I hate DLC solely because all of my consoles aren't connected to the internet yet. Still need to convice my landlord that wireless internet is goooooood.
Poll: Downloadable Content Doesn't Belong In Games
- Thread starter Mechanix
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's about 5-6 new areas full of zombies, frankenstein-esque monsters and wereskags. It's got a completely new storyline, and if it had been in the main game, I'd have been more pissed off than with it being DLC because it just doesn't make any sense with the rest of the game.dududf said:
Also, it has about 200% more zombie movie references, and another Pulp Fiction reference, a tradition that I hope goes into all the DLC.
Meh im a bit of a DLC fanboy really, especially when its free like the crash course campaign for left for dead 1, but the fact is that there will occasionaly be a big game with a bad dead line which will mean the design team will not be able to get everything they want into the game at the time and may want to release it at a later date once its completed, though any companies misusing the DLC system should be ashamed of themselves, the great thing about bought DLC is that you dont HAVE to buy it you can just decide not to, so you really dont have a place to complain about it given that with out DLC you would have the content at all!
Ya so then they can delay games forever. Who doesn't mind waiting an extra year or 2 for a game to be released? I know I wouldn't have minded waiting 2 years for the full Fallout 3 experience. And I am sure Bethesda's stockholders would have been in full support of that.AndyFromMonday said:
It depends, if the dlc has enough content on it, and teh game itself already had enough content on it, then I'm wiling to buy it. If I got a game that actually sucked and it didn't have enough content, being asked to pay to get more is just annoying. I've only bought dlc once in my life, and it was$1.50
How many people remember when Sims 3 was released? More than half the content was already on disk, but you couldn't use it unless you bought the DLC to unlock it. That turned me off of DLC right then and there. EA, you're not reading this, I know, but if it's on disk, I should not have to shell out more money to actually use it.
I agree, that compared to the original cost of the game, and the cost of DLC (Say $2.50 for 3 new weapons and a new vehicle) That the price is pretty outrageous.Mechanix said:
However, think about it from the developers point of view. Games are costing more and more to make these days. And yet the retail price hasn't gone up by much. DLC is good way for developers to make more cash, and extend the life of their product. It's never going to go away. The Difference is that DLC is optional, You can pay for it if you want, or not. If they did a retail price hike, Everybody has to pay for it.
So given that, Which do you prefer? (MW2 not-with-standing since it had a higher price.)
Valve is pretty much the only developer i know of that offers lots of additional content to their users for free. But then again, Valve is the only developer that has never disappointed me. (Left 4 Dead DLC costs money on XBL because of Microsoft forcing them to charge for it.)
I like it if it's free, but I've never paid for an expansion on a game.
My personal favourite 'most hated' DLC is the Mirror's Edge one. £7 or something for a few unimaginative, minimalist designed levels that looks like it took them 1 day to make. Hell with that!
My personal favourite 'most hated' DLC is the Mirror's Edge one. £7 or something for a few unimaginative, minimalist designed levels that looks like it took them 1 day to make. Hell with that!
Generally I'm against it. I'll gladly buy extra, professionally-made levels in addition to the main game, like the epilogue levels for The Force Unleashed or special bonus stages for Sonic Unleashed, but if I pay $60 for a game I want the WHOLE game and I don't want to see a commercial for ITSELF disguised as in-world features. Dragon Age reportedly pulls a lot of dick moves where there's shops and quest items for stuff that's IN THE GAME but that you can't actually access without buying a bunch of DLC. That's the epitome of lame--and it says a lot when I'm able to take games like The Force Unleashed and Sonic Unleashed, not masterpieces by anybody's account, and say I like them better.
I think paid DLC should be reserved for extra campaigns, or new gameplay modes not things like costumes or extra colours. It should also not be something that has been removed from the game disc just so that you can be charged again for something.
I like it unless it's like "Hey, this stuff is on the disc but we realized we could make you pay more for it. (Dragon age)
You want to release the game faster but cut down on the content? Sure, not a problem! Do so, then gradually release the rest of the game for free. I should not pay for content that should have been in the game in the first place.squid5580 said:
Are you defending SecuROM? Or maybe you just don't understand PC gamers at all? Because no PC gamer would really defend a crappy, bugged and punishing the legal players DRM... hell, any DRM except for Steam is idiotic.cainx10a said:
Same reason I bought it instead of just downloading off torrents: because I thought the developers actually cared.dududf said:
They don't. Also I can't buy the DLC, because direct2drive doesn't sell it and official sites accept only Credit Cards, no Debits or Paypal. Dozens of PC players are getting refunds or just not buying DLCs. I bought the game on d2d, so I can just NOT patch it, but someone who bought from Steam...
