| sabvre42 said: I don't get why DLC is evil, but used games are okay. DLC apparently screws the consumer, but its necessary to offset the costs of used games (since used game sales are lost revenue to the publisher and developer). |
It all depends on the DLC. At it's core, DLC is a very fine idea, but most publishers use them soely on quick cashgrabs instead of bringing something meaningful. This is also why some DLC are praised (like the MK8 and Hyrule Warriors DLC which expended greatly upon the games) while others can start flame wars (remember the Horse Armor, anyone?)
Dragon Age: Origins is a good example as it does both the good and the bad ones: The Prequel Missions for Leliana and Morrigan and the one where you fight for the Blight are very well made and worth their money. On the other hand, having a Questgiver at your camp which gives you a mission you could only do by buying some extra DLC is just a no-go, and the DLC character Shale is not enough expanded upon and stays as an empty character (a shell, if you excuse the pun) troughout the entire game.
Also, used games are lost revenue? They already got their money for the game. Just imagine if you would sell your car or some of your furniture the manufacturers would come and say "we want 10% of the original price or else you can't sell it". You literally couldn't sell them as the price would go above anything worthwile. Even moreso on an used game, as this could easely expand the price above the price of a new copy, espacially during sales.
Plus, almost all of the money from selling used games is reinvested into new ones. In other words, they are losing nothing through it. Worse, if there would be no more used games market (or regulated to the point that it becomes moot, like I explained above), I bet the sales of newer games would be less high since not everyone can afford buying new games all the time without trading in older ones.
