Poll: DLC subjective, objective or perspective?

[Conza]

I've very rarely subscribed to DLC, I wish that games were just complete to begin with, and if more content were released, it were free.

But given the environment, how on earth do I tell if DLC is good value, a rip off or only a matter of perspective?

Here's an example; I bought some DLC for Gran Turismo 5 called the 'Car Pack 2' it contained my favourite car of recent time, a Volkswagen Golf R (along with 3 other cars, 2 were basically re-released newer models of existing cars, the other was an updated car of a Volkswagen Golf GTI called a Scirroco R).

Anyway, so 'Car Pack 3' is released, and it's a major rip off, it contains (imo) 1 great car, the Lamborghini Aventador, along with 5 other less impressive cars.

'Car Pack 2' had 2 cars I did, and 2 I didn't want and was $6.95AUD (and only $4USD?!?! Taxes...), now 'Car Pack 3' has 1 car I want, 5 I don't, and its $9.95AUD.

So while I'm content with my initial purchase, this latest pack I won't get. If it were same as USD price, I'd get it no question (for $10USD you get 6 cars AND a track, but it will cost Australians nearly $17AUD for the exact same content).

Getting back to the main subject, how do we judge if DLC is worth it or not? Is it purely subject or objective? Is it only a matter of perspective? Or do we base it on a sales basis?

 

[ChupathingyX]

The same way you would judge a normal game.

What one person may see as a rip-off someone else may think is brilliant.

Personally Dead Money was my favourite DLC for Fallout: New Vegas, yet that one is often seen as the worst by many people.

It just depends on the content and whether or not you think it is worth it or not...just like a normal game.

 

[Conza]

The same way you would judge a normal game.

What one person may see as a rip-off someone else may think is brilliant.

Personally Dead Money was my favourite DLC for Fallout: New Vegas, yet that one is often seen as the worst by many people.

It just depends on the content and whether or not you think it is worth it or not...just like a normal game.

There's only so much truth to that, if the DLC were $1 buys everything forever, that's basically free and regardless of what it is, its basically good value, likewise, if each new car in my game cost $20 each, almost everyone would think its a rip off.

So there is a definate yes and no for everyone we can narrow it down for...

 

[ChupathingyX]

The same way you would judge a normal game.

What one person may see as a rip-off someone else may think is brilliant.

Personally Dead Money was my favourite DLC for Fallout: New Vegas, yet that one is often seen as the worst by many people.

It just depends on the content and whether or not you think it is worth it or not...just like a normal game.

There's only so much truth to that, if the DLC were $1 buys everything forever, that's basically free and regardless of what it is, its basically good value, likewise, if each new car in my game cost $20 each, almost everyone would think its a rip off.

So there is a definate yes and no for everyone we can narrow it down for...

That's true, but what if someone really loves those cars?

$20 does seem like a lot but the thing is that, like I said, it depends on what the person likes.

Just look at those train DLCs on Steam that are worth over $1000. You just know that somewhere, someone has all of them.

Sure if all DLC was only $1 it would be great, but even at higher prices I still don't feel like I'm being ripped off because a $10 or $15 DLC can sometimes give me more enjoyment than a full game.

 

[xvbones]

That's true, but what if someone really loves those cars?

This.

You can call it a ripoff as much as you want, the actual value of any product is what people are willing to pay for it.

You (and I) can call, for example, the extra couple bucks you can pay to have some new weapons or vehicles unlocked from the shop in Just Cause 2 to be ridiculous, crass money grubbery, ludicrously useless to gameplay and basically all around pointless but if someone sees enough value in it to want to purchase it, that is their perogative.

Entirely subjective in every possible way.

Case in point, I think the above DLC for JC2 is pretty grotesquely awful, and yet at the same time have been really really tempted to shell out $5 for a pack of Batman skins for Arkham City, which are just as utterly meaningless and as much of a waste of my money as those extra guns.

 

[omicron1]

Just look at those train DLCs on Steam that are worth over $1000. You just know that somewhere, someone has all of them.

Yep - one person.
Who, coincidentally, also owns everything else Steam sold as of the beginning of January.

On target: We do judge things' value subjectively, 'tis true - but on a component-by-component basis. Say, we judge a new car for a game as a unit of value. A good car may be a lot of value, a bad car just a little. But then we take those units of value and we tend to sum them up - how many toys/new things do I get? Do I feel like that number is worth the asking price?

So, for instance, the map packs for CoD. They might have a ton of work and effort put into them, I don't know. But a multiplayer map doesn't have a very high apparent value to most folks, and four of them for $15 seems like a rip-off to almost any outside observer.