730 réponses à ce sujet

[CG50]

If DLC is like Overlord, LotSB or Arrival where it expands on the game after it was finished, or in Arrival's case, lead into ME3 i don't mind. If i like the game and want more of it i can pay and play DLC. I just didn't like Kasumi because it should have been in the game from the beginning (why else couldn't you open that door on your own ship?) but i can understand if they couldn't finish it in time for the deadline.

Complaining about free dlc is pointless. It's free your not losing money. It's just a marketing ploy to get people to try other games. E.g. dead space 2 - dragon age 2, the kingdoms demo - me3.

The only DLC that i hate are map packs that come out every 2 months. But some people don't mind it and pay for it so that ain't stopping any time soon.

[nacholibre83]

DLCs are, generally, just an easy money grabbin' policy, nothing more (with exceptions; i'll talk about that later). Total disrespect of the loyal fans. It's sad that some people here lack the awareness, and justify BWs shameful business behavior. 
Let's look at Mass Effect 2:
As far as equipment go, there were only one armor in the game (n7), and the other six were DLCs, used for various pre-order promotions (Blood Dragon, Cerberus, Collector's, Inferno, Kestrel, Terminus); there were four head accessories (helmets, visors) in the game (n7 helmet, n7 breather, kuwashii visor, death mask), and another six of them used as DLC promotions (umbra visor, recon hood, sentry interfece, archon visor, capacitor helmet, kestrel helmet); half of the weapons in the game were DLCs..<_<

Does anyone here really think that these things weren't stripped from the original game? They were offered before the game came out. Because of this little marketing stunt, the game suffered from the lack of customisation. And did it really hurth them that much to put all those things back in the game after a while? CD Project Red did exact same thing regarding the Witcher 2 (not to mentio all the free DLCs). Why not 'reward' your fans for spending their hard earned cash for your game? Nooo, BW had to charge us extra for the things that should've been in the game, that we spent full price on..

And what about armor customization for companions? It's laughable that there are only two default skinns for each companion, and most of them are either awfull (Jack), or totally out of place, and time (Miranda, Samara..). When squad customisation is soo poor, why not give your fans extra appearance packs for free, to make up for it, instead of charging it. Really, is it such a hard work to create some new looks for companions to justify the price?

Now let's look at ME3:

There are so many DLC nonsence, that people are starting to make jokes about it in other forums: 'If you buy new socks/boxers you'll get exclusive DLC, bla bla. Is that content cut out from the main game? Will the customisation suffer again?  Why is there a exclusive companion & mission in collector's edition? That stuff pisses me off!! What, I'm suppposed to pay extra 10$ to get a full game, on top of the standard price I've payed for the new game?! So I'm buying the game, and not receiving a complete one?! Pirates are getting all the DLCs day one, and a complete game. Way to go, BW for encouraging your customers to give you their money..

Now, I'm not against DLCs, but only if they're done after the game, had a significant content (3-5 hours), and are fairly priced. LOSB & Overlord fulfill the first two conditions, but the price is not fair, if you compare it to the price, and content of the full game..

I've been folowing this company since the Baldur's Gate days, and I can't even recognise them anymore. They are at the zenith of greed in the whole industry. I'm really thinking of cancelling my preorder, and never buy anything from them anymore. Damn, even Bethesda is way better; at least they put their DLCs after the game.

[vonSlash]

Grimm jow wrote...

breyant wrote...

FFXIII-2 may be the worst culprit... They intentionally left the ending open so that they can release episodes to finish the story.

I've always been on the fence about DLC and even supported it in some cases (Overlord, LotSB)... but in Square Enix's case, this is just some DLC BS. DLC is supposed to add to the game, not conclude it!

