DLC - NO or YES??

[vulcan77]

Despite the name of this tread first i have to take a trip , rather flashback in those times when online future with various services was like science fiction too biggest part of us .
I try to be more specific , have to warn - this might not be an interesting reading for nowdays (now it's hard to say wich generation is wich folks - the so called today's generation , players who started they gaming experience with such beasts as PS2 or XBOX and further. It's more will be dedicated to old generation , those who started from golden age of home console systems , such as Mega Drive AND NiNTENDO .
Ahem , i was a little carried away , so - early 90's japanese home systems invaded west countries injecting our minds with never before seen joys of life . We got a plenty various pleasures , games wasn't just graphical miracles , it was all brand new world for expanding our imagination - inovation in all possible forms (almost all .
Even now i clearly remember my first cartridges Sonic3 , X-Men 2 , Golden Axe 3 , i was lucky enough to start with those titles , and before was only encountering some primitive (it's not hatred ) non serious content or food for mind and heart content. The games was simple amazing and perfect for those times , colorfull and pleasant content almost always was supported with story , sometimes simple but still original and long stucking in memory.
But what we where getting after finishing games from past? Sometimes nothing. Simple and nothing promising , maybe sequel one day and that's all . But there was a reason to play again and again - first because it was fun , second - you could finish game for few different reasons : different characters , hidden secrets (7 emeralds makes life easier and way different and if developers was kind enough some ending. That was enough , that was era we knew when meaning ,,bonus'' born.
In short terms we could get from game all + some bonuses we was so happy to recover - almost - absolutely for free !!! Golden age? Perhaps , but you might dissagree.
Nowdays , i do not mention past generation of consoles and they weak adaptation in to online service . I start and finish with todays generation . With new tendention of present online gaming to all at as low (sony do it for free as possible , developers realised about potential to explotate customers in all way they could come-up. Various DLC services , i stay specific and mention only general ones. Stages (maps) , characters (mostly already coded on original disk but not available ) and various addons . What we got , we got what we once dreamed playing old games - more fun for already popular games (science fiction , remember new locations created on one purpose to please us for contractual price , also characters followed in various shapes for same conditions , all would be fine if not greed of developers , prices are unfairly high , more - some content is just laughable but comes in pack with better ones - so you always are forced to buy even what you don't want . Nevertheless - creed never has climbed so high , we have to pay for characters outfits same price as for new character ? And full set of new outfits is equal to BRAND NEW game?? (in some cases) , later more wicked ideas - pay for additional colors? Voice systems?? (BlazBlu) You gotta be kidding ??? Science Fiction become a Nightmare???
Well in the end we do our payments , i'm no exception , but after playing i don't feel same joy as i felt in old times finishing Sonic 3 with all chaos emeralds , even if i knew i will be not able to save my progress.
Verdict , i guess i leave it for others to judge .
Gaming sure have changed , i still not sure if for better......

[sj33]

DLC isn't a problem in itself. Developer and publisher attitudes towards DLC are, however.

DLC that is genuine new content designed to provide people with new content for their game is a good thing. Oblivion: Shivering Isles is a good idea of DLC done properly. People want more of a game they enjoy and are happy to pay for it if it is actually new content. This is a positive approach to DLC.

DLC that is essentially designed to encourage consumers to pay extra for content that would otherwise be included in a game is a bad thing. This is content developed as part of the initial development process, and essentially syphoned off as separate 'premium' content. This includes 'Day One DLC' (e.g Mass Effect 3, 'Premium Edition' exclusive content etc.), unlock keys (e.g. everything Capcom seem to produce these days) and other cynical approaches to DLC that are aren't actually giving players new content, but simply trying to extract more money from consumers for existing content. This is a negative approach to DLC and shouldn't be supported.

[dataDave]

DLC if free = Yes.

DLC = paid for... No, doubt I'll ever pay for any again. It's usually guff, apart from the big stuff like Shivering Isles like SJ says, although that did feel like a proper PC expansion of old, not just some pap DLC balls.

