Is downloadable content becoming excessive?

[Shanks120y]

Do people feel that the amount of downloadable content that is being churned out nowadays has become, in a way to much? I have a Xbox 360 and don't tend to get a great deal of downloadable content (except mass effect 2, loved it) mainly due to the cost, that with 3-4 bit's of content and over a few games starts to add up. In Australia we tend to have to pay between $80-110 for a new release title and when you see new content to purchase showing up within the first couple of weeks for up to $6-10 you kind of feel well I just forked out for the game why wasn't that content in it?

I guess my main questions would be:
- Are game companies releasing additional content that you have to pay for to soon after the games release?
- Do people feel that quickly released content should have been in the release game?

Edit: Meant Mass Effect 2

[Yuni]

Sometimes it does annoy me when DLC comes out right after the game comes out, unless it's free.

I do, however, love the concept of DLC. Being able to continue playing some of my favorite games, even after I've done everything in the main game is awesome to me. Rock Band lasted way longer than it normally would for me, simply because of all the songs I could download. I easily downloaded 200+ songs for those games.

[bigsandwich732]

DLC's for most games I dont mind. but for FPS's it kind of annoys me. Oh you want 3-4 more maps? Cool, pay 10-15 more bucks! Want some new outfits? Sure! 10 bucks! Omg we have 3-4 more maps! 15 bucks again!

also Dragon Age 1 had like freakin what... 10 DLC options? smh...

Gets kind of annoying.

[lunaspike]

Do people feel that the amount of downloadable content that is being churned out nowadays has become, in a way to much? I have a Xbox 360 and don't tend to get a great deal of downloadable content (except mass effect 3, loved it) mainly due to the cost, that with 3-4 bit's of content and over a few games starts to add up. In Australia we tend to have to pay between $80-110 for a new release title and when you see new content to purchase showing up within the first couple of weeks for up to $6-10 you kind of feel well I just forked out for the game why wasn't that content in it?

I guess my main questions would be:
- Are game companies releasing additional content that you have to pay for to soon after the games release?
- Do people feel that quickly released content should have been in the release game?

I agree with you completely. I rarely buy dlc though. The exception would be mass effect 1&2. I had to have every single piece of dlc that came out for them. The good news is that some of it was actually free, and I thought that was great. The free stuff wasn't even bad, some of it was really awesome. Of course for every one good, there are a ton that are just terrible. If more companies put out quality dlc like bioware it would be different. Instead we end up with the stupid 3/4 map pack deals that are garbage. Though the stupid weapons pack dlc was crap tastic for me2.

[Sorx]

I just see it as another opportunity to gouge consumers.

whereas before you could sell a game for "$40", you can now sell it for 100+. It's all for the sake of profit.

In concept i don't mind the idea of DLC too much. just depends on how it's done

[Sofii]

I don't mind DLC as long as it's not "essential" for the game, and not overly expensive.

[Ms Andry]

I gotta admit, it is getting a little too much. I don't mind some DLC every now and again, but I think more of it should be either a lot cheaper or free.

DLC is sometimes more expensive than the actual game

[Mechazod]

I always hated DLC since day one. Extending a game is great but I much rather spend my money on an expansion pack that has all of the extra content rather then broken apart bits and pieces. Also its allure is just to much of an opportunity in my eyes to leave out stuff from the finished product. Then there is just the generally ridiculous DLC stuff like extra colors/costumes, experience/bulk item packs, unlocking stuff already in the game which you would unlock anyway by beating it, giving out free content but then requiring something else to play it that needs to be payed for and of course worst of all is the stuff that is already on the game disk.

Also personally I hate it just because without a physical form it can easily be discontinued and forgotten about thus making possibly awesome content vanish.

Now im not saying you cant have DLC but I wish it was just an option. Like for example sell an expansion with all the content or sell the individual pieces separately as DLC.

Basically because of DLC I am personally forced to wait a couple months/years until a game of the year/super mega pack edition comes out that has all of the DLC content on disk.

[brown]

I don't buy it unless I know I will really enjoy it though. Ofcourse with the amount of DLC that I see now, I can't help but wonder if some game developers withold that content upon release knowing that you will pay for it later. Either way it is a nice way of extending a game until a sequel.

[Poodles]

Free DLC? All for it.

Charging for DLC that should have been in the game to begin with? Go to hell.

[Arrashi]

The problem with DLC's is that They usually are either content ripped from original game to be sold later (hello mass effect 2) or thing completely not worth that money. The only game that had considerably good DLC's was fallout 3 and even then it was only 2 of them( Broken steel and point lookout). I would much prefer is they come back to releasing real X-pack to games like Lord Of Destruction to Diablo 2.

[BAKANA]

I always hated DLC since day one. Extending a game is great but I much rather spend my money on an expansion pack that has all of the extra content rather then broken apart bits and pieces. Also its allure is just to much of an opportunity in my eyes to leave out stuff from the finished product. Then there is just the generally ridiculous DLC stuff like extra colors/costumes, experience/bulk item packs, unlocking stuff already in the game which you would unlock anyway by beating it, giving out free content but then requiring something else to play it that needs to be payed for and of course worst of all is the stuff that is already on the game disk.

