DLC abuse
- Thread starter Theo Rob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
great thing about consumers trying to avoid things they disapprove of, chances are you're too late to prevent your purchase if the thing you disapprove of is buried far enough into the game that you can't turn back by that point, and then frontload preorder content to lure you in far enough to commit to it
this is planned more and more these days
there's pretty much no way to avoid it unless you're psychic, or enough people play the game to the point where it becomes public knowledge, which tends to also be the point where companies sell enough copies to succeed
this is planned more and more these days
there's pretty much no way to avoid it unless you're psychic, or enough people play the game to the point where it becomes public knowledge, which tends to also be the point where companies sell enough copies to succeed
You dislike the very idea of content created months after a game has been released? You would rather the game developers not bother rather than have them create the content and provide you with the option purchasing it?isometry said:
I like it myself. Any content that can enrich my gaming experience in an aging game is great in my book. If that content gives a bunch of developers sitting around twiddling their thumbs after the game has been released a chance develop more content for the game and earn a buck or two while doing it, then great.
Day one DLC is a lie in it's very nature and something we need to squash under our heels.
Yes because developers starting content after the base game is done and in final testing phase and working on it for the 5 or so weeks between when the the game is done and sent off for certification, and when it finally comes out in stores is a "lie"?TorqueConverter said:
You would rather have them twiddling their thumbs for over a month waiting for the game to before they start making new content when they could be making new content they could possibly get out for us day 1 or within a week after the game comes out?
No, I don't feel that way about all post-release content. I like full-sized proper expansions, which used to be more common (on PC) before the DLC era. The difference is that expansions make an old game feel new, it's not just tacked on "more", it's another retouching pass over everything to make it "better", in addition to adding "more."TorqueConverter said:
The best of DLCs do some of these things: raise the level cap, add new skills and items throughout the game, polish things like AI and bug fixing to a high degree. But the bar is set much lower for DLC in general, so tacked on missions are a lot more common than the kind of fundamental game improvements that I miss from full expansions.
Yeah, it is. What's a "base game"? Are we going to allow the game devs and pubs such a thing? A base game. What's "final testing phase"? Where are the other testing phases and why can't DLC be developed during those times too? Certification time? It sounds plausible on the surface, but its' only a few weeks long. How do we know content was indeed created in the certification time? Take their word for it?SajuukKhar said:
How many arbitrary excuses will we let them conjure up get away with until we draw the line in the sand? Wait until the worst case scenario becomes a reality and give a shit then?
I understand. I miss expansion packs as well. I ever really saw DLC as the cause of the disappearance of expansion packs. If anything I was worried about the future of the modding community, as much of the DLC out there resembles game mods.isometry said:
I have no idea why expansion packs are less popular these days. Perhaps game developers prefer to make sequels, as in they are more profitable?
All the content needed to tell the story the game was trying to tell.TorqueConverter said:
We apparently let book writers and movie makers get away with it when they write a book/movie series and then like 10+ side books/comic/extra material that explain things that were only touched on in the base series.TorqueConverter said:
It simply isn't possible or logical to expect that every detail mentioned in the base series will be fully explained in the base series, if they tried to do that everything could be a giant cluster-fuck.
The final testing phase is the final phase of testing they do before the game is sent off for certification.TorqueConverter said:
Also they do make DLC during all the testing phases, because they all happen at the end
You say "sounds plausible" like certification isn't something every developer who releases games on a console goes through.TorqueConverter said:
Also most day 1 DLC usually involves copy pastad models already in the game with few original assets, that's why it can be done so quickly.
How do we know a book writer isn't planning to leave some plot critical information out of a series only to realse it in a spin-off book?TorqueConverter said:
How do we know a movie maker isn't gonna do the same by releasing some plot critical information in another movie?
You really can;t know but making a conspiracy out of every day 1 DLC and treating it ALL as evil is stupid. You have to judge it on a CASE BY CASE basis. You can't blanket hate it without being ignorant.
None of those excuses are arbitrary or really excuses for that matter.TorqueConverter said:
Also trying to destroy something that could be, and often has, been used for good just because someday they MIGHT do evil with it is stupid.
I think many PC exclusives still do expansions, Shogun 2 just had one and Civilization 5 has one coming up, Stardock has released several big expansions for Sins of a Solar Empire and Galactic Civilizations II. Maybe it's just the strategy game genre, but those are the only triple A PC exclusives I have these days.TorqueConverter said:
So based on all those PC exclusive expansions, I'd say the emphasis on smaller DLC is probably due to consoles having limited hard drives and primitive digital distribution, limitations which will hopefully get better next generation.
A big problem with expansions is that there's only ever 1 or two for most games, they can take ages to make, and when they come out people burn through them faster.isometry said:
smaller, faster released DLC keeps people in the game more continuously for longer periods of time.
