So you’d rather have the game’s release be pushed back to add that content? Wouldn’t you bitch about that too? ;)
I don’t mind DLC. If the game is solid, why not support the developers so we can have more of that solid game?
That’s one viewpoint.
Another is that I’m being charged $60 for 90% of the game and another $10 for the remaining 10% of the game, with 100% of the game being ready on release date.
That’s why I see DLC’s as being different from an expansion that comes out later to add to/finish off a game…i.e. DA:Awakenings or the Eco Divinity expansion that finished off the game.
I see the expansions being done after the success of the games has been assured, while DLC’s seem to be add-ons that maybe weren’t good enough or were left out (for some reason) of the original release. Granted some are produced after that release.
And some are right there on the disc waiting for an unlock code.
Why do you assume that they are withholding content? Most games, especially RPGs, end up having stuff cut during development that was planned and even partially completed simply because at a certain point you have to wrap up development and ship the game. If some of that work can be reused in a DLC then thats great.
The only case I know of where it was clear something was intentionally withheld was Dragon Age, where one of the companions (Shale) was seperated late to allow for Bioware’s “buy it new” bonus. So you didn’t pay for the DLC unless you bought the game used.
To be clear, I’m only really talking about significant story DLCs here. DLCs where you pay for some item are a total rip-off and should not be supported.
I rarely buy DLC. I feel the content should have been part of the basic game or included with an expansion.
Company A budgets 500,000 man-hours of development time for the creation of the game. They budget 10,000 man-hours for the first DLC, and hire a few extra people to work on it while the main development cycle is wrapping up so it can be ready at the same time as the game launch.
Company B budgets 500,000 man-hours of development time for the creation of the game. They budget 10,000 man-hours for the first DLC, and pay a few people from the original team to stick around after launch and create it so it’s ready a few months down the line.
What significant ethical difference is there?
Either way the game has had the same amount of time and care put into its creation, and is either worth your $60 or not. Now, if a game feels underdeveloped and lacking in content, then it’s probably not worth buying, but that’s a separate question than whether there’s DLC for it and when that DLC happens to come out.
DLC pisses me off as a non-buyer, because some fuckwit companies constantly spam you to buy it in the gameworld (Oh hi, Dragon Age, Crackdown et al.)
If I like a game, I buy all the DLC. It’s partly because I want to enhance and extend the experience, and partly because I want to cast a vote (with my money) that more games like that should be made.
Exactly. You decide how much, if anything, you’re willing to pay for what’s being offered. If it’s less than they want you to pay, you don’t buy it. If more, then you do. This doesn’t seem complicated to me.
I’ve cooled considerably on DLC. I will still pick up the occasional thing that looks really cool (c’mon more cars for GT5!) but for the most part I have found it to be a waste.
I do DLC if it’s a game I like and it’s 50% or more off. The exception to the rule being Fallout New Vegas DLC, which I did at full price because A: I didn’t pay for FNV, it was a gift, and B: I reeeeeeeally love FNV.
For reasonable and cheap DLC (Defense Grid maps, just barely Duels of the Planeswalker deck packs) I might go for full price. Very rarely is there reasonable and cheap DLC without a sale though.
I agree. I guess i have found that in general DLC tends to be priced about double what I think it ends up being worth to me (though there certainly have been DLC packs I have loved and thought were worth every penny).
Way back when DLC was known as “expansion discs”, I remember dropping $20 on each of the four add-ons for SWOTL, which would each get you one plane and a handful of missions to go with it. I can’t imagine doing that today. I still purchase DLC though, if I really like the base game, feel the DLC is going to be cost efficient, and in situations like the Fallouts, I’ll sit them out until I feel they are finished making them and get them all in one fell swoop - when they become available on a Steam holiday sale.
I guess I’ve been fortunate enough to not run into this yet, because it would completely turn me off from buying it.
I’ll buy an expansion now and then, not even tempted by overpriced undervalued DLC which is what most of it seems to be, this includes games I enjoyed a lot.
Not that I want to turn this into a piracy debate, but I am sure you realize the inherent fallacy of that statement.
I find that if I steal a car, I can get a better car than if I buy one. So unfair!
Since you stole that analogy, why is it so terrible?
If it’s what would have been called an expansion pack in the olden days, and it’s well reviewed, I’ll buy it. Otherwise, probably not, although there are a few exceptions to that rule for games I really love.
To be honest though, I don’t buy much DLC at all. At least for PC and consoles. Off the top of my head in recent years I can only think of GTA 4, Ticket To Ride, the EU 3 expansions, the Borderlands ones which I got on a Steam sale, and CoH: Tales of Valour. I’ve been meaning to pick up Minerva’s Den and The Shadow Broker, but haven’t yet.
On iOS it’s slightly different - I’ve bought map packs for quite a few tower defence games.
Rarely, and that’s decreasing.
The problem is that they’re generally not worth the dough. It’s a double whammy. They’re not long enough and they’re generally not up to par of the quality of the original game. So you get worse content that costs far more per hour of entertainment.
I recently decided to do a complete walkthrough of Mass Effect 1 & 2. To that end, I bought the ME2 DLC. Here’s the hassles that took:
-
I had to figure out the exact number of points I needed to buy because some of the DLC doesn’t equal the blocks the points are sold in.
-
I had to buy each block individually because there was no way to buy more than one block of points.
-
Because somehow the Cerberus Network DLC had been registered under another email account, I couldn’t combine the DLC I just purchased with the DLC I got when I bought the game. So I had to spend more dough to re-buy the Cerberus DLC again.
-
All in all, I spent more money buying the DLC ($40) as I did the original game ($30).
And for all that, I got just a handful of hours of gaming. I bought Genesis, Arrival, Shadow Broker and Cerberus (again). Of those, only the Shadow Broker was on par with the quality of the original game. Genesis and Arrival were entirely throwaway adventures and not up to the quality of the quests in the base ME2. Overall, I feel that it was money not well spent.
I had similar impressions of the DLC quality in Dragon Age and much of the Fallout 3 DLC (beyond Operation Overlord). The DLC was mediocre at best and overpriced.
Ultimately, what I’m being “taught” by gaming companies is that DLC just ain’t worth it. In fact, the more they put out, the more of a barrier it becomes to buying the original game. Take Magicka for example. The more of the shitty spam DLC they release (and they’re not fixing bugs in the base game), the less chance there is of me ever buying it because I want to buy the “complete” experience and they’re making that more and more of a hassle.