Is DLC changing your buying habits...

[Neon Ignition]

It doesn't affect my retail buying habits but it can annoy. I find the releasing of it more bothersome than the cost. Really, the need to have a proper release date system so if there's some I'm interested in I know to keep the disc. Major DLC should also launch quickly with smaller stuff behind for people who stick at it. Most irritating is COD which for no reason at all waits at least 6 months to release the first map pack. By the time the last one arrives the next game is almost due.

[rmoxon]

The thing that bothers me with DLC is that it's never available when I want it, I'd actually prefer it to be available from day one, then if I wanted to carry on my singleplayer experience I could.

If it was avaliable from day one then it shouldnt be DLC, surley it should have just been in the game to begin with if its already made.

Course most DLC is planned before a game is released anyway, so I guess its all about making money regardless.

I'm suprised they released the FIFA Ultimate Team thing free this year, since when does EA not want our money?

[Number45]

It doesn't affect my retail buying habits but it can annoy. I find the releasing of it more bothersome than the cost. Really, the need to have a proper release date system so if there's some I'm interested in I know to keep the disc. Major DLC should also launch quickly with smaller stuff behind for people who stick at it. Most irritating is COD which for no reason at all waits at least 6 months to release the first map pack. By the time the last one arrives the next game is almost due.

This is the best idea I think. If they let you know in advance that there are plans for substantial DLC over the course of a 12 month period you know to keep hold of that game. You also might as well wait for the GOTY version.

[EvilBoris]

If it was avaliable from day one then it shouldnt be DLC, surley it should have just been in the game to begin with if its already made.

Course most DLC is planned before a game is released anyway, so I guess its all about making money regardless.

Perhaps as internet vocal gamers we have a little bit of a twisted perspective on things?

I mean, people seem to be willing to except and purchase a directors cut of a film) after having already bought the regular edition of a film and having seen the film in a cinema already.

But many gamers seem to object to the idea of having to purchase a game and then pay extra for supplementary content which is maybe 10% of the price of the full game.

[chopemon]

I have really been enjoying modern DLC trends. I have enjoyed dipping back into GTA 4, Bioshock 2, Red Dead, Prince of Persia etc. months after they have been released.

I tend to buy a lot of DLC and don't tend to go for purely multiplayer DLC (except for Halo) but recent single player offerings have been great.

A good game is good forever and I'm not fussed about having DLC day 1 or day 200.

[Adam]

I don't like picking up a game months after release to play a 2 hour long DLC and be done with it again. I want to play everything all at once as one minute I will be in the mood to max out all skills on Fallout, the next I wont want to play it at all. Example being a game I liked alot: Nier. I baught the DLC for that when I was playing through it the first time and I liked it alot, but if DLC was to be released today I wouldn't touch it as I'm not in the mood for Nier right now and I wont get excited about a mini delve back into the game as it will end all too quickly.

[Charlie]

I tend to shift games soon after completing them but the few I keep I have no problem buying DLC for (even though it's usually disappointing). When DLC comes out for a game I really liked but got rid of I'm never tempted to buy the game again.

[chopemon]

If it was avaliable from day one then it shouldnt be DLC, surley it should have just been in the game to begin with if its already made.

It possibly wasn't made though.

There is a large stretch of time towards the end of development where artists and designers are bug fixing then weeks while it goes through cert and manufacturing. Often DLC gets made in that time as all you are doing is producing new content with proven tools and the turn around is quite quick.

This isn't always the case as sometimes stuff is deliberately held back but some DLC is made during that bit of downtime.

[Flabio]

Ay, the way the timing goes with certification then manufacturing, it's entirely possible to create DLC and have it ready for the actual street date of the game.

The Fable3 stuff is like that, it's not on the disc but was available at launch.

[Brats]

They had a good suggestion on a recent Giant Bomb podcast.

