DLC... Your Opinions
It seems that DLC is becoming a bigger & bigger part of the gaming experience... I mean virtually ever game has some sort of DLC behind it anymore.
That being said, what I want to know from you guys is how*you feel about*downloadable content as a whole (like what do you feel is fair & unfair usage). Also, what pieces of DLC did you feel was most/least worth the money you payed for them?
That being said, what I want to know from you guys is how*you feel about*downloadable content as a whole (like what do you feel is fair & unfair usage). Also, what pieces of DLC did you feel was most/least worth the money you payed for them?
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
If companies want to release DLC, that's fine by me as I will only purchase DLC that I feel is beneficial to my gaming experience so long as it's fairly priced. An example of this would be LittleBigPlanet. Sure, Sony and Media Molecule release a ton of DLC for the title, but I've only bought the DLC from it that I care about such as the Metal Gear Solid DLC.
Do I think some companies milk the idea to no end? Absolutely. EA Sports releases an obnoxious amount of DLC with each of its titles in the hopes of gamers purchasing things they could otherwise unlock for free through sheer playtime. Do I fault them for it? No. They're a business and that's their right.
Regardless of the end result -- DLC is a choice, not a necessity.
Nexon ACTUALLY stated themselves that paid-for items for the game would not benefit the player whatsoever, and only be an extra.
But, like all MMOs, they actually did end up benefitting the player in outrageous ways. Half of the reason I've stopped playing is because of that.
For example, how would we feel if we need to pay $5,95 for Nutricious specs for 301? Ripped off? Sure feels like that with pretty much all DLC.
I suppose the only exceptions to this rule are the GTA IV DLC packages, but I never played them since GTA IV itself is such an unoptimised mess that my PC can't run it properly...
But then again, the DLC for GTA 4 is pretty much like a seperate game. The only reason it's labelled as a DLC is because you need GTA 4 to play it.
Not only did I play it, but I completed it before release. I also didn't play any of the post-release DLC for the title and am satisfied with my experience with the game from just out of the box.
Alan Wake comes with the first DLC episode free too, which I'm very much looking forward to.
Yeah, and you've got some DLC that's entirely free if you purchased a 6 pack of Dr. Pepper from a 7-Eleven in 2009!
I'm heavily anti-DLC. The first 3 packs of DLC for FO3 were so obviously cut from the primary game it's uncanny. The only thing that's worse than DLC that's cut from the actual game is DLC that's still IN the final game. Bass mode in Megaman 10, the bonus characters in Castle Crashers, etc.
And for the record, there is no such thing as "Free DLC". That is what you call an "update". My blood BOILS when people say things like that.
Free DLC: Downloadable content that can be accessed without paying a monetary fee.
Take, for example, the ice cream truck in Just Cause 2. It's essentially a God Mode vehicle. It's by no means a newer version of the game, it is by no means an extension of the main game, it's extra content that you download that is free of charge.
Buu for subscription games based on P2P games!!!!!!
Companies have seen it as a way to make money in order to offset the losses through piracy. You don't HAVE to download the stuff, you get a fully playable game without it. I think people have an odd sense of entitlement when it comes to entertainment but it's all just a business. If you want it and you desire to stay within the law then you have to pay for it.
It's not really any different to the mission packs you used to get on disc several years ago.
The 20 free songs in Rock Band 2, as well as Still Alive. Functionally identical to the songs you have to pay $2 for in every way except that they're free.
It's content and you download it, fairly sure that it applies whether or not there is a cost. A true update is usually just balancing and bug busting.
Sorry for being a derpface.
Oh, we took out the air-conditioning and radio. Sure, they were supposed to be in there, but now we think you should shell an additional $2000,- for it.
Hey, don't blame us... you can still drive with it, right? Isn't that the purpose of a car?
That's a terrible comparison.
Adding in navigation, On Star, 20" Rims, and chrome finishing is more akin to DLC for a car... You know -- the "Extra" things that don't come in the BASE PACKAGE...like the base package of a video game.
Basically, some content just gets cut because its costs exceeded the budget. Oftentimes, this cut content ends up being DLC instead of being added to the game with an added price tag.
Added to that is DLC that completely adds new things post release. like in LittleBigPlanet. Not shipped with the game, because it's optional, and made way after the game has been released.
Oh and Dragon Age's DLC can f&*% right off. I do not want to have DLC being advertised to me while I'm actually playing the game.
I agree with most of what you said there. I also hate paying for unlock keys (such as the alternative costumes in Street Fighter IV).
