Exclusive DLC just go away.

[Snake422]

Why is there exclusive DLC in my opinion it's not fair to the gamers of the world. I mean I know from a business stand point why company's have been as of late throwing money at developers to get exclusive DLC most notably Microsoft with GTA4 and Fallout 3.

But really I mean I guess I half expected the developers to actually care about there fan base (silly me) rather then alienate them. Cause alright GTA started on the Playstation nobody can dispute that and it wasn't until San Andreas that it went to the Xbox so the way I see it it's the Playstation community that made it the huge success it is today.

And then suddenly Rockstar say's screw you PS owners that have a PS3 and not a 360 but are still big fans of and love GTA4 it's like thanks a lot way to be kind to the gamers that made your game the success it is by giving them the finger simply cause money speaks volumes.

Now I own GTA4 for my 360 but I would have liked to have gotten it for my PS3 cause I'm more familiar with the controls on that console but I figure I'm throwing down $60 for this game so I'll get more bang for my buck if I go with the console that has the exclusive DLC that's the same reason I bought Fallout 3 for my 360. But I don't like that you should get more bang for your buck no matter what console you prefer there shouldn't be favoritism when it comes to DLC it's not fair to the gamers of the world.

And Sony isn't getting out of this either they got exclusive DLC too for Mirrors Edge that is (albeit only once.) I guess I expected a perfect gamer world where all gamers are treated equally what a fool I was money still talks in the gamer world as well.

So here's my final word if a game is multiplatform make the DLC multiplatform otherwise the ones who bought the game for the console that doesn't have the exclusive DLC will feel ripped off cause guess what they are they could have it better but they don't cause they simply had the wrong console great logic on the part of the developers right.

 

[willard3]

Paragraph breaks, please. For the love of God, paragraph breaks.

It's a matter of money money money. More people have 360s and Live and are willing to buy, and Microsoft is clearly shelling out large "incentives" to developers to make them exclusives.

 

[inkheart_artist]

I don't agree with DLC in any way shape or form. It becomes an excuse to release an unfinished game and charge more for it in the process. I really have trouble understanding people that actually spend money on it.

As for it being exclusive, first off it saves money for the developers I'm sure and second, the systems need some sort of exculsive content that is game breaking to ensure consumers will buy their console and their version of the game.

 

[Wargamer]

Ow. Big, ugly block of text. >.<

Firstly, this seems to be about GTA4. I don't see why people want more content for a bad game, so I'll ignore that.

Exclusive Content, like Exclusive Titles, make sense in a business world. If you have something your rivals do not, it's a reason for them to come to you over your rivals.

Both the PS3 and 360 have exclusive content for games, and quite often multi-platform games; the two I know of for certain are Bioshock and Mirror's Edge on the PS3, and GTA4 gets waved around far more than it should by the 360 crowd.

What I find very, very strange is that, arguably, the PS3 should be leading on the DLC front. The HDD for the 360 is a minor extra that is not particularly needed unless you intend to buy things off Live. By contrast, the HDD is integral to the PS3, and as such the console should be making better use of it.

The PS3 can have far larger HDDs than the 360, as swapping the HDD out is easily done and fully legal in Sony's eyes (it is not in Microsoft's). As such, plenty of people out there already own PS3s with 160GB, 250GB, even 500GB Hard Drives.

If Sony actually went ahead and pushed this side, producing truly epic games with gigabytes worth of downloadable content, they could really smash the 360. After all, who's going to worry about a game that totals 40GB if Sony start putting 500GB+ HDDs in as standard?

 

[Snake422]

Sorry about the big text block there. I fixed it must have slipped my mind.

 

[JJDWilson]

To be fair, GTA started in DOS and was ported to the PS at a later date, but we'll let that slide.

 

[Corpse XxX]

I agree.. Exclusive DLC's is a BIG no-no in my book!

Exclusive games is ok, but not DLC's, thats just plain stupid!

 

[GloatingSwine]

Why is there exclusive DLC in my opinion it's not fair to the gamers of the world.

Newsflash! Life is not fair.

What I find very, very strange is that, arguably, the PS3 should be leading on the DLC front.

What I very much suspect is that distribution via PSN is somehow less attractive to developers than distribution via XBLM. There could be any number of reasons for that, price, backend infrastructure, no active focus on securing content from Sony, etc.

If Sony actually went ahead and pushed this side, producing truly epic games with gigabytes worth of downloadable content, they could really smash the 360.

Good luck making that profitable. Those gigabytes of downloadable content, and the server side storage and more importantly bandwidth to provide them to consumers, aren't magicked into existence. Making the content costs. Storing the content costs. Allowing people to connect to and download the content costs. And the costs scale to the amount of information. Gigabytes of add-on content would have to be priced at a level that the majority of consumers are simply not willing to pay for add-ons to remain viable.

 

[wilsonscrazybed]

Exclusive DLC? I think it's great, if MS wants to pay Rockstar to provide me with extra content on my Xbox360, so be it. Sure, it ticks off fanboys, but they don't need much provocation in the first place. More than that it forces companies to compete for developer's attention. That means they make more money and ultimately more games.

This isn't about playing favourites, this is about business. If you want to get angry about DLC get angry that you are pretty much paying for games that are free (flash games) on your PC. (I'm looking at you tower defence clones.)

 

[Dr. UBAR]

After all, who's going to worry about a game that totals 40GB if Sony start putting 500GB+ HDDs in as standard?

My internet download limit.

 

[Sketchy]

It's now a part of gaming. We have to get used to it.
I very rarely buy DLC anyway, the only one I can think of is Shivering Isles (for Oblivion).
Which is absolutely worth it.

 

[Eagle Est1986]

For some reason, I can completely deal with platform exclusives but exclusive DLC really grates me.
I think it's because if I have the choice of which platform to play on, then I don't want M$ whispering in my ear, telling me to buy it for their console.

 

[bjj hero]

I have a 360, I love my console. Im sure Id love my PS3 if i had one but with a family I cant really afford to buy multiple consoles like I used to. DLC is nice but it wouldnt make me move to another platform.

ts part of producing games, if exclusivity pours money to developers at a time where big name production houses are going under its got to be a good thing. LEts hope it leads to more quality titles, though I was thoroughly unimpressed with GTA4

 

[Wargamer]

After all, who's going to worry about a game that totals 40GB if Sony start putting 500GB+ HDDs in as standard?

My internet download limit.

I don't mean a 40gb bulk download. I did say TOTALS 40gb; you download 1GB worth of upgrade, then the next 'chapter' is another 1GB download, and so on, and so forth.

You could produce a truly EPIC episodal game that way.

 

[GloatingSwine]

You could produce a truly EPIC episodal game that way.

For a similarly EPIC price.

 

[Singing Gremlin]

The PS3 can have far larger HDDs than the 360, as swapping the HDD out is easily done and fully legal in Sony's eyes (it is not in Microsoft's). As such, plenty of people out there already own PS3s with 160GB, 250GB, even 500GB Hard Drives.

Eh wot? Could you explain that to me, since the 360's HDD add-on is clip-on, clip-off? Do you mean none-official ones?

Sorry, I'm being slow.

 

[Theo Samaritan]

The PS3 can have far larger HDDs than the 360, as swapping the HDD out is easily done and fully legal in Sony's eyes (it is not in Microsoft's). As such, plenty of people out there already own PS3s with 160GB, 250GB, even 500GB Hard Drives.

Eh wot? Could you explain that to me, since the 360's HDD add-on is clip-on, clip-off? Do you mean none-official ones?

Sorry, I'm being slow.

You can take any SATA hard drive and plug it into a PS3. I have seen people use 1TB before.

If you want it to look tidy you have to settle with laptop harddrives which max out at about 500 currently.

But, for the record, its not warranty breaking - sony provide instructions on what to do and how in the PS3 user manual.

 

[Frybird]

Exclusive Content IS unfair to gamers. There is no way around it. But so are exclusive games, but it is business.

And if every Game + DLC would be released on every console, the companies might as well all work together on one console only and then, the gamers would be really screwed.

I really can't say much about the whole thing other than that.

Luckily, real big, epic pieces of additional downloadable content is rare (It just so happened that two big games profit from that at the relatively same time), so it's not much of an issue yet...unless you are a GTA/Fallout Fan of course.

 

[beddo]

Why is there exclusive DLC in my opinion it's not fair to the gamers of the world. I mean I know from a business stand point why company's have been as of late throwing money at developers to get exclusive DLC most notably Microsoft with GTA4 and Fallout 3.

But really I mean I guess I half expected the developers to actually care about there fan base (silly me) rather then alienate them. Cause alright GTA started on the Playstation nobody can dispute that and it wasn't until San Andreas that it went to the Xbox so the way I see it it's the Playstation community that made it the huge success it is today.

And then suddenly Rockstar say's screw you PS owners that have a PS3 and not a 360 but are still big fans of and love GTA4 it's like thanks a lot way to be kind to the gamers that made your game the success it is by giving them the finger simply cause money speaks volumes.

Now I own GTA4 for my 360 but I would have liked to have gotten it for my PS3 cause I'm more familiar with the controls on that console but I figure I'm throwing down $60 for this game so I'll get more bang for my buck if I go with the console that has the exclusive DLC that's the same reason I bought Fallout 3 for my 360. But I don't like that you should get more bang for your buck no matter what console you prefer there shouldn't be favoritism when it comes to DLC it's not fair to the gamers of the world.

And Sony isn't getting out of this either they got exclusive DLC too for Mirrors Edge that is (albeit only once.) I guess I expected a perfect gamer world where all gamers are treated equally what a fool I was money still talks in the gamer world as well.

So here's my final word if a game is multiplatform make the DLC multiplatform otherwise the ones who bought the game for the console that doesn't have the exclusive DLC will feel ripped off cause guess what they are they could have it better but they don't cause they simply had the wrong console great logic on the part of the developers right.

It's quite simple business. For years Sony was pushing the GTA franchise as exclusive to them, even when it was multi-platform it was released on the Xbox and PC a while after.

Sony wanted an exclusive next-gen GTA title to sell its PlayStation 3 console as the franchise had done so much for the PlayStation 2.

Microsoft knew this so they made alternative offers to Rockstar for the title. Moreover, to draw consumers to the Xbox 360 Microsoft wanted to secure an advantage over Sony which they did by getting exclusive content for around $50 million.

While this may lose Microsoft some money in the short run they hoped that by weakening a major draw of Sony's PlayStation 3 they would acquire more customers and consumer loyalty in the future.

To the developers this is fantastic. Rather than being restricted to one format they were able to secure good deals with both competitors. By developing on both platforms their revenue from sales would vastly increase. On top of that a proposal of $50 million for two additional productions with the same engine is irresistible. The development cost of the additional content would be easily covered and then there's even more revenue from selling that content.

So the answer to your question is simple, it's because of competition. It's not fair but then it's not fair that Sony have have Blu-Ray over the other consoles, it's not fair that you have to pay for Xbox live (It is really, the costs of running the servers is ridiculous). It's just something that you have to put up with, if you don't want it then vote with your wallet.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

It's now a part of gaming. We have to get used to it.
I very rarely buy DLC anyway, the only one I can think of is Shivering Isles (for Oblivion).
Which is absolutely worth it.

Isn't the Shivering Isles an expansions, and the Knights of the Nine DLC?

On the subject: I find nothing wrong whit console only DLC's. Sure for the PS3 owners it will suck, but it's pretty much all about business. Microsoft payed, Rockstar Delivered. Sony could had done the same.