DLC

Downloadable Content is a concept that has engrossed the entire industry now.  It started with just a few games offering something extra for a few cents on the side and grew into being an enormous McContent generator.  Take a look at IGN, Shacknews, or your favorite gaming sites and you’ll see that every day new DLC is being announced for games.  Some of it is good stuff, and some of it is not.  I don’t really have a problem with the idea that developers/publishers will sell content, but where I do take issue is when they do it before or right after launch.

Publishers are chopping up games and taking stuff out just to sell it on the marketplace.  How is that right?  Why can’t the completed game be sold to the player — they’re paying $60 or more for the game already.  It’s becoming a way for the publishers to raise prices on the games yet still be capable of keeping that normal price on the shelf.  It’s a screwed up practice.  What’s worse is when the DLC is announced weeks before the game is even available in stores!  Lost Planet 2’s DLC is announced without a price point and the game is not even available yet.

What’s even worse is when this content is already on the disc! They’re essentially selling you the content, but not the right to play it unless you pay for it -again-.  Publishers are getting crafty and giving out access codes to the content for you to download as an incentive for buying the game.  It helps curtail the used game business (which I despise) but also creates an excuse and further incentive to continue releasing games that are either chopped up and sold for parts and locked away until you pay.

I would be fine if DLC were entirely new stuff that comes out justifiable amount of time after launch.  I’m also okay with content that isn’t finished being given to players via download … but do it for free.  If you couldn’t finish a feature, a map, a mode, whatever, before launch then give it to players after and let them know you care.  Guess what?  Then you can release content and they’ll be willing to pay for it because they already feel like they’ve gotten their money’s worth and then some.

  • The DLC is also much more expensive per hour of content. For me that’s what it’s all about, if I like the game then whether or not I buy the DLC comes down to how many hours of play I get per dollar? Loved Dragon Age, didn’t buy Awakening because it’s 40$ for 10 hours of game, no way. The original was a much better deal at 60$ for 40 hours. If they did their DLC better then they’d really have a racket going that I’d actually buy into. 60$ for 40hours at launch, 15$ for 10hours 1 month later, 40$ for 30hours 3 months later. Now if they did their DLC like that for Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age then I’d have bought all of it. But giving me 1 hour free, 1 hour free, 2 hours for 10$ then 10hours for 40 they spread the DLC out too much and charge too much, no sale.

  • The only new thing about DLC is the “downloadable” part; Mission Disks, “deluxe” re-releases of games with a few new bits, they’ve been cashing in forever…

  • The only counter to this argument I’ve read recently is that for a lot of the games, the DLC is made by a completely different team while the main game is being developed. In general, the question becomes, why does the timing play such an important role in when they release DLC? We haven’t seen the peace-meal game yet except for Fable 2 and that was released as a complete game to START.

    So unless we feel that the content of the game is less then it should be for the price point, I don’t see what’s the problem.

    And if you don’t like it, don’t by it. Easier to convince the masses of this though, I know.

  • My comment didn’t go through. Boo.

    I just wanted to say there is nothing inherently wrong with DLC that is released at launch. If you don’t want to pay for it then don’t.

  • I think publishers should be able to charge what the market can take. We can’t have some kind of itty bitty regulatory kitty committee overseeing video game sales and sales practices, soon it will grow into aggressive content regulation and get all wrapped up in politics.

    if you don’t like it don’t buy it.

  • the worse offender has been for me Madden 10. there’s a lot of useless DLC like cheats and extra modes(that were in their competitor for free 6 years ago) and everywhere the game is trying to force it down your throat even if you are not interested.

  • I agree with the price/hour thing. I don’t have a problem with DLC in principle, but the prices are just plain way too high compared to what you get most of the time. Long story short, I just don’t buy it. I tend to buy expansions for games i like though.

    Borderlands is a good example really, its kind of the poster child for overpriced DLC recently in my opinion. If those DLC packs were like 5 bucks a pop instead of 10, I’d buy all of them, I liked Borderlands and the main problem is that there wasn’t more of it. But I paid 40 bucks for the game, and I’m not going to pay 10 bucks for a couple more hours tacked on, thats like 20% more price for about 5% more game.

    On the flip side, I shelled out the 30 bucks for the DoW2 expansion Chaos Rising because it had plenty of content, is probably a once per year purchase in terms of xpacks, etc. (By the way, its just as much DLC strictly speaking, I DOWNLOADED the CONTENT from Staem).

    My point is, it isn’t “DLC” thats a problem, its charging a lot of money for little game. Whether you download it or buy it in the store or have it warped in via some sort of inter dimensional deliver service (okay, maybe I’d pay more for that) its the price thats the issue. I don’t buy new games that cost 60 bucks either cause I don’t think its worth it.

    Small amounts of content for small prices is something I would definitely be interested in, especially because it would hypothetically allow me to pick and choose just what I want and ignore the stuff I don’t want, as opposed to the normal pack it all together and charge 30 bucks for an expansion method. Its a great model in theory, but the problem is that basically its literally 100% more expensive than “non Downloadable Content” or whatever you want to call it, a lot of the time.

  • DLC and map packs just charge people for stuff that should have been in the game.

    Bioware has a nice system, free cosmetic (and sometimes actual gameplay) But for MW2 to charge more than 10% of the games total cost for a few maps is crazy.

  • There’s a very fine line with DLC from it being excellent value for money that enhances the original game to it being a greedy attempt to generate more cash.

    Here’s a perfect example of good DLC: the expansions for Sins of a Solar Empire. They’re cheap (like $10) and really had so much to the game. They’re also natural progressions, as expansions should be, and not just obvious attempts to milk the player. I really can’t be bothered with companies that want to charge me $7 for new character costumes…

  • The problem is that people will pay for it anyway. The game could ship with half the content cut out and sold for an EXTRA $60 in $10 packs as DLC and people would complain and buy it right up.

  • Modern Warfare 2’s next map pack illustrates part of my point. Here we have yet again more maps that are yet again way better than the stock maps. Why couldn’t they have given us the variety and quality when the game launched?

  • This reminds me a lot of the “MMO Beta” crap that a lot of companies pull when their game isn’t up to snuff.

  • @Dave: I also hate that sham beta status; if you are taking money from players, you are officially open for business!

  • On one hand I like the idea of additional content, even at a nominal fee. Most of the time, I don’t bothers since by the time the expansion comes out, I have finished the game and moved on.

    Now with Dragon Age and Mass Effect, I kind of found it cheesy that I got what amounted to an incomplete game. Granted in that case, if you buy the game itself you got the DLC for “free.” But I still had to activate it. It just seemed wrong.

    I can see this as part of the future. This is very similar to the non incomplete manuals you get in the game box. Thus pushing the consumer to buy additional add-ons. This does not stop me from buying those games. I just won’t buy the add-ons if it seem like they are primarily a marketing gimmick.

  • I have to disagree, especially in the case of Dragon Age. DA has been one of my favorite new franchises for sure, and the DLC has added to the experience in a big way. The DLC is cheap, and adds large missions (in the case of the Warden’s keep and the return to Ostagar.) These encounters would not have been included in the game release, and any new missions are a godsend for my part. If more quality keeps coming from them, I’ll keep paying the 5 measly dollars to enjoy it.

  • There’s always a point for me when DLC just becomes a money milking scheme. But at the same time, I do enjoy the option of DLC for some games as it actually adds to the experience and prolongs the amount of fun I get out of a game.

    As you mentioned, it’s pretty damn lame to charge for content that’s been completed before a game has even been launched. It’s actions like these that piss me off.