I think a lot of people are missing the point here. This is fundamentally about honesty and trust -- Disc-Locked-Content can undermine the trust a player places in the publisher and developer, especially when it's paired with the publisher or developer being dishonest about it.
With any DLC, there's always the possibility that it was deliberately withheld, something originally intended to be part of the experience, but carved out for extra profit. The player generally has no way of knowing if that's the case, so all they can go on is whether or not the game "feels complete" without it, or whether it feels like there's a deliberately gaping hole, just waiting to be filled. But when that content is already on the disc, it removes that sense of doubt -- and the player feels that they've been cheated. Here's something that could have been part of the original purchase price, was produced in the same time frame, on the same budget, but they're being charged extra for, seemingly arbitrarily.
The argument that Disc-Locked-Content was produced between submitting the game for certification and publishing is suspect: If they modified the game to add that locked content, then I would think it would have to be resubmitted for certification. Either you have a shipping build or you don't. Maybe I'm wrong and the rules are different for video games than they are for regular PC software -- there's no comparable third-party certification process -- but it doesn't make any sense to submit one build for certification, and actually ship a different build that hasn't been thoroughly tested.
Now, if the player is informed up-front that some of the content is locked, that can feel different. If it's touted as some kind of only-pay-for-the-content-you-what model, that it's a way of giving the player a choice to discount the product, then a lot more people are going to feel sympathetic to the idea. Some will still complain that they don't feel like they're getting good value for their money, but they probably won't feel like they've been conned. And that's what it's all about -- making an informed decision. Full disclosure is going to be received more favorably than lies and deceit.
I'd suggest that the majority of people who don't have a problem with Disc-Locked-Content are approaching the situation as an informed customer, not as someone who's just been bitten. Either they expected Disc-Locked-Content and factored that into their purchasing decision, or the DLC has already been released, and they're just now making the original purchasing decision. They may have trouble understanding the sense of betrayal that others are feeling.
With any DLC, there's always the possibility that it was deliberately withheld, something originally intended to be part of the experience, but carved out for extra profit. The player generally has no way of knowing if that's the case, so all they can go on is whether or not the game "feels complete" without it, or whether it feels like there's a deliberately gaping hole, just waiting to be filled. But when that content is already on the disc, it removes that sense of doubt -- and the player feels that they've been cheated. Here's something that could have been part of the original purchase price, was produced in the same time frame, on the same budget, but they're being charged extra for, seemingly arbitrarily.
The argument that Disc-Locked-Content was produced between submitting the game for certification and publishing is suspect: If they modified the game to add that locked content, then I would think it would have to be resubmitted for certification. Either you have a shipping build or you don't. Maybe I'm wrong and the rules are different for video games than they are for regular PC software -- there's no comparable third-party certification process -- but it doesn't make any sense to submit one build for certification, and actually ship a different build that hasn't been thoroughly tested.
Now, if the player is informed up-front that some of the content is locked, that can feel different. If it's touted as some kind of only-pay-for-the-content-you-what model, that it's a way of giving the player a choice to discount the product, then a lot more people are going to feel sympathetic to the idea. Some will still complain that they don't feel like they're getting good value for their money, but they probably won't feel like they've been conned. And that's what it's all about -- making an informed decision. Full disclosure is going to be received more favorably than lies and deceit.
I'd suggest that the majority of people who don't have a problem with Disc-Locked-Content are approaching the situation as an informed customer, not as someone who's just been bitten. Either they expected Disc-Locked-Content and factored that into their purchasing decision, or the DLC has already been released, and they're just now making the original purchasing decision. They may have trouble understanding the sense of betrayal that others are feeling.
