Poll: DLC - "Optional" content.

Recommended Videos

BiscuitTrouser

Elite Member
May 19, 2008
2,859
0
41
I was thinking today about DLC. DLC can be a new way of reviving old games that perhaps, you left in the dust a little and have forgotten, by adding new experiences and fresh ideas, replay value will only stretch so far.

This was my feelings towards halo and , more specifically, Call of Duty World at War. Now CodWaW has an average multiplayer, its a lot of copying and ruined by tanks, but at the time i found it great fun. This is where DLC comes along. Coming back for some nostalgia after a long period of mass effect i find that four new DLC's have come out. As nice as this is i cant afford that for a game im only going to play for nostalgia, so i play normally. Now i find that, for the crime of not owning DLC, i am booted from about half my games, if not more. Halo also barred be from playing any regular game modes because of my lack of "Optional" content. I find myself paying FOUR lots of 800 microsoft points simply to make the game operate as it did before.

How "optional".

I am aware ODST fixed this problem but i had to buy a while new game to do so, this was before then.

I basically had to pay $40 to play my game again in a normal way with some new environments to play in, no extra or additional ideas, just some new areas to look at.

This is an issue not only with multiplayer. Fallout 3 a culprit here releasing multiple DLC, i love fallout 3 but that amount of DLC has made it almost impossible to enjoy the same game as everyone else or talk about it in general context without paying over $40 again.

I now hear that DLC is coming out for MW2 multiplayer, a game i love to play online, assuming they stick with the old system looks like im paying another $10 to play my game.

This isnt the money making post this is simply making the game behave in the same way again, and in the case of fallout, not have me missing out on massive amounts of story and information.
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,475
0
0
That pisses me off as well.

I don't even like playing Modern Warfare 2 online, but I'll have to spend cash on the maps simply because my friends like to.
 

AvsJoe

Elite Member
May 28, 2009
9,051
0
41
Welcome to the future of gaming. The developers have found a new, immoral, and, quite frankly, ingenious way to make more money off of us and they're gonna be doing so happily until something slows or stops the process. It's times like this when you're jolted back into reality and re-realize that games are just another cold-blooded business like computers, soft drinks, and war. I've said it before and I'll say it again:[HEADING=2]
The future is gonna suck!​
[/HEADING]
 

Daemascus

WAAAAAAAAAGHHH!!!!
Mar 6, 2010
792
0
0
If I like the game there is no problem with me buying DLC but it does irk me when they relese DLC the same day as the game( cough cough Dragon Age).
 

xDHxD148L0

The Dissapointed Gamer
Apr 16, 2009
430
0
0
Sometimes. FPS games will always be able to see more map packs easy due to the fact you can't really play the game without them, and I think its cheap and it makes it worse knowing that developers hold maps from the final copy of the game, just so they can sell them later . But I think other games do a good job at it, adding more to their games and fixing or adding things that were excluded from the retail version.
 

DeadlyYellow

New member
Jun 18, 2008
5,141
0
0
The multiplayer model is atrocious, but predictable. I remember the old Unreal operating similarly by limiting to patch version. Of course, since PC patches tend to be free, it kinda debunks the idea.

I also when it is inserted into games, an effect likely aggravated by EAs plans. I remember Dragon Age: Origins, the NPC stationed in camp with a permanent exclamation above his head that was only ended by purchasing and playing DLC.

Oh and lets not forget about disc content that can only be activated through a separate purchase.
 

AndyFromMonday

New member
Feb 5, 2009
3,921
0
0
Activision can go fuck itself. I'm never going to pay 15 bucks for 3 new maps and 2 rehashed ones. NEVER!

But yes, I do agree with your point. In order to experience a game from start to finish nowadays you have to ditch out at least 30 bucks if not more. It's bullshit if you ask me.
 

Sephychu

New member
Dec 13, 2009
1,697
0
0
Separate playlists for DLC map games are all a game needs. After that, I'm down with it. If it looks good, I'll get it.
 

BiscuitTrouser

Elite Member
May 19, 2008
2,859
0
41
Sephychu said:
Separate playlists for DLC map games are all a game needs. After that, I'm down with it. If it looks good, I'll get it.
This is a system i also considered but sadly has not yet been used at all. No games come to mind anyway, feel free to cite me if im wrong. As good an idea it may be it means i have less obligation to buy the DLC, making them less money.
 

Sephychu

New member
Dec 13, 2009
1,697
0
0
somedude98 said:
Sephychu said:
Separate playlists for DLC map games are all a game needs. After that, I'm down with it. If it looks good, I'll get it.
This is a system i also considered but sadly has not yet been used at all. No games come to mind anyway, feel free to cite me if im wrong. As good an idea it may be it means i have less obligation to buy the DLC, making them less money.
I think the idea was briefly around on Call of Duty, but that may be my imagination.
 

Flour

New member
Mar 20, 2008
1,868
0
0
DeadlyYellow said:
I remember Dragon Age: Origins, the NPC stationed in camp with a permanent exclamation above his head that was only ended by purchasing and playing DLC.
Another option on the PC would be to torrent the DLC to get the NPC out of there and ignore the quest.
However, this does operate on my logic of "use the DLC as a 'mod' to get him out of the camp" and I doubt the EA/Bioware overlords like seeing installed unpaid content.