XIII-2 Spolier:
The ending wasn't "left open", entropy reigns. Because of how things are setup, the outcome may or may not be changed. Chaos was released and time is stopped. Caius wins. That is a true ending to a complete game. They may or may not make it into a trilogy. If you wan to damn SE for expanding the story further, then damn Bioware for making ME3 or DLC aswell. Arrival pretty much concludes ME2.
End Spoiler

I don't really mind DLC anymore if it's not some nickle and dime attempt, or where the developer cut a chunk out of the game to resell(Assassin's Creed 2). That is unless it's day 1 DLC. Stuff like the Normandy crash site I can't support, and didn't need to thanks to Microsoft's blunder

In the ending of FFXIII-2, they explicitly state that the story will continue, so we are more or less guaranteed some sort of continuation to the story. Most people I've talked to expect to see FFXIII-3 rather than a $10 DLC ending, however.

Personally, I hape they're right. XIII-3 would be much better than episodic DLC releases.

[chengthao]

nacholibre83 wrote...

DLCs are, generally, just an easy money grabbin' policy, nothing more (with exceptions; i'll talk about that later). Total disrespect of the loyal fans. It's sad that some people here lack the awareness, and justify BWs shameful business behavior. 
Let's look at Mass Effect 2:
As far as equipment go, there were only one armor in the game (n7), and the other six were DLCs, used for various pre-order promotions (Blood Dragon, Cerberus, Collector's, Inferno, Kestrel, Terminus); there were four head accessories (helmets, visors) in the game (n7 helmet, n7 breather, kuwashii visor, death mask), and another six of them used as DLC promotions (umbra visor, recon hood, sentry interfece, archon visor, capacitor helmet, kestrel helmet); half of the weapons in the game were DLCs..<_<

Does anyone here really think that these things weren't stripped from the original game? They were offered before the game came out. Because of this little marketing stunt, the game suffered from the lack of customisation. And did it really hurth them that much to put all those things back in the game after a while? CD Project Red did exact same thing regarding the Witcher 2 (not to mentio all the free DLCs). Why not 'reward' your fans for spending their hard earned cash for your game? Nooo, BW had to charge us extra for the things that should've been in the game, that we spent full price on..

And what about armor customization for companions? It's laughable that there are only two default skinns for each companion, and most of them are either awfull (Jack), or totally out of place, and time (Miranda, Samara..). When squad customisation is soo poor, why not give your fans extra appearance packs for free, to make up for it, instead of charging it. Really, is it such a hard work to create some new looks for companions to justify the price?

Now let's look at ME3:

There are so many DLC nonsence, that people are starting to make jokes about it in other forums: 'If you buy new socks/boxers you'll get exclusive DLC, bla bla. Is that content cut out from the main game? Will the customisation suffer again?  Why is there a exclusive companion & mission in collector's edition? That stuff pisses me off!! What, I'm suppposed to pay extra 10$ to get a full game, on top of the standard price I've payed for the new game?! So I'm buying the game, and not receiving a complete one?! Pirates are getting all the DLCs day one, and a complete game. Way to go, BW for encouraging your customers to give you their money..

Now, I'm not against DLCs, but only if they're done after the game, had a significant content (3-5 hours), and are fairly priced. LOSB & Overlord fulfill the first two conditions, but the price is not fair, if you compare it to the price, and content of the full game..

I've been folowing this company since the Baldur's Gate days, and I can't even recognise them anymore. They are at the zenith of greed in the whole industry. I'm really thinking of cancelling my preorder, and never buy anything from them anymore. Damn, even Bethesda is way better; at least they put their DLCs after the game.

*applause*

[mranderson25]

DLC is also there to help combat the losses a developer takes with piracy and used game sales. I'm not saying I'm against the used game market, but developers see ZERO money from used games. Only one person buys it new, then they trade it in and it goes back on the shelf for others to buy. You can see how his would add up. DLC let's the developer make money even on used copies of a game, so at least it's not a total loss. Does that mean they should have skimpy, half-assed DLC? No. But I think Bioware is one of the few developers to actually do DLC right.

[Ross42899]

I like DLCs. If a DLC adds nice new content and missions (e.g. Lair of the Shadow Broker) and is not previously cut content re-added to the game, there is no reason to complain.

Please produce more DLCs in the future. Thank you.

[Someone With Mass]

Kasumi and Zaeed were supposed to be in the vanilla game, but they were made DLCs instead. Kasumi being the most obvious one.