Personally my favorite DLC is Knights of the Nine fo Oblivion. I got it the day it came out & I still feel it was worth every penny.
While what you say is what DLC *SHOULD* be, what I said (basic stuff ripped out to sell) is the common practice. As such I can't honestly support DLC in any way.
In the old days they would postpone a release if something was not done and finish it, in these days they just cut it, get it on the proper date, than charge you $10,- for that what had to be in from day #1...
False information.
No, in the old days they didn't just "postpone a release" if something wasn't finished. The only reason this is capable of happening now and not before is because the majority of hardware now comes with a HDD built in or optional.
Elements have been getting cut from games since development started costing millions of dollars from start to finish. This isn't a "new" practice whatsoever. Studios are given budgets for a reason and due to them, some things aren't completed in time and the studios are not given the luxury of just saying "we'll push it back" -- especially not in this economy. Not all developers are as lucky as Polyphony Digital (very few are).
However, now that downloadable content is a viable option for studios, some of them feel that the completion of uncompleted elements within a game sometimes do warrant the time to finish. Unfortunately, that added development time also includes a new added budget for said downloadable content. While some larger developers like Criterion are willing to give post-release DLC away for free, they also eventually need to make money from the budget they're blowing through like Criterion eventually did with their Island DLC release.
A lot of people are very misinformed about this entire topic unless they've had the opportunity to actually sit down and discuss these things with a handful of developers.
Are there some out there that milk time-assets in the form of DLC? Sure. EA Sports does it all of the time in order to give busy gamers the chance to unlock everything without putting time into the game. Is that the "standard" practice? No.
Do you really think companies got less lax these days? In the past days console games had to be bugfree. After all, there was no way to patch them at all. Modern days allow that, hence companies having no trouble shaving off some QA time patching it up later. Companies work that way.
Free DLC provided in the past, like Morrowinds, got a price (Oblivion) without ANY added value at all. That's the thruth. And why DLC is a pretty bad development.
Console games had to be bug free? What imaginary land were you playing video games in? Console games have had bugs in them since the original releases -- especially sports games.
Companies are less lax these day. That's not even debatable. Just look at situations like Activision and Infinity Ward. Do you think things like that happen because of how relaxed companies are now? Lol. No -- it happens because of how airtight and not relaxed the industry has become.
Look at E3. It used to be a free-for-all public showcase of fun and excitement. Now, it's more personal and business-oriented where you have to be a member of the industry in some form to attend.
The gaming industry is a lot less lax than it ever has been.
DLC is not a bad development at all. DLC has helped create much better gaming experiences for console owners unlike ever before.
If you're a single parent, work 40 hours a week and only get 2-3 hours a week to game...do you think having the ability to spend $5 to unlock everything in one of your favorite titles like Skate 3 is worth it? Of course it is. That's a blessing that wasn't available in the past.
Look at games like Valkyria Chronicles where the base game is amazing piece of work. It's one of the best and under-appreciated games of this generation and any...however, because of DLC, Valkyria Chronicles allowed fans of the series to spend minimal dollars to extend the gameplay and replay value of the title 2-3 times over.
Downloadable content is a great addition to gaming and most importantly it's a choice. I can't stress that enough...choice. Nobody is forced to buy it. Nobody is forced to play it. And nobody is losing out if they miss out on it. They still get the full value out of their purchase as a base product.
How boring would Rock Band or Guitar Hero be if you couldn't download new songs every week? Are you saying those should be free and EA/Activision should pay royalties to artists out of their own pocket? That's a terrible business model.
You've got a choice. Either play the full game as intended for additional $, or not for the full price! No, because it is clearly cut from the game. Games like Dragon Age make that painful obvious with ingame commercials. Seriously, wtf?
That's how we want gaming to progress? I don't know... I play AudioSurf, where there are no such restrictions, you can just use whatever is in your library. Feel free to purchase your songs again though just to play in your game, I am the laughing third...
More misinformation, surprise.
E3 is not a free-for-all again. It's still an industry-only event. Check the website.
The acceptance process? Are you kidding? Games have to go through certification within Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo before they're Gold pressed and out the door. The certification process is actually LONGER now than it used to be. Now, certification takes place roughly 2 months prior to release with Gold presses taking place a month or so beforehand. That means in order to meet a deadline, teams have to finish projects much quicker than before.
Also -- PC Gamers are quickly turning irrelevant in the industry (as sad as that is). Games are starting to just skip over PC development as piracy starts to increase. Secondly, DLC costs money because it's no longer on your bandwidth alone. It's also having to go through Microsoft's or Sony's servers which aren't free and developers have to actually pay for -- thus the consumer has to pay in return.
