Does a long list of DLC turn you off from the game?

[Epona]

I bought Final Fantasy 13-2 at launch. While I loved the demo, I didn't like the game (I don't understand that but it is what it is) and didn't play more than a few hours. A few days ago I came back and decided to try it again. I started the game and looked at the DLC, the list was long and expensive. This game has not even been out for 3 months and already the list was too long for comfort and would probably add another $60 to the price of the game, complete.

Seeing that, I lost any motivation to play and yesterday I traded it in. I don't even want to start a game that I can't complete without spending a large amount of money. I already paid full price for this game and they want to pay full price again to get the rest of it? That's how I see it.

How do you see it? Does a long list of DLC fill you with dread and zap your motivation to play at all?

 

[Epona]

You can complete it without spending a load of money.

On Topic: No. I look at DLC when I'm through a game. And then I decide if I buy it. Have yet to come across any game where I got the feeling of an uncomplete game because of DLC.

...and yet by definition a game without all of it DLC is incomplete.

 

[Epona]

...and yet by definition a game without all of it DLC is incomplete.

Do you call games with expansion packs also incomplete? Because that's the same. Just in smaller amounts and questionable addition to story and so questionable need of purchasing the product.

Yes. So do developers and publishers which is why they REPLACE both a stand alone game and an expansion with a GOTY edition.

 

[DustyDrB]

Nope. I don't even buy most DLC. I still haven't got any paid ones for Red Dead Redemption even though that's one of my favorite games. Though that hardcore mode they added in the Game of the Year edition is something I really want.

 

[Epona]

Nope. I don't even buy most DLC. I still haven't got any paid ones for Red Dead Redemption even though that's one of my favorite games. Though that hardcore mode they added in the Game of the Year edition is something I really want.

So you still consider your vanilla version to be complete even though new content has been released and even a GOTY edition?

 

[DustyDrB]

Nope. I don't even buy most DLC. I still haven't got any paid ones for Red Dead Redemption even though that's one of my favorite games. Though that hardcore mode they added in the Game of the Year edition is something I really want.

So you still consider your vanilla version to be complete even though new content has been released and even a GOTY edition?

Yeah. But I loathe zombie stuff, so I don't really feel like I'm missing out.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Depends on whether I think the game minus the DLC has any value.

I played New Vegas with no DLC. Put about 90 hours into it. It would be fairly absurd for me to complain that the game was all cut to ribbons because later some DLC came out.

Honestly, I find the pitch and volume of the complaining about DLC to be absolutely hilarious. I'd use the word "entitlement", but then I'd have to blow my own fucking head off, and I'm not too keen on doing that.

 

[Xpheyel]

For purchasing yes. If I see a lot of DLC I'll wait for a GOTY edition. For replays/finishing, not really.

 

[Epona]

The thing is: It is "additional content" (and in some cases content that was created in the time they should've worked on the main product... but then again, as long as it is more than skins I don't buy it).

The vanilla version of a game is the complete version. As a comic is complete in itself and side series are just additions. They are not mandatory to enjoy the product and they don't take away from anything.

The GOTY edition is in many points just a marketing trick to 1: give people easier access to the additional content and 2: lure people in giving money long after the initial release.

The GOTY is more than a marketing trick, it is the COMPLETE game in one package. That's my point, the game is incomplete without all the content intended for it. DLC does not stand alone, it exists because there is a vanilla game, the DLC is forever linked with a game and cannot be unlinked.

 

[Rawne1980]

Nope, I don't buy DLC anyway.

If I buy a game sparkly new on release date I still won't buy DLC when it's released so if I buy a game that has been out a while and has a lot it makes no difference.

Long story short, I never buy DLC.

Therefore a game is complete for me without it.

 

[Epona]

On the other hand: The game stands perfectly fine on its own feet. Unlike the DLC or expansion pack it is complete in that regard. It does not need the DLC to run or even exist.

Edit: Well, the thing is: I don't think that you are wrong, like on other topics there are many ways of looking at this. While I understand why people get the feeling of a butchered game if there is a lot of DLC or expansion packs *I am looking at you Sims* and disregard anything with any future content to be released as incomplete I can't share this view because I never feel forced to buy DLC or even get the feeling of an incomplete game after playing it without those.

It's cool, I can see both sides too. I just lean more on the side of: once DLC or an expansion is released, the vanilla game is no longer complete by itself and the more DLC/Expansions are released, the more incomplete vanilla becomes.

 

[Epona]

i play sims 3.. nuff said about being turned off games for dlc

My GF plays Sims 3, she has probably spent $500 on that one game...so far...expansions and DLC are still coming I am sure.

 

[Taunta]

Depends on what kind of DLC it is. I can still enjoy a game if all the DLC is cosmetic stuff. But if they're actual gameplay, like expansion packs and stuff, then I get perturbed.

i play sims 3.. nuff said about being turned off games for dlc

Oh god this. I will never be caught up with all the premium store items.