But I had no problem with paying for her. It was pretty fun and rather unique for Mass Effect to go all James Bond on a mission.

[Bleachrude]

Er...I played ME2 without purchasing kasumi at all...Don't think I lost any gameplay value or anything..

[Darth Death]

nacholibre83 wrote...

DLCs are, generally, just an easy money grabbin' policy, nothing more (with exceptions; i'll talk about that later). Total disrespect of the loyal fans. It's sad that some people here lack the awareness, and justify BWs shameful business behavior. 

Pretty much this. 

[Kaidan Fan]

I, too, like DLC. That's my opinion and it won't change. If you like it, buy it. If you don't, don't buy it. Pretty simple.

[chengthao]

mranderson25 wrote...

DLC is also there to help combat the losses a developer takes with piracy and used game sales. I'm not saying I'm against the used game market, but developers see ZERO money from used games. Only one person buys it new, then they trade it in and it goes back on the shelf for others to buy. You can see how his would add up. DLC let's the developer make money even on used copies of a game, so at least it's not a total loss. Does that mean they should have skimpy, half-assed DLC? No. But I think Bioware is one of the few developers to actually do DLC right.

Zaaed? Kasumi? Pinnacle Station? Firewalker? Ceberus Armor? Equalizer Pack? New Skins for Garrus, Miranda, Thane, Tali, Jack?

also there are no "losses" from used games or piracy, calculating that kind of loss is impossible

first of all just b/c someone bought a game used or pirated it doesn't mean that they would have bought it new,

secondly it can't be "calculated" as lost as they did not lose any kind of product, its not as if someone stole a hard copy b/c that can be calculated as loss b/c they (EA/BW) had to spend money to ship it/manufacture it, where buying used or pirating, EA/BW spent $0 manufacturing/shipping it

[vonSlash]

mranderson25 wrote...

But I think Bioware is one of the few developers to actually do DLC right.

I'd have to disagree. Bethesda (post-Oblivion Horse Armor Bethesda, anyways) is one of the few developers to do DLC right. Most Bethesda DLC is released a few months after the game launches and each one adds a few hours of content to the game, as well as new weapons/armors/misc items. I'd like to see Bioware release their weapon packs, alternate appearance packs, and so on as part of the larger DLCs like Overlord and LotSB, without inflating the price of the larger DLCs, and avoid day 1 DLC altogether, with the exception of retailer-specific MINOR pre-order items that will be made available to everyone else at a later date.

Bioware DLC might (usually) be a bit higher quality than Bethesda DLC, but Bethesda packages their DLC better, paces their DLC releases better, and doesn't make any major DLC (such as characters) part of a day 1 DLC deal.

[Alan Hawke]

Боже я и дня не проживу без доп.кусочка игры(Нужно больше ДЛС)

[darthnick427]

Asking for a gaming company to stop making DLC's is like asking Garrus not to calibrate. You can ask all day, you can even demand they stop, but they'll just keep on calibrating.

[Darth Death]

darthnick427 wrote...

Asking for a gaming company to stop making DLC's is like asking Garrus not to calibrate. You can ask all day, you can even demand they stop, but they'll just keep on calibrating.

Like my boss use to say, 'Do it right or don't do it at all'.

[GnusmasTHX]

Avalanche404 wrote...

Last but not least: please, stop producing gameplay-ruining DLCs, like over-powered weapons and armors. Sure, there is no reason to buy them if I don't want to, but what if I am a collector and I like to buy limited edition? Am I forced to have a lot of addictional contents which gave me enough power to finish the game without changing equipment? Is like cheating! And again, someone could say "no one force you to use them", but hell, I have spent a lot for a collector's edition and those money cover also that, why I shouldn't use what I've paid for?

Any point you tried to make fell apart when you said that.

[WaffleCrab]

I have to admit though, i do like a well done DLC, Like the Knoxx DLC for borderlands.

[corporal doody]

LotSB has to be my favorite DLC for ANY GAME!!!

[Gibb_Shepard]

We need some CDPR reppin up in here. All DLC is free, and they are soon releasing an expansion pack (YESANEXPANSIONPACK) which they will obviously charge for; and with good reason.

