Anyone else fed up with DLC?

[R Nilla]

Originally posted by: mmntech
As some of the others said, to me, DLC is worth it only if it's a significant expansion to the game. It's no different than the boxed expansion packs we had back in the day. However, with the price of games here back up to $70, its outrageous to ask for $5 or $10 just for a couple of cars as Burnout was doing. Considering you can pick up entire games on XBL and PSN for that, it just doesn't make sense. As someone above mentioned, there's also the controversy of publishers releasing DLC immediately after a game comes out, which could easily have been included. That's gouging, plain and simple. DLC done right is ok but there needs to be some sort of set pricing scheme and release timetable for it so it's fair to consumers. MS, Sony, and Nintendo all have the power to regulate that, as they do with other content.

People need to focus less on when the DLC is released and more on the content on the disc versus the content of the DLC. I think there's a large misconception about how the disc-based software publishing process works that leads to some of the timetable outrage but certainly this isn't always the case (see the NCAA Football 10 DLC).

It seems like a lot of anger comes from the completionist mindset. People think they are missing part of the experience because there's more content available for their game but then get mad because they have to pay for it. Perhaps this further leads to the perception that any game with DLC available has been released "incomplete."

 

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: Queasy
If you don't like the DLC...don't buy it. Simple as that. If you think the DLC is a good value, buy it. It's just like any other game purchasing decision.

It isn't as simple as that. The "don't like it; don't buy it" is a cop-out argument. I don't like it, and I don't' buy it, but I still think that there is room to complain about something you don't like on an internet forum.

Especially when this DLC trend is causing developers to skip out on releasing the expansions that I love (when was the last real sized expansion?), and leaving out content that should have and could have easily been on the disc (day-of-release DLC and buying codes to unlock content?).

I didn't say you couldn't complain. A vote with your dollar will probably have more impact though. Lame DLC should be called out. But I refuse to lump all DLC together to complain about and think DLC done right should be praised.

DLC is still very much in it's infancy so I think alot of developers are still working out the best way to handle it. Bethesda used Oblivion to experiment with different sized DLC (from horse armor to Shivering Isles) and still seems to be using Fallout 3 to narrow their focus on DLC moving forward. I believe others are doing the same.

Sorry, I thought by simple as that you meant discussion over the topic shouldn't exist.

I do vote with my wallet, as noted above. Perhaps I would praise DLC done right, if I could find such a thing. I have yet to see DLC that is worth it and offers more than the old expansion pack model. Bethesda is a great example, as I miss the likes of Tribunal and Bloodmoon rather than thee half assed expansions they offer today (and half assed games).

Even if there is some company, somewhere that manages to do DLC, they would be a drop of water in a lake of oil that I refuse to drink from.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Yep. I remember getting NES Mario 2 for $70 Canadian. Most new SNES games were $70. The AAA titles like Chrono Trigger and Super Mario RPG would cost over $100. I remember the Playstation 1 having $50 new games and I thought "wow that's cheap" and the best selling PS1 games with the green label were only $20! Cheap games was why the PS1 beat the N64. N64 was still using ROM cartridges, so their games were still $70-80 new whereas the PS1 games were always $50.

PS1 games were $40 new, not $50. Aside from a few SE games.

It did suck paying $80 for a N64 game though. I "worked" (6 hours a month) at EB, and got my pick during that first crazy holiday season though. I imported a system with a few games. Beat Mario 64 getting 120 stars without being able to read anything in the game.

The main issue I have, in that consoles have ushered in this "pay for extra maps" thing. Which used to be free on PC's. It still is some of the time (CoD4), but not always. And buying retro games, doesnt always give you the whole game, and they dont make that clear.

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: erwos

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Fallout 3 is a twenty-hour special, and that is being generous.

Have you even played Fallout 3? If you want to fully explore the game world, it's more like a hundred hours of content. Sure, you can blow through the main quest in like seven, but you're missing the whole point of the game.

Heck, even the cartridge-based Final Fantasy games really didn't have that much _content_ - it was mostly grinding. Ah, hunting giants near Elfheim, or whatever the elf city was called in FF1. I ran through the FF1 remakes MUCH faster when the difficulty got turned down. It's a surprisingly linear game.

