Hate for DLC

[Deleted]

I've been looking around recently for new games to play until MoP is released and it only just striked me today how much DLC has become a thing.

I will take Modern warfare 3 for example. It has a ridiculous amount of DLC. The price of the DLC isn't exactly cheap each, The game it's self is around £30 at the moment while the DLC packs are £11 each. So you end up spending more money on DLC then you do the actual game, when it's content which should be provided for 1) free later on 2) with the game release. What annoys me even more is they are selling you back things you already bought. The makers of CoD (both Infinity ward and Treyarch) add maps, from previous CoD's, as DLC.

CoD isn't the only game doing this, I saw the DLC for BF3 and there was tons of it. I wouldn't be to bothered about it if it was a reasonable price but £11 for 2 maps? That's 1/3 of the games price for 2 maps you'll get bored of in a few days.

And the cherry on the top? Game developers are actually getting away with this, I see DLC for everything now, pretty much any game released in the last 2 years have had atleast some DLC, I for one am getting a little bored of it. Any thoughts?

[Flaks]

If people buy it, they'll sell it. Easy as that. There's a lot of blind consumerism going on and in a capitalistic economy it's inevitable companies will milk their consumers for all the money they can get.

[Tradu]

Didn't know BF3 had much DLC. Only knew about the 2 map packs(Back to Kharkand and Close Quarters) and the "unlock everything" pack.

I'd obviously prefer to get it all for free, but some of it they've actually worked on after releasing the game and deserve to be paid for.

[Deleted]

I'd obviously prefer to get it all for free, but some of it they've actually worked on after releasing the game and deserve to be paid for.

Well if the work was put into the DLC that I also wouldn't mind paying either, but 2 maps, which could be knocked up by a few developers in a few days and whack a £11 price tag on it seems...unreasonable.

The BF3 DLC is slightly better, I know you got quiet a few guns and such but still.

[Zao]

MW is probably a bad example because it's a cash-in franchise anyway.

There's plenty of examples of great DLC that gives you excellent content for a moderate amount of money. Mass Effect and Dragon Age both had great DLC like Lair of the Shadow Broker and Legacy (in addition to a few duds)

Then there's negative examples like the AC2 DLC which was already on the disc but had to be bought seperately.

Stuff like the infamous horse armor from Oblivion or skins for weapons/characters is stupid, but not harmful in any way, because it offers no value to the player besides cosmetics.


DLC isn't inherently good or bad, it's a simple eceonomic decision. As long as people pay for it, developers will produce it.

[Landin55]

All DLC's should be optional, and all the ones I can think of are, don't like it? Don't buy it, won't make or break the game.

[Deleted]

All DLC's should be optional, and all the ones I can think of are, don't like it? Don't buy it, won't make or break the game.

This "SHOULD" be the case but it isn't, I noticed any game using the match making system breaks as it tries and pairs you with people who do or don't have the DLC. Potentially halving the amount of people the match-making system can find.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

I'm not a fan of DLC. I'd prefer if it was either an expansion or all of it together. If they can't get it in one package that's fine I understand, but do an expansion if you feel the need to.

[Landin55]

This "SHOULD" be the case but it isn't, I noticed any game using the match making system breaks as it tries and pairs you with people who do or don't have the DLC. Potentially halving the amount of people the match-making system can find.

If they are doing randoms maps then yeah they will have the same chance to be put into the lobby with you. IDK if you can do random or specified maps but if they pick random you still have the chance to get them won't break your game.

[Lynix]

I've been looking around recently for new games to play until MoP is released and it only just striked me today how much DLC has become a thing.

I will take Modern warfare 3 for example. It has a ridiculous amount of DLC. The price of the DLC isn't exactly cheap each, The game it's self is around £30 at the moment while the DLC packs are £11 each. So you end up spending more money on DLC then you do the actual game, when it's content which should be provided for 1) free later on 2) with the game release. What annoys me even more is they are selling you back things you already bought. The makers of CoD (both Infinity ward and Treyarch) add maps, from previous CoD's, as DLC.

CoD isn't the only game doing this, I saw the DLC for BF3 and there was tons of it. I wouldn't be to bothered about it if it was a reasonable price but £11 for 2 maps? That's 1/3 of the games price for 2 maps you'll get bored of in a few days.

And the cherry on the top? Game developers are actually getting away with this, I see DLC for everything now, pretty much any game released in the last 2 years have had atleast some DLC, I for one am getting a little bored of it. Any thoughts?

I agree with those 2 games as examples... I would never pay for maps no matter how big or small, stuff like that used to be free... What happened?

Real content on the other hand (new features, settings and single player levels) I will pay for because there's obvious work put in.

---------- Post added 2012-08-03 at 05:01 PM ----------

All DLC's should be optional, and all the ones I can think of are, don't like it? Don't buy it, won't make or break the game.

You are just a really angry person aren't you? multiplayer maps are far from optional. It's why I don't play FPS online.

[Edge-]

I only recently caved and started purchasing DLC (primarily because when I purchased the Batman pack on Steam it came with a ton of it), but I'm super selective about it, only buying DLC that I feel adds real value to the game and is worth the price (for example, the Missing Link DLC for Deus Ex).

I still like the idea of DLC as it's potentially super awesome for consumers, but there's just way too much shitty DLC out there that is exploitative. But consumers buy it, and as long as they buy it developers will keep releasing the poor quality DLC. Thankfully people are beginning to lash out at companies like Capcom who put ALL their DLC on the disk. Hopefully we'll see a bigger backlash against companies who consistently release sub-par DLC as well.

