DLC is an everyday part of gaming, with season passes and character skins available for most titles and a plethora of missions, weapons and costumes along for the ride. Tickles asks if DLC really is a good thing?
PC Aficionado: "Obsidian published a survey in early October, asking for responses from players concerning DLC. Now, 55,000 responses have been noted, and the final results are out."
Nobody wants to pay for DLC... Tell that to the idiots who are killing gaming by buying into the current microtransactiin trend without a fight.
I'm willing to pay for expansions. Those things we used to get that were of proportionate price to the base game's content and was worth the money.
They'll use this to plan future DLC. Yep, lots of small games with loads of DLC is incoming. Just MT's to get them used to now. Nearly, there guys. Way to kill the industry.
Fvck DLC. Either put the content in the base game or piss off.
Yeah I'm talking to you EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc.
Been wondering where that Champions Ballad DLC is for Breath of the Wild? Well, Nintendo confirmed it's coming December...on the European eShop only.
Good timing - other than Xenoblade 2, nothing's really coming out during that time.
awesome.. I would expect it to release around the same time in NA too. Can't wait!
December, eh?
Guess I'll likely be taking a brief break from Xeno mid-to-late December, then.
No way am I missing out on the very first ever post-game content that the Zelda series has ever had.
Looking at the industry trend of charging for DLC after a game is released and if it is justified for companies to do so
This is tricky. In my opinion, I feel like DLC should be free because we purchased a game, a finished product, for 60+ dollars, so things like Day One DLC shouldn't exist. On the other hand, I understand this is a business and that development is expensive, and expanding a product instead of making another one is good capital.
What I think would help is if the community was met halfway with a reinvention of the downloadable content system. Give the content we purchase certain standards, kind of like Day One DLC isn't permitted. If Season Passes are purchased, then the customer must have an outline of what they are purchasing, and if the individual didn't want everything in the outline then he/she could drop what they didn't like for a cheaper fee. Also, while I'm in the land of never ending possibilities, a rewards incentive is made for a certain amount purchased from all the developer's games released (which can also be carried over from system to system or gen to gen), like buying 10 DLC packs gives you one free. This way we both get what we want: they get some money and we don't feel taken advantage of.
Given that companies used to release DLC back in the late 90s and early 2000s for free as "supporting their product" for extended appeal? No, it's not justified, and never was.
Full on expansions are entirely different, but this bite-sized DLC bulls**t became popular with the biggest caner of them all, Call of Duty and their bulls**t map packs.
Once these companies discovered just how stupid the average "gamer" (and I use that term loosely) was, it was straight to the bank. Now look at where that first step has gotten us to today.
Of course, as consoles have inched closer and closer to PC, in recent years, it makes since when considering the existence of expansion packs. Why should they not, as it is always an option not a requirement.
Dlc isn't really good or bad.. It just is
Some seem to think any dlc should or would have been in the game otherwise.. That just isn't the case..
Devs can make extra money by pumping out content.. Its much cheaper then trying to make another full game..
Don't buy it if you don't want it.. It really is as simple as that.. Pretend it doesn't exist so you don't feel cheated Lol
You need to view it as extra content rather then removed content.. If they couldn't sell it extra, they likely wouldn't have made it at all
Gamers have gotten what we asked for...
Gamers buy games used where the publishers and developers don't get any profit.
So they have fought back by creating DLC and microtransactions.
I don't like DLC and microtransactions, but since gamers and Gamestop don't see any reason to give the publishers/developers any part of the used market, they are simply doing something that gets them the revenues they are losing out on.
This has been an issue for a very long time.
It honestly depends upon how it's executed, on a case by case basis.
Proper DLC like TLOU Left Behind & RDR Undead Nightmare are good but disc locked DLC and stupid stuff like costumes and camos that you would expect from EA or Activision are bad.
I agree dlc should be 6 months to a year after the so called full game. They release half a game upto £60 and month later are askin for more.