Stuff That Sucks - DLC
Greg Burke tackles the tough questions as he reminsces about the times before paid DLC became a big thing.
DLC has become a big thing in video games in the past couple of years. This week Greg Burke talks about how DLC used to work, and the quickly growing DLC practices which need to go.
-
Shack Staff posted a new article, Stuff That Sucks - DLC
-
-
-
Expansion packs. They were created AFTER A GAME'S RELEASE, once a game had PROVEN ITSELF to the market and consumers. A sizable chunk of content (another 20-25%), game upgrades, usually another character class.
Counterpoint: Aliens Colonial Marines had a pre-orderable Season Pass DLC before the game was gold.-
As much as I agree with the sapping endless DLC these days, I do have to say that comparing development costs then and now isn't the same. To generate quality assets for modern games, you need a massive team compared to the good old days. Putting out an expansion or dlc isn't cheap and they have to make up those costs in some way.
-
-
-
-
No way is it worse for 99% of players. The DLC push that he is complaining about is either A. crap skins or B. rewiring the core gameplay to push DLC.
DIablo3 always on was clearly advertised and prevents the hacking/griefing in D2. They said it would be a multiplayer game from the get-go and if Torchlight2 was there as an SP alternative.-
-
-
Has there been someone that has been hacked or something? The only thing I've seen people talk about on the console versions is that some people have hacked their own characters.
IMO if it doesn't affect my own character, let them do whatever they want with their characters. There isn't even an AH anymore on the PC version, so I don’t see any way that they can affect someone else's game.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yeah I agree that it's lazy. That being said I'll take the unpopular road and say the Advanced Warfare stuff doesn't bother me at all. Solely cosmetic except the one gun you get with the season pass (which is only ok as it overheats easily and isn't particularly powerful for an assault rifle). It was released for purchase well after the game was released, and you get already can unlock a HUGE amount of armor/guns/camo without paying for anything but the game itself. I probably have 5-7 elite Exo suits without spending a dime, just playing multiplayer, and I'm only on like Prestige 4. Would I have been happier if they were included in the map packs? Sure, but honestly I don't care much. Most of them look like crap anyway, imo.
-
-
-
-
are you serious?
They patched the game for years. And then there is this http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Brood_War_maps
Also they released the free mini campaign. I'm sure there was more. All of that was free.
-
-
-
-
-
Yup. And how do I explain it to my kids, They are only 6 and 11 and its all they know. :(
Also a sad LOL http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2015/02/23/convenience-itself -
I agree with most of what you said. DLC content needs to be viewed as a way to give players an incentive to continue playing the game instead of dropping it for something new. Extra colors for skins and armor or additional inventory space is NOT how you do that and is simply a terrible attempt by a publisher to just milk more money from their user base.
The only point where I disagree with you is in providing players a way to accelerate through the grind in single player games. As a gamer and a parent, I have a finite amount of time to play games but a shit ton of games that I want to play to completion. Giving me the option to drop another $2-$5 to unlock items that will speed up that process is something I would be willing to consider. Only if it's a single player game, though. I don't feel that this should be done in a multiplayer competitive game. That becomes too close to the "pay to win" scenario that you see in far too many free-to-play games.