Paying not to play the game you bought? Once more -- Skate 3 is a freedom game where you can Skate practically anywhere at any time. Why should you put 20+ hours into the game unlocking things if you only have some free time here or there and you'd like to just play for a bit and then move on? That's called casual gaming and A LOT of people take part in it -- do you know how you know? Because this type of content sells A LOT.
And no, you're not playing a butchered game, you're playing the game you paid for and would have ended up with regardless of DLC or not. If the DLC never releases and it's just cut elements you'd never know. The only way you do know is because they release DLC later on, right? So what are you talking about? I didn't see anyone complaining 15 years ago about "butchered games" they paid for. Why? Because the cut content wasn't being completed in the form of DLC.
Yes, because AudioSurf provides you the ability to use a microphone, guitar and drums, right? Exactly. It's beyond the lesser of the three in terms of sheer quality and entertainment. For $2, I can gain an unlimited amount of entertainment over time and you're the laughing third? How many movies have you paid $9.50 for in the last year for 2 hours of entertainment and it may have been awful?
I'm the laughing third.
Sucks, doesn't it? That's what DLC gives you. Some PC devs still allow it to be free (praise to them) but it's sheer impossible on the consoles due to the powers governing them... A 5-map pack for MW2 for $15 sells a LOT too. Doesn't make it less of an extortion or completely overpriced for what's offered... Pfff... don't tell me horse armor for Oblivion wouldn't be in it if they couldn't charge $ for it later...
Pretty much all of DA:O's and DLC that tries to prevent selling the game through is in the game files, just unlocked. And part of what was planned for the release anyway. You underestimate the power of modders. Of course, some game devs try to limit modding so they can sell more stuff themselves (see MW2 again). Ehm... KOTOR2? Sure, that's just 8 years, not 15.
Point is, it does happen to some games. Usually they cut it out cleanly, sometimes they don't. And when they don't and it comes around as DLC... well, you don't think that suspicious in the least? Lol, I suppose for you... and I laugh at $2 for a single song, while the whole of AudioSurf is $8,95 with unlimited songs (and thus unlimited entertainment).
But whatever floats your boat I guess...
Really? What happened to Alan Wake? How about Dead Space 2? The PC is losing titles it was meant to receive piece-by-piece. When was the last time Madden graced the PC? Developers are passing up the PC regularly now and it's starting to grow in numbers as the months go by.
Once again, misinformation. Sony is not forcing any developers to deliver paid content. Once again -- Criterion delivered a ton of free content for Burnout Paradise. Did Microsoft push Valve to charge for content on the 360 for titles like Left 4 Dead? Absolutely. However, don't push that on Sony when it's Microsoft's nickel 'n Dime job doing that.
Furthermore, this is also why Gabe Newell bit the bullet and is now developing for the PlayStation 3. Gabe plans on taking advantage of offering plenty of updates for Valve's titles that he couldn't do on the Xbox 360 console.
We weren't discussing whether it was overpriced or not. The Modern Warfare 2 Map Packs being expensive has nothing to do with the fact that gamers continue to buy into it. Gamers are CHOOSING to buy into it. They're not being forced to do it.
Also -- This whole "unlocked" thing is something you need to get over and realize how misinformed you are. There is a lot of things stuck in a games code that is irrelevant...you know, like PS3 code being found in Mass Effect 2 despite holding no relevance whatsoever.
Have you ever noticed when you purchase this so called "unlock" code content that it's followed up by a massive patch? Do you know why that is? It's because it's content that isn't on the disc. That patch is the content being placed inside your game. It doesn't take 253MBs to unlock code -- use common sense. It's much easier to implement code inside a game's script beforehand so that it has an easier time integrating later on. That doesn't mean the content was already finished and ready to go.
What does it matter if its obvious, suspicious or not? The point is, behind the scenes it's happening. If it's not noticeable and it never shows up again, it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Do you think nothing was cut out of God of War III despite there being no plans for DLC? Of course not. I guarantee things were cut.
Look at Final Fantasy XIII, they cut out explorable towns almost entirely...did they release it as DLC? No. Does that mean we only received a butchered game? Of course not. The budget wasn't there to complete the game like they had wanted....which is the exact reason we haven't seen a remake of Final Fantasy VII either.
