I wasn't sure if this topic was discussed, so I wanted to bring it up. If there is already a discussion on it I do apologize.
I am not here to start a flame war, just to hear others opinions about this issue.
So we've all seen DLC now for quite awhile. Its becoming a trend in Gaming developers and its on the rise. Now I would not have a problem with DLC myself, its just that they (I believe) leaving out content that should already be in the game. I would like to use the "Cake" example for this.
Actual game expansions and optional DLC: Here, have some more cake if you like.
DLC, map packs, etc: Here, have the rest of your cake if you like.
I understand some companies are getting revenue on the DLC and its how business works. What I dont like is how left out some users are because they dont have a certain DLC and are being charged for the rest of the game they bought for about $50-$60 USD.
I would like to hear the thoughts of the Facepunch community. Thank you.
-Danda
The GTA Episodes from Liberty City were good examples of DLC.
The Call of Duty map packs are bad examples of DLC.
Im fine with DLC aslong as its not Way over priced (COD map packs/SOME sims Expansions)
To me it also means the Game Dev's are still paying attention to the game.
Content that could have been on the base disk are good examples of companies trying to exploit their customers.
Essentially I have nothing against bonus content. The problem that I have is usually with the size and pricing of it.
I used to love old datadiscs (expansion packs) and considered they were priced alright and added new fresh air to a game.
But DLC that essentially once put all together has the same content as the old expansion packs at 4 times the price is not alrightin my book.
[QUOTE=Coffee;30619243]The GTA Episodes from Liberty City were good examples of DLC.
The Call of Duty map packs are bad examples of DLC.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. Episodes from Liberty city actually had a good amount of content, characters, etc.
Black Ops, they are ditching out on the content it should have came with the game. Ya know?
[QUOTE=cr2142;30619431]Im fine with DLC aslong as its not Way over priced (COD map packs/SOME sims Expansions)
To me it also means the Game Dev's are still paying attention to the game.[/QUOTE]
While you are correct, whats the reason for content being very overpriced on some DLC? Even if they are paying attention to the game.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;30619603]Essentially I have nothing against bonus content. The problem that I have is usually with the size and pricing of it.
I used to love old datadiscs (expansion packs) and considered they were priced alright and added new fresh air to a game.
But DLC that essentially once put all together has the same content as the old expansion packs at 4 times the price is not alrightin my book.[/QUOTE]
Bonus content... Varies. Like BF3 releasing some perks early for those who preorder is not too bad, since it released one month after the game is out. What I dont like is content that is 'Exclusive' and is leaving out to those who didnt order, essentially punishing other customers for not prepurchasing.
DLC can be good, and it can be bad.
Good DLC is stuff like the Fallout: New Vegas DLC, the DLC for GTA4, stuff that actaully adds things worth having in the game. map packs are acceptable, they keep multiplayer fresh, but not 15 dollar map packs, like Black Ops. Shit's just overpriced. Bad DLC is stuff that is already on the disk, that you need to pay to unlock, or day one DLCs.
Bungie did a great job with DLC.
Fairly priced map packs with fun and unique maps (and some older maps, but those are often requested by the community). ODST came with all of Halo 3's maps on a separate disc, too. It was really cool.
DLCs are cool, aka Magicka's DLC.
[QUOTE=Skyward;30619832]DLC can be good, and it can be bad.
Good DLC is stuff like the Fallout: New Vegas DLC, the DLC for GTA4, stuff that actaully adds things worth having in the game. map packs are acceptable, they keep multiplayer fresh, but not 15 dollar map packs, like Black Ops. Shit's just overpriced. Bad DLC is stuff that is already on the disk, that you need to pay to unlock, or day one DLCs.[/QUOTE]
Day one DLC is just aggravating. The content was ready to go, and yet they charge players for it. Thats why people are upset with BF3s expansion that everyone knows its Day one DLC, even though DICE stated its not day one DLC.
I miss Expansion packs. You got the base game, waited a year or two, and bam, tons of new content that makes the game a new experience. Now, with DLC, that content trickles in that makes the game playable for a bit longer.
While I'm not against it, I'm not fond of grabbing DLC the moment I see one. Most of the time I'll get it if its for a game I enjoy and people are like "This is amazing".
Every single dlc ever made by bethesda is a bad example of dlc. Except shivering isles and knights of the nine... and point lookout, those were good because they added new lands and a good story.
[editline]21st June 2011[/editline]
Broken Steel is so dumb that should have been included with the game at launch.
[QUOTE=seano12;30620435]Every single dlc ever made by bethesda is a bad example of dlc. Except shivering isles and knights of the nine... and point lookout, those were good because they added new lands and a good story.
