The Future of Gaming: DLC

We take a look at the future of gaming in three parts: 3D, Social Gaming, and DLC.

Where does the future of gaming lie? Will we all be rocking games in 3D? Will all our game purchases be over the Internet? And will social games take over from more "core" titles? In this three-part feature, GameSpot looks at three topics that promise to change the way we play games. Presented over the course of three weeks, The Future of Gaming will look at the rise of 3D titles, the increasing importance of downloadable content, and social gaming's impact on the games industry. Contributing to the feature are some of the biggest names in games development, who all share their thoughts, aspirations, and reservations about the impact of these three topics in the years to come. The second topic presented is The Future of Gaming: DLC.

Read The Future of Gaming: 3D here.

Downloadable content (DLC) has become a vital part of the games industry. The ability to digitally distribute content directly onto consoles and PCs is changing the way developers make games and the way consumers play them. Where once upon a time downloadable content meant a new gun or two, a different-coloured pair of pants, or a multiplayer map five or six months after launch, DLC is no longer an afterthought--it is now seen as continuous, upgraded game content that more often than not takes the shape of fully realised add-on episodes that extend the life and gameplay hours of the original title. With an increasing number of AAA titles now receiving postlaunch DLC support, game developers have had to reevaluate the early planning stages of any titles they seek to make.

The transition hasn't happened without controversy. Many gamers have criticised the DLC model as a way for publishers to make more money from a single product. Some have also called into doubt the motivations of developers, who are seen to be deliberately leaving out game content in order to release it after the initial game, and at significant cost to the consumer. Both Microsoft and Nintendo have come under fire in the past for their currency system models, which trade real money in return for a certain number of points that can be used to buy games and items through Xbox Live and the Wii Shop Channel. Even free DLC has earned its fair share of criticism, with some accusing publishers of deliberately leaving out certain features of a game in order to extend the marketing life of a title after release.

Whatever its past problems, it's looking more certain that DLC is here to stay. Aside from extending the life of a game, developers have found that releasing downloadable content gradually allows them to spend less time and planning in the development stage, meaning it is likely that consumers will no longer have to wait three or four years for a AAA title to arrive. It also allows developers to gather and implement feedback from gamers, making DLC content more polished and in line with what the community wants.

So where does the future of DLC lie? Will an increasing number of titles be split up into various parts? Will all games one day be distributed as episodic content? And will gamers get on board with the economic implications of such a model?

Extending the life of games

At this month's GDC Europe in Cologne, the game industry service Electronic Entertainment Design and Research (EEDAR) presented new information about the continued growth of digital downloads. Despite worldwide game sales now exceeding US$50 billion annually, EEDAR found that most consumers purchase only two to three games per year, a significant drop from the previous average of six to eight titles per year. However, in the DLC field, EEDAR found that 2009 was the biggest year on record in the industry for downloadable content sales, a trend that is expected to continue to rise through to 2011 and beyond as longer development cycle games come to market. EEDAR also revealed that regardless of cost, 28 percent of gamers do not check for the availability of DLC, while 22.5 percent actively seek it out before launch.

Developers are unanimous that DLC is the future. Some see it as an opportunity to extend the life of games; others believe it's a way to deliver better quality titles in a shorter amount of time. Medal of Honor executive producer Greg Goodrich sees DLC as an opportunity for developers to reach out to players.

"DLC is a vital part of any project. I think that for a long time, game developers were reaching out to people once every one or two years. Now, this gives us a way to extend the life of a franchise and continue the game experience in between the major releases."

Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine producer Raphael van Lierop thinks DLC allows players to live longer in the gameworlds they love.

"When you really love a game, you want to live in that world as long as you can. We've all played games where we didn't want the experience to end. DLC is a great way to extend the life of a game and allow players who love that game to keep playing in that world. I also think DLC extends the value of the product--from a developer's point of view, rentals and resales are harmful to developers, and I think it's great if we can give people who bought our games more of a reason to hold onto them. DLC is a great evolution for our industry, and I hope it continues to develop further and further."

