon and armor packs ME2 has. If all of that was already in game BioWare could spend more time on Content DLC like Overlord and Witch Hunt, things that add to the story. Like Kisumi and Zaieed should have been part of ME2 to begin with, same with Shale in Dragon Age. One more thing, why have appearance packs, how does it make the game better? Just give it to us

Oh and nice NMH quote. *claps*

 

[Ulkjen]

I personally prefer DLC for games like Killing Floor. Its about $1.00 US and just gives you some characters. I dislike $15.00 for a map a modder can make for free... I can see maybe just a few dollars but not 15 for 3...

Another thing i can agree with is the system they used in Mass Effect 2. Buy the game new and get that cerberus code. Buy it used and you have to buy the cerberus code to get all the extra juicy DLC that they just hand to you for having it. Though this is comming from someone who never buys used copies out of Brick and Mortar stores.

 

[digitalzombie]

Remember when they would eventually offer DLC like multiplayer maps for Halo 2 for FREE and only change if you wanted them a month before everyone else? Then Halo 3 came around, and if you didn't buy the maps, you could only access 25% of the multiplayer game types. Now THAT is complete B.S.

I think all DLC should eventually be free. Instead, now it's an expected extra charge publishers and developers are slapping on the consumer, because WE KEEP BUYING THEM.

Just FYI, last I checked, Halo 3 maps still weren't free, and you can get the game used in perfect condition for less than the cost of the DLC. Doesn't make much sense.

 

[thiosk]

The only times I get perturbed is when the DLC is:

Announced and ready at the time of game launch
Already packaged in the game and ready for unlock.

I have no problem with small scale distributions that fix\append the game without needing a full blown 30+ dollar expansion.

 

[linwolf]

snip

Have you guys read the OP?

OT: No, I'm not going on a boycott. ULC is annoying, sure, but not worth all the time and effort to get rid of it.

Of course I have, but since I don't buy DLC I have no reason to different between that and ULC. So I answers what I thought about the issue.

 

[Varrdy]

DLC is fine with me but, despite never encountering it, ULC does sound rather shitty. Sometimes "cut" content from the game is still included on the discs and can only be accessed through hacks / console commands. This is fine and I think that the devs left it in for that exact reason.

However, including something on a disc that you already paid for and actually charging you to access it is just wrong. I'm pretty sure it's borderline illegal...

Is it legal, say, to take money for a car but, when the new owner takes delivery, charge them extra if they want the interior lightbulbs, the aircon switch or the controls for the stereo? None of these items are vital to the running of the car but they all do things that make the experience more enjoyable and/or comfortable. Maybe not illegal but only a car-dealer would support such a twattish move so why should game-makers be any different?

DLC, when it something just something extra (like 22" chrome rims for your car if you're a tasteless idiot) is fine and if you want it, you pay for it. If you don't want it then that's all good too. I have Fallout New Vegas and have not even thought about getting the new DLC yet. When you have to start paying to unlock things you already have then that's different and should not be tolerated!

Wardy

 

[Antari]

I already somewhat boycott DLC. I don't have many games that do have DLC options. In the cases that I do. Those are quite literally the last games I will ever buy again from those companies.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

Yeah, because internet boycotts ALWAYS work.

Right?

 

[ultimateownage]

Expansions I'm fine with, as I am with other DLC made after the release that wasn't intended to be released as part of the game. What I am not fine with is like what Fable III has done, it has removed things from the game that belong in the game and make me pay for it. Why do I have to pay a pound for a few dyes- including a Black dye- all of which there is an empty space for in the game that won't be filled until you buy them! They just removed some shit from the game, and then made me pay full price for the game and then an extra £10 for the rest of the game.
I even bought the collectors edition because I'm a sucker, and that didn't with any of the day 1 DLC that should have been packaged with it! I bought the best copy, and then had to spend more to get the rest of it. If you're going to remove stuff, at least also add it with the preorders or limited edition if not in all new copies!

 

[DeadlyYellow]

Honestly, I've never bothered with buying dlc. Within about a year and a half or so the publishers tend to release a pack that includes the full game and all dlc, usually at or lower than the price of a new game.

 

[DanielBrown]

I haven't bought any DLC since I purchased two for Dragon Age: Origins. I payed around 14£ them and the total playtime was perhaps 25 minutes. I was so pissed off!
The Borderlands DLC was however totally worth it's price. Secret Armory and The Island of Dr.Ned brought lots of playtime and intresting places to run around in... but yeah, since DA:O I won't touch any DLC again, unless I'm sure it's really worth the price.