Someone needs to take off those rose-colored glasses.

Yea but the Final Fantasy games were actually interesting and engaging. Fallout 3 quests were horribly boring and everything looked the same. YAY another vault or building with raiders in it how exciting. YAY another group of people that I have to save from the super mutants. That's not even scratching the surface.

 

[Bman123]

DLC is fine if it adds to the overall game story time.Like in FO3 the DLC for that game adds what a extra 40 hours.On top of the game easily being able to take over 100 to beat if you do everything.
DLC like this is awesome as for $10 I can get the same story length worth of DLC as you get for some $60 games.

Some people hate it as they are cheap as shit but in all reality some DLC is like buying a whole new game and it is not expensive.Say $10 for 8 more hours of gameplay I am down for that in a single player story game.

Even when it is a good map pack I buy it,but it has to be worth it in my eyes like the halo 3 map packs which costs $20 but I got alot more enjoyment and fun from the game with getting them.

 

[PieIsAwesome]

I never buy it so I guess not.

 

[Injury]

Originally posted by: R Nilla

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Nowadays, it is apparent that developers are intentionally cutting a game short in order to gouge you for DLC (/cough BETHESDA /cough).

That is bullshit. Oblivion and Fallout 3 offer a huge chunk of content on the disc--DLC is not needed to enjoy either of those games. To claim that those titles, or even something like Saints Row 2, were released unfinished or somehow cut short just because DLC is available is absolutely ludicrous.

And are you honestly implying that NES or SNES games offered more content than today's games?

lol... both Fallout 3 and Oblivion took me in the realm of 80-100 hours just as the game was starting to hit that point of being "too long". If that's cutting the game short, then I hope they keep cutting them short or I'll never finish them.

 

[Injury]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Cool story, bro. Fallout 3 is a twenty-hour special, and that is being generous.

I don't need to "imply" that NES and SNES games offered more content than today's games. They DID offer more true content than today's games.

You perceive "content" as an endless supply of similar and generic dungeons with no story or purpose that offer no real use or value other than mindlessly grinding, AKA, the bulk of the content of Fallout 3 and Oblivion.

Keep your head in the sand, and keep saying LALALALA! as you pay $60 for a twenty-hour special and $5-$10 for each piece of two-hour DLC.

This is a laugh. So dungeons that are similar in modern games get chastised but in your oh-so-precious comparison of NES and SNES games they get a free pass? Secret of Mana is one of my favorite games from back in the day... but let's be honest here, the game gives you a new dungeon by changing the color of sprites to match the environment that you are in. They change the colors of the enemies to match the environment. Pretty much all of the enemies are used as least 3 times in the game just with different colors, most of the bosses are used at least twice, and the strategy to beat most of the enemies remains the same through the duration of the game. Pretty much the same thing goes for Earthbound, Super Mario RPG, and every iteration of Final Fantasy. Chrono Trigger is one of the few games that does a pretty good job of keeping things fresh, but even they have you revisit the same dungeons and worlds in different time periods.

The tactic of recycling dungeons is nothing new and your complaints about it are pretty worthless in comparison. Game developers have always used these tactics to save on space and in the ~20 years I've been playing games I've never never considered it to be a problem. Have you ever stopped to consider that there are only so many ways you can make a cave or only so many modeled structures you can fit on a disc? You are clearly the odd man out in thinking that both FO3 and Oblivion only offer 20 hours of game play.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Yep. I remember getting NES Mario 2 for $70 Canadian. Most new SNES games were $70. The AAA titles like Chrono Trigger and Super Mario RPG would cost over $100. I remember the Playstation 1 having $50 new games and I thought "wow that's cheap" and the best selling PS1 games with the green label were only $20! Cheap games was why the PS1 beat the N64. N64 was still using ROM cartridges, so their games were still $70-80 new whereas the PS1 games were always $50.

PS1 games were $40 new, not $50. Aside from a few SE games.

Probably $50 Canadian