[toythatkills]

Addressing the question in the thread title;

It's an impossible question to answer. People that say "no" will likely be doing so under the assumption that they'd just get the DLC on the disk instead as if it was part of the game. In reality, that probably wouldn't happen so there's just loads of content that will never exist. Or maybe it would appear on the disk (unlock key content would, at least). It's impossible to know what effect it'd have on the industry overall though. Games might just get smaller.

Tentatively though, I'd say I'm fine with DLC. I'm not forced to buy the DLC and if a game takes the piss with it I just won't buy the game at all.

[dataDave]

Tentatively though, I'd say I'm fine with DLC. I'm not forced to buy the DLC and if a game takes the piss with it I just won't buy the game at all.

Wouldn't it not piss you off knowing how something which could have been awesome is let down by piss-taking DLC hooks? This is why I'm becoming more and more of a Blizzard fanboy with each of their releases, no DLC in sight - just meaty, old-school expansions every couple of years.

I see pretty much all console stuff (bar Nintendo, obviously) taking the piss with it these days.

[Pikate]

Publishers are a businesses, they have a right to make money just as consumers have a right to not buy something if they don't think it offers value for money. There's too much of a sense of entitlement in gamers. If you buy a new car you don't get sat nav and 19" wheels, they're options, there for those who want a slightly uprated product. DLC is the same principle regardless of if it's on disc or day one. Do I want to pay extra for content? Not really! Do I buy most of my games second-hand (effectively not paying the publisher/developer for their product)? Yes! So they have a right to charge me for some content? Just as I will exercise my right not to buy that DLC if it's not something I want or think offers value for money.

Personally though I think the best solution for everyone is Digital-Delivery/Online Passes (so a software license not a disc) where DLC as we know it comes as free updates. And then later down the line expansions are paid for.

[sj33]

To be honest, I think the idea of 'sense of entitlement' is really just used as an excuse to justify cynical business practice. The idea that people should just vote with their wallet somewhat ignores the fact that the integrity of the core product is being eroded. If this wasn't the case, then people justifying these cynical business practices by crying 'sense of entitlement' would have a point.

The question is if this specific business practice is a positive development for the industry. It's not so much a sense of entitlement as simply a recognition that cynical approaches to DLC are a retrograde step. Publishers don't have to take this approach. Publishers don't have to be (for example) locking 12 characters from Street Fighter X Tekken that are actually all on the disc (and can be fully unlocked with pirated copies of the game!) and selling this content for 1600MSP. If we recognise the fact that this content would be available as part of the stock product in previous console generations, then we can see that such cynical approaches to business are a retrograde step.

[Family Fry]

Its just timing, most people are ok to pay 10quid 6months later and not feel ripped off, same dlc comes out 6 weeks later its all could have been on disc etc. Well I'm sure if a writer wrote long enough they could release a 2000page trilogy in one book, question is would they charge 14.99 for it or 44.99.
All devs publishers out there need to do is, make your dlc alongside the full game, wait 4 months and them release it at full price. Of course by that time people have moved on if it's single player and sometimes in the case of MP too. The content needs to come sooner than later and that unfortunately means locked content, or fast turn around on dlc.

[toythatkills]

Wouldn't it not piss you off knowing how something which could have been awesome is let down by piss-taking DLC hooks?

Yeah, but that's why I wouldn't buy it, because I wouldn't want to encourage that. Gamers are fickle though. They're happy to moan about how ****ty a piece of DLC is but then they buy the game in droves, and that just sends the message that everything's fine.

