The Growing Scourge

[dezdimona]

lets just burn a DLC in effigy,thats the real answer :whistling:

[humanbean234]

My argument with DLC is the screw put to the consumer; DLC content cannot be resold, so if you get handed a lemon of a game, there's no possibility of reselling it to recoup any portion of your lost investment. I'm encountering a similar problem in trying to divest myself of Spore (even though it's only seen a single installation).

 

There used to be a store in my hometown that bought and resold used software... I don't think they've survived. :down:

[Vagrant0]

My argument with DLC is the screw put to the consumer; DLC content cannot be resold, so if you get handed a lemon of a game, there's no possibility of reselling it to recoup any portion of your lost investment. I'm encountering a similar problem in trying to divest myself of Spore (even though it's only seen a single installation).

 

There used to be a store in my hometown that bought and resold used software... I don't think they've survived. :down:

Except that Spore is not DLC, and there is no true DLC for spore. That argument of reselling doesn't really work since people would only buy DLC for a game they actually want to play. As far as reselling goes, that's been kinda dead for PC games for the last 10 years or so with the increased usage of copy protection for games and people being able to just duplicate the CD/DVD. Even with requiring that all packaging and instructions are included doesn't help. The fact of the matter is that if you buy a game, you aren't going to be able to return or sell it once its been opened. This is the case with almost every game made by almost every company out there; you can return if if broken, but not for a different product. This is why you should never buy a game the day it comes out unless you can afford to live with the consequences.

 

I also bought spore, I may even decide to reinstall it one of these days, but probably not until it's been modded up the wazoo and is able to keep me interested for more than a few days. Compared to the cost of something like a few movie tickets, I suppose it's still been a bit more economical hour for hour. But then again, movie tickets are ridiculously expensive too.

 

But I digress. DLC, although it is additional cost, is always something optional. Although there might be some DLC that really adds value back into the game, for the most part, it's only there for people who are willing to spend the money to get that bit extra. So long as it remains something optional, although the costs are rather extreme in some cases, there really isn't anything fundamentally wrong with DLC. Most would still rather have it, and have to pay for it than for it to have never existed or been released.

[Sniperwhere]

My problem doesn't lie with the fact that DLC exists, but the fact that I get the feeling that companies deliberately put less into the initial game, so they can put more into DLC and charge you an additional 100+% for content that doesn't NEED to be DLC. For something that is simple enough that it should have been integrated into the original game itself. That's where my problem lies. It feels like professional laziness. Sure it may be optional ad all that, but really, they turn mass amounts of stuff that should be there in the first place, and turn it into a separate investment for us so they can line their pockets with an extra layer of gold to insure the shine.

 

What I miss are games like Medal of Honor, or Final Fantasy VII and earlier. Those are the games with months of playtime without the need to throw in more content after the 4th month since release. I remember it: Chocobo racing, Gold Saucer arcade, Chocobo breading, strategizing ways to defeat Emerald Weapon, super rare random encounter hunting. All these hours of gameplay. It was all optional as well, but the best of all? It's there anyways. No one payed extra for it, but it's still there if you ever decide to try it.

[jaosals42]

Alright so Ive seen this one coming for a while now, and I have to say I think its soon going to come full blast.

The guy who thought of DLC must have been the same guy who thought of selling bottled water, because its freaking brilliant. EVERYONE is buying into it lol.

 

This is whats happening.

A company releases a game that is short and very basic. Charge like 60 bucks for the game. Then release a bunch of DLCs to finish the game they didnt finish to begin with. The DLCs cost money. So the inital freakin game ends up costing almost double just to have a "finished" product.

 

My example.

Fallout 3

Retail price is 60 dollars

if you bought all of the DLCs over GFWL, Fallout 3 costs 120+ dollars.

 

I cant be only who things this DLC fad is outrageous. There are also rpoblems with this whole DLC online thing with other games. Players cannot play with other players who have the downloaded content. SO If someone buys CoD and wants to play online, they have to buy the map packs to be able to play with other people, after they already bought the game.

