I agree with Ubisoft on this. It's not like they're charging for things that are essential but were 'conveniently' left out at launch.

Well, I am a Serina fan myself, so that DLC wouldn't do much for me. The hilarious part would be that that DLC would be sold left and right becuase guys are so gullible haha!

I seriously like DLC that expands on the game, like Fallout's or Fire Emblem's.

That type of DLC does not bother me at all. All it does is give lazy people, who are willing to pay, an option. It does not affect anyone negatively at all.

The problem is that game development does not work that way.  Before a game is actually started its already been storyboarded.  Most developers cannot fit everything they can within a game within the defined timeframe they have to release a game.  Actually its best if the developer have a defined timeframe and meet milestones to stay on course and not bleed money trying to throw everything they can in a project and not recoup the cost.  TIme is money for software development and not meeting your release dates cost a lot of money as there is a huge engine behind the scenes that work to get games into gamers hand.

Gamers have a very limited amount of understanding how software development works and even less how game development works.  OF course gamers believe all DLC content should have been in the original game but in reality its far from what actually goes on.  During certain phazes of game development a lot of the team have down time.  During this time if they are not working on another project they they are let go.  DLC gives those people jobs that they can do which bring in revenue for the studio and everyone gets paided.

The only vote that counts is the one you make with your wallet. No amount of internet whining would stop the practice if people keep buying absurd dlc.

I read this thread and it makes me laugh, what was once a cheat code you just got in the game, sometimes specifically hidden on a map or in an easter egg are being put up for sale as DLC, and people defend it. Weird.

It's good to see the customer base bending over so nicely.

That's not the point. Sure, they'll develop content to add into the game. The problem is, they have the audacity to give a Day-1 season pass, knowing that consumers will spend a lot more on their game than standard price. Then, smaller teams work on terrible DLC, which is charged at a $15-20 premium where it should be given for free (in case of maps or game modes). 

That's not to say all DLC is bad. Bethesda makes excellent DLC, and if more of the industry followed their footsteps this wouldn't be a problem. 

My main problem with DLC is that they usually don't offer much in the way of longevity or substance.

I said it in regards to the Hyrule Warriors "preorder DLC" costumes, and I'll say it again here.

It's the specifics that make the difference. Giving people an option to pay to unlock something that would otherwise require time and effort to unlock isn't a big deal. It's not like you're being prevented from accessing the content on the disc. You're not missing out on any gameplay because you didn't pay for a "time saver". Assuming the game isn't made in a way to make you feel you NEED to get the "time saver", they're not doing anything to force you to get it.

But it's all about the specifics. If they were to make it so that you either do something that requires such extreme precision that you'd have to spend 20+ hours practicing to do it, or pay for it... then it's going too far, and is a case of a game designed to pressure the player into spending more money. But if it's just something that takes a bit of regular gameplay to unlock, I don't see any issue.

Sure, they could have just had a cheat code. Or they could have had a "Super Guide" type feature, or an "Easy Mode", or what-have-you... but it's their prerogative on that point. It'll probably lose them a few sales, and it'll probably earn them a few dollars from people who are OK with it. In the balance, it probably doesn't benefit or harm them. And it doesn't harm the player who simply ignores the existence of this "time saver" entirely.

It's just like how preorder DLC that is just a little trophy (not necessarily literally) to say "hey, you preordered our game, here's a little gift to say thanks", like an alternate outfit for a character that doesn't change anything except appearance, then that's fine. But if the preorder DLC were to make a noticeable difference to gameplay, then it may be a problem. It's all about the specifics.

The gripe with pre orders is how they're pushed through the roof, how games you don't even know will be any good are tricking people with these gorgeous CGI trailers and instantly want the people to drop a preorder.  It's easy to blame the consumer for "falling for it" but it shouldn't be their fault, it's the fact that the publisher is selling a game on lies a lot of times (Final Fantasy 13, Watch Dogs) and it shouldn't be the consumers job to do quality control.

If I had "voted with my wallet" with Mass Effect because of it's shitty ending, you think EA would have thought "They must not like the ending"?  No it was because of internet whining that the ending got changed.  There are numous cases of it working too - in this thread alone someone mentioned how online whining stopped Ubisoft from giving AC4 an online pass.

When has "voting with your wallet" ever sent the right message?  Don't worry, I'll wait.