DLC abuse

[omicron1]

I think part of the problem is the degree to which companies tend to value their product. Take Just Cause 2, for instance. The main game is many, many hours of content, of all sorts, for $50. The addons are a couple of weapons or a new vehicle for $1-$2. Marginal value, but they cost as much as 1/50 or 1/25 of the full game. Judged on the same price scale (which any gamer is apt to do), DLC of this sort is incredibly overpriced.

Or take Deus Ex. The full game is a $50, 30-hour adventure. The expansion is 1/4 to 1/3 the price for 1/10 to 1/8 the content. Plus, as with so many of these things, it's clear that the level of dedication that went into the main game didn't find its way into the rote, by the numbers expansion.

Quite frankly, I'm not sure good DLC on the micro-transaction level is commercially viable. There's just too much overhead involved in making quality content, such that 1 hour of new content may cost half as much as 5. And when the DLC is priced according to what the company spent on it, not according to what it's worth to the consumer, we have a problem.

Expansion packs truly were the way to go, I think. Large enough to offset the overheads, and expansive enough to FEEL like value-for-money, even if they weren't quite as big or engaging as the main game.

Still, if your expansion pack is only 20 hours to the main game's 60, please don't price it at $40 to the main game's $60. We can tell when someone's pulling one over on us.

 

[Epona]

Its interesting. It occured to me just today that they actually intentionally left a small gap in the story of Deus Ex revolution purely for dlc.

When adam hides in this cargo hold on a boat. He lost contact with the guy on the radio he talks to for a long amount of time, I think a week. The guy on the radio asks him when Adam gets radio contact with him again what happened and Adam replies "Ill tell you later"

Then they release DLC about what happened while Adam Was in transit.

So....Intentionally leaving a hole in the story for dlc? I dunno, It doesnt upset me that much, just makes me uneasy....

Well, it wasn't "left for the DLC", as much as it was "game rushed because of executive meddling", the way I understood it. It would have made more sense to just have it in, but...yeah, executive meddling.

On topic tho; I prefer full expansions for more story related stuff, DLC should be purely cosmetic.

That's pretty convenient. Sounds suspicious to me but even if it's straight, that excuse is no doubt used all the time. We couldn't fit "xxxx" in before the deadline but if you pay us $10 more you can get it.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Buy it or not buy it. Not worth moaning about it, your not forced to. Me personally i will only buy huge expansion pack missions, those like in ME2 and Fallout/Elder Scrolls. The extra objects (weapon, cars etc), anything online related or characters i dont give a crap about.

 

[Sylveria]

The biggest problem I have with DLC is not that its overpriced, or that companies are intentionally cutting out core parts of games to sell them later on, its the inconsistency in quality.

If I wander into a random game store right now and just buy a 60 dollar title at random, theres a 80% chance the game will be at least decent.

If log onto xbox live or go to Steam and buy a random piece of DLC for 10 bucks, theres a 60% chance its going to be a complete pile of shit. For 10 bucks I could get a mission pack for Deus Ex: HR, which is decent at least, or I could get something like the Normandy Crash Site, which is terrible.

Theres just so much straight up terrible DLC out there. No one really reviews it, most people just buy it on a whim since they liked the core game, and thats my biggest problem with DLC. Developers and publishers seem to think "Hey, its DLC, we dont have to put any effort into this!"

I think you're overestimating your odds of getting a good game and underestimating your odds of getting shitty DLC.

 

[GoaThief]

those were not dlcs. those were mostly expansion packs.

I know where you are coming from but times have changed from the days of yore, those listed were pretty much all created, marketed and sold as DLC.

That is why we have such a varying grey area at present.

 

[artanis_neravar]

A while ago my friends and I got to talking about DLC. my friends said that DLC would be the next step in in gaming since it allows new content without the need of a expansion disc and while I agreed with this I said that this could be used as a excuse to charge us more for things that are already finished.

The street fighter x tekken hacking has got me worried that what I said wasn't a load of bull and companies are really thinking this way. The future is bleak if other games meet the same fate all because where charged extra for content that's already there so now well all be suspicious of DLC.

disscusion:
1.Is companies abusing DLC for personal gain?
2.do you believe that DLC is one of the best things in resent gaming ?