 

Like this crap is really getting out hand.

 

 

What do you think? Over reacting? Justified Rant?

I can understand them wanting to charge for the DLC/expansions (whatever you want to call it) for FO3. They are generally better quality than the Oblivion DLC (other than KOTN and SI), though I do believe that they overcharge for a lot of it. IMO, the value of the Pitt and OA combined would be $10 and should be no more than $15 at max, so $20 is overcharging you. Still, it's better than price (2 or 5 something dollars?) for the horse armor DLC for Oblivion, which I didn't get till the KOTN compilation with the other DLC was released.

 

 

As has been said before though, EA is the worst one. $50 dollars for the Sims 3 and now they are not charging $30 for new expansions, but rather $40?!?! Who do they think they are? If I want it badly enough, I might as well buy it on Ebay and get it for $20 instead where I'm not getting ripped-off. Thanks EA, but you can keep your over-priced games.

[Vagrant0]

My problem doesn't lie with the fact that DLC exists, but the fact that I get the feeling that companies deliberately put less into the initial game, so they can put more into DLC and charge you an additional 100+% for content that doesn't NEED to be DLC. For something that is simple enough that it should have been integrated into the original game itself. That's where my problem lies. It feels like professional laziness. Sure it may be optional ad all that, but really, they turn mass amounts of stuff that should be there in the first place, and turn it into a separate investment for us so they can line their pockets with an extra layer of gold to insure the shine.

 

What I miss are games like Medal of Honor, or Final Fantasy VII and earlier. Those are the games with months of playtime without the need to throw in more content after the 4th month since release. I remember it: Chocobo racing, Gold Saucer arcade, Chocobo breading, strategizing ways to defeat Emerald Weapon, super rare random encounter hunting. All these hours of gameplay. It was all optional as well, but the best of all? It's there anyways. No one payed extra for it, but it's still there if you ever decide to try it.

Well, to play devils advocate for a moment, some games, in particular Oblivion, really did have content which was stripped before release. Except that this content was not held back due to wanting to make profit later on, but instead because a single DVD could not contain all the files they had. Evidence of this is littered all over the place if you know where to look in the CS, from the quests that were ripped out to the inconsistent dialogues of beggars and races. The DLC wasn't stuff that was purposely held back to be resold, the DLC was stuff that couldn't make it into the release, but was seen as being significant enough to get people interested. They probably didn't even know for sure that anyone was going to buy the first DLC mods, but people did because they wanted more. The reason why DLC exist is because people are willing to fork over the money to buy that little bit of extra.

 

As for your examples... That's because they're for consoles, and more importantly, were made before consoles could connect to the internet for extra content. Many games feature hidden and extra stuff simply because there are people who spend months going for 100% completion and it ensures that the game retains a following. It's missing from most newer games simply because more emphasis is placed on better graphics, voiced dialogues, all of which eat up valuable real estate on the disc. Space wise, adding something like rare encounters, special items, or even a small minigame may not be that much, but it also requires the time to implement and test it. That's the other side of things. As game sales drop, companies have been getting cheaper and cheaper with what they're willing to spend the money on. This is evident in all the bugs that are found upon release. Rather than spend more money in testing and coding to fix before release, they get millions of free testers from people who buy that game. It may not seem right, but since most every computer and console can connect to the internet to get patched, it is the more economical solution. Sales may take a hit initially, but will recover.

 

It's actually funny you should mention FF7 considering how much of the story was scrapped due to time and cost.

[Robok]

To be honest the concept of "DLCs" as they call it these days has always been there, they were called Expansions, but somehow now since they're downloadable they're called "Downloadable Content" instead.

 

Semantics aside, I think the amount of content added is the only thing that justifies a hefty price-tag, you might say that the developers were lazy and should have included it all in the final game, but when you buy the game you accept it as is, with no expectations of anything major to be added to the game. Game companies like Bethesdachoose to add content via DLCs when it is significant enough. While Bethesda's DLCs were somewhat lacking (I'm thinking the only 2 worthy DLCs released by them are Point Lookout and the Shivering Isles), they are still not nearly as ridiculous as DLC mappacks for games like CoD4 on consoles.

