DLC: Yay or Nay?

[balimuzz]

What do you think about DLC? Is it a good thing, or do you think release dates should be pushed back to help include that content with the game? Do you think that if people stopped buying DLC, developers would start including it in their games, or would they stop creating this content altogether?

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Um why are there 4 of these threads

 

[Sparrow]

Yeah, you appear to have posted this 4 times.

 

[balimuzz]

sorry, internet shut off during my post and i couldnt find it afterwords. turns out i accidentally posted it 4 times

 

[Sparrow]

DLC ROCKS
/all 4 threads

There, I corrected it for you ;D

 

[Sparrow]

DLC ROCKS
/all 4 threads

There, I I Just Made An Arse Of Myself ;D

There, I corrected it for you (insert middle finger here)

Pah. I have a comeback for this one but, that was sheer win so I'll let it slide.

 

[Arcade_Fire]

DLC ROCKS
/all 4 threads

There, I I Just Made An Arse Of Myself ;D

There, I corrected it for you (insert middle finger here)

That was a... disproportionate... response.

 

[Trioptical]

DLC's been kind of hit and miss so far. It's still young, so I'm going to give it some time.

I don't think it would be a good idea to let developers push back games to add new features, since there's always new features. Then we'd never get the games.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

it's a fledgling system and currently a lot of the content gets released buggy and broken but I think once it gets going in earnest we'll see in increase in standards (then again we thought that about the shift from oblivion to F3...)

 

[balimuzz]

it's a fledgling system and currently a lot of the content gets released buggy and broken but I think once it gets going in earnest we'll see in increase in standards (then again we thought that about the shift from oblivion to F3...)

Fallout did raise standards to a certain extent. it has never crashed on me, something Oblivion can't say for itself. However, Bethesda creates massive worlds, and they have slowly been taking steps to reduce bugs in them, but they will never be perfect, simply because of the sheer size of their gameworlds.

 

[Jandau]

The IDEA of DLC is a sound one, but for the most part DLC is either overpriced or should have been in the game release in the first place. Either way, you're getting ripped off, since in the first case you're paying too much for too little and in the second case you're paying extra for something that should have recieved for free.

As far as I can tell, the basic retail price for newly published games hasn't changed in the last decade, maybe even gone up a bit. Adding microtransaction on top of that is just greedy. I wouldn't mind the system if they cut the retail price, but as it stands it's just wrong.

 

[AtticusSP]

DLC was good in theory, but companies see it as nothing more than a way to squeeze more money out of gamers.

Paying for NEW content, Great. I'd love too.

Paying for a key to content on the disk I already bought? Fuck off. (I'm looking at you, Capcom.)

 

[matsugawa]

It's one thing when the DLC is something like a bonus mission or a special item, it's another thing altogether when it's an entire chapter of the game. For example, in Prince of Persia (minor spoiler alert) the DLC is basically the ending. You buy a game, play through it, then have to wait until the DLC is available for the blasted ending? Publishers and developers must be deathly afraid of the eventual apathy associated with delayed releases for them to put out what is essentially an unfinished game and leave the ending for a downloadable patch.

Maybe I'm too much of a dyed-in-the-wool console gamer, but patches are best for minor bugs and scripting errors in PC games to be eventually made obsolete by future releases and reprints of the original, not narrative-related game content. That's best left for a full sequel if anything.

 

[DoW Lowen]

Yay.

 

[phar]

Nay.

I dont mind if they release something like an expansion pack online like GTA L&D or Fallout3 stuff.... but things like the horse armour maps or skins shouldnt even be allowed to be charged for.

 

[imPacT31]

I think DLC is a good idea but only certain developers have actually embraced it as more than the chance to add new skins or unlock features hidden on the disk. While these examples are nearly always overpriced I can generally accept that the more considerable additions such as: Fallout 3's content and Burnout Paradise's major updates have really been worth the asking price.
The problem is that there's a really unbalanced equilibrium between content that adds nothing tangible to a game and that which actually does enough to be worthwhile. While I may be willing to pay for LBP's MGS pack (several costumes, 5 levels, new building tools and about 70 stickers) I think its ridiculous that they can charge half that cost for a single costume when some have even been released free of charge.
Dead Space was the ultimate example of microtransactions taken to the extreme; £18 worth of skins that, barring the high level suits that make the game far easier, don't change the experience in the slightest. Yet developers like Valve can manage to supply free content updates for Team Fortress 2 and have even managed to wrangle free distribution of said content on the Xbox 360.

DLC is in no way a bad thing, developers either using it as a way to make more money from content hidden on the disk or lazily releasing a few skins at ridiculous prices is.

 

[balimuzz]

Paying for a key to content on the disk I already bought? Fuck off. (I'm looking at you, Capcom.)

I have to agree with you on that one, but otherwise, it seems like DLC is generally new content, and not just a key. Still, DLC tends to be a little too pricey for my liking.

 

[balimuzz]

in Prince of Persia (minor spoiler alert) the DLC is basically the ending. You buy a game, play through it, then have to wait until the DLC is available for the blasted ending?]

The PoP DLC was NOT just the ending. The ending of the game was a cliffhanger, designed to set up a sequel, and the DLC was an intermediate chapter between that game, and what will hopefully be a sequel.

 

[AtticusSP]

Paying for a key to content on the disk I already bought? Fuck off. (I'm looking at you, Capcom.)

I have to agree with you on that one, but otherwise, it seems like DLC is generally new content, and not just a key. Still, DLC tends to be a little too pricey for my liking.

I find the price thing is largely microsofts fault, since Xbox Live points are really expensive. I like PSN's price system better, although I never use it. Since I don't play my PS3 for anything but Street Fighter.

 

[balimuzz]

developers like Valve can manage to supply free content updates for Team Fortress 2 and have even managed to wrangle free distribution of said content on the Xbox 360.

Free major DLC for L4D on 360! w00t!!!