Poll: The Problem with DLC Today

[joshuaayt]

Ehn, DLC doesn't bother me too much. Isn't day 1 DLC usually aesthetic stuff anyway?

I suppose if a narrative based game was all "Yo, pay us $108 (confirmed Australian here) for this game, then another $5-20 for the rest of the story, released at the same time" I'd be a little cross, but as it is, usually it's pretty innocent.

I don't have any problems with DLC released later, though- that's just stuff they've gotten together for and made separately. I'm cool with it, even if it is always way overpriced...

 

[Philip Collin]

I personally dont see what was wrong with the only expansion packs. The companies worked for a half year to make another 10 hours gameplay for a game and released it for about £30/40 (just look at morrowinds expansions or even oblivion shivering isles). All i can see nowadays are little 2/3 hour "DLC's" (at best) that are priced at £10/20. (example is every DLC ever made by bioware).

In my opinion everybody would eb happy if they stopped releasing these tiny poorly made bits and instead focused on a decent length and quality expansion for the game, like the old days.

 

[getoffmycloud]

I don't mind day 1 DLC if the reviews for the game are released a week in advance so I can sort out getting my copy if the game is good if i'm on the shelf about a game I will wait until there are reviews about it and I can get an idea on whether I want the game or not. DLC I hate is stuff that is cut out from the middle of game assassins creed 2 i'm looking at you here and from what I have heard deus ex does it too. With games like this you should get a full story and do DLC Bethesda style and release shorter stories that are nothing to do with the story of the main game there are just set in the same place and time period and they are all planned out after release so they can address issues people had with the main game.

As for map packs they should always be about £5 never really any more than that and there is nothing really wrong them provding they have a good number of maps in them too not just 3 including one ported in from another game.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Remember back then, when they'd release a game and then later release some expansion packs? That wasn't any better than some of today's DLC, but it got less grief because it only happened if a game was popular enough.

 

[MasterSpaceman]

I generally can't help myself with DLC. If I like the game, I'll even pay for a few new items or costumes. That sorta DLC should be free however.
Day One DLC is a pretty stupid idea, should be shipped.
DLC for the sake of DLC is just as stupid. Leaving areas of the game purposely blank to later fill with DLC. Resi 5 Multiplayer, The upcoming Deus Ex DLC.

However, when I play a game like Mass Effect 2 from beginning to end on Insanity and love every second.. It is sad to end it all. DLC is then a godsend. Shadow Broker was amazing. Just enough more to get that Mass Effect fix.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

I don't buy the whole arguement that online passes are worth it...i think they actually damage the industry. People who buy second hand games generally aren't willing to pay the full price or can't afford to. What benefit is there to stopping them playing your game more? If i have a good experience from a game then i might be more willing to pay full price for it's sequel. What about the fact that most games after 3 months have nobody playing them? It's not exactly good advertising for your game and company. Most people who buy second hand would never otherwise play the game and isn't it better to have a larger user base? More chance at future revenue? More chance the DLC you release will be purchased by more people?

That said i have no issue with good DLC but most of what i've seen has been short and unbalancing. Buy a supercar as DLC on Burnout paradise and you can't lose to normal players. How does that help sell your game? Buy our DLC or fuck off and come last! Why is it your allowed to buy your way past some of the challenge? Money and no other reason

Day one DLC isn't such an issue for me because i never buy games on release day. If it's something they didn't have time to finish and then realease later as free DLC then i'm fine with that. If it's something they couldn't finish in time and then expect me to pay for later then forget it.

 

[Rhinzual26]

DLC is a companies way of keeping a game popular and fresh long after it's release. Just look at Fallout 3 and New Vegas. I have long since completed the main games but continue to play both because of the DLC. So in my opinion well made DLC is worth the money.

Neverwinter Nights is still got an active modding community thanks to the Construction set, so does The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind. Heck, even Baldur's Gate 2 is still getting some mods. Popular and fresh can be achieved by a great game, great engine, and either an easily moddable source or construction set.

This is also why DLC doesn't exactly work in those criteria, because the modding community would -always- churn out stuff better than what people pay for, and they'd make stuff similar to what was DLC and make it better. Lair of the Shadow Broker for Mass Effect 2, great DLC, but if it was in the hands of a competent modder or mod team, it would've been much, much greater (aside from lack of voiced roles, another reason mods are less likely to appear in such a scale these days).

Which is all fine from a PC point of view. But what about consoles who don't have that option? Developers need to extend the life of a console game with DLC.

Go the City of Heroes/Villains route and allow for the DLC to be downloaded for free. The only reason they charge for that crap is because of how ungodly expensive games are to make these days, yet the price has only increased by 10, maybe 20 bucks in the US alone (I won't speak for aussies and such).