EA CEO: People Need DLC To Tide Them Over Between Releases

[misg]

I don't even buy games when they come out now. I was looking at the steam fall sale last week thinking of buying Dishonored. Buy then I decided I would wait until the "game of the year, XL, superawesome, etc... Edition" when it has all the DLC included. It's the only way I buy them now, wait get the whole experience all at once. Personally I hate going back to a game I have beaten just to play another hour or two of DLC that may or may not add to the story.

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

I like DLC. I'll say it. Sure, some of the costs I quibble with - small packages for too much mostly, until they finally wise up and bundle em up - but overall I enjoy DLC for the games I play. Then again I play mostly RPGs and the DLC for them basically falls into two categories: 1) additional quests +/- areas and 2) pretty up your party. Both of which I enjoy personally, though I am absolutely more willing to pay for expanded play than I am visuals and feel pricing should reflect the clear difference in content type. Oblivion, Skyrim, Dragon Age Origins, Dragon Age II, Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Mass Effect 1, 2, and 3, etc. have all had DLC I have felt perfectly comfortable paying for and enjoying for a number of years of replay - based on the original game as much as the DLC that now compliments it and expands it in my replays.

I suppose that for other genres might be different in terms of types of DLC and therefore the perspectives players take on purchasing them. Granted, not even everyone who is mostly concerned with RPG DLC would be on the same page on all items all the time anyway. I could easily see, though, from some purchases my fiancé rejects making on games he likes - FPS and Turn and Non-Turned based strategy games primarily - where the type of content and what it adds to the game is different across genres.

Half my list up in the first paragraph is from EA/Bioware though so? I don't think this person is way out of line saying that DLC can be desirable for both parties. I do think he overgeneralized and is probably going to take some heat for that because the world is a reactionary place. If he's talking about the games I've been playing that his company has been making, then I'd have to say I agree with the sentiment in part at least. If he's talking about all games of all types everywhere, then he's not really thinking his statements through, or is a moron, one of the two.

 

[VoidOfOne]

There was a time where there was no DLC, and yet people were very loyal to different game franchises because... the games were very good. Like with the Mario series, or Final Fantasy series (til they went MMO), or Metal Gear, or other franchises that have lasted through the 21st century. DLC has it's uses, but it doesn't keep me interested in playing the game. A really good game, that is what keeps me coming back to the franchise. And while it's not the same for everyone, I feel many people agree: keep making great games, and we'll keep coming back, DLC or no.

Still waiting on Jade Empire 2...

On a different note, wonder what the next Jimquisition is going to be about...

 

[Morthasa]

I like DLC. I'll say it. Sure, some of the costs I quibble with - small packages for too much mostly, until they finally wise up and bundle em up - but overall I enjoy DLC for the games I play. Then again I play mostly RPGs and the DLC for them basically falls into two categories: 1) additional quests +/- areas and 2) pretty up your party. Both of which I enjoy personally, though I am absolutely more willing to pay for expanded play than I am visuals and feel pricing should reflect the clear difference in content type. Oblivion, Skyrim, Dragon Age Origins, Dragon Age II, Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Mass Effect 1, 2, and 3, etc. have all had DLC I have felt perfectly comfortable paying for and enjoying for a number of years of replay - based on the original game as much as the DLC that now compliments it and expands it in my replays.

I suppose that for other genres might be different in terms of types of DLC and therefore the perspectives players take on purchasing them. Granted, not even everyone who is mostly concerned with RPG DLC would be on the same page on all items all the time anyway. I could easily see, though, from some purchases my fiancé rejects making on games he likes - FPS and Turn and Non-Turned based strategy games primarily - where the type of content and what it adds to the game is different across genres.

Half my list up in the first paragraph is from EA/Bioware though so? I don't think this person is way out of line saying that DLC can be desirable for both parties. I do think he overgeneralized and is probably going to take some heat for that because the world is a reactionary place. If he's talking about the games I've been playing that his company has been making, then I'd have to say I agree with the sentiment in part at least. If he's talking about all games of all types everywhere, then he's not really thinking his statements through, or is a moron, one of the two.

I agree with the positive points you have made for DLC in general, as I too have greatly enjoyed the Mass effect series, and thought the various expansions greatly enhanced the games, however I think those DLC were good because they were made with the purpose of improving the game, as opposed as "every game needs DLC, so we must make some".

DLC is not bad per se, but I think that it ruins the game when the focus is providing DLC for its own sake (which would look like -and probably be- a money grab), as opposed to providing an enhanced experience.

 

[hazydawn]

All these overpaid CEOs pulling hypotheses out of their ass and telling people what they want...

 

[Glaice]

Mr. CEO, have you ever heard of third party user mods? Apparently not. This is the true way to keep people interested by releasing the SDK/modding tools for your PC crowd. The console crowd are SOL on this option, sadly.

Let's take an example with DOOM, it came out in December 1993 and will turn 20 on the 10th this year, it and its brethren DOOM 2 still sell on Steam and it has a thriving modding community mainly because the specs for the game were released, having then basic map editors and other tools as early as early 1994. The mod scene only grew from there and in 1996 they released the source code which brought user created source ports that fixed bugs and added features to the series, which are still being developed to this day.