I personally got more time out of 3 of New Vegas's Dlc then I ever did most expansions and i got them quicker and for less overall cost.
Get away with what and how is it applicable to video game development? Video games aren't movies nor books.SajuukKhar said:
How does this relate to content removed from a video game and sold as day 1 DLC? Refer to DLC Quest. It a base game with all the little details taken care of through DLC.
It's satire by the way.
Sounds like video game content created during game development to me!
Certification time is short if they wish to hammer out any code in that time then fine. They better have a damn good reason for charging money for that code and not use "certification time" as some excuse to remove content from the game. If it's little things like a weapon mod developed during certification time that they want to use as an incentive for new game sales, then fine. Don't cut sizable amounts of content from the game and then spew "certification time" as some sort of, well, lie.
Obviously. The ease of production is not exactly an argument in support of charging money for this day 1 DLC, now is it?
This doesn't apply. Video games aren't novels nor movies. I'd be damned if I was asked to pay an extra 7.99 at a cinema to view "deleted scenes". Books? The content is either written or it is not. I shouldn't have to explain the difference between a book foreshadowing another novel and content removed from a game and sold on the side under the guise of extra*.
There is no conspiracy theory. It's as clear as day. How can there be DLC on day one unless it is a product of game development? As soon as you accept any excuse for why content, created before game release, is not part of video game development, then you are opening the door for the game developers and publishers to trample all over you with other ready-made excuses. What's next "Tom didn't show up to work today so all content created today is not part of the game."?
Again I feel the satire of DLC Quest may be lost on you but do look into it.
What good? When? You're still referring to day one DLC right? Don't give me the digital collectors editions garbage as that goes against the very nature of a collectors edition. Incentivising new sales?
No, I merely included the definition that sadly a few companies seem to use. It is one of the main problems with DLC. I do not accept such practices. DownLC or DiskLC however, I still do not like so much. I would rather digitally distributed expansion packs, rather than a lot of mini and independent add ons. I have yet to see DLC be used effectively - even though I do believe it has the potential to. I do not believe it is the best thing to happen to gaming recently either. Digital Distribution in general is.Crono1973 said:
1. And books aren't movies, yet they can still do the exact same thing. The fact that games aren't movies or books doesn't negate the simple fact that all 3 cant possibly put every little thing ever brought up in the base game because of time and cost and bloat.TorqueConverter said:
2. The DLC quest video was a hyperbole, hyperbole about something MIGHT happen, and that a vast use of DLC shows probably wont.
3. If you think something done during testing, when the base game is content complete = something done while the base games content is being made, then...... well I cant think of anything to describe how silly that is.
4. I have yet to see a game dev use certification as a lie, or a DLC that was a sizeble or important chunk of content removed from the game, but when it does happen they should be called out on it.
5. Production is still production, the fact that many assets were already done doesn't negate the fact that people still had to go to work and actually put the DLC together
6. Again the fact that video games aren't book or movies doesn't negate the fact that all 3 do the exact same thing for the same reasons. Secondly many movie publisher often charge more then the value of a movie because of the bonus content on the disk, and there have been several book series that have some character or item that is important but you never learn its full back-story only a brief description, only to have it further explained in some side book later on. Games do the exact same things for the exact same reasons, it simply is not feasible to put detailed descriptions of everything in the main books/movies/games of a series.
7. Because it was made in the months+ time they had between the game being content complete and the game coming out. development done after the base game had finished development. its pretty simple.
8. And again DLC quest is a giant hyperbole of everything people think DLC will become and try to act like it is now, but when in reality it isn't.
9. Shale and Warden's keep were both fun day 1 DLC for DAO, The Exiled Prince for Da2, and Javik for Me3 weren't bad either. Completely optional content not needed to get a full experience from the base game, as day 1 DLC should be.
This is the internet, sarcasm and other such things don't travel well. Please explain.Skoldpadda said:MercurySteam said:
I think you misunderstood me.
1. yes there are companies abusing DLC and there are also companies who do DLC right i.e. bethesda, rockstar and gearbox. Also I guess valve is just making a whole bunch of free dlc for team fortress 2 and that's great.
2. I don't know whether to say its one of the best things that has happened but there is no reason to take a step back form it.
A simple solution is don't by DLC which you don't like, the same way you wouldn't by expansion pack you don't like, or games you don't like, or food you don't like or movies you don't like etc. The point is just don't buy it as long as there are people willing to pay for this stuff companies are going to keep doing it, I am not saying tis right I am just saying its really the costumers fault if they keep on being sold something they don't like because continue to buy something they don't like.
2. I don't know whether to say its one of the best things that has happened but there is no reason to take a step back form it.
A simple solution is don't by DLC which you don't like, the same way you wouldn't by expansion pack you don't like, or games you don't like, or food you don't like or movies you don't like etc. The point is just don't buy it as long as there are people willing to pay for this stuff companies are going to keep doing it, I am not saying tis right I am just saying its really the costumers fault if they keep on being sold something they don't like because continue to buy something they don't like.