I Should also say that I don't hate the idea of DLC I just hate what's being done to it

Let me ask you something, what is the purpose of a company?

 

[MrHide-Patten]

This is why I like valve.

Dlc is free.

I don't think every other company has a store to get profit's from though.

 

[Vegosiux]

Its interesting. It occured to me just today that they actually intentionally left a small gap in the story of Deus Ex revolution purely for dlc.

When adam hides in this cargo hold on a boat. He lost contact with the guy on the radio he talks to for a long amount of time, I think a week. The guy on the radio asks him when Adam gets radio contact with him again what happened and Adam replies "Ill tell you later"

Then they release DLC about what happened while Adam Was in transit.

So....Intentionally leaving a hole in the story for dlc? I dunno, It doesnt upset me that much, just makes me uneasy....

Well, it wasn't "left for the DLC", as much as it was "game rushed because of executive meddling", the way I understood it. It would have made more sense to just have it in, but...yeah, executive meddling.

On topic tho; I prefer full expansions for more story related stuff, DLC should be purely cosmetic.

That's pretty convenient. Sounds suspicious to me but even if it's straight, that excuse is no doubt used all the time. We couldn't fit "xxxx" in before the deadline but if you pay us $10 more you can get it.

Well, the DLC was released a few months after the game, as opposed to day 1 DLC...

 

[Phlakes]

I didn't know you could abuse extra content. You know, since it's optional. And extra content.

 

[GoaThief]

Difficult to link properly thanks to being on my mobile but have a look at the page address on the official Elder Scrolls website; http://www.elderscrolls.com/oblivion/dlc/.

Under the DLC heading, aye? I agree with your sentiment, however.

 

[Epona]

Its interesting. It occured to me just today that they actually intentionally left a small gap in the story of Deus Ex revolution purely for dlc.

When adam hides in this cargo hold on a boat. He lost contact with the guy on the radio he talks to for a long amount of time, I think a week. The guy on the radio asks him when Adam gets radio contact with him again what happened and Adam replies "Ill tell you later"

Then they release DLC about what happened while Adam Was in transit.

So....Intentionally leaving a hole in the story for dlc? I dunno, It doesnt upset me that much, just makes me uneasy....

Well, it wasn't "left for the DLC", as much as it was "game rushed because of executive meddling", the way I understood it. It would have made more sense to just have it in, but...yeah, executive meddling.

On topic tho; I prefer full expansions for more story related stuff, DLC should be purely cosmetic.

That's pretty convenient. Sounds suspicious to me but even if it's straight, that excuse is no doubt used all the time. We couldn't fit "xxxx" in before the deadline but if you pay us $10 more you can get it.

Well, the DLC was released a few months after the game, as opposed to day 1 DLC...

Yeah but alot of DLC today is released on Day 1 with the "it wasn't ready when the game went to certification" excuse. DLC feels like a scam now. It may have started as smaller chunks of an expansion pack but now it's just exploitation.

 

[Yearlongjester]

Its interesting. It occured to me just today that they actually intentionally left a small gap in the story of Deus Ex revolution purely for dlc.

When adam hides in this cargo hold on a boat. He lost contact with the guy on the radio he talks to for a long amount of time, I think a week. The guy on the radio asks him when Adam gets radio contact with him again what happened and Adam replies "Ill tell you later"

Then they release DLC about what happened while Adam Was in transit.

So....Intentionally leaving a hole in the story for dlc? I dunno, It doesnt upset me that much, just makes me uneasy....

Didn't they already do that with ACII? They skipped two memories that were "corrupted" to sell as DLC? If that isn't BS I don't know what is

 

[LordLundar]

I've said this elsewhere but it bears repeating.

DLC is a fine idea. At it's basic level, it is simply additional content that is downloaded from the internet as opposed to a physical copy. Done right it is a great idea as well. What is that idea? Similar to an expansion pack, aka something that is meant to add on to a completed game to extend it re-playability and encourage more sales.