On-Topic: I don't play online but if a single player game continues the story in DLC then the game is not finished and I'm not going to pay for it. A version with all the DLC would be an exception, but in that case I'd be buying the 'full' game.
 

ReaperzXIII

New member
Jan 3, 2010
569
0
0
I just want the DLC to be cheaper since I can't afford to pay like £30 to get additional content on a game when I need live and I want to get a new game coming out.

Also what I am tired of is online shooters making lots of maps up for sale but never patch the things wrong with the game (which is why I got tired with Gears, good solid shooter and fun but host adv. lag, glitchers, cheaters etc... make the game boring). Also playing the same old game types on different maps is boring to me, oh wow team deathmatch on a new map it makes so much of a difference. They want me to shell out 800/1200 microsoft points bring out new game modes.
 

AkJay

New member
Feb 22, 2009
3,555
0
0
I just hate 2 things about DLC.
1. Overpriced DLC (I'm looking at you Activision, and Bethesda Softworks)
2. Day One DLC. Honestly, you can just put it into the fucking game already? you cheap bastards.
 

Radeonx

New member
Apr 26, 2009
7,012
0
0
AkJay said:
I just hate 2 things about DLC.
1. Overpriced DLC (I'm looking at you Activision, and Bethesda Softworks)
2. Day One DLC. Honestly, you can just put it into the fucking game already? you cheap bastards.
Sometimes they were making the DLC, but didn't finish it by the time the game was being packaged and ready to ship.
However, if they had planned on making DLC during the making of the game, they probably should have just waited and put it into the actual game.
 

BiscuitTrouser

Elite Member
May 19, 2008
2,859
0
41
Radeonx said:
AkJay said:
I just hate 2 things about DLC.
1. Overpriced DLC (I'm looking at you Activision, and Bethesda Softworks)
2. Day One DLC. Honestly, you can just put it into the fucking game already? you cheap bastards.
Sometimes they were making the DLC, but didn't finish it by the time the game was being packaged and ready to ship.
However, if they had planned on making DLC during the making of the game, they probably should have just waited and put it into the actual game.
If its that close to production they should just make it free. Thats like saying.

"Well we were gonna put ice cubes free in your lemonade but we didnt have any"
"Here they are jim!"
"AH brilliant, thats $1 for an icecube"

This takes place the second you hand over your money for the lemonade. These annoy me the most.
 

Ironic Pirate

New member
May 21, 2009
5,541
0
0
somedude98 said:
Radeonx said:
AkJay said:
I just hate 2 things about DLC.
1. Overpriced DLC (I'm looking at you Activision, and Bethesda Softworks)
2. Day One DLC. Honestly, you can just put it into the fucking game already? you cheap bastards.
Sometimes they were making the DLC, but didn't finish it by the time the game was being packaged and ready to ship.
However, if they had planned on making DLC during the making of the game, they probably should have just waited and put it into the actual game.
If its that close to production they should just make it free. Thats like saying.

"Well we were gonna put ice cubes free in your lemonade but we didnt have any"
"Here they are jim!"
"AH brilliant, thats $1 for an icecube"

This takes place the second you hand over your money for the lemonade. These annoy me the most.
That is a perfect example. Do you mind if I use that in the future?
 

Radeonx

New member
Apr 26, 2009
7,012
0
0
somedude98 said:
Radeonx said:
AkJay said:
I just hate 2 things about DLC.
1. Overpriced DLC (I'm looking at you Activision, and Bethesda Softworks)
2. Day One DLC. Honestly, you can just put it into the fucking game already? you cheap bastards.
Sometimes they were making the DLC, but didn't finish it by the time the game was being packaged and ready to ship.
However, if they had planned on making DLC during the making of the game, they probably should have just waited and put it into the actual game.
If its that close to production they should just make it free. Thats like saying.

"Well we were gonna put ice cubes free in your lemonade but we didnt have any"
"Here they are jim!"
"AH brilliant, thats $1 for an icecube"

This takes place the second you hand over your money for the lemonade. These annoy me the most.
The person in me agrees, but the businessman doesn't.
If you ever, ever have an opportunity to make more money as a business, odds are you are going to use them. It isn't fair, and it's very irritating, but, that's how business works.
 

Delock

New member
Mar 4, 2009
1,085
0
0
No problem with free DLC whatsoever, even if it is Day One.
Same with stuff like Cerberus Network, as in you either get it seperately or it comes with a new game and it lets you get more than the price of the DLC (I've already added it up on a seperate topic, but as of now, the stuff released on it would be priced over ten dollars if released seperately). Also, none of it is necessary, only additional content, as DLC should be.
However, I hate short DlC, Unlockable Content (as in, on the disc. Especially if was advertised... Capcom), You-literally-can't-play-without-it DLC, necessary-to-plot DLC, 3 different preorder DLCs (forcing me to choose where to buy based on content before I even know if the game is going to be good), really a patch DLC, Overpriced and will soon be bundled DLC (hey! let's punish the people loyal enough to us by releasing it dirt cheap later once we've bleed dry our fans), the really limited availible DLC (ex: Pokemon. Go to new york for a special offer or you're screwed forever!), micropayments DLC (as in, small things that if bundled together at a reasonable price would make great DLC, but are sold individually for way too much).
I've got nothing against DLC's concept -get more game for a little extra- but so far very few games I know release actual good DLC.