Why I Hate DLC and patches?

[The_vagabond7]

Words Of Wisdom said:

madskillz said:

Words Of Wisdom said:

madskillz said:
So, OP, I take it you don't play on Xbox LIVE either. I personally love DLCs. Driving more cars, playing new episodic content and additional game modes. If it's an awesome game, I'll pay to keep the party going. In the end - if you don't want to pay, pass. I will say most complaining about DLCs are coming from one side of the room - from the 'have nots' though.

So, rather than pay $60 for the full game and all its content, you would rather pay $90+ for the game and large portion of its content as DLC?

Makes perfect sense.

If I buy a game and like it, why not? I have bought a few - I have 'Bring down the sky' DLC for Mass Effect, Lost & the Damned, two of the three FO3 expansions, Shivering Isles and a heap of cars for Test Drive Unlimited. As I clearly stated, if I like the game and want extra content, I'll buy it. I love having the option to download it. In the end, some folks can afford it. Some can't. I can and will pay, if I have to. However, if I can get the content free on the PS3, I won't pay for it on the 360.

In the end, it's about options. I enjoy DLCs wholeheartedly.

It's not about the content.

It's about the fact that it was withheld from the original game/purchase.  Do you not understand or do you not want to understand?

Why do you assume that it would have been in there without the DLC? I think that is the big mistake in assumption. It's not like Valkryria Chronicles would've had those extra story missions if there was no possibility of DLC. They wouldn't have delayed the game to add them in, they would have released the game, and we would never have seen the missions from the empire's side. A chunk of the story would've been ommitted for budget reason.

Wind Waker was missing alot of content because it had to be released at some point, even Ocarina of Time had at least one dungeon cut so that they game could actually come out. Parts of the story from Final Fantasy VII also didn't make it. . If there was DLC back then, we would probably have gotten to play those things. Things get cut for time and budget reasons. These things that would not be in the game actually have a chance to be released now. And yes, you have to pay for the stuff that got cut for budget reasons. That is not insane or unreasonable. You don't have to buy the directors cut stuff.

And speaking of directors cut, back in the PSX days "directors cut" games weren't uncommon. Instead of DLC, you got Resident Evil and then six months later "Resident Evil Directors Cut" with the content that was originally left out to make the schedule. Is buying the game over again preferable in some way?

Do some companies take advantage? Absolutely. But to assume that all our games now would've just shipped with all the DLC you find on the PSN is ignorant. Those are the things that normally got cut from games, not included in them for free.