Also personally I hate it just because without a physical form it can easily be discontinued and forgotten about thus making possibly awesome content vanish.

Now im not saying you cant have DLC but I wish it was just an option. Like for example sell an expansion with all the content or sell the individual pieces separately as DLC.

Basically because of DLC I am personally forced to wait a couple months/years until a game of the year/super mega pack edition comes out that has all of the DLC content on disk.

This is what gets me about DLC. They release "most" of the game and then about a year later after all the DLC they release the actual "full" game and call it the "game of the year edition".

[Damus Grayhorn]

It sure seems like they're developing a game, then splitting it in half and selling the second half in chunks as DLC.

[PACOX]

DLC is the modern word for expansion pack and directors cut.

Remember back in the day when you had wait for a directors cut to get any material that didn't make it to launch?

How many console games could have later been expanded or been given an expansion back but were limited by the technology?

Imagine if there was DLC for the original Goldeneye.


Yes, there are some companies who abuse DLC, most however use it as a service to their customers. The reason why it DLC is more and more prevalent because it is easier for a developer to release content. PC games aren't the only one that get to continue after their major story arcs are finished. Cut content is forever shelved or requires to purchase the game all over again to access it. The content patches and support you get in exchange for MMORPG subs is like paying for a DLC membership (something Rockstar has started to adopt, COD is looking to adopt it as well)

Its up to the gamer to decide if DLC is worth buying or not. Their are companies that release amazing DLC, adn companies that are just milking their game. EA is known for milking $$ out of DLC, but DLC for once two of the best uses of DLC that come to mind right off the back are Rockstar and Bethesda with their games, but there are tons of other games that get DLC right. Even LBP and Just Cause 2 .99 items are DLC done right IMO. DLC doesn't have to mindblowing because its usually cut content anyway. What EA/Bioware did with DA2 is a example of bad DLC. Expensive DLC on day 1 just tells gamers you intentionally left content out of the game and decided to hole it for ransom.

DLC != preorder bonus by the way.

Some other games that do DLC right

Borderlands
Bioshock
Assasins Creed
LA Noire
Red Dead Redemption
Grand Theft Auto
Burnout
Rockband
Warhammer 40k 2
Fallout

like I said, I could list tons

[Chkchkboom]

One game that really bugged me with the DLC was Assassins creed 2, they cut out Sync 12 and 13 or w/e and released it as dlc =|

[blackangel209]

The problem with DLC's is that They usually are either content ripped from original game to be sold later (hello mass effect 2) or thing completely not worth that money. The only game that had considerably good DLC's was fallout 3 and even then it was only 2 of them( Broken steel and point lookout). I would much prefer is they come back to releasing real X-pack to games like Lord Of Destruction to Diablo 2.

What did they hold out of ME2 that was ripped from the original game?

[Shinryu]

Depends on the DLC to me; if it's something uniquely developed afterward that enhances the game's experience and longevity, I'm not completely opposed to it, might not spend the money to get it but it's fine otherwise. Now, if it's paying to unlock crap already programmed into the game (see EA), then they deserve to have the crap kicked out of them.

[PACOX]

Depends on the DLC to me; if it's something uniquely developed afterward that enhances the game's experience and longevity, I'm not completely opposed to it, might not spend the money to get it but it's fine otherwise. Now, if it's paying to unlock crap already programmed into the game (see EA), then they deserve to have the crap kicked out of them.

I am not whole opposed to this form of DLC. A lot of times when their is release day DLC, its in the forum of some preorder bonus. Preorder bonuses are heavily traded by gamers, the developer is just taking out the third party.

[Vevex]

This topic comes up among my friends I often. My opinion is that downloadable content makes it so a company can make a full game, advertise it, go back and cut out 10-15 hours of gameplay, release the "unfinished product" and then release the 10-15 hours later earning them $70-$80 instead of a flat $60. I think most companies are guilty of this. I also think it is incredible that people put up with it.

When I was growing up you payed $45 for a video game, as production costs increased the price increased to $50. It was not a big deal, it was just an extra $5 I had to drop down on a video game. By the time I had a job I would have been paying $60 a video game, the console cost me $200-$300. The industry has changed, for the worse I am afraid. Quality of Games has decreased (probably because i'm older) and downloadable content only shows just how greedy these companies truly are.

The console gamers can say what they wish about WoW; how it is stupid to pay $15 a month on a video game but between X-box live (lol PS3) and DLCs to keep up with people on X-box live I find THAT to be ridiculous. I, obviously, have a bias though...

[Botoks]

Some other games that do DLC right

Borderlands
Bioshock
Assasins Creed
LA Noire
Red Dead Redemption
Grand Theft Auto
Burnout
Rockband
Warhammer 40k 2
Fallout

like I said, I could list tons

How could you leave Witcher 2 out of that list? Simply the best example of how dlc should be done.