Stanley Woo wrote...
Sure, i'll try and field this one. In my opinion, videogames and gaming has become extremely popular, so much so that it's no longer considered "nerdy" or "unpopular." With the invention of the Nintendo Wii, browser games, mobile and tablet games, and with large-scale adoption of broadband interrnet, gaming has never been more popular and it looks to get more popular still. because of this popularity, there is a lot of competition. There will never be a time when the average gamer is without a game to play, whether it's Angry birds, the latest AAA release, an ongoing MMO, or Farmville on Facebook.
Expansion packs were a way to keep people interested in a game long after they were finished the main game's story. Due to the size of expansion pack, they were few and far between. these day, i reckon, in the time it takes for a developer to release a full-on expansion pack, people might already have forgotten your game. DLC is, again, in my opinion, a way to counteract that "forgetfulness." With smaller but more frequent content releases, you keep people interested in your game for a lot longer, which means potential sales of sequels can be bigger and, if actual expansion packs are released, players will still be hankering for them.
i see DLC as micro-expansion packs, which is probably why i don't really have a problem with them. the old game + expansion model had to adapt to the changing market and player expecation, just as game budgets had to increase to keep up with player expectation. DLC pricing is the way it is (seen as more expensive than similar amounts of content in a single expansion pack) to get a better return on a much larger investment than, say, 10 years ago.
A decade ago, a million-dollar game would have been pretty snazzy. These days, AAA titles probably run in the tens or even the dozens of millions. That's why all the advertising (now seen at the movie theatre, on television, billboards, etc., and not just in game enthusiast magazines). That's why the ancillary products / tie-ins. That's why everything, really. 
But the DLC model is really that much better? Sometimes it is 5 months to release of 45-70 minute adventure DLC. In the old days that was half way through releasing a solid expansion with many hours of gameplay, new classes, powers and gameplay tweaks.
I don't understand, how is this model better. Sure it is cheaper, but the end product is a mere shadow of what you used to release for your games.
Do you really think that if you put out an awesome game, that people would need monthly cheap DLC shennanigans to keep your game in their memory? People will remember your game and want an expansion because the game was damn good. Not because you put out monthly like me advertising begging campaign disguised as a DLC.
Retour en haut
should ignore it if they're not interested in it. People who actively campaign for them to stop making DLC...eh, I just find that silly on the whole.
![=]](https://lvlt.forum.bioware.com/public/style_emoticons/default/sideways.png)
