Poll: Witcher dev believes all DLC should be free as a thank you for not pirating

[Spartan212]

Witcher 2 developer CD Projekt RED has stressed to VG247 that DLC should be viewed as a "post-sale service" and therefore shouldn't see any money changing hands.

CD Projekt RED's Konrad Tomaszkiewicz explained why gamers shouldn't be paying for post-release digital content, given their bite sized nature, "We've always believed in free DLCs. The thing is that we consider DLCs as a normal post sale service, which shouldn't be priced. Back when retail games were dominant, we had expansion packs. These were really large chunks of content, which were worth their price."

"If today's DLCs offered the same amount of content," Tomaszkiewicz continued, "they would be worth paying for, but in most cases players think they are overcharged for what they receive. That's why we offer expansions to our game for free. This is also a way of saying "thank you" to the people who decided to buy our game instead of copying it from an unauthorised source."
http://www.vg247.com/2012/08/09/cd-projekt-red-dlc-is-a-service-that-shouldnt-be-priced/

How can you not love these guys? Unfortunately, pirates will still steal the game then steal the free DLC to go with it. At least CD Projekt RED seems to be handling this in a more mature manner than most devs/pubs. Do you guys agree?

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

I believe I would actually hook my Xbox to the internet and deal with the horrible shopping experience to support this.

After all... it's free stuff, legal free stuff. Who doesn't enjoy that?

I love CD Projekt RED with their "Let's not screw over the people who give us money" attitude.
It's a shame quite a few other developers would look at that idea (free DLC) and just laugh.

 

[GiglameshSoulEater]

All depends. If its good, large dlc, like Shivering Isles for Oblivion, then sure, go ahead. But day one dlc is irredeemably bad, and hour-long dlc is also terrible.

I have nothing against weapon pack dlc, as I simply don't buy it. Same with cosmetic dlc. If the absence of the dlc won't significantly effect my game, then I reckon they can do whatever they want. Also, I hate dlc that you have to be online to play. I don't have a very stable connection, so having to try three times before I can play my Fallout 3 dlc is just irritating.

Dungeons of Dredmor had good DLC. Everything is cheap to begin with, but the first dlc you paid for - it added 50% more to the game. The second dlc did not, but it was free. The third dlc added whole new dimensions, and was also cheap. Significant expansions were paid for: lesser one s were not.

But hey, pirates don't want to pay for anything anyway, so thinking the greedy buggers will pay for a game with free dlc is nothing less than naive. Didn't The Witcher 2 get pirated way more than it was purchased? So yeah, it was a nice theory.

EDIT: Yeah, it was pirated around/over 4.5 million times, according to the escapist.

 

[OrpheusTelos]

I KNEW there was a reason I liked these guys.

 

[LetalisK]

I like it, but naive developer is naive. Pirates would still have to buy the original game and somehow I think a pirate's pocketbook is more important to them than "sending a message".

 

[Fappy]

These guys are the best. Seriously, I wish I could brofist them all.

 

[MisterShine]

I want to say its pandering to the people who irrationally dislike DLC, but its hard to argue with free, quality content (and CD Projeckts Enhanced Editions and various other things they've added post-release to their Witcher games were stellar)

I have no issue with DLC as a concept, I just want devs and publishers to be honest.

If it's a 10 dollar DLC that takes like 2 hours to complete, just say that, and then people can decide for themselves whether they want it or not depending on how much they like the game. But hey, if CDP wants to release all this stuff for free, I will certainly support that Even more reason to buy their stuff on Day 1.

 

[Stormz]

And this is when all PC games go the way of Steam and other services, I will still be supporting CD Projekt because they are the only ones that actually seem to get it.

 

[spartandude]

I believe I would actually hook my Xbox to the internet and deal with the horrible shopping experience to support this.

After all... it's free stuff, legal free stuff. Who doesn't enjoy that?

I love CD Projekt RED with their "Let's not screw over the people who give us money" attitude.
It's a shame quite a few other developers would look at that idea (free DLC) and just laugh.

ya know what else, the witcher 2 was heavily pirated (possibly one of the most pirated PC games out there supposedly) and they still say DRM isnt the answer

so they have that attitude
they release the video game version of god!
release an expansion (sort of) for it and give it to free to people who already brought the game.... seriously how many companies would actually do that
then say dlc should be free

how can people not love these game

 

[StriderShinryu]

That's a bit of a tough question. While I appluad the idea in theory, especially if they really could keep the DLC restricted to paying customers, I have a fear that it might eliminate some of the more expansive DLC that we still see from time to time. Some DLC actually does cost a significant amount of time/money to create and if there is no direct monetary compensation for doing so it could be tough to justify.

Also, I'm sure there are some people out there that would equate this to some sort of DRM scheme in some fashion and thus I don't think it would be as backlash free as ProjektRed believes.

