Full Expansions vs Addon Packs

[blitzburns4]

I couldn't help but notice gaming in general has been moving away from huge "expansion" packs and towards smaller "Addon Packs" and I just wanted everyone's opinions on that. Personally, I prefer expansions overall. For example, I felt Zion from Honest Hearts DLC could have been done in a fashon similiar to that of Oblivion's Shivering Isles. I personally felt Honest Hearts was a missed opportunity and was seriously under developed. (In that it could of been much larger with much more content packed into it.) For example, in Oblivion I returned to Sherogath's realm constantly while I never returned once to Zion.

 

Although, I may be slightly biased because I believe expansions don't nessecarily have to relate to the main game. (Assuming some people believe expansions are meant to be continuations of the main storyline.)

 

Anyways just wanted your opinions.

Edited February 19, 2012 by blitzburns4

[Syco21]

Bloodmoon was a great expansion, didn't relate to the main game.

 

I hate, hate DLC for what it represents. The increase of insignificant content packs and outrageous rate hikes. Ugh.

[RitualBlack]

I would prefer if both were free content that was not removed from the game to be resold to the consumer, but I do like expansion packs more. At least they feel more like full games and paying $20 for them is justified. It also keeps the game fresh. The worst example of something that is pushing the industry is the COD franchise. By the end of an average game they release 5x$15 'DLCs' which cost more than the over priced game. There is no reason people should have to pay additional money to be included in the full multi-player experience which they are most likely paying Xbox live fees on top of. At the end of it all one has shelled out $200+ on the console, $60 for xbox live (yearly), $70 for the COD game (yearly), and $75 on extra content (yearly). I don't mind expansions at all but the whole DLC thing seems like a scam in general because almost nothing in them couldn't be released with the game or put in for free.

[blitzburns4]

I would prefer if both were free content that was not removed from the game to be resold to the consumer, but I do like expansion packs more. At least they feel more like full games and paying $20 for them is justified. It also keeps the game fresh. The worst example of something that is pushing the industry is the COD franchise. By the end of an average game they release 5x$15 'DLCs' which cost more than the over priced game. There is no reason people should have to pay additional money to be included in the full multi-player experience which they are most likely paying Xbox live fees on top of. At the end of it all one has shelled out $200+ on the console, $60 for xbox live (yearly), $70 for the COD game (yearly), and $75 on extra content (yearly). I don't mind expansions at all but the whole DLC thing seems like a scam in general because almost nothing in them couldn't be released with the game or put in for free.

 

Ya, I really hate CoD. It's not a bad game for sure, but the way it has steered the whole industry....It's terrible! I honestly feel that if CoD wasn't so sucessful the whole idea of releasing multiple sup-par "DLC" packs for 15 bucks a pop would be recieved with an outrage today. As for the Xbox Live and free conent comment, I think that was the original idea. However over time they realized that their consumer base would just stupidly pay for every little bit of extra content, and Microsoft was just like "Ok, if people are going to throw money at us we won't say no." Up until that point not many other game developers have made their players pay as much for some maps (Halo was $10 new and the older packs went down in price over time.) and not many other game developers have at least given its playerbase some free content. After CoD, however, the entire standard changed. Plus we even now have some developers pushing what CoD started even further. (Battlefield 3 required an online pass and released a map pack like a month later.) It's almost as if gaming has become "How much money can we possibly milk from our customers?"

 

Pretty ridic. if you ask me.

 

Also thanks for the responces.

Edited February 19, 2012 by blitzburns4

[brokenergy]

Expansion packs only work if you have enough interest in a game while making if viable in 6 months +. Addon packs or DLCs can draw up interest in a shorter period and bring some sort of income and interest back into the game. In the end we need more assessment depending on individual developers, for example BioWare and Beth creates DLC that isn't directly tied to the main plot while giving something worthwhile others either sell back cut content or gives stuff that adds nothing of value to the game.

 

Really it depends on lots of factors but in the end, all these DLC's cost money to develop and the cost must be recouped. If developers were to give a reward for being just there in the community that would be nice but they are under no obligation to handout stuff to you. They are a business just like anyother just like you wouldn't expect Wallmart or Coles or your local bank to hand-out freestuff for being loyal to their business. A discount on next purchase maybe but not freestuff.

[blitzburns4]

Yea.....You're right broken. Whay I suffer from is a thing called wishful thinking. Still, I can't help but think there is some milking going on (*COUGH! Microsoft*)

[zegh8578]

i really dont like addon packs, because you typically have to pay for them.

its too damn sneaky.

 

games should be complete, they should include everything they intended to include from the beginning.

they do not forget to include stuff. they save it for the later addon packs, just so they can squeeze even more money out of people, its like charging consumers for patches. Oh sh--, i hope i didnt give them ideas now :0

 

a real expansion pack is different, cus it adds a whole new gaming experience, such as entire landscapes, entire new storylines, and thus, is worth the effort.

Edited February 20, 2012 by zegh8578

[Illiad86]

i really dont like addon packs, because you typically have to pay for them.

its too damn sneaky.

 

games should be complete, they should include everything they intended to include from the beginning.

they do not forget to include stuff. they save it for the later addon packs, just so they can squeeze even more money out of people, its like charging consumers for patches. Oh sh--, i hope i didnt give them ideas now :0

 

a real expansion pack is different, cus it adds a whole new gaming experience, such as entire landscapes, entire new storylines, and thus, is worth the effort.

 

Completely agree.

 

They need to understand something. Unless you are making a good wage or a child living with their parents (who also make a decent wage), people are not going to shovel out $120 for a "complete" game. Games, like for me and my boyfriend, are a treat to buy. We are lucky to buy a game every 6 months or so (the quality of games and variety are lacking, but still). It's just horrid when you pay 50-60 bucks for a game, only to find out it's way too short...then the 10+ DLCs come out for it at $10/piece, and the companies think you just going to throw everything down and pay for them. Sorry guys, I have rent and bills to pay, a cat to take care of, and more things that are a priority than buying a $10 pack that consists of 2 sets of armor. Damn near every DLC I've seen isn't even worth the money. Horse Armor, THQ selling cheat codes...I mean come on?

 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, are there certain FPS games were you are pretty much forced to buy the DLCs to even continue playing online? If so, that is pretty much like paying for a patch.

 

The Witcher 2 did the right thing, FREE DLCs. Even when you got the special DLC from buying it at a certain store, they eventually still gave everyone the DLC for free. I was quite irate when I got the game. Beautiful game and all, but it was so short. I was expecting them to start whipping out DLCs at a price, but they didn't. Plus, the always kept up with fixing the game and even added the Arena. Now, the Enhanced Edition is coming out and it's completely free to people who already own the game. The EE of the original Witcher changed the game a lot and made me play it over again, I'm sure TW2s will be the same. CDProjekt has the right idea. I payed $60 and got the complete game and as a bonus, they give you free addons. Yeah, maybe they should of just included them in the game in the first place, but I guess it feels nice when they give you something for free because you bought their game.

Edited February 21, 2012 by Illiad86

[brokenergy]

Snip

 

That only works if a) what you define as "complete" game or b) are worth it in the base game. TW2's "DLCs" really added nothing to the game and made no difference to the base game. I didn't think that those DLCs were even worth to be give out as DLCs and should have been renamed as returned content because those content, to me were worthless and added nothing. So please don't say that CDRed is doing it right, they are following a different business model and have different ways to re-coup costs (i.e gog and their other projects).