Obsidian's creative director on Fallout: New Vegas, Chris Avellone, sees developers prepping for DLC a lot earlier in the game-making process.

"I see DLC following the same model as it has been doing. I imagine this is because it has been so successful, meaning it will be started a lot earlier in the development process. I think it's a great way to introduce episodic content in a title and thus give it more life, bridging the gap between big releases. The development process is so long, so this appeals to both players and developers. It's also exciting because it allows developers to create further stories in a particular gameworld."

Fallout: New Vegas' creative director, Chris Avellone, sees developers thinking about DLC in the early stages of development.

The DLC controversy

In March 2009, Capcom drew the ire of some gamers when it announced that it would be charging US$4.99 for the Resident Evil 5 Versus mode DLC, which allows up to four players to compete in two different competitive game types. Many felt Capcom had no right to charge a fee for a gameplay mode that is now the standard in most titles, and were vocal in their demand that the publisher relent and give gamers what they had already paid for. In response, Capcom remained adamant that the Versus mode remained "above and beyond" the initial scope of Resident Evil 5, making the US$4.99 price tag justified.

The controversy over DLC comes down to value versus cost. For example, many gamers found the US$2.50 price tag slapped on the infamous horse armour DLC for The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion laughable; the same goes for the two "missing" chapters in Assassin's Creed II, which gamers accused Ubisoft of taking out of the original game to release as paid DLC down the track (which is exactly what happened).

It has also been revealed that DLC pricing is also a matter of dispute between publishers and developers. In its April 2007 issue, Game Informer revealed that Microsoft was forcing developers to release priced DLC even when it was the latter's wish that the DLC be free, spurred by a dispute between Microsoft and Gears of War developer Epic Games. After speaking to industry contacts about the process that developers go through to get their content on Xbox Live Marketplace, Game Informer also found instances when DLC had to be delayed due to developers refusing to accept Microsoft's pricing.

Some developers recognise that a balance has to be struck when it comes to the cost and value of DLC. Spec Ops: The Line lead designer Cory Davis believes DLC is viewed in a very different way by developers and consumers.

"DLC from a consumer perspective is very different from DLC from a developer's perspective," Davis said. "Some things are just not going to be possible to do in DLC depending on the game you're making. When I see DLC today I want to see more expansion packs rather than just a few new weapons or a skin for a character. The strongest DLC we've seen expands the narrative and allows players to experience more of that game's universe in a deeper way. That's what we should be shooting for as developers--giving really valuable DLC to players."

Bodycount senior producer Andrew Wilson agrees.

"I think it's going to step away from little trinkets and bonus packs and properly branch between game series. Developers will start trying to make DLC more meaningful via proper chunks of game. That's where the future is headed."

Ghost Recon: Future Soldier producer Stuart White believes DLC will allow developers to take into account how consumers feel about a title.

"DLC is going to get a lot bigger. It's a great move for both consumers and developers--we'll spend less time worrying about shipping content upfront and more time on tweaking the game according to player response."

Vanquish director Shinji Mikami believes all games will one day be delivered via DLC.

Helping out indies

A lot of developers also see DLC as a way to give small, independent studios a better chance at selling their games, meaning a more diverse games industry in the long run.

Twisted Pixel lead designer Dan Teasdale says some small studios simply wouldn't survive without the downloadable content avenue of distribution.

"I think DLC has a massive future. It means developers can keep working on content nonstop, and it's also a good way for smaller studios to get noticed without having to sign a huge publishing deal. I think giving a voice to developers who have amazing ideas and want to get them out there to a big audience."

Mike Fegan from Trickstar Games in Melbourne is a firm believer in the future of DLC and its impact on the industry.

"DLC is the first time where we can see content creators moving up the food chain from a business perspective. In our case, it gives us the chance to make the games we want and the ability to publish them ourselves on Wii Ware, PSN, and XBL. We're confident that DLC and digital distribution will grow dramatically over the next few years."

