I'm aware that no one is for D1DLC, but I thought that "Counter Arguments to Counter Arguments to the Anti-Day One DLC Position" ran long. Also, this isn't about D1DLC itself so much as it is about the arguments used to support it; I'm fairly ambivalent about the issue itself, but dislike some of the arguments used by both sides. The reason I'm focusing on the Pro-D1DLC arguments is that they're less emotionally charged-thus more interesting-than the Anti-DLC arguments.
Argument One: Companies have the right to do any (Legal) thing that makes them the most profit.
Counterargument: Perfectly true. "It is only natural for people to act in what they believe to be the best interests of themselves or their perceived group." - Voidism. Since many people believe it in their best interests for D1DLC to stop, it's also natural they'll speak against it.
Argument Two: Profit aside, the cost of making games is rising higher than the cost of buying them. D1DLC, being several times more profitable, helps them make more games.
Counterargument: Actually, the cost of game design is going down. It's just that nearly every game design/publishing company wants their game to be coated in the best layer of graphics possible. You know what I've been playing all last weekend? Civ4. The weekend before that? Fable: The Lost Chapters. At no point in either game did I think "I would be enjoying this so much more if only the graphics were improved!" And yet, compare the system requirements for [a href="http://www.2kgames.com/civ4/support_msr.htm"]Civ4[/a] and [a href="http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=963&game=Civilization%20V"]Civ5[/a]. [a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/905588"]Fable:TLC[/a] and [a href="http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=1050&game=Fable%20III"]Fable III[/a]. I don't know how much money it cost Firaxis to make their TBS' graphics require up to eight times as much memory as the previous instalment, but I doubt it was worth every penny. I'd be perfectly happy if I didn't need to blow a couple hundred bucks every year to upgrade my computer so that I can enjoy the latest game, to be honest.
Yes, updating graphics is a good thing, but if Bioware is really losing so much money they need D1DLC to turn a decent profit on Dragon Age 2, maybe they should consider the merits of a cheaper graphics set. And while one of the main draws of some games is how shiny they look (Final Fantasy, Crysis, I'm looking at you), that doesn't mean that anyone else needs to try and keep up with them.
Argument Three: Once the Weapons Design Team is done making all the game's weapons you can't just redeploy them to Terrain Mapping, so you might as well have them make extra weapons and sell it as D1DLC.
Counterargument A: The Weapons Design Team isn't composed of wizards who sit around a hard drive and recite ancient chants until a new weapon is coded and who, having trained their entire lives in weapon-based-chanting, are unable to do anything else. It's composed of people who think up the way the weapon looks and what it does, people who refine the weapon's stats so it doesn't break gameplay, people who refine how the weapon acts so the mountains don't vanish whenever you crit with it, and other jobs. Oftentimes a team member can preform several of these roles. So I somehow doubt that once all the original weapons have been made these people are unable to contribute somewhere else in the design process to speed things up or help refine what's already been done.
Counterargument B: I similarly doubt that, should the Weapons Design Team actually be composed of such wizards (Or whatever legitimate reasons mean they can only be used for weapons design) they would otherwise be paid to sit around twiddling their thumbs. The money that they are getting paid to design D1DLC swords could also be used to hire additional Terrain Mapping wizards.
Argument Four: It's insubstantial to the rest of the game, therefore it doesn't matter if you have to pay extra for it.
Counterargument: If it's insubstantial, then the designers probably shouldn't be wasting their time on it when there's substantial stuff that still needs doing.
Argument Five: A lot of D1DLC is made in the time between game completion and game release.
Counterargument: While this is true for a lot of D1DLC, there is often content on the shipped disc that can only be accessed by unlocking it with a credit card.
-Counterargument credit to Lostcrusader
If you have any counter-counter arguments, or additional Pro-D1DLC arguments (Or interesting Anti-DLC arguments), please feel free to share them.
EDIT: Changed the Fable3 link to actually go somewhere that showed you the minimum system requirements.
Argument One: Companies have the right to do any (Legal) thing that makes them the most profit.
Counterargument: Perfectly true. "It is only natural for people to act in what they believe to be the best interests of themselves or their perceived group." - Voidism. Since many people believe it in their best interests for D1DLC to stop, it's also natural they'll speak against it.
Argument Two: Profit aside, the cost of making games is rising higher than the cost of buying them. D1DLC, being several times more profitable, helps them make more games.
Counterargument: Actually, the cost of game design is going down. It's just that nearly every game design/publishing company wants their game to be coated in the best layer of graphics possible. You know what I've been playing all last weekend? Civ4. The weekend before that? Fable: The Lost Chapters. At no point in either game did I think "I would be enjoying this so much more if only the graphics were improved!" And yet, compare the system requirements for [a href="http://www.2kgames.com/civ4/support_msr.htm"]Civ4[/a] and [a href="http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=963&game=Civilization%20V"]Civ5[/a]. [a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/905588"]Fable:TLC[/a] and [a href="http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=1050&game=Fable%20III"]Fable III[/a]. I don't know how much money it cost Firaxis to make their TBS' graphics require up to eight times as much memory as the previous instalment, but I doubt it was worth every penny. I'd be perfectly happy if I didn't need to blow a couple hundred bucks every year to upgrade my computer so that I can enjoy the latest game, to be honest.
Yes, updating graphics is a good thing, but if Bioware is really losing so much money they need D1DLC to turn a decent profit on Dragon Age 2, maybe they should consider the merits of a cheaper graphics set. And while one of the main draws of some games is how shiny they look (Final Fantasy, Crysis, I'm looking at you), that doesn't mean that anyone else needs to try and keep up with them.
Argument Three: Once the Weapons Design Team is done making all the game's weapons you can't just redeploy them to Terrain Mapping, so you might as well have them make extra weapons and sell it as D1DLC.
Counterargument A: The Weapons Design Team isn't composed of wizards who sit around a hard drive and recite ancient chants until a new weapon is coded and who, having trained their entire lives in weapon-based-chanting, are unable to do anything else. It's composed of people who think up the way the weapon looks and what it does, people who refine the weapon's stats so it doesn't break gameplay, people who refine how the weapon acts so the mountains don't vanish whenever you crit with it, and other jobs. Oftentimes a team member can preform several of these roles. So I somehow doubt that once all the original weapons have been made these people are unable to contribute somewhere else in the design process to speed things up or help refine what's already been done.
Counterargument B: I similarly doubt that, should the Weapons Design Team actually be composed of such wizards (Or whatever legitimate reasons mean they can only be used for weapons design) they would otherwise be paid to sit around twiddling their thumbs. The money that they are getting paid to design D1DLC swords could also be used to hire additional Terrain Mapping wizards.
Argument Four: It's insubstantial to the rest of the game, therefore it doesn't matter if you have to pay extra for it.
Counterargument: If it's insubstantial, then the designers probably shouldn't be wasting their time on it when there's substantial stuff that still needs doing.
Argument Five: A lot of D1DLC is made in the time between game completion and game release.
Counterargument: While this is true for a lot of D1DLC, there is often content on the shipped disc that can only be accessed by unlocking it with a credit card.
-Counterargument credit to Lostcrusader
If you have any counter-counter arguments, or additional Pro-D1DLC arguments (Or interesting Anti-DLC arguments), please feel free to share them.
EDIT: Changed the Fable3 link to actually go somewhere that showed you the minimum system requirements.