[Adam Jensen]

This "SHOULD" be the case but it isn't, I noticed any game using the match making system breaks as it tries and pairs you with people who do or don't have the DLC. Potentially halving the amount of people the match-making system can find.

I personally don't mind any optional DLC. Mass Effect is a GREAT example for good DLC. Not one single ME paid-for DLC is required to understand or finish the plot, yet they are all great DLCs that supplement the plot, adding new missions and new side stories. You can go through all three ME games and have a well rounded story without any DLC, not required at all. And the same goes for Dragon Age Origins. That's the kind of DLC I like.

ME2 has AMAZING DLC. Arrival, Lair of the Shadow Broker, Overlord, Kasumi Goto, all of them are awesome missions with great stories and characters, but NONE of them are required to have a successful run through the Omega 4 Relay during the final mission of the game.

However any DLC that is required in order to make the plot make sense or gives characters a boost in multiplayer, I think is a terrible idea and should never be done.

[Landin55]

I agree with those 2 games as examples... I would never pay for maps no matter how big or small, stuff like that used to be free... What happened?

Real content on the other hand (new features, settings and single player levels) I will pay for because there's obvious work put in.

---------- Post added 2012-08-03 at 05:01 PM ----------



You are just a really angry person aren't you? multiplayer maps are far from optional. It's why I don't play FPS online.

Yeah I'm angry /rage. Maps are optional never bought any packs for MW2 and worked out great for me. So once again you spread misinformation, big surprise, oh wait not really.

[Deleted]

I've been looking around recently for new games to play until MoP is released and it only just striked me today how much DLC has become a thing.

I will take Modern warfare 3 for example. It has a ridiculous amount of DLC. The price of the DLC isn't exactly cheap each, The game it's self is around £30 at the moment while the DLC packs are £11 each. So you end up spending more money on DLC then you do the actual game, when it's content which should be provided for 1) free later on 2) with the game release. What annoys me even more is they are selling you back things you already bought. The makers of CoD (both Infinity ward and Treyarch) add maps, from previous CoD's, as DLC.

CoD isn't the only game doing this, I saw the DLC for BF3 and there was tons of it. I wouldn't be to bothered about it if it was a reasonable price but £11 for 2 maps? That's 1/3 of the games price for 2 maps you'll get bored of in a few days.

And the cherry on the top? Game developers are actually getting away with this, I see DLC for everything now, pretty much any game released in the last 2 years have had atleast some DLC, I for one am getting a little bored of it. Any thoughts?

By ridiculous ammounts you mean 2 DLC packs containing around 5/6 maps each? So much hate, sigh.

What to say about, oh i don't know... Train Simulator 2012? It has so many DLC's, that if you buy them all it adds to around 400€. But it's easier to hop on the MW3 hate bandwagon.

[Lynix]

DLC on the disk.

This is what gets me. It's such a dog move to create things before release for the sole purpose of making money at a later date after release.

[Mashpotaters]

I'd obviously prefer to get it all for free, but some of it they've actually worked on after releasing the game and deserve to be paid for.

That's part of the issue with DLC nowadays. It's predetermined what will be released as DLC. It doesn't matter when the game is launched. For example, Gears of War 3 was delayed for marketing purposes, but there was DLC locked in the game because it was content that was planned for DLC from the start. If DLC was actually content that they decided to make to support the community I wouldn't mind paying for that, but it feels like they are leaving things out of the game in order to release it later as DLC. They have DLC planned before the game is even complete. That shouldn't be happening.

[Landin55]

By ridiculous ammounts you mean 2 DLC packs containing around 5/6 maps each? So much hate, sigh.

What to say about, oh i don't know... Train Simulator 2012? It has so many DLC's, that if you buy them all it adds to around 400€. But it's easier to hop on the MW3 hate bandwagon.

But MW3 is made by activision! AND THEY ARE EVIL they make video games for money!

[Deleted]

But MW3 is made by activision! AND THEY ARE EVIL they make video games for money!

Don't know if you're "siding" with me, or just fooling around with me :P

But yeah, let's all hate MW3 because a friend of a friend of my cousin's girlfriend friend said it suck!

I bought MW3 last week and i don't regret a single euro i've spent (or wasted, depends on your point of view). I've never played Black Ops or MW2, it's probably because of that i don't hate MW3 as everyone else does.

[Lynix]

By ridiculous ammounts you mean 2 DLC packs containing around 5/6 maps each? So much hate, sigh.

Well personally I hate MW because it's garbage not because of it's DLC. It's expensive DLC just gives me more reason to not buy it... Not that I would I got fooled with 1 and 2...

Fool me once, shame on them
Fool me twice, shame on me

They wont fool me a third time. 3 games, never improved. Regurgitated shit for the last 3 - 4 years but fan boys will still defend it to the core because it's popular among their own friends. My mates love it... I call them tards for it.

[Landin55]

Don't know if you're "siding" with me, or just fooling around with me :P

But yeah, let's all hate MW3 because a friend of a friend of my cousin's girlfriend friend said it suck!

I bought MW3 last week and i don't regret a single euro i've spent (or wasted, depends on your point of view). I've never played Black Ops or MW2, it's probably because of that i don't hate MW3 as everyone else does.

That post was all /sarcasm =p, I too am tired of the hate gamers spew on pretty much any game. Its great if you have an opinion and you can have one but jeez if you have nothing better to do but get mad at a game enough that you call people fanbois, lazy, losers, sheep, etc, etc you shouldn't be playing games or talking about them.