Good DLC - Mass Effect 2: Lair of the Shadow Broker
Bad DLC - Pre-order Characters, costumes, weapon packs.
I think dlc is ok as long as it is done right. Although everyone here is praising Magicka's dlc, I never really liked it because it felt to not have enough content for the price. They usually contain one new robe with special stats and a new chapter that as far as I know are pretty short.
DLC is fine as long as it:
1. Wasn't created with the development of the game, was created after the release of the game.
2. Isn't overpriced --- it's worth the price for the content it holds.
Magicka's DLCs are perfect exalmes of well-done dlcs - they give you a lot of content for a good price
It also depends on the game. If the game feels complete and amazing, then DLC will be welcome.
BF3, even though they're offering the BF2 maps as DLC, if the main game is great, then I won't care.
[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]
'Fairly priced'? Ha! That's a laugh. You realize that, per map, the Reach map packs are even more expensive than Call of Duty's?
Anyways, I think DLC is perfectly alright when it adds meaningfully to the game, and preferably changes it in some way. For example, the CoD map packs are bad DLC because they just add more maps without actually changing the base gameplay at all, whereas something like RDR's Undead Nightmare feels like a radical departure from the base game and an entirely new experience.
As long as it genuinely expands on my gameplaying experience, is reasonably priced, is not already one the disc, and is of quality. No problem, hell I might even appreciate the effort the devs put into it and love them as a result.
If it comes out on day one, is of shoddy quality, is disproportionately expensive, and offers little in the way of new fun. In that case I flip shit.
Well, I should clarify that a bit. 'More' content as opposed to 'different' content can be fine in some cases. For example, Fallout 3 had DLC that basically just added more area and more quests that was fantastic (Point Lookout), but also had DLC that changed the core gameplay and was utter shit (Operation Anchorage).
Map packs in general are awful as DLC. All they do is split the playing base. DLC should never impede your ability to play a game if you don't buy it, but that's exactly what map packs do.
Automerge broken.
I am going to admit it, I am a sucker for cosmetics in online games (keep that shit out of my single player experience though).
[QUOTE=redBadger;30619446]Content that could have been on the base disk are good examples of companies trying to exploit their customers.[/QUOTE]
Some games have DLC on the base disk that require your purchase to unlock, could have been on isn't a good excuse, this shit is ON it.
THAT is bullshit.
Plus you know game devs actually have no development time about a month off of the release date because of shipping, printing, all that good shit.
That train sim has some pretty nice DLC. 2$ for a train. BUT the trains are just cosmetic so it's ok.
[QUOTE=MoarFunz;30619953]DLCs are cool, aka Magicka's DLC.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, releasing a bunch of robes for 2 bucks is SOOO fucking great, that's just as bad as the Black Op's map packs.
In my opinion all DLC are bad, anything with the size of DLC should be free, things like BFBC2:Vietnam or the GTA IV episodes would be considered expansions, those are fine.
[QUOTE=postmanX3;30622388]'Fairly priced'? Ha! That's a laugh. You realize that, per map, the Reach map packs are even more expensive than Call of Duty's?
Anyways, I think DLC is perfectly alright when it adds meaningfully to the game, and preferably changes it in some way. For example, the CoD map packs are bad DLC because they just add more maps without actually changing the base gameplay at all, whereas something like RDR's Undead Nightmare feels like a radical departure from the base game and an entirely new experience.[/QUOTE]
You realize that Bungie has games other than Reach?
[QUOTE=Sublata;30623795]You realize that Bungie has games other than Reach?[/QUOTE]
The Halo 3 map packs weren't very cheap either.
[QUOTE=DX_V;30623905]The Halo 3 map packs weren't very cheap either.[/QUOTE]
There was also DLC for Halo CE and Halo 2, and if I remember correctly the DLC for Halo CE was free.
[QUOTE=Sublata;30624019]There was also DLC for Halo CE and Halo 2, and if I remember correctly the DLC for Halo CE was free.[/QUOTE]
Uhh Halo Custom Edition was pure user content while Combat Evolved wasn't LIVE enabled. :raise:
DLC should be what expansions used to be.
I love Vietnam for BC2, it's more than just a few maps as it changes the gameplay a lot from the original.
[QUOTE=Legolas;30624170]Uhh Halo Custom Edition was pure user content while Combat Evolved wasn't LIVE enabled. :raise:[/QUOTE]
Halo Custom edition wasn't what I was talking about, now that I recall there was a disc in the store like for Halo 2, so it wasn't free. But more recent reproductions of Halo CE come with the maps built in.
I dont like it when its locked in the disk, but im okay with it if its thought of after/before release and is released later/finished but cant be added into the game before release, as long as its a reasonable price.
One of the best DLC I've ever played was Undead Nightmare for Red Dead Redemption.
I don't know if it counts, but a big reason I'm against DLC/expansions is due to the Sims. I mean seriously, it shouldn't cost you over $400 for a game plus all it's expansions. Especially when all the expansions add are stupid shit like some furniture, a new area or new careers. This shit should be a few bucks max. I'd rather have no DLC at all then the garbage we have now, even if there are some good ones among them all.
DLC is fine, but only if its made after the initial game is released. Content that is taken out only to be released as DLC is bullshit. And of course, if the price is reasonable. Some DLC is way to expensive.
Imo BFBC2:Vietnam was a prime example of good DLC.
[QUOTE=FuzzyPoop;30623503]Yeah, releasing a bunch of robes for 2 bucks is SOOO fucking great, that's just as bad as the Black Op's map packs.
In my opinion all DLC are bad, anything with the size of DLC should be free, things like BFBC2:Vietnam or the GTA IV episodes would be considered expansions, those are fine.[/QUOTE]
At least the game doesn't kick you if you don't have said robes.
The Nippon DLC was a good idea. A dollar for a new character look (that looks awesome), a decent starter staff and an even more decent starter sword.
I'd like to have more expansion pack type of dlc such as EFLC and undead nightmare. I would also like to see more dlc like the Just Cause 2 dlc, for which you pay 99 cents and get someyhing small, but very entertaining.
[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]
Honest Hearts for Fallout New Vegas was pretty good, imo.
Dead money sucked camel dick though.
If they are updates, content packs and not just content that is locked or was cut from the final game I'm fine with it. I don't feel like I'm getting a good deal when I buy call of duty map packs, but I do because they do add longer playability to the game, in my opinion.
As far as the best DLCs, I got tbogt for 400 ms points, and it was worth so much more than that. Rockstar know how to make DLC right.
Good DLC = Good amount of completely new content. (See Fallout 3/NV)
Bad DLC = New Equipment/Maps/Game modes
[editline]22nd June 2011[/editline]
Opinion
[QUOTE=Samiam22;30627503]At least the game doesn't kick you if you don't have said robes.
The Nippon DLC was a good idea. A dollar for a new character look (that looks awesome), a decent starter staff and an even more decent starter sword.[/QUOTE]
Not to mention that the nippon DLC is part fundraiser to help people in Japan.
TF2 has great DLCs.
Minus the hats.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