 

Then you also get gaming companies like Valve, they give you a 75% finished game and add content to it as they go, CSS was exactly like that, TF2 got the same treatment, and then L4D (not much, but still got some content). Do people like it? I do, it keeps the game alive for you much longer, but thing is, it's the same as DLCs, except free. Not all companies are as easygoing as Valve when it comes to releasing free content, they all think "more expenses means we must get paid for this!" instead of "why don't we add more content to this game so we can get more people interested in buying it?".

 

Anyhow, to cut it short: I'm not against DLCs if they provide sufficient content (in which case they'll be expansions), but I'm still hugely in support of companies like Valve giving more content to their consumers they go.

[Harabec Weathers]

Yeah, I know...something about Maxis games...Sim City 4 is like that too.

 

I'm not into those games, but my grandma loves them and we're computer tech support for her...so we get to listen to how crap the game is haha. Bugs galore...ah the wonderful world of PC gaming, eh? ;) Bugs, annoying "anti-pirate" software, $6 DLCs, what's next? :P

 

Windows 7 haha

[nV Vanity]

DLC isn't completely evil in a sense. Some games and publishers will rip you off and some know what to add. A good example of ripping you off (as much as I love Bioware) is Dragon Age: Origins. Basicly Bioware released the toolset for us PC owners to make all of the content we want while EA rip's off the PS3 and 360 owners. The Wardens Keep DLC features a castle you clear out and then keep where you have a party storage chest and a few new armors that are simple reskins of already existing ones. Complete waste of money. The upcoming Retrun to Ostagar features a chance to get the Golden Plate armor the King had, EA wants five dollars for something that you can give to yourself with a simple console command on the PC version.

 

Any map packs as well are usually wastes. On Halo 3 I spend what 5-7 dollars on a map pack containing three maps and usually I only play on one of them and the other two are garbage. Why spend money on three maps when on Far Cry I created my own maps and not just putting a few crates and barrels around an already existing map.

 

 

Good examples of DLC would be games like Oblivion, Fallout and GTA IV. Oblivion did have some small rip-offs like Horse armor, spell tomes, and the various castle, tower, base DLC's. While some of them did add in some neat features that could have been made or outdone with mods (Ancient Towers mod for Oblivion is a fine example of outdoing the DLC). Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine are the only two real DLC's that make the game even more fun.

 

Now GTA IV really shows what DLC should be. GTA IV already took over 50 hours of gameplay from me without DLC. The missions were fun, the story was great and everything was set up perfectly that it didn't really need. There were some minor things we wanted since Saints Row 2 had them (Parachute, Tank, etc). The Lost and Damned and Ballad of Gay Tony improved the game even more by adding the new content and parts of the story we didn't know about.

[Illiad86]

Yeah, I know...something about Maxis games...Sim City 4 is like that too.

 

I'm not into those games, but my grandma loves them and we're computer tech support for her...so we get to listen to how crap the game is haha. Bugs galore...ah the wonderful world of PC gaming, eh? ;) Bugs, annoying "anti-pirate" software, $6 DLCs, what's next? :P

 

Windows 7 haha

 

LOL Windows 7...personally like it a lot, haven't had any issues...because I haven't installed it yet :P Nah, in all seriousness, the bf had been using the beta and RC and never had any issues really with anything. Both have OEM copies right now, I just can't be bothered to reformat :P

 

Out of Oblivion's DLCs, I enjoyed Mehrunes Razor out of all of them. It was a very challenging dungeon. Bethesda's DLCs are worth it. Even FO3's DLCs looked pretty cool, didn't purchase them as the DVD became one with the microwave :P I wasn't very happy with it as you can tell lol.

 

My uncle just loves map packs for his Xbox360 games and I just laugh and say "You do realize it took them like 5 minutes to whip up those maps and they are charging you $7?" ;D