AudioSurf sounds like a lot of fun. How much fun do you and your friends have in your living room playing it simultaneously on the same screen together? You know, a blank notepad and a pen is unlimited fun too...but that doesn't make it more entertaining than a finished script and a movie theater.
I'm not opposed to your views on DLC, but this isn't true. He never said that, he said he was bringing steamworks support to the PS3 version of Portal 2.
Valve's Erik Johnson spoke with CVG in regards to Valve's decision to develop on the PlayStation 3. Valve's main goal is to offer not only what Steam offers to gamers on the PC for the PS3, but to also offer as many updates, free of charge, to PS3 users like they do for the PC.
Johnson pointed out that for Team Fortress 2, Valve released roughly 120 updates for the game on the PC, but for the Xbox 360 they only released 5. This is something they're working on fixing with the open steam cloud options within the PlayStation 3.
But that's a whole other subject to rant upon... Ehm, yes, it has everything to do with it. The whole subject of this thread was wheter we liked being milked. Apparently a lot of people do, MW2 proves so. Doesn't make it good progress though. And I find it hard to believe anyone else would think paying more for less is a good idea. Well, unless you're not gamer but shareholder I guess...
Gamers keep buying crappy shooters like MW2 too. Doesn't mean *I* want crappy shooters like MW2. Although if a whole character with voicelines and mission and stuff takes 10MB, doesn't that become a little suspicious? Like you said, use common sense... And it's not to late to stop the DLC milking scheme yet. Unless we all willingly surrender like sheep of course... but then I guess my time as gamer is over. Together on the PC yes. I don't have a Wii, PS3 nor X-box... really don't care bout them anyways
Most eventually find their way to the PC once most stop caring about them. That makes the PC model "2nd class." Which -- unarguably -- shows that "growth" isn't happening on an overall level in terms of development.
And no, the thread's OP has no relevance to what YOU and I were discussing. We weren't discussing price point, but rather if DLC was beneficial to the industry and consumer or not as a base package itself.
The fact you and I are on a message board talking about this means that most developers aren't worried about what "you" want as a gamer (sadly). Most developers are worried about catering to the casual crowd that makes up probably 75% of the actual market. Those individuals aren't having hour long conversations on message boards like us
Most characters are going to be based simplistically off of the models already rendered within a title. That means the space provided to them is also going to be minimal. Depending on the audio quality, voice tracking isn't going to take up that much space either depending on how many lines of dialogue is being included with the download. Also -- If most of the environments are already in the game, then having a mission for that character continues to be even more minimal in terms of actual space needed. There is a lot of variables to go into something like that.
Considering AudioSurf has a ton of song recognition issues (that are widespread and commonly known), I'd say it's much more of a pain in the ass to go through a list of songs that don't work properly instead of paying $2 for something that is guaranteed to work as promised.
I can see where you're both coming from. I still stand by my decision that DLC can be both good and bad. Activision on one hand are a company who milks every single penny out of their DLC, charging ridiculous prices. That said, it isn't just DLC which Activision are terrible with. They milk their franchises to death too. Re-releasing the same games just with different wallpaper. They're even considering charging a subscription for CoD's Multiplayer too. Bah, I've gone off on a little company rant there, I apologise. If a DLC is well priced for what it is, then by all means it is fair. If it is expensive for what it is though, then of course it's unfair, like with anything that costs in life.
That said the idea of fair and unfair is subjective to the person. You can argue till you're blue in the face, and you probably won't come to an agreement.
I played this game for about 100 hours now and never had any of those problems. Maybe it's just me but I usually play songs I converted to mp3s from my own Cds. If I would buy crappy quality files from Itunes with DRM included then the game would not recognize them of course (they cannot make you surpass the DRM, that would be illegal). So what you have to do: burn the songs to a CD and convert them to mp3s afterwards so the DRM is removed and the game will recognize them.
Someone made that exact same example on Gamespot to which I believe I replied that air-conditioning and radios are a luxury (as is a car) and it's not unreasonable to expect to pay extra for it on top of the price of the car - and like DLC, those things are just a fraction of the price of the original item.
@Rawr
At least someone gets the point
Ten years ago, The Lost and Damned and The Ballad of Gay Tony would have just been called "expansion packs" instead of DLC. It's a pretty different thing from unlocking a single new level, or a new paint job for your car, even though the delivery mechanism for small additions like that is identical to the mechanism which can deliver you a nearly full new game like the GTA packs.
Well if you read the point of the thread (which everybody seemingly ignored), you will realise that half of the crap they are "discussing" has absolutely nothing to do with what this thread was started to discuss.