Sony VP Wants Content on Discs, Not DLC

[SaintWaldo]

Or is he saying that whenever you release DLC, it should come in physical form as well, like what Rockstar did with its GTA4 expansions? I could see that being the case, but horse-armor-on-a-DVD probably has a very limited market

If it's the 25-30% of the market that's not on the network (or even a portion of it), who cares if it's "limited"? It still has money, and this businessman has made a statement about not wanting to limit peoples ability to give him money. Makes complete sense to me.

Shifting some of the PSN titles to physical PSP (Monsters anyone?) releases is another (non-full-title priced) way they've made moves to capture the folks who like to touch their titles. That's not horse armor, imo, that's just multiple venues for revenue streams.

Even "The Guild" has a physical DVD...

 

[Miumaru]

I was always pro physical media, but even more so now since Activision REMOVED the DLC from both Marvel: Ultimate Alliance games.
Expansion/DLC discs would atleast be a nice median, but obviously not for every individual piece of DLC. Could do it grouped though. As the article poked fun of the horse armor, it would be better on a disc that included horse armor, spell tomes, and maybe the wizard's tower.

Crazy out of my ass idea I just thought for the future, some sort of service where you can make your own custom DLC disk, where at a store (like Gamestop) you buy and download the DLC you want onto a disk that lets you play it with the retail game. No paying for what you dont want, and lets you not need live, or need to buy it through the marketplace. (Either cause you arent allowed to download maybe or if you refuse to, say to not need to give credit card info)

 

[ffs-dontcare]

I think I can see where this guy is coming from. If I was running a game development company I'd want them to work on getting everything right so it would all be put on the disc, rather than just releasing something 80% finished and put out DLC to complete it later on.

 

[Silva]

I'm with Mr Rob Dyer all the way.

Americans can talk down DLC disc releases all they want: they have fast enough Internet speeds to download it. Some of their compatriots don't even know what an ISP's monthly download limit is when I mention mine. To everyone, anywhere else, except maybe Japan and South Korea and parts of Europe, that's pretty privileged.

For the rest of us, this form of game release makes a great deal of sense. And why wouldn't it be feasible? It costs a few cents to make a disc copy of a game, it's not going to cost much more for DLC. Yes, there's the concept art you do for it, but I can only see that sort of thing boosting the industry's creative talent and appeal, even if it costs an extra few million dollars every year.

If Rockstar can do it, then EA, Ubisoft, Nintendo, and all the other big developing companies can do it. To me, it makes far more sense than downloadable DLC, which forces you into registering on all sorts of stupid company gaming networks if you want the goodies, as Shamus has been telling us for quite a while. Why reduce the forms of game distribution to one or the other? Business-wise, doing so makes little sense. A company would want as many people, hardcore or otherwise, to be able to get their content, and if they are more willing to pay extra for DLC if it's in a physical store, then why not take advantage of that?

The only argument against disc form DLC that seems logical to me is the environmental one. Plastic discs are a product of oil, and the more of those we produce, the worse things get in many ways. Of course, you have to keep in mind that a lot of pollution goes into downloading DLC too, like the dirty power that is usually used to run the computer during download and the server you're getting it from. Hopefully, we'll figure out a more environmentally friendly way to store data (or just get green enough power for Internet DLC to be totally friendly), but until then, you're really doing damage either way.

All this considered, I have to ask, Mr Funk: why mock Mr Dyer's opinion? Why do you disagree exactly? To me, his suggestion makes sense.

 

[Plurralbles]

he wants all content on the disc, but still wants to lock down certain parts so you still have to download a few kilobytes of code(paying money) in order to experience the entire game.
Asshat.

 

[samsonguy920]

It sounds to me like he's saying:

"My company totally missed the boat on this DLC thing, and I don't like that. because now we're losing. Can we turn back the clock please? because I liked it better when we were winning. Thanks."

Then again, my Executive Speak-to-Real Person Lingo translator tends to be a bit cynical.

We must shop at the same translator stores.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Isn't that the reason most DLC isn't plot-based content? So that the primary story can be told on disc, and the bonus content is there if you can get it? Wouldn't it be an incidentally easier idea to try and increase support to the areas where PSN/Live aren't available, and thereby embrace a consumer base who has been waiting for you to do just that?