 

[Kordie]

I voted for yes, but there should be an option for "depends on the DLC". While I can see a lot of DLC being not worth a thing, if it adds a decent amout of content I think its worth it's price most of the time. For an example of DLC I think should be free, the pre order bonuses from Fallout NV and similar style games. Once it's been out a while I say just let everyone have it.

 

[J Tyran]

It would be nice if devs released small DLC like extra equipment or cosmetic additions for free but I do not mind paying for small or large expansions. CD Projekt are great though, no DRM and they try and focus on bringing the player a great game. They are even more consumer friendly than Valve.

 

[Weaver]

I don't know when people started gaming here, but this actually used to happen pretty frequently on the PC. We just called them patches or bonus packs.

Unreal Tournament 99, for instance, had 4 bonus packs which added about 40 maps and a bunch of new player models all for free that you could just download from their site.

 

[DustyDrB]

I certainly love CD Projekt for believing and practicing this, but I don't think it's fair to make it the standard to release substantial DLC for free. There's a great chasm between free DLC (which makes me want to join in on a group hug) and the other practice of releasing map packs for $15 (which is simply ridiculous and makes me want to slap the people who buy them).

 

[MammothBlade]

I wouldn't go all the way. Provide SOME free DLC to paying customers but not too much. They still have to make money, and I don't begrude them for that.

 

[LetalisK]

I like it, but naive developer is naive. Pirates would still have to buy the original game and somehow I think a pirate's pocketbook is more important to them than "sending a message".

Well, their "naivety" works.

None of their games on their site have DRM yet the first copies that appeared on torrent sites were the versions with DRM (on disc) and they have still sold millions of copies of the game.

Two things. First, how does that work? How would a pirate take a non-DRM copy, put it up on a torrent site, and it suddenly have DRM? Or was there some other version that had DRM that was released? In which case, isn't it academic? The pirates could then either just spread the non-DRM copy around, or do what they do best and break the shit out of the DRM?

Secondly, selling millions of copies would speak more to the popularity of their game, not that they "beat" pirates, since they are also the same developer that estimated the vast majority of Witcher 2 copies were pirated copies, yes?

Mind you, I'm addressing the implication that providing free, substantial DLC will combat pirating. I say that's naive and pirates will pirate the DLC too, so there is no reason for them to not pirate the original game as well. Well, there is the "sending a message" reason, but seeing as how even a 1 cent indy humble bundle gets wildly pirated, I'm thinking people in that group are probably in the minority.

 

[The Madman]

All depends. If its good, large dlc, like Shivering Isles for Oblivion, then sure, go ahead. But day one dlc is irredeemably bad, and hour-long dlc is also terrible.

Edit: As of writing, I'm the only one that voted "No". DLC shouldn't necessarily be free. Small and non-vital, yes. Bigger DLC with hours of extra content or, lets say the Enhanced Edition upgrade us Witcher 2 buyers got for free, shouldn't. Not that I complain of course, but I'd happily pay for bigger content packs to support the developer.

I certainly love CD Projekt for believing and practicing this, but I don't think it's fair to make it the standard to release substantial DLC for free. There's a great chasm between free DLC (which makes me want to join in on a group hug) and the other practice of releasing map packs for $15 (which is simply ridiculous and makes me want to slap the people who buy them).

Re-read the quote:

"Back when retail games were dominant, we had expansion packs. These were really large chunks of content, which were worth their price. If today's DLCs offered the same amount of content, they would be worth paying for..."

To which he then added:

"...but in most cases players think they are overcharged for what they receive. That's why we offer expansions to our game for free."


Large substantial DLC that adds new content and works as an expansion might have in ye olden days of gaming, that's fine. Admirable even if the quality is good for the price, he's not arguing against that. It's more the horse-armour and explosive weapons pack sort of thing he's railing against.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

As of writing, I'm the only one that voted "No". DLC shouldn't necessarily be free. Small and non-vital, yes. Bigger DLC with hours of extra content or, lets say the Enhanced Edition upgrade us Witcher 2 buyers got for free, shouldn't. Not that I complain of course, but I'd happily pay for bigger content packs to support the developer.

There were no way for me to pay for the free Enhanced Edition though. Instead, I got an extra copy of the game for a friend. That way I could at least show some extra appreciation to CDPR for their hard work and good way towards their customers.

pretty much agree with this.

if it's small fixes here and there, that make the game work or iron out unforeseen bugs, then yeah those should be free, and maybe some sweet cosmetic things should be free

but if it's huge missions or sweet add ons, then yeah that's hard work people put in extra, should be paid for (not expensive, mind you, but 10 bucks should probably hold that charge up, maybe 5 if it's smaller)

i do wish they had some kind of way to give them money though on their developer page, and say if you give anything more than 5 bucks, your allowed to have a note that makes suggestions or say things you like in the attached 5+ bucks, so the dev can see that and say "hey, this guy gave us extra money to show his appreciation for this, we should make sure we don't cut that corner in the next game" or something. I know i'd toss them 5-10 bucks to tell them to keep it up.