You can say the same for the Quake series in terms of the mapping and modding community, which exist but nowhere as huge as the original Doom games are. This shows you can have new user made content without needing to pay a cent for it, but there are a few exceptions to that with Final Doom which is a standalone package of 2 32 level sets with new textures and music, you have The Lost Episodes of Doom which is a new 27 level set for original Doom then finally you have Hell To Pay and Perdition's Gate, two additional level sets.

You don't need DLC to be essential, what happened to making significant expansion packs like Quake's Scourge of Armagon and Dissolution of Eternity, Half-Life's Opposing Force, Oblivion's Shivering Isles, Skyrim's Dragonborn and Dawnguard? These show you can give a better bang for your buck than some simple weapon pack, skin pack or other petty addon to the game.

 

[weirdee]

that's great guys, but now you've just told us that you're charging us for YOUR ADVERTISEMENT.

anyway, feel free to spin your wheels some more, i'm sure that what you're doing won't have any consequences in the future.

 

[RJ Dalton]

Never bought DLC once in my life and I still play the old games I've got. So, yeah, not believing this.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I completely agree, actually.
Of course you will need to offer DLC when you offer so little substance in the core game.

Nevermind how forbidding user created content only compounds the issue further.

 

[The Apple BOOM]

I'm just going to put this out there. Soulcalibur V has not had any core game content DLC at all except for one character being released a few months after launch. There is music and costume DLC, but even that stopped a good while ago. This weekend in Philadelphia, there is a fighting game event including two SCV tourneys, singles and teams. The singles tourney is expected to have over 100 participants, include people from outside the country. If you make your game well, people don't need DLC to keep playing.

 

[Lightknight]

Lose interest? I'd say the constant stream of DLC will give me series fatigue before I'd lose interest in a franchize that I actually liked. Perhaps I'm not the norm though?

 

[Something Amyss]

Given that yearly releases of full games are enough to make me lose interest in a franchise (Yes, Assassin's Creed, I am looking right at you), I don't think a stream of DLC is going to have the opposite effect.

Perhaps they have sales data to support this notion, but from a personal perspective, I'm not seeing it.

I kinda wish he'd just say, "We sell a ton of DLC because it makes a nice profit and I have shareholders to answer to. Fucking deal with it." Sure, tt'd be a PR disaster, but it would be rather refreshing, don't ya think?

I'm like you, and I wonder if maybe we're just...Weird. I mean, maybe it does work on the average consumer. Maybe it's a strong business model. Maybe the internet complaints aren't founded. I mean, as a whole we seem to be against Day 1 DLC, right? Yet sales of DLC are highest in the first month according to multiple publishers/devs.

Anyway, yes, if that's the reason, it'd be refreshing for them to say it's why and to "deal with it" but if consumers actually do tend more towards continued purchases, this isn't all that wrong.

I still thing that an endless stream of DLC and sequels dampens the effect, but could I be the minority?

I don't know. Elder Scrolls and GTA seem to be able to get away with it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Or maybe you can also support modding, EA...
I mean, its not like it aint basically free DLC/Expansions/Brand new games...

Mr. CEO, have you ever heard of third party user mods? Apparently not. This is the true way to keep people interested by releasing the SDK/modding tools for your PC crowd. The console crowd are SOL on this option, sadly.

But they can't make money off mods!

I know this isn't strictly speaking true, as I've actually repurchased games for PC that I've owned on console based on the presence of a robust modding community, but I'm more than 80% sure that's the reasoning.

 

[silasbufu]

Yeah , you go ahead and keep thinking that.
I'll just go see browse the Steam Workshop for some more awesome FREE stuff for Skyrim and Portal.

 

[Teriver]

It all depends on what kind of dlc they release and the gap between games. Good dlc will keep potentially uninterested fans interested in the franchise but bad dlc. Good dlc is something that actually adds to the experience, it doesn't add new guns or something like that but it adds a new dimension to the game, either through a new area, storyline etc or through a massive addition of content that rebalances the game. Bad dlc is something pushed out quickly with very little content that is simply to generate profit. 5 bucks for 1 costume that is purely cosmetic on a game I already paid 80 bucks for, no thank you.

However if there is only a year's gap between games (like Assassin's Creed) there is absolutely no need for dlc. If there are several years (such as elder scrolls games) then it makes sense to release new content because 5 or so years is a long time to keep interest in something. It is still not necessary though, as shown with the elder scrolls games all you need is some kind of modding tool and content (and therefore interest) is generated for you for years.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Yeah it's a wonder that Nintendo's biggest franchises have managed to survive without the benifit of DLC for nearly 30 years eh? Or indeed it's a wonder how any franchises managed to survive before DLC even became a thing. Regardless selling an incomplete game for $60 and then selling the rest of it in little bite-sized pieces as DLC is still bullshit no matter how you slice it.

 

[Billy D Williams]

Yes, because gaming hasn't been around for decades and there are really that few to play while we wait around for another retread of the same thing.