Sadly, publishers are using it as a crutch to milk more money out. Games being left unfinished either due to time constraints or intentional decisions are much more common now and the idea for it being acceptable to publishers largely boils down to "we'll just charge them extra for the unfinished bits later on". Examples of such an attitude are Bioware with Mass Effect 3 and Capcom with Asura's Wrath.

Put simply, DLC is not bad, there's just too much abuse of it right now.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Blanket hating on DLC would be stupid IMO

Bethesda, and Obsidian, have shown how DLC should be made. The Fallout 3 and New Vegas DLCs were amazing, the Oblivion DLCs sucked but are at least an example how of what kinda of content, IE OPTIONAL, content should be put in them.

Bioware's hasn't done DLC too bad either, there have been a few iffy moments but they aren't like the deus Ex or AC2 or Capcom DLC.

I would rather pay 30 dollars for 3 Fallout New vegas DLC then 40 dollars for a old timey expansion that has less content then those 3 DLC, and took far longer to make.

 

[Rawne1980]

Never purchased any DLC and I never will.

I have a grand total of 4 games that have DLC with them.

Fallout 3 GOTY.
Fallout New Vegas Ultimate Edition.
Oblivion GOTY.
Dragon Age Origins Ultimate Edition.

Because they were cheap ... and because the DLC came with them (by cheap I mean they were £5 each on Amazon).

Never saw the point in paying for DLC for an individual game. If I see a GOTY or Ultimate edition for a game I don't already own then i'll buy that but I won't buy DLC individually.

If I already own the game then I won't be buying it again in GOTY or UE form and I won't buy DLC for it.

 

[The Lunatic]

Holding content back is always a bad idea.

 

[Dandark]

I used to like DLC. Now I hate it and think it's one of the worst things to happen to gaming. Companies are determined to abuse the hell out of it and people are more than happy to support them. Oblivion: "Shivering isles", Fallout: "Operation anchorage" and "Broken steel", GTAIV: "Lost and damned" and "Ballad of gay Tony".

These were great examples of DLC, I loved these pieces of DLC, they added plenty to the game after it had been released, they were also well worth the price. Most of the DLC now seems to just be content that was cut out or should have been in the game originally.
DRM and DLC abuse are two of the most **** companies do. This is why I hate EA and Ubisoft, because they do **** like this.

those were not dlcs. those were mostly expansion packs.

They are extra content that can be obtained by downloading them. I consider them DLC, if im wrong then what are the differences between DLC and Expansion packs?

 

[King of Asgaard]

I've never liked DLC for one specific reason, that being that I cannot access any kind of DLC, free or otherwise, because of the country I live in. Before y'all say anything, yes I tried to register other accounts and no, it didn't work. (PS3 by the way)
I think this is terrible, and what makes matters worse is that almost every game I own has DLC in one form or another, and it frustrates me.
The only DLC I've ever played was RDR: Undead Nightmare, and only because Rockstar released it in Blu-ray form. (props to them)

 

[Ranorak]

Buuuuuuuut....... expansion packs filled with tonnes of new content on the other hand..............

....are exactly like DLC, besides the Download part.

To me, DLC comes in several chunks.
1)The Expansion Pack DLC *Shadow Broker, Shivering isles, etc* Adds new things to do that may or may not continue the story. Just like, say, Diablo II Lord of Destruction did.

2)Weapon packs, item packs and other additional objects *Saints Row's item packs, Mass Effect's weapons* Completely optional, got some extra Xboxpoints to spend and the weapon seems like fun.

3)Additional characters in Fighting games *Jill in MvC3, Freddy Mortal Kombat* I can live with that. up to people to decide if it's worth it.

4)Cosmetics *outfits, horse armour, pets, hats* Again, if you got a coin to spare.

I see no reason to hate the option of getting these upgrades or not.

I do laugh at how people wined that the last DLC for Mass Effect 2 continued the story.
Expansion packs have been doing that for AGES:
The Lord of Destruction, The Frozen Throne, the 2 morrowind expansions. The fact that it is only available through Download I can understand for those with slow connections, but don't act like it's the first time that a additional, post-release optional content, continued the story without being a direct sequel.

 

[Arina Love]

i buy DLC i want and don't care about anything else.