Platinum Games studio founder and Vanquish director Shinji Mikami believes all games will one day be delivered via the DLC model.

"For a developer that is unable to sell games directly to consumers, the concept of DLC is great. I think 10 years from now, a point is going to come where DLC is going to be the primary form of game delivery, and that is exciting." Will DLC change the future of games? Let us know by leaving your comments below! Make sure you check back next week for The Future of Gaming: Social Games.

Written By

Want the latest news about Fallout: New Vegas?

Fallout: New Vegas

Fallout: New Vegas

Discussion

346 comments
Wes_Scott
Wes_Scott

I generally like DLC when it adds to the story and allows me to spend more time in a game that I already enjoy. Both of the Mass Effect and Dragon Age DLC content are a good example of when this works. While there were a lot of little things they did this way, I never got the impression that they were using the medium to deliver things that should have been in the original game. It was pretty clear that the DLC's were indeed additions that you could ignore without missing a major part of the game. I do not, however, approve of DLC that is clearly being used to squeeze more cash out of gamers just because they are lazy. If indeed they did this in Assassin's Creed II, and it was supposed to be part of the story, then I will be much more likely to ignore and not buy from that developer ever again. Finish the game and give me the complete story the first time, or I will vote with my wallet and move on.

majikninja69
majikninja69

so many ppl hating on DLC, if you dont like it dont buy it simple. some DLC is stupid ill agree, other add a lil bit more flash, then you have some that acculy feels realy good & is worth the money you pay (honestly there isnt much of it). one could argue that aracade games are the same tacked on mini games for a price, some are fun & are a great way to pass the time with a small gameing leisure time, but if you dont wana buy something THEN DONT

patriotsnake171
patriotsnake171

[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]

green_dominator
green_dominator

I don't like DLC with every game I play. if an item is free and I play that game I'll get it but if I don't play a game that often regardless of if it's free I won't touch it. I don't like the trend of reserving a game and either having content [weapons, armor or characters] on day one, it's tacky but if the developer is trying to entice people to buy their game with a freebee at launch what's the harm? seriously, what's the harm in that?? My issue is how every major retailer gets special content WTF, just throw it all in one pack and be done with it. I think if people are going to complain about Mafia II and it's "adding the rest of the game later" I think I should do the same to GTA's episodes after all they released the rest of GTA IV later didn't they?? I don't like paying $60.00 for games only to be gouged later by pathetic DLC [Mass Effect 2] I was very lucky to have bought Fallout 3 GOTY and it's DLC was awesome.

Export
Export

I dont buy DLC because it adds nothing to the story . Assassin Creed 2 for example . Nothing to do with the story . I can see more value in like Dragon age than AC2 . Its a "Catch 22" because if you add more story than ppl who just buy the game feel like they are held hostage and being force to buy for the story . DLC seem to work more with FPS since ppl like to waste money for a few maps for 15 bucks . That why I stick to pc version of FPS . I can honestly say that I have never brought a DLC tho I have brought GOTY game after waiting almost year and used too :P

LeJR
LeJR

As a lot of people probably say, DLC is genius from a marketing standpoint, which is why it is inherently devious. It's exploitative. And when a new game gets to the review phase, nobody is going to downrate it. Then after its most positive possible reviews come out, the remainder of the game will come out. That's what seemed to have happened with Mafia II. By the way, the final comment in the article above made me sick. (I'm guessing nobody really read the article, they just came here to complain about how much they hate DLC, hah) If the developers use DLC to "extend the life of a game" as mentioned above too, that is perfectly fine with me. But it's obvious that's far from what's actually being done, or probably ever going to be done. Games have a limited life, whether they DLC them up or not.

sp1966
sp1966

It is down to value rather than cost. If a consumer sees value in the DLC then it will be purchased (maybe), that is if it is a small fee but charging a retail price of £40 or £50 for a game on PS3 or Xbox360 or £30+ for a PC game and then expecting people to shell out significant money on DLC that really should have appeared in the original game is not on and that will start affecting how we feel about the manufacturers themselves, if they start taking liberties often then people may well stay away from their games.

