I find it okay for music games like Rock Band, because you can't have 1,000 songs on a couple discs. For shooter games it's usually a rip-off, I mean, why would you pay 1/4 of the games original cost for 2-3 more maps?
Erradicate DLC ?
- Thread starter Orcus The Ultimate
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Pretty much this, and now companies are attacking the used gaming market. Games like Mortal Kombat will require $10 to play online after two days, for used copies. So pretty much now I buy games used when they're in 40 dollar range. The price of games has gone up and companies still think its appropriate to withhold 10% of the game for more profits, fuck that.Antari said:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As sort of a game designer, DLC gives me a way to be lazy!
"Should I include all 18 maps, or cut it in half, save me some time, and give people something to look forward to who buy the game?"
It makes the job of a designer easier.
But the prices for some are outragious.
If I were to make DLC, it would be like 4 dollars for 4 maps- a buck a map. But seriously companies? 15 bucks for 4 lousy maps? that is wrong.
I can understand fallout's DLC's being 10, though I wish they could have been a bit longer story wise for the money.
It is a great concept, but played out so crapily, I would like to punt a puppy about it.
As sort of a game designer, DLC gives me a way to be lazy!
"Should I include all 18 maps, or cut it in half, save me some time, and give people something to look forward to who buy the game?"
It makes the job of a designer easier.
But the prices for some are outragious.
If I were to make DLC, it would be like 4 dollars for 4 maps- a buck a map. But seriously companies? 15 bucks for 4 lousy maps? that is wrong.
I can understand fallout's DLC's being 10, though I wish they could have been a bit longer story wise for the money.
It is a great concept, but played out so crapily, I would like to punt a puppy about it.
I wasn't aware that you worked at EA, Capcom and Ubisoft and/or are good friends with the Dev teams and marketing. Since, as you know, its impossible to judge what a company does with its products and resources unless you actually have access to information on resources, which is usually kept under lock and key inside of the company. Of course saying what they have and don't have at any point based purely on what someone sees as a consumer outside of company and without access to this information leads to essentially guess and incorrect assumptions.[/sarcasm]Dexter111 said:
How can you be so sure that a company is cutting up its games? You don't have access to that information and unless you work there you will have no idea what is finished and what isn't
and thus don't know what is completed at the time of release. Now the only thing that is different here is Day-one DLC and content on the disk that needs to be unlocked with a DLC code. That is a valid point to make. Considering the time constraint that games are under its still possible that this is stuff that was cut and not expected to finish but at the last moment did, but it seems like some of it was developed before release anyways.
My response here is similar to the one above, gamers are self-entitled. Despite what some people seem to think, there isn't a rule anywhere that says everything a company makes must be in the released game or there for you to access. Companies can do whatever they like with games and customers can choose not to buy them. Don't like these kinds of DLC? Don't buy the games, get your friends to not buy the games and get their friends to not buy the games, Raise a stink on the internet, send them a strongly worded letter, do something to raise the issue and bring the fight to them. You even have my support to do that since most companies are failing at selling DLC right now anyways. Just know that you can't twist a companies arm, you can only show them something is not economical because of general dislike and make them rethink there approach.
As for expansion packs... expansion packs are non-downloadable Content, NLC. Like modern DLC there were additional work the company put into there games and shipped. Unlike modern DLC, you could not download them and its harder and expensive to make them. If you were going to ship the damn thing and expect it to be worth your time ti better be damn good. Today, its far easier to get additional content out. What does that mean for companies? Why spend thousands of dollars more developing for months to create a new Expansion pack when you can create a new level, sell it for a cheaper then an expansion but still a good price and make money quickly? It's more economical for companies to release small chunk DLC. People buy it. Its not a matter of them not making expansion packs its a matter of them shipping out more smaller items and making more in total. An expansion pack is just a really long DLC and banning DLC is banning expansion packs. If you want better DLC, and to be able to call them expansion packs, then you have to reshape the market to make this more profitable. SO long as people buy those 5$ weapon packs alone, companies aren't going bother creating big DLC to sell all at once. Releasing it in chunks or snippets makes them more money over all and if a game stops selling they don't get left holding the bag on a expansion to an unpopular game.
Ahhh but this is all pointless anyways. DLC == Expansions packs == extra content == post-production and cut ideas. Its all matter of how and when they sell them and that reflects technology and cultural influence. Its a progressive process and people are holding too fast to "in my day" logic. This whole economical political bull-crap is making my head hurt.
Nope. If you don't buy the DLC then you miss side stories on the overarching storyline. Lair of the Shadow Broker, Arrival are all completely optional. As in You don't have to do it at all, in fact if you played Lair of the Shadow Broker you would know its all about Liara and her thing she mentions when you meet her. So your idea of lazy writing becomes the fleshing out of a story of a former compatriot, on of which you had very little interaction with in Mass Effect 2 and is OPTIONAL. You can keep making things up and pretending your right.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
DLC would be great if there wasn't such blatant money making bullshit, even when it does have some decent content you haveto wonder if they didn't just cut off parts of the game so they can sell it to you for extra cash... and when it comes to money there is always someone who wants to pull your pants down and try some forced anal.
It would be nice if people did boycot DLC and force companies into proper expansion packs, but let's be honest 80% of gamers are pure consumers that just want something shinny and new, 5 maps for CoD wouldn't cost $15 if they didn't sell like hotcakes.
It would be nice if people did boycot DLC and force companies into proper expansion packs, but let's be honest 80% of gamers are pure consumers that just want something shinny and new, 5 maps for CoD wouldn't cost $15 if they didn't sell like hotcakes.
For me DLC have both pros and cons. One thing I hate is day 1 DLC that could've easily just been put into the game. DLC should only be reserved for things that can't be completed before the game ships out.
One thing I love about DLC is Fallout: New Vegas in particular and how Obsidian are pretty much using it to create Van Buren, which to those unaware, is what Fallout 3 should have been.
One thing I love about DLC is Fallout: New Vegas in particular and how Obsidian are pretty much using it to create Van Buren, which to those unaware, is what Fallout 3 should have been.
assuming they get to that point.Orcus The Ultimate said:
Bad reputations seem to mean little, so unless there's a real sales dip, I don't see it making a difference.
Beyond that, they'll probably just blame piracy, and come up with a new way to milk remaining customers. Prject 30 dollar or something.
I concur. If I'm essentially paying for "unlock keys" that could've been included in the game itself via some special condition (i.e. costumes in S/SF4), then that can suck fuck all.ParadiseOnceLost said:
If the DLC is extra stuff that was thought of after the fact (Shivering Isles for Oblivion), or was made because there was literally no room left on the disc (why do you think ME2 came out on 2 discs?), and it looks intriguing enough, then sure, I'll bite.
Don't just boycott, one sale makes little difference as they don't know it's gone. If you send them emails and letters every single time they bring out a game that you're not buying they're more likely to take notice. Especially companies like Bioware and Valve that actually pay attention to their fans.Antari said:
DLC is at love/hate status for me. There are those pieces of DLC that are literally just money grabs. They add almost nothing and are such crap. There are those that add something that should have been in the game from the beginning which pisses me off even more. Once in a while though, there comes the DLC that expands on the game and delves deeper into the story/world. The FO3 DLCs are like that imo. Some of the ME2 longer DLC's are awesome. (I'm ignoring the bullshit weapon/armor ones.)
So basically, DLC CAN be good, but it seldom is.
So basically, DLC CAN be good, but it seldom is.