They are also adding an update to the vanilla game that adds even more content, estimated at over 3 hours. For free of course.

This is integrity, this is soul.

[Severyx]

Wow. It's surprising how quickly the thread devolved in just 10 hours. People seem to have completely forgot the reality of DLC. These people are the ones who claim DLC is just a 'money grabbin' policy' and other such nonsense.

No, let's just ignore the devs who worked on DLC when their roles on the base content was complete. Oh, and the fact that Digital Content takes far less time to be approved for release (hence 'day one DLC') means nothing. Oh, and I don't mind the fact that people with no knowledge of the industry are being quoted for truth. And while we're at it, let's just toss out logic in favor for baseless opinion stated as fact. That seems to be the way the masses want things these days.

[corporal doody]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

We need some CDPR reppin up in here. All DLC is free, and they are soon releasing an expansion pack (YESANEXPANSIONPACK) which they will obviously charge for; and with good reason.

They are also adding an update to the vanilla game that adds even more content, estimated at over 3 hours. For free of course.

This is integrity, this is soul.

What is CDPR?

word

[AloraKast]

Still working my way through the thread but wanted to throw my two cents in.

Stanley Woo wrote...

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with ignoring all DLC and just playing the base game that comes out of the box. While developers and publishers do like DLC, they can't and don't count on everyone choosing to buy it so the base game still has to be seen to be of value and worth the purchase price.

As much as you might want all the extras, I think that as long as the game out of the box is still significant and can be taken in and of itself, we as a gaming populace are still in a good place. Absent all DLC, if a game gives you a good play experience, has an ending to the story presented in the game, and leaves you satisfied, it should still be considered a decent game. Then, if you really want more out of your game, there's replays or, if you want to spend the money, bonus/extra DLC available to continue or enhance the experience.

that's one way to look at it.

Stanley, I am trying to see this issue from both sides (the consumer side as well as the business side) but the issue of DLC is a dicey one... and I also hope that you can try and see this from the consumer point of view.

The issue, to me, is not so much about the multitude of small DLCs that (rather unfortunately) seems to have become the norm in the industry (that's a whole nother discussion), but rather that dreaded "Day 1 DLC" that the company says is NOT part of the main game but the consumer views as yes, it IS part of the main game. I mean, it's right there on the disc, available at launch, etc...

Take "The Stone Prisoner" for example. In my view, that was handled very well, with the consumers getting the code for this "DLC" with every new copy of the game purchased, while the company addressed the issue of "used games" while not penalizing the consumers. To me, that was a very good way of handling the "Day 1 DLC" because the consumer didn't have to pay extra for it and the company addressed something that was a concern for them... again, without penalizing their consumers.  And let's face it, I use the term "DLC" very loosely when talking about "The Stone Prisoner" as it really is a part of the main game, an integral part at that. Remember taking Shale to the Deep Roads with you? To me, that is a part of the game and a very important part.

I realize that you can also argue that no, in fact Shale is not necessary to the main game experience, and is not really a part of the main game. Following that logic I suppose you could also argue that you could take away all of the companions, leaving only Alistair and Morrigan, as everything else is not really a part of the main game... *sigh* Where does it stop? Where do you draw the line at cutting away parts of the game experience, the story you are trying to tell, the adventure you wish to take the player on... until you are left with the very bare bones? What is the purpose of presenting a game experience that is nothing but bare bones and very clinical, without much substance, if any?