Publishers should state at release what their DLC plans are and there should then be an option to buy a 'season pass' for all the announced DLC at a discounted price (a bit like the Telltale season passes) so that as soon as it becomes available, you can download it, or you can pay for it when it comes out and pick what you want.

I'd be really happy with that and I'm sure that the publishers would too. They get a substantial chunk of money up front and I get to know what is coming out and pay for 'everything' in one go, or know whether to wait for the GOTY version.

There would need to be some sort of guarantee that the DLC would appear on time and some sort of refund scheme if the developer went bust, but overall I would be in favour.

[eastyy]

this generation i have this nagging feeling of not actually owning games any more

i like some dlc but the bordelands game of the year edition the dlc should have been put on disc rather then having to download it

my argument is with ps2 games for example i have them so i can always play them. Whats going to happen in a few years when servers are stopped and we are on the next gen all this dlc will be lost

i am willing to bet alot of dlc is done while there making the main game

as far as changing buying habits it has sort off for example learned now to wait for later editions of games like dragons age which has the ultimate edition with the dlc with it

most dlc i have this feeling of being ripped off i have to say but i thought the buying alan wake new and getting the first dlc free was a great incentive

[Flabio]

Publishers should state at release what their DLC plans are

This is assuming that they're planning that far ahead. I imagine Bethesda do with the Fallout ones, and probably the Mass Effect ones were planned up front. But it's fairly common for the content and number of future DLC to not be decided until after launch of the main title.

Quite often the decision as to how much DLC to do is made based on sales of the product. No point greenlighting a 6 month DLC project if sales of the original title mean you won't be able to sell enough DLC to pay for the development.

[Brats]

Very true, but for titles that are guaranteed successes, it's a good idea.

For the rest, I'd imagine most developers know after the first couple of weeks whether their game is a success or not. I bet they would have would have ideas about potential DLC, so if the game was a success, it's not like they are starting from scratch. They could then announce their plans shortly after launch if the sales justified it, even if it was a brief statement such as 'we plan to release three single player add-ons over the next 12 months'.

[SUMIRE]

I buy a fair bit of content these days. I tend to keep all the hardcopy games I buy, so can easily go back to them and get some more life out of stuff I really like if there is downloadable content available later. One of the best games I played recently, Red Dead had one of the best downloadable content I have played so far, so I was glad I kept that game.

I bought a fair few retro games from Virtual console just for the ease of accessing them. XBOX live has some great games that you can only buy as a download anyway, so i tend to buy those when they are really good.

One thing I would never do though is buy the full games on xbox live originals as they are overpriced anyway.

[Friction]

I think DLC is a great idea, but at the same time I don't really like paying for something I don't get physically if that makes sense. Often now I find myself not buying any DLC and waiting for GOTY editions, or in the case of GTA and Red Dead witht the Zombie add on I waiting for the stand alone versions! Red Dead Undead Nightmare being out later this month as a stand alone disc!

My main bugbear with DLC as I'm sure many of you will agree is the stuff that comes out day one, and is over priced to boot! Or where you feel they skimped on the main game, just to make a DLC later!

Some examples: (all 360 related)

Katamari - you can't get all the achievements without buying a fair amounf of DLC - when you pay £40 for something you expect to be able to do enough without having to spend more!

Prince of Persia (the cell shaded one) - the ending was but don't worry, couple of weeks later Ubisoft released the proper ending bit as DLC but you had to pay for it.... Nice!

More recent than this was Fist of the North Star Ken's Rage - the game has been out for AGES in Japan etc, and finally comes over here - let's be honest, it's not going to be a COD style seller - it's more niche and for fans (it is pure fan service which is ). There is a ton of DLC out in Japan for the game, and why was this not included on the disc for us here! Instead it comes out on day one for a stupid price - 560 points for a character and two tiny missions....

On the flip side some DLC is welcome - Forza adding new cars as they come out is great - and justifiable I guess, devs holding back stuff to rush games out expecting us to pay for it later isn't really great!