[vulcan77]

Ok , here is the sample - Marvel Vs Capcom 3 , i was soooooo hapy when saw it released , eventually i got my copy . After 6 months - Ultimate MvC3 announced (please don't throw any stones to capcom's windows , it's just sample this time for DLC) i was dissapointed ..... same story with SF4 -SSF4 , so in both situations same management done same speculation . Good#1 - new version was released for half price (if you haven't purchased first instaliation it's even worth more) . But - there is always but - Bad #1 - New DLC costume packs (pricy ones) , pack per 4 costumes - 2-3 from wich unusable (tastes-tastes) , but instead of picking-up one -you forced to pay for unusable-ones . Good(?)#2 - full set of costumes costs same price as game on release day?? I actually confused is it good or bad . Facts- i wanna have about 1/3 of costumes , but myself (there is something inside me can't force me to pay for DLC - game price! More for content i will not be using !! Capcom forced customers again , like it buy all we offer , no ?? Someone else fills our pockets. So i don't feel any balance between customer and seller?? I do not. But i wanna Weapon X outfit , over all this i have to buy game ...... or wait for capcom to release Full set with all DLC in wise price? Or this is just science fiction??

[MisterBubbles]

So DLC for different colours no thanks, and i wouldn't encourage it, Crapcom ( though i do love your games ) are the absolute charlatans of this era, they'd sell you used bog paper if they could. And anybody who buys different costumes needs there head looking at.

[nakamura]

Its just timing, most people are ok to pay 10quid 6months later and not feel ripped off, same dlc comes out 6 weeks later its all could have been on disc etc. .

How many people nowadays keep their games more than a month? It seems to me games are forgotten very quickly now,

[Cornflakes]

I won't mind paying for expansion pack that you used to get on disc. DLCs where you just get costumes, multilayer maps, (re-skinned) character or items should be free, as it adds nothing to story mode of the game itself. If publishers want to charge for small DLC, like what they do in those free to play online games, where you pay for those special items and sorts, wunderbar, then give us the base game for free.

[vulcan77]

Well , i see few points i like , free DLC and even if this are just a stupid color/costume it shouldn't be more than 1$ (still too pricy in my opinion) and for sure stupid additional missions must be free of charge. Or just let customers to buy separate content they WANT , and not a SET they offer!!!

[dataDave]

Publishers are a businesses, they have a right to make money just as consumers have a right to not buy something if they don't think it offers value for money. There's too much of a sense of entitlement in gamers. If you buy a new car you don't get sat nav and 19" wheels, they're options, there for those who want a slightly uprated product. DLC is the same principle regardless of if it's on disc or day one. Do I want to pay extra for content? Not really! Do I buy most of my games second-hand (effectively not paying the publisher/developer for their product)? Yes! So they have a right to charge me for some content? Just as I will exercise my right not to buy that DLC if it's not something I want or think offers value for money.

Personally though I think the best solution for everyone is Digital-Delivery/Online Passes (so a software license not a disc) where DLC as we know it comes as free updates. And then later down the line expansions are paid for.

To be honest, I think the idea of 'sense of entitlement' is really just used as an excuse to justify cynical business practice. The idea that people should just vote with their wallet somewhat ignores the fact that the integrity of the core product is being eroded. If this wasn't the case, then people justifying these cynical business practices by crying 'sense of entitlement' would have a point.

The question is if this specific business practice is a positive development for the industry. It's not so much a sense of entitlement as simply a recognition that cynical approaches to DLC are a retrograde step. Publishers don't have to take this approach. Publishers don't have to be (for example) locking 12 characters from Street Fighter X Tekken that are actually all on the disc (and can be fully unlocked with pirated copies of the game!) and selling this content for 1600MSP. If we recognise the fact that this content would be available as part of the stock product in previous console generations, then we can see that such cynical approaches to business are a retrograde step.

This is exactly it. It's not so much providing extras at a cost, but more of a holding back of stuff that should already be on there and charging for it later.

Gone are the days where you had to unlock things with game progression, now you just buy it.

Yeah, but that's why I wouldn't buy it, because I wouldn't want to encourage that. Gamers are fickle though. They're happy to moan about how ****ty a piece of DLC is but then they buy the game in droves, and that just sends the message that everything's fine.

I'm very guilty when it comes to Capcom DLC. I'm forcibly distancing myself from the company from now on by not partaking in a mainstream console next gen.