I like it for games that I liked playing.
I have paid for DLC once in my life. I was at a friend's house for a Rock Band party. He didn't have the David Bowie songs. I bought them for him so we could rock out. Other than Bowie DLC, it's pretty much a waste of time, all the time.
| cliffhanger said: I don't know, but everytime I see that a game is getting DLC, I cringe. I really don't like it. I guess I just think that once a game is out it's time to start working on the next one. I can see that it's adding value to the original game, but I don't care about that. Just put it in the damn game, or move on. I'm just wondering how popular these things are and how many people actually download them. Maybe I'm just living in the past... |
Yes, though I understand your concerns. It's valid too. When a company like Bethesda has a horse pack and sells it for money it's a joke. Capcom selling new costumes for $2. Those are jokes and highly abusive DLC. Good DLC is more like Fallout 3. So I will exaplain why DLC is good and is the future.
Creating games is a time and money consuming process. From the gamers point of view that doesn't matter. Many gamers won't even care if a company loses money until goes under. DLC offers an improved way of finacial continuance. The games that your refering to are mostly burst orientated sales. They provide great income once. Then the company needs to rely on that amount until their product comes out. But the time between products is increasing. Where it used to be 1 year, it's now coming 2.5 to 5 years for a game. If you play some RPG ThirdPersonShooter, but have to wait 3 years until the next game is a long time. The gaming landscape can change and "my" company has to survive to the next game. If the game flops. well "my" company is dead in the water. If however I make a game and put in some extra investment into DLC. Then "my" company is in a better position. More easily digestable price per content. It's a well known fact that people will pay small increments of $5-$10 and over pay than just charge the large lump sum. It's more convient and less painful on the wallet. So because of that "my" company can come out with $10 content every 2 months that keeps "you" interested in the game, while maintaing a longer term income. "you" end up getting more gaming rather than less.
So in the end well done DLC makes gaming better to both the developer and the gamers. Part of the resistance to DLC is that it represents change. But industries can't constantly improve on the same model and keep costs down. Better means more cost and ther is no way around it. Sooner or later the increase of cash will return less qaulity. So this is just a change to maintain and improve gaming over.
If your worried about it. Avoid it for another few years until a well established style of DLC comes out.
Squilliam: On Vgcharts its a commonly accepted practice to twist the bounds of plausibility in order to support your argument or agenda so I think its pretty cool that this gives me the precedent to say whatever I damn well please.
If it is free, I'll take it. Otherwise, hell no.
Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic
Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Mobile - Yugioh Duel Links (2017)
Mobile - Super Mario Run (2017)
PC - Borderlands 2 (2012)
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)
I don't like the idea of the feeling I get when I find out there is major DLC for a game. Sometimes I feel the game is incomplete without it. Sometimes I feel that they released half the content just so they could sell DLC later. The Sims 3 is a really good example of this.