gaz_atolla
gaz_atolla

I think that DLC is fine provided it is relevant, new items, quests, characters are fine, limited edition versions of games having DLC is all good or preorder bonuses fine again, but adding whole new stories is a bit much, if you want to add stuff like that put it in from the start

Huggy_Monster
Huggy_Monster

Mass Effect 1 was full compleate and incredible story.... Mass Effect 2, in 'some' ways was better in terms of game mechanics and game play, but the story seems short and in-compleate... Then loads DLC come out and you soon realise why i feels in-compleate... and when you get the DLC something dont feel quite right there either... eiher the quality is not upto par, or characters your familiar with feel more like extra's... They always something that dont 'feel' quite right of feels out of place... This is likely down to fact that DLC is a 'after-thought'... Rather than a deep crucial part of a emotional storyline.

ruarz
ruarz

Full expansion pack? Yes please. DLC? P*ss off, I want a proper game.

razzledazzle666
razzledazzle666

I'm sick of buying half finished games. Back in the PS2 days games had to be fully finished and be 99.9% bug free before release. Now developers rush games out filled with bugs " oh dont worry.. we will make a patch for it, and another, and another". What if you don't want to get online play for your console? You get stuck with a sloppy, bug filled mess. Also, developers seem to be removing content from games then selling the missing parts to us at a later date. Who is the mugs? it's us the gamers! how many people complain about DLC then go ahead and buy it? We need to stop buying the removed content and demanding the finished articule! we pay enough for the games as it is without having to give them even more money for ' extra' content.

Wolffe5
Wolffe5

I hate DLC. It's a total ripoff and a pricing scheme for more money. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft/EA sat down a few years back in a smoky room and discussed ideas on how to maximize profit from the already booming gaming industry. And alas, DLC appeared. I predict even more future microDLC available. Most gaming publishers and mega giants like EA hate making their games moddable and having map editors etc, because it doesn't make them money. Think back to Half Life 1 & Starcraft. Those games stayed alive for almost a decade. Was it because of their intense single player? No. It was because of mods (In half lifes case) and a powerful map editor (in starcrafts case). It was only until half life 2 and starcraft 2 came out that they lost popularity. If the developers and publishers really cared about making games re-playable and a fun experience, they would let players mod and mapmake for most of their games. Almost all the cool content I've played in games like Half life 1 & starcraft were custom, player made content. Such as that star wars mod (First Strike) for BF2142 which I played for countless months. I just don't see how paying $70 for a game is worth it, then paying upwards of $15-30 for DLC whos improvements or additions to the game are always minimal and cosmetic in nature.

BombayNugz
BombayNugz

screw dlcs son ill just buy a new game if i want somethin new... maybe not a new one a used new one... its cheaper lol

Zcrimson07
Zcrimson07

Seems to me publishers need to do the following: release a full featured game that might be a bit shorter in length and price it at $40USD, THEN following it up with some well sized $10-20 expansions a few months later which include any of the little trinket downloads some people seem to like. maybe if this were the case i wouldnt use gamefly...

RevSharpton
RevSharpton

If they would let us mod our damn games on our consoles we'd never need DLC. Gamers make better add on content than developers ever will, and having great mod communities adds way more to their pockets in people wanting to buy their games way longer than some crap costume DLC. If it isn't Fallout, GTA, etc. level DLC they shouldn't even bother. I want F'n mod ability on consoles.

chopperlink
chopperlink

I don't see why they can't put the DLC in the game in the first place. I think it is a way to earn more money and to put off programming. That's why I feel no guilt in buying used!