 

[DaOysterboy]

I'm not really liking the DLC direction of the market to be honest. Sure it's extra revenue for a modicum of extra work so I understand why the companies are doing it, but is it really too much to ask that I be able to walk into a store, buy a game, bring it home and then be able to play the game in its entirety at my leisure? Super Mario Bros. didn't charge extra for the "world seven" content... I miss the days where continued development led to getting something substantial, like a new campaign (Starcraft->Brood War) rather than putting three moderately useful items in my backpack and one moderately useful person in my party for $10 every three months.

EDIT: Yes I realize this it the difference between "DLC" and "Expansions". I guess I'd just prefer that developers stick in anything small enough to be DLC as a feature of the expansions, but then I do have a "consumer bias." Like after Icewind Dale's Heart of Winter expansion came out, everyone blamed because it was too short, so they made Trials of the Luremaster as a free downloadable extension. That's the kind of model I guess I'd prefer. Ah well, it's not like I ever paid for DLC anyways.

 

[Asehujiko]

How are developers supposed to put all of that on the disc?

The same way people did it before the cancer that is dlc showed up: They made expansion packs. That and/or content patches.

 

[katsabas]

Well, it pretty much depends on the type of DLC. If it something like a ME2 expansion or something as big as Big Surf Island, it should be on a disc. If it is something like SF4 costumes do not release it neither online nor on a disc and if it is something like new maps for an fps, make it a dlc.

 

[mjc0961]

I rather like the idea of having the content be released on an extra disc as well as the marketplaces (like the GTA IV content example). But some games really don't have enough stuff for that to be worth it.

I think this is why we keep seeing a lot of "Game of the Year" versions come out these days, though. It's always base game plus other extras, INCLUDING most, if not all, of the game's DLC. My only beef with that is the name: think of something different. Something less cocky. Something less silly (just go to Amazon and search "game of the year" in video games; not all of those were game of the year for their respective years, it's crazy).

 

[Galletea]

I want stuff back on discs too. I don't see how it's fair that developers can charge so much for so little in their DLC. It also annoys me that if my boyfriend and I want to play the same game, then we'd both have to buy the DLC.

 

[Kenjitsuka]

Dyer for president!

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Physical disc DLC is fantastic. Hell, if I'd have known that Shivering Isles would be on disc, I'd never have connected my Xbox to the internet.

 

[ace_of_something]

I get the idea he wants things to be available for those who don't have PSN. Meaning that maybe it should be downloadable AND on disc for those who cannot download it.

 

[likalaruku]

I always make disc back-up copies of direct downloads, so why not have it already on a disc?

 

[Sixties Spidey]

DLC... On the disc...

That's the single stupidest fucking thing I have ever heard.

Why would it be? Not a lot of people have access to Xbox Live or PSN, let alone be bothered to download DLC. Releasing it on a physical media makes it more accessible. In many ways, he's right. DLC's just making the developers a hell of a lot more lazier than anything, and it's really restricting the player-base to those who can afford to pay for DLC over online services like PSN, Wii Shop Channel, or even Xbox Live.

Even then, I find there's quite a lot of bullshit to deal with when it comes to trying to purchase shit from those services. More than 5 occasions, I had to go down on Customer Service asses to get them to remove the block they placed on my Credit Card. It's a lot easier especially for consumers to walk into a store, buy a download ticket or a disc, go home, use it, and get the DLC.

 

[Mr. Socky]

Used-smoosed. Using DLC to fight the used games market is bullshit. Make your game actually good so I'll want to keep it around and replay it. This paying to unlock content on the disc crap has got to stop.

While I think that hiding sh*t on the disc is an awful, exploitative practice, you have to look at this from the publisher's prospective. Used game sales get the company absolutely no money, and more people get used copies than pirate the game. DLC is the only way of punishing people for this. Does it suck? Yes. Is it necessary? That can certainly be argued!
Plus, if the content is actually good, I don't really see why DLC is a problem.

 

[John Funk]

How are developers supposed to put all of that on the disc?

The same way people did it before the cancer that is dlc showed up: They made expansion packs. That and/or content patches.

And yet, a lot of stuff that's DLC is pretty minor stuff. Not worth an expansion pack at all.

For more MAJOR things like extra campaigns or what not, sure, you're absolutely right. But if it's things like, I don't know, the extra SF4 costumes? That's not worth putting on a disc.

And content patches have the exact same problem as DLC for this guy - not everyone's connected to the internet.

I personally don't mind DLC myself.