DLC - A Discussion

[CrypticQuery]

One of the reasons for DLC`s being something so common today is that game companies see more profitable to release content that expands the game for the sole reason that the game is already made, the main engine already exist, so scripting some new models, characters, etc, into the already existing game is not as expensive as creating the game from scratch, making new features in a game already made is more like updating it,they dont spend much time on programming because they just simply "add" stuff to the game with low development cost, and they can charge more from DLC`s because they see them as "new stuff" for your game, when the case is that it`s just the same features tweaked to be somehting else, of course, this it not always the case, but i think DLC`s are not enough reason to spend more on the game, at least in my opinion.

I don't actually mind DLC; I think it is a creative and fun way to continue playing a game that may have run its course. [unless you're on PC; then start installing mods! ] I do have a problem when a developer either cuts things from the game to sell as DLC [LA Noire's extra cases, for example] or has day-one DLC, implying the former.

And then, there's Capcom. :facepalm:

[Drasiana]

Whoa, you were so far away from the point I almost didn't see you there.

So from what I gather, its best to do your research and/or form your own opinions based off of your experience with a particular game developer...We live in a world were money seems to be everything. So regardless of rather or not its wrong...stuff like this is going to happen.

This.

Everyone is acting like "developers do dumb shit and try to make you pay for it" is a new invention and the downfall of the gaming industry and the evil grasp of THE MAN when it really isn't anything new or special. While they shouldn't include necessary parts of the game as DLC--which is a vocal complaint upon its release anyway--a lot of the people whining about the evils of DLC are the idiots who got duped into buying shitty character palettes in Mortal Kombat and are trying to blame everyone but themselves for their dumb spending habits.

[Fox-Shot]

Actually, Fox-Shot, the SPECACT weapons in in Bad Company 2 were just reskins of the last gun you unlocked in that class, with the M16, UMP45, and MG3 getting camouflage, while the Barrett M95, already having camouflage by default, got a constant, matte black colour from its SPECACT version.

Oh, I thought that they were also slightly buffed up, even then, the shortcuts DLC is annoying in BC2 and any EA game that has it, I miss having my effort pay off in a game.

[Vy'drach]

Whoa, you were so far away from the point I almost didn't see you there.

Everyone is acting like "developers do dumb shit and try to make you pay for it" is a new invention and the downfall of the gaming industry and the evil grasp of THE MAN when it really isn't anything new or special. While they shouldn't include necessary parts of the game as DLC--which is a vocal complaint upon its release anyway--a lot of the people whining about the evils of DLC are the idiots who got duped into buying shitty character palettes in Mortal Kombat and are trying to blame everyone but themselves for their dumb spending habits.

Way to avoid making a response beyond going, "Nope."

Also, we were on the point, the point being that Expansion Packs =/= DLC. They may both be additional content, but they are not the same thing. Just as, using the example you provided, a car and a truck may both be automobiles, but they are not the same thing.

Also, you couldn't download expansion packs up until recently. The time you could download them was after they made it so that you could download the entire game. Before that point, and even today if you want, you bought/buy expansion packs on discs. I have yet to see discs made for that shiny new set of armour, or that shiny new weapon, or that one inconsequential character, or for those three extra missions.

And I hope you're not trying to imply that I bought those retro character models for Mortal Kombat, and thus am one of those "idiots," as I did not. I have retro Scorpion and I got him as a pre-order bonus.

Oh, I thought that they were also slightly buffed up, even then, the shortcuts DLC is annoying in BC2 and any EA game that has it, I miss having my effort pay off in a game.

Shortcuts DLC was just a waste of money as you unlocked everything pretty quickly, and I actually miss the days when you didn't have any of the weapons or features denied to you.

[Luminous-red]

I don't actually mind DLC; I think it is a creative and fun way to continue playing a game that may have run its course. [unless you're on PC; then start installing mods! ] I do have a problem when a developer either cuts things from the game to sell as DLC [LA Noire's extra cases, for example] or has day-one DLC, implying the And then, there' :facepalm:s Capcom.

Then all is ok, the main problem many people face is the thought of them wanting the DLC but being uncomfortable about why they have to pay for what they took away from the main game just for money; and while some Developers do this on purpose , others actually may have wanted to include those features in the main game but couldn`t due to time restraints, and may even offer extra content for gamers for free (like Solatorobo), but in the end, everything comes to the person who pays, and if they have the chance to be able to get DLC`s and like what they get then all is well because they get what they expected . :-)

[DarthDelgado]

So, DLC is like pouring a mystery bag on your game disk, right? (Bear with me here.) You pour the DLC bag all over the disk and it could coat it in a nice shiny coat that also cleans your game and helps it run smoothly, or you could just be pouring a bag of shit all over it.

I would say if you enjoy the game and there's DLC you buy it. Now, you don't buy story expansions, only if they were made after the game was released, as I think someone else here said.

Basically I agree that DLC should be really small things like attires or characters or maps. Stuff like that. Not story add ons.

[Icy]

Basically I agree that DLC should be really small things like attires or characters or maps. Stuff like that. Not story add ons.

Seriously? I thought the consensus here was that little character/costume/car/etc packs that were developed well before release, intended to be released as DLC for $$, were what was killing games these days.

Large expansions and stuff, that really are worth the $$, I think are a very good value.

I pretty much refuse to buy costume/character packs. It's just a waste.

Well, honestly, I don't refuse, because sometimes you NEED that DLC to have fun with the game. That is what I hate. Developers making you pay to have fun with a game. To have the content that was already READY at release.

Eh, I made a much longer, in-depth post earlier in this topic.

Idkbi.

[DarthDelgado]

Seriously? I thought the consensus here was that little character/costume/car/etc packs that were developed well before release, intended to be released as DLC for $$, were what was killing games these days.

Apparently I didn't think so.

[PantherFanGirl728]

DLC really should be for small stuff or just game ad ons, like costumes, weopons, maps, songs on games like rockband and guitar hero, ext. but when a compant decides to make you buy DLC to continue the story lline after the game ends(for example, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow), the game devolpers might as well just make a new game.