[editline]21st June 2011[/editline]
Broken Steel is so dumb that should have been included with the game at launch.[/QUOTE]
I'd consider Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine expansions. While horse armor was silly, the rest of the stuff was great after the price drop.
if it's free, worth the price, or some kind of pre-order bonus that everyone gets at some point, sure
if it's not worth the price, or only available to people who pre-order, get out of my face
I think that my 60 dollars should go to ALL development that was made before release day. So Day one dlc is like. Ehhh, We could drop this in but we wanna charge you a bit more for it.
BFBC2: Vietnam.
I'd say it really depends on the DLC itself.
Its a very broad question that depends on context.
Like, an expansion pack like OP4 or HL:BS? I'd have no problem downloading that as DLC.
Something like Broken Steel for FO3? Should have been in the game, it's literally the end of the game story and I don't like paying for an incomplete product like that,
Something that is already on the disc? Fuck that you're not going to exploit me.
Developers don't care about the content, most of the time they already have it already made. For example the Battlefield series is known for DLC that "unlocks" new guns or what not. But for those companies that actually care (i.e. GTA) are out there to make DLC worth while.
I think oblivion did it right. Pay $5 or so for a little bit of content, like a new house or the horse armour pack (lol).
[QUOTE=TizzYcho;30621007]BFBC2: Vietnam.[/QUOTE]
That is a GREAT example of a DLC. Cheap and added lots of new content.
[QUOTE=gokuman4594;30621011]Developers don't care about the content, most of the time they already have it already made. For example the Battlefield series is known for DLC that "unlocks" new guns or what not. But for those companies that actually care (i.e. GTA) are out there to make DLC worth while.[/QUOTE]
The price we pay for the content should be included with any DLC. Especially if the game is $60. Unless its a whole game itself (Dragon Age Origins: Awakening), it should be included into the game (Maps being the main concern for many gamers).
I'm fine and even prefer DLC as long as it's something that's thought of and developed after the game's been released a while to give dedicated players more content to enjoy. It's just launch DLC and overpriced effortless DLC that pisses me off.
[editline]22nd June 2011[/editline]
Probably my favorite DLC and the best value I've ever seen is RDR's Undead Nightmare. It was like a whole new game and a damn good one.
I miss huge expansion packs.
Like United Offensive for COD or The Frozen Throne for WC3.
Cod map packs I really really [i]really[/i] hate. The maps are usually bad, but they force you to buy them to play online (basically. The map selection will switch to a DLC and it kicks you if you don't have it).
DLC that is just cosmetic items that don't affect gameplay to support the developer are fine and a good way to support a developer, map packs and weapons and other shit should be free like before.
Excluding expansion packs though as paying for them is fine (BFBC2 Vietnam, Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine, Bloodmoon etc...)
I consider DLC to be good when it isn't pre-planned, cut from the disc DLC (See: MW2, Black Cops), or as Capcom loves to do, unlock code DLC (Resident Evil 5, DR2).
Now if it is the Disc Locked Content kind of DLC, then I hate it automatically (See: Every Capcom game on 7th generation consoles), with the exception of the unlock codes being free downloads after a certain date (BFBC2), those I am OK with, but I still don't like it when they do that.
[QUOTE=certified;30621818]I consider DLC to be good when it isn't pre-planned, cut from the disc DLC (See: MW2, [b]Black Cops[/b]), or as Capcom loves to do, unlock code DLC (Resident Evil 5, DR2).
Now if it is the Disc Locked Content kind of DLC, then I hate it automatically (See: Every Capcom game on 7th generation consoles), with the exception of the unlock codes being free downloads after a certain date (BFBC2), those I am OK with, but I still don't like it when they do that.[/QUOTE]
[img]http://ihateketchup.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/rush-hour-close-up-cap.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Galago;30621901][img]http://ihateketchup.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/rush-hour-close-up-cap.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Alas, my finger must have slipped.
[QUOTE=Agoat;30619913]Bungie did a great job with DLC.
Fairly priced map packs with fun and unique maps (and some older maps, but those are often requested by the community). ODST came with all of Halo 3's maps on a separate disc, too. It was really cool.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't happy with how they handled it in Halo 3. I was able to play Team Deathmatch when I originally bought the game, but when they released their DLC maps I was forced to buy those to play Team Deathmatch again.
imma agree with the cod dlc.. i bought only one and hated it and decided never to buy another again.. but a better example would be how patapon 3 for psp did it where when you redeem the online code you gain access to online play and further content which of course is free and i like how they use their "dlc" it kind of makes it so that those who pirate the game wont get the full experience without it but if you enjoyed it the game so much you can just pick up the online code for 10 bucks and play on.. i can understand how it can generate further revenue but 10-15 dollars for a couple maps doesnt really cut it when a game retail is at 60 pushing it towards 70-75 afterwards.. 60 dollars for a game should entitle us to everything and small content unless its like wow expansions where they are game changing and a whole lot of new garbage to mine all over again
DLC's are okay, although I'd prefer a proper expansion pack rather than a small content boost.
The DLC's of Fallout 3 and New Vegas were great, also I like the character packs for KF and Magicka.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