Marcusraitor
Marcusraitor

Digitall Downloads are only good to rent videogames, but to buy a full AAA Title Digitally sucks. Also I never Buy DLC Because the developers must sell you the full game physically for 59.99, I dont Like to give more money to them for more levels and all of that thats a rip off. And I Dont Think Digitall Downloads in videogames are going to sell more than physical copies, There Are A Lot of people who prefer having the physical version than the digitall. Videogames are like comics there are a lot of gamers who like to collect the box of his videogames in his room and to have the disc. If halo reach goes digitall on day one i bet that is going to sell very very bad there are not going to be preorders, no more lines at the stores no more nothing, digitall downloads are going to kill videogames when all games are 100% digital Downloads. If videogames goes 100% digitall i never buy a game again.

Riceball_1
Riceball_1

@ canowhoopass75 I hadn't actually considered the physical production phase of the development cycle - my aim was to bring to light the fact that in the context of the product lifecycle, DLC is still an infant. Synthesising what you suggest in terms of more fan engagement, it will be a matter of time until a developer realises the potential for the improved model I kind of proposed in my previous comment. I totally agree that DLC is presently a rip-off when looked at on a cost-per-hour basis; but as the industry evolves and adapts to the new way of marketing and delivering its product, competition will no doubt lower prices

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

DLC is the future in the sense that games won't be disc format anymore.3D on the other hand isn't the future of anything apart from perhaps cinemas.Nobody wants to wear the nerdy glasses when watching TV..

yahyakun
yahyakun

Conclusion: Nobody likes DLC.

RonTorque
RonTorque

I never had DLC before although i think it's sometimes cool to add tweaks or extra content for the game or the title to live on for sometime.Although what i am not a big fond of is that about 80-85% of games these days have DLC which i find it irrelevant. Not all or most of the games should have extra content to obtain or maybe missing content, because it's unfair for some players not to have the whole experience of a full game.Ex: Assassin's Creed II DLC

avc123
avc123

I find DLC to be a lazy idea for the developer from making another game and just put in extra stuff for 15 bucks

shabulia
shabulia

DLC has massive potential. It is still in it's infancy which means developers, publishers, and distributors are all still kind of getting their feet wet. They are all trying things to see what will make the consumer more apt to buy. Of course, some are ripping us off. Others are trying experimental tbings as add ons. But we all must realize that companies and gamers will all find a common ground eventually. It'll just take time. Fighting games should stick with new characters, additional game modes, and balancing tweaks. Action and FPS games should stick to multiplayer modes and side stories to fleah out the full game itself. Other genres will find their place. When they all do we will be happier and better off as gamers. Our hard earned money will be well spent. It'll just take time.

canowhoopass75
canowhoopass75

@greene8892 Hey, here's an idea - maybe the devs could start reading the forums and comment boards? Maybe they could start listening to their fans voices instead of just listening to the cash register? "sorry son... you wanna share an opinion? gimme 10 bucks for this here 30 minute add-on and i'll clean out the ear wax." The internet is alive with discussion and fan opinion. They don't need to see dollar figures as they fumble along from one small and crappy release to the next small and maybe less crappy release. "Whaddya mean that DLC didn't sell well?! Hmmm.. should we check the fan websites? Nahhh... let's just churn out some more cheap crap and make a nice trailer. That always works." Here's a question to my fellow readers - how many of you think the devs will actually act on any of the negative feelings towards DLC that so many of us are sharing here? Sure, there are some Devs with heart out there; those that care about developing a quality, complete product at good value to their fans. But I'd argue those are becoming fewer and fewer. They've all been bought out by Activision, EA and their ilk. And there are Evil Empires like MS that will stand in the way of any good intentioned developers anyway. "No, Epic (or anonymous indy developer), you CAN'T give away wallpaper for free. I can't take a cut out of FREE!" There's just too many golden eggs on the DLC wagon, and it's on a downward slope.

canowhoopass75
canowhoopass75

@Riceball_1 You seem to imply that with maintenance and production costs going down, it is reasonable to expect that prices will drop over time. I have seen no evidence of any such trend; the cost of downloadable games has not gone down at all despite drastic reduction in costs. As beaulee described well, they are saving by not having to produce physical media, boxes, manuals etc. (although I disagree with beaulee when he says there is no middle man; money grubbing MS, the evil empire plays middle man quite happily via XBLA). In fact ,in many cases, the cost-per-hour to play DLC is much greater than that of a standard full release game.

Cloud_Reaper
Cloud_Reaper

why does it seem that no how hard these developers try and support the idea of DLC, it comes off as though they know its a perfectly good way to extort ALOT of revenue from consumers who largely loved the first game. I mean it seems to me that besides that dev from marvel vs cap com, most of them had the face of MONEY MONEY MONEY!

4love10
4love10

Game companies will stop making DLC when gamers will be willing to pay 100$ and more for a game,dlc is a way to make more money.

Prometheus
Prometheus

Mafia 2 is the newest example of how arrogant some developers have become. A 15h campaign of which 8h are driving from A to B? Now they want to sell DLC to give us more content that should have been in the original game. I hope Mafia 2 tanks so that it gives developers a lesson. I'm fed up with overpriced DLC.

stabby_mcgee
stabby_mcgee

Unless game companies are willing to put more resources into developing DLC's, I don't think they'll ever be worth it. Even the best DLC's have glaring flaws. Take the Mass Effect 2 DLC's for example, probably the highest quality ones out there, they're still missing a lot of the character interactions and dialogue you get in the original game. The fact that Zaeed and Kasumi get almost nothing outside of their personal quest just make them seem so tacked on. It's also really annoying when they include DLC bait in the game like how in Dragon Age, there's this dying guy that gives you a quest and when you accept it, he tells you to buy Return to Ostagar to do the quest.

SaberSpellSword
SaberSpellSword

If the PSP Go is anything to go by. Download-only consoles could be the the next console generation. a lot of ppl who work in games stores will be losing their jobs if that happens. But I think it's definitely going to happen eventually.

nazarovtr
nazarovtr

Expansion pack approach gave you a full game at release date, and significantly more with the expansion after a year.

nazarovtr
nazarovtr

Nowadays, if you wanna play a really complete game, you must wait about a year after release for the GOTY or Gold edition with all important DLC's. I think it's NOT good.

orbit991
orbit991

Buying a DLC is getting less and paying more for it.The upside for the consumer is that we don't have to wait to long for one to come out. The downside is how tiny they can be, plus the cost vs actual length of a DLC compared to the original game. Personally I prefer expansions or sequels, simply because many games need to have time to develop a story and characters and this wont happen in one hour of game play. But to each he's own.

Riceball_1
Riceball_1

Also a qualifier on my comment below; I wouldn't consider new costumes or any of that crap as worthy of being called 'DLC' - thats more like "TUC" (Totally Unnecessary Crap). DLC should be reserved for what used to be called expansions - WIII & WIII TFT for example...

Riceball_1
Riceball_1

DLC is going to completely change the economics of the games industry into the future. It will enable companies who develop a successful IP to stretch out the revenue from the IP over a number of periods, rather than the "old model" of recording a massive spike in revenues on release of a major title which is then followed by successive quarters of losses due to continuing costs associated with supporting a game (ie managing multiplayer servers, developing and issuing updates). While the model may be something that is yet to be perfected (companies still charging prices for initially developed games that they would in the "old model" and then charging for DLC), it is just a matter of time until intial release prices come down and reflect the staggered nature of the "new model".

ButtonBreaker38
ButtonBreaker38

DLC is definitely getting bigger. While it's still possible to pull both smart and stupid moves with this, the Internet is starting to become the main source of many companies' income. I agree that it shouldn't be just an excuse to make extra money off of a game, but it's going to get hard to replace as a gaming element, and if done right, it can lessen the initial prices of games (if the companies are willing to appease the fans). I guess what I'm trying to say is that DLC has potential, but companies tend to just make stupid choices with it. If someone in there realizes that they've been doing this wrong, we may have our roots for the entire 8th gaming generation (though that's stretching it a little).

wis3boi
wis3boi