 

[Something Amyss]

I will buy DLC I think is worth it and not buy DLC I don't think is worth it.

 

[Cosplay Horatio]

The only DLC I will boycott from now on is L4D 1&2 because their mutations are a waste of my time cuz their either unbeatable or leave you with players that wont let you finish the levels.

 

[Darkauthor81]

Before I get into it, I'm just going to say that I have nothing against DLCs. Actually, I think that the idea behind them is wonderful. Major bug slipped past playtesting? Now it can be fixed with minimum fuss! Reviews say the main issue with your game is not enough of 'x'? Now you can add 'x'!

I'm not even saying that DLCs should be free. Developers work hard on their games, but they do have fairly strict deadlines. Maybe they couldn't find the time to shove something into the gold build of the game? Well, then they can use the DLC system to get it out there.

No, my issue isn't with Downlodable Content. It's with Unlockable Content, or as I shall refer to them from now on, ULC's. If you look in the Playstation Network (Assuming. Don't have a PS3) or Xbox Live Marketplace and you see a DLC that is about 300kb in size, that would be a 'key' to unlock content that is already on the disk that you paid full price for.

Many people just say 'Well if you don't like it, then don't buy it.' That doesn't stop it from being major douchebaggery, and some people will still fork over the $5 or however much it costs to get at the ULC. If noone buys the ULC, maybe some gaming companies *CoughEAcough* will get the hint and actually start letting you have everything on the disk that you've already paid them for.

In otherwords, Believe in your force and head into the Garden of Madness. [sub]Shameless No More Heroes reference. Don't hurt me.[/sub]

You should have titled the thread Boycot ULC instead of DLC and then trying to explain that this is about ULC in the post. People are too busy knee jerk reacting to DLC hate to actually read your post and thus the point has flown over the heads of many.

Not that I agree with you. I'm just offering advice on how you could have better presented your argument.

 

[Kingsnake661]

I kind of agree with the "extra credits" take on DLC. (Or at least, my take on what there take was.. YMMV)

DLC is, more or less, a heavy handed way the games makers are using to try and recoup money they've "lost". (mainly from second hand game selling, maybe a bit from pirating) And in a way i understand why they do it. You need money to stay in bussines. Games now a days cost a metric ton to make. Droping a few hundred million on a project means you need to make that back and then some to turn a profit, stay employed, and turn out new games. To make hundreds of millions of dollars off a new game means they have to sell, millions of games. (10's of millions even).

Pireting a game cost the developers money. Second hand gaming doesn't get them any money either. (only game stop gets it.) Both result in net losses for a game company. So, what do you do? As of right now, it's DLC. The developers get money this way, even from second hand users. Money they don't have to share with Gamesstop. (though, they are trying to get developers to sell there DLC in store..LOL) I would think most DLC wouldn't work with pireated games, or hacked systems, so, that's good too.

DLC is a way for companys to say in bussines, turn a profit, and keep making games. But, as is life, the pengulim effect takes over, and, well, in some cases it can feel now a days that your paying for your new game twice. You get half a new game at the start, for full price, and the rest later in DLC. This is CRAP IMO. But i'm not really sure what we can do about it. Personally, it's not as big adeal to me anymore, because, i really don't game like i used too... So, a little extra DLC on the one or two new games i play every few months, to a year even, isn't an issue. The rest of you.. eh. Good luck with that. You'll need to somehow send a clear message that reasonable priced additonal DLC will be well recived and rewarded, were as, braking a game in half and selling it for full price up frount, and in DLC bites later, will not work.

Like i said, good luck with that. I'm a pessimessit, and i doubt enough people have that kind of self disipline. If they have the money to spend, they will. *shrug*

 

[GreyKnight3445]

Awesome idea! This will totally work!

L4D2?

oh yah...

 

[Alfid Zeiss]

Always Bugged me when I was in camp
"Help me restore my family's honor"
The guy was just there, standing, watching, wanting you to "help"

 

[manythings]

-snip-

I'm pretty sure they've been doing this since 2005 and it's looking like no one cares enough. Also the "Don't Like, Don't Buy" policy works with enough people. If you vote with your wallet they'll notice.