The point here is when they do think of content, create it, and then actively deny it to paying costumers when the product is purchased. I love it when content is dreamed up, weeks, months even years after a game has been developed and released. I love legit DLC and expansion packs.SajuukKhar said:
I used ot think of it as something that might happen as well. When a AAA developer of a sortied history takes one of the first steps towards this direction (From Ashes DLC) I have come to the realization that this will happen.
Yeah I do, again what is a "base game". Does the notion that we can allow developers to create such things as base games not scare the shit out of you? How would you have liked it if Lira, Jack half the weapons and large portions of the Citadel in the game were extra* day one DLC? Where you, and I mean you, draw the line?
I hate to bust out analogies, but have you ever seen this logic applied anywhere else and it's been acceptable? Ever ordered a meal before and been told to wait for a portion of it to finish cooking? Do they charge you AGAIN for it when brought to your table?
Mass Effect 3 From Ashes DLC. Yeah, "Certifications time" is a totally legit reason for charging for that content. It's not like only a potion of that content was created in certification with the rest of it locked on the disk or anything.
Because they finished up some of the game content before release with the faith that it was done during certification time somehow makes everything Ok? Sounds like they overran their deadline and game development of planned game content spilled over into certification time but still finished the content by the release date. This allows them to charge for it how again?
Yeah, sometimes it's not possible to cram as much lore as one would like into a game and this occurs when the content is never developed in the first place. You can argue that much like deleted scenes, developed game content could be dropped from a game because it's worthless or just redundant. Day 1 DLC with a price tag slapped on it is clearly not redundant or worthless. I'd be alright if Bioware had dropped the Prothean character from the game entirely because they felt it was redundant and then threw him in as an extra a year later in an ultimate edition or something. This is very much how deleted scenes work with DVD sales. Worthless content unfit for the finished product is removed before release (the cinema) and is thrown in with the disk when the movie finds it way to DVD to incentivise DVD sales. They sure as hell aren't selling you "deleted scenes" at the cinema for a wad of cash.
It's content complete when it's content compete. If the game is not released yet and there is still content being created, then it is not content complete at that time. That's one of the few standards we can hold these companies to. I don't care if they fail at a game and it's crap. I don't care if the ending is abysmal. If you sell us a video game then that game need to be content complete and not broken. Why? It's a very grim future when we refuse to hold companies to these standards and games become 1/3 content complete at full price with the other 2/3 as day one extras.
Yep.
You realize Shale isn't optional, right? Shale is part of the game and free to anyone who bought Dragon Age new. Shale is only DLC so as to remove the content from the disk. This was done to deny the content to copies purchased through used game sales and not because he is optional. It was unfortunate this battle between retailers and the pbs/devs made the used game consumer a casualty of war. The From Ashes DLC and Wardens Keep DLC are unethical and directly targeting the consumer.
1. proof of that.... ohh wait.... you have none.TorqueConverter said:
2. From ashes was a completely optional DLC that provided no real importance to the ME story. If you think making completely optional content that isn't needed to get a full game experience is bad then all new content is bad.
3. Does the notion that book writers get to determine what is necessary to a book's story scare the shit out of you?
does the notion that a movie directer gets to determine what is necessary to a book's story scare the shit out of you?
It is their game, their story, and only they ever have and ever will have the ability to determine what is needed to tell a story.
also your analogy fails because when you order something like fires it is they who get to determine how it is cooked. You don't like the way its cooked well too damn bad in most places fires are cooked in some specific way.
4. The only part that was on the disk was the character and SOME of its dialog files, most of the content was not on the disk, and thus they have every right to charge for it.
5. It seems more like that after the base game was content complete and in testing phase some of the devs were able to finish part of the DLC's files and put them on the disk you you would have less to download later.
6. Considering Shale, Warden's Keep, The Prothean, and all other bioware's Day 1 DLC HAVE BEEN OPTIONAL and WERE TOTALLY UNNEEDED, your argument kinda fails.
7. Content complete is when the game and all the things in it are done and in testing, that the devs are working on project 2 does not make project 1 somehow not content complete. I swear do you even think about your arguments before you make them?
9. Shale is optional because you DONT need to get a full game experience, that she was free with new copies of the game does magically negate the fact that not having her does not mean you don't have a full game, with a full story, and a full endings.
What I mean is that it seems that content on the full game was held back in order to charge us for it.Phlakes said:
Disk locking is one hell of a dick move, even more so than day 1 paid dlc. they cut a chunk out of the game and told every one that the stuff is there, you just have to pay us more.
so the base of DLC has turen from "lets give players new stuff" to "lets finish the game but charge people more for stuff we already put on the disk"