Fast forward to DA2 and "The Exiled Prince" being the Day 1 DLC... this one was not so nicely handled, imo, with only those who obtained the Signature Edition having this particular DLC already part of the game.  And again, Sebastian was definitely part of the main game experience and everyone else having to pay extra for it is the beef I'm having. It's a Day 1 content, available at launch and is part of the main game... And before you say it, yes, I recall Mike talk about this DLC and how there wasn't enough time to finish this content and so "hooks" were left in at certain points to combine this DLC with the main game. But if this content was available at launch... how can we treat Sebastian and his content as DLC, add-ons, whatever you want to call it? This is the crux of the matter; pre-order "bonus" content and Day 1 DLC being treated as extra, add-on material and not part of the main game.  I think the picture referenced here described the point very well:

http://social.biowar...95080/3#9195537

Of course, I much prefer to have an true expansion come out 6/9/12 months after the main game release, so that I may continue the story, the adventure, the experience that I fell in love with and be truly satisfied with another 40 hours of gameplay, following the 80 hour campaign of the main game. I have absolutely no problem paying another $30 for a true, quality expansion (and do so gladly) on top of paying the $60 for the main game, because I am paying for substance, quality and yes, quantity as well... instead of the 3-4 hour experiences of these numerous, stand-alone DLCs... which is not terribly satisfying.

Kileyan wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

After I've put hundreds of hours into a game like Oblivion, if the next time I launched the game a pop-up came up and said "hey, we see you're really enjoying our game, would you like to give us 5 dollars?", I would have no trouble paying that.

In the case of DLC, I even get something for my money. Something that may vary in it's own value, but why should that bother me? I consider DLC to be another way of supporting a developer I appreciate. If I don't care much for the game, I won't care much for the DLC.

I don't know how to put this but I'll try. If it was a matter of an awesome expansion pack PLUS all this DLC, I wouldn't even be in this thread. I'm not against all these mini adventure and item DLC packs, they are profitable and easy to distribute. I want Bioware to make money and make games.

My complaint is expansion packs are gone, and the DLC they are replaced by, even if it is all add together after the games DLC cycle is over, all that doesn't add up to nearly the playtime and content of single expansion packs of old. Not to mention all that DLC might add up to 90 bucks for a grand total of 1/4 of the play hours. Sadly that last bit pretty much sums up why no more expansion packs. DLC is much more profitable for less content in the end(less work).

I suppose todays expansion packs are the yearly full priced sequel release model that some companies are striving for.

Has this practice truly gone the way of the dinosaurs?

[Darth Death]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

We need some CDPR reppin up in here. All DLC is free, and they are soon releasing an expansion pack (YESANEXPANSIONPACK) which they will obviously charge for; and with good reason.

They are also adding an update to the vanilla game that adds even more content, estimated at over 3 hours. For free of course.

This is integrity, this is soul.

Not to mention the amazing job they're doing for 360 owners. They know how to capture a gamer's heart. <3

[KylieDog]

I miss expansion packs, actual expansion packs that offered huge amounts of new content at about half the price of the main game but half the content, pretty fair.

Now we get small DLCs that often recycle some of the main game and when added up together can cost the same if not more than the main game yet fail to offer the same amount of content, not even close.

We now pay much more and get much less.

What I also liked about expansion packs is you get a large amount of content all at once to delve into, releasing a 1-2 hour DLC and then another 1-2 hour DLC months later is a pretty lame release pattern imo, especially in the cases where you need play through the story from start again to reach a point to access the DLC.

I'd rather wait an entire year with nothing then get a full fledged expansion than get drips every few months.

Modifié par KylieDog, 09 février 2012 - 03:17 .

[casadechrisso]

I wish they went back to making either expansions or DLCs that clearly feel like expansions, contrary to giving the player the feeling they have to pay double to make just the base game complete. The only DLCs I somewhat enjoyed from BW were the ones that felt like they were actually cut out of the main game (i.e. Shadow Broker) or actually were cut out of the main game (i.e. Stone Prisoner). If you look at, say, Fallout New Vegas, that's how I wish BW would do it too - a few unimportant bonus items as preorder bonus, fine, and then DLCs that are clearly expansions. The only recent example that comes to my mind was Mark of the Assassin for DA2, not really my favorite DLC but at least one that actually was done like all DLCs should be and a fair trade.

Needless to say the Bioware point system is one clear ripoff too, I think I still have some useless points there and no DLC I can buy from it. Not only are the DLCs already overpriced enough, you always end up buying more points than you actually need. DLCs for real money and not converted from $ to € one to one is the only fair method, and that's probably the reason we don't find new BW games on Steam anymore.