Games you refuse to buy because dlc

[fix-the-spade]

Did Dead Space 3 have DLC other than the one forgettable story pack?

Not exactly, but it did have the 'you need more consumables to upgrade this gun, play the game some more or BUY SOME FROM EA STORE SCRUB,' thing going on, as well as the optional co-op that really wasn't optional. It also had the completely accidental infinite item glitch that was never patched out too, so I think Visceral hated it as much as we did.

Speaking of which, I stopped playing Mass Effect 3 and didn't buy Battlefield Hardline for much the same reason, putting consumables and randomised unlocks behind a paywall is just the scummiest of the scummy things to do in a paid for game. Even in F2P games I'm not keen on it, preferring the World of Tanks model of paying for specific unlocks since it's at least quantifiable and the user can decide on it's value ahead of time.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

Evolve has absolutely turned me off anything about that game, I really couldn't give a shit about it. But I'm not sure that qualifies, as I wasn't totally interested in it in the first place.

That's the first one that came to mind for me.

I was never big into Left 4 Dead, though I did find it fun when I played at other peoples' houses. I thought Evolve might be more my cup of tea, but then I heard about all the DLC shenanigans. Yeah, forget that.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I can tell you my biggest regret is getting the vanilla version of Borderlands 2. Some of my favorite moments from the previous game (which I bought GOTY) came from the DLC, so I know exactly what I'm missing when people go on about Tiny Tina's Dungeon and the Mr. Torgue campaign...

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

I thought GTA 5 was douchey in how unfinished the heavily advertised online portion was, along with the pressure for microtransactions and Rockstar making it harder and harder to get money. But I bought it and just eventually grew bored.

What are you on about? All their Dlc is released for free and in all the time i've played it, have never noticed any pressure to spend any money on those cards which, to be honest, I didn't even know were there until I went looking through all the extras. It could just be my lack of observational awareness though.

OT: Evolve may have been the latest game that lost my glimmer of interest after hearing of their intentions. Titanfall too. It always tends to be the purely multiplayer games. You would think that not having a campaign would encourage the developers (or publishers depending on leverage) to compensate with more launch content. Evidently not.
Oh and COD seems pretty OTT with their dlc nowdays.

 

[Dandark]

I refused to buy ME3 due to it's ******* awful DLC practices and I'm glad I skipped it, for me the series ended at ME2.
I also refused to get Evolve even though I was really interested in it because I liked the idea and I heard it was from the guys who made L4D which I really liked. Again I am thankful they let everyone know the game would be bad in advance with their DLC practices because it stopped me wasting money on it.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

Why would anyone do this?
If the base game is worth whatever they are asking, why would you not get it and just ignore any unwanted DLC?
You're only hurting yourself. A big company isn't going to care about a single sale, especially when they make more from putting in said DLC.
Literally the only time this would make any modicum of sense is if you are locked out from playing the base game if you don't have the DLC. I can't think of a game that does this, but even if there is, DLC is hardly the enemy. The stupid prices of some DLC maybe, and the stupid part where it locks you out, but not the DLC itself.

 

[Danny Dowling]

I bought a review copy of SFxT to minimise the profits Capcom made out of the DLC principle.

I flat our refused to buy Evolve. I thought it looked great but the amount of optional DLC was retarded, it should have all been in-game unlockable not there for "buy it if you want" that's just dumb.

 

[tippy2k2]

Literally the only time this would make any modicum of sense is if you are locked out from playing the base game if you don't have the DLC. I can't think of a game that does this, but even if there is, DLC is hardly the enemy. The stupid prices of some DLC maybe, and the stupid part where it locks you out, but not the DLC itself.

I can't speak for anyone else in this thread but I 100% believe that my example (post #2) is being locked out of the base game. Until Tiger Woods, I have never refused to buy a game due to DLC .

 

[Parasondox]

I would say Mass Effect 3 now because WHY DOES THE DLC COST MORE THAN THE GAME ITSELF TODAY?!?!

 

[Reasonable Atheist]

Why would anyone do this?
If the base game is worth whatever they are asking, why would you not get it and just ignore any unwanted DLC?
You're only hurting yourself. A big company isn't going to care about a single sale, especially when they make more from putting in said DLC.
Literally the only time this would make any modicum of sense is if you are locked out from playing the base game if you don't have the DLC. I can't think of a game that does this, but even if there is, DLC is hardly the enemy. The stupid prices of some DLC maybe, and the stupid part where it locks you out, but not the DLC itself.

Because a great many of us believe that content that is important to the base game, is being removed, so they can sell us the game twice on day one. Its scummy. Leaves a bad taste in your mouth, the taste of scum.

Ps. My comma use is inflammatory, I know.

 

[hermes]

WB is awful at it. Just awful.

It started with the Catwoman DLC, which had story chapters at the beginning of the game and locked collectibles that would show up on the campaign, and they promoted it before the game was out. So far, Knight is pretty much free, with mostly cosmetic elements and challenge rooms, but I fear for it too... Then Netherrealm started nickel and diming for pretty much everything, with MKX being the latest and worst offender, with everything from microtransactions, adds in the menu screen, consumables, and paying to unlock stuff that is on the disk...

Needless to say, I will stay away from that game, and wait until there is a complete edition, and then wait for the complete edition to be on sale on Steam. If it ever appears in a humble bundle, I will change the slides to give everything to charity.

 

[major_chaos]

Well, I should have said microtransactions, I don't know if there was a day one DLC. But shitty practice is shitty practice.

Not exactly, but it did have the 'you need more consumables to upgrade this gun, play the game some more or BUY SOME FROM EA STORE SCRUB,'

1. I find it slightly amusing that I managed to beat the game three times while totaly forgetting those exist. Or if I ever did notice it was such a fleeting nuisance that I quickly forgot about it again. Kinda minimizes the outrage when its so ignoreable.

2. I would guess that not buying the game at all tells the EA higher-up/shareholders "No one likes Dead Space, stop making it". If you really want to make a point, wouldn't it be better if people bought the game (demonstrating that DS is viable) but totally ignored the cash shop (demonstrating that microtransactions in single player games are not meaningfully profitable)?

 

[Maximum Bert]

I dont like DLC in most cases I feel it takes away from the main game very few companies do DLC right. There is not many games I refuse to buy because of DLC as long as I feel the main game is worthy of a certain price that I have in my head but I must admit the more DLC a game has on release the less it tends to be worth in my mind so recently I did not buy Evolve because I was unwilling to pay more than 15 pounds for it and could not get it for that price so I did not get it.

Mortal Kombat X I had a price of 30 in my head and recently found it for 32 which is over but I am a sucker for fighters so I bought it but I am really pissed off by their DLC practices luckily I am only interested in Goro and Tanya but I wont be buying Goro on principle and when Tanya drops I may not be playing anyway as I tend to burn out on NetherRealms games quickly (lets see if they actually have a decent combat system this time, im not holding my breath).

Some games have driven me away because of DLC though most notably Hearthstone which quickly turned into a huge grind. I had other issues as well but the DLC was a huge part that turned me off I would have much rather spent 30 quid for a game with all the cards unlocked from the start but of course the sense of progression that keeps people coming back would be lost (and they would make less money).

If I am only mildly interested in a game DLC tends to turn me off if I very interested I tend to buy it anyway but its rare I buy any DLC I just dont want to support their bad practices even though in buying MKX I am actually saying that the practice is ok indirectly even if I dont buy any DLC. On the flip side as long as I dont wait too late I can actually trade it in for cash at a nearby shop for more money than I have actually paid for it.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

Various F2P games.

I get that they rely on micro-transactions to survive, but you have to make me want to give you money. Most F2P games don't seem to get that. They'll put draconian restrictions on content and/or just make the general playing experience miserable, telling you that you need to fork over some cash to get the full experience.

Fuck you, hypothetical dev.

Meanwhile, a F2P game like Path of Exile, which has never once asked me for any money and never once restricted my gameplay experience, has gotten $200 from me because I enjoyed the game enough that I wanted to support it. It's a game I would have paid for anyway.

 

[Maximum Bert]

The last game I didn't buy was purely because of DLC was arkham city. That was because Catwoman was used so heavily in the build up and was later announced to be DLC. If they'd been up front about her being DLC from the very beginning I wouldn't have had a problem.

Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel
If Borderlands 2 is anything to go by, it'll be years before all the crap is out. I'd rather wait to see how it all shapes up by the time they're done.

MK10
Because fuck characters as DLC.

Only reason MKX didn't bother me was I don't want to play as any of the DLC characters and realistically outside of story mode and unlocking all tower endings, like all fighting games once I go online I will default to maybe one of three characters, Kung Jin, Kung Lao or Cassie Cage. Characters for me are easy to overlook because the amount I'd ever play as them would be almost 0.

Maybe but what if you wanted to use two of the DLC characters and only one in game would it bother you more then? DLC characters in fighters is one of the crappiest things you can do much worse than cosmetics and even stages. From a business perspective its a great idea giving people a strong incentive people to preorder with Goro and then another strong incentive to spend more by having quickly released `new` characters coming out it also helps buoy relevance with your game by having something to look forward to.

Trouble is you dont want to spend an extra 20 quid on those new characters then the playing field isnt level doesnt matter if you wanted to use them or not your missing a functional part of the game and you cant even learn to fight them by going to the lab because you just dont have them. Costumes and cosmetics are one things and annoying enough but they dont impact gameplay character DLC does especially so soon after its release. Costumes are much easier to not care about than characters and Netherealms knows it and milks it for all its worth while people applaud them. Arc and Capcom understanbly get slammed for this practice (and so they should) but Netherrealms gets a free pass depsite being the worse offendor just goes to show the power of their marketing.

Also I feel ya on Arkham City, once again locking a character sucks. I do believe though that you got her free if you bought the game new which I dont feel is as bad as what MK is doing in which case no matter how you buy the game you aint gettin those characters for nothin (except Goro with preorders only, new ones after dont count).

 

[Shoggoth2588]

If I were to try it, I'd probably get into Hearthstone in a huge way. The problem is that I don't have enough disposable income to indulge in what I'm told is a really not-terrible DLC structure. Other than that, I don't buy fighting games with DLC fighters unless there's a definitive or, complete edition. I loved Street Fighter 2 as a kid but I'll probably never buy a SF on a post-Dreamcast console because of the DLC and whatnot.

 

[sXeth]

I thought GTA 5 was douchey in how unfinished the heavily advertised online portion was, along with the pressure for microtransactions and Rockstar making it harder and harder to get money. But I bought it and just eventually grew bored.

What are you on about? All their Dlc is released for free and in all the time i've played it, have never noticed any pressure to spend any money on those cards which, to be honest, I didn't even know were there until I went looking through all the extras. It could just be my lack of observational awareness though.

Not long before (and even more after) the Shark cards came online, some stuff suddenly became more expensive in the game. Armored car spawns also degraded by a huge amount. Additionally, replaying missions (the only general way to make decent money) became increasingly difficult, one update no longer let you pick them on the map, then you couldn't bookmark them, then you couldn't make playlists, then Rockstar started deleting any playlists that did have them. They also seemed to almost never come up in the selection of "Next jobs" for voting compared to low-pay activities.

 

[Yeager942]

Destiny.

I'm really not interested in paying 50-60 dollars for the base game and then every expansion on top of it. Shame too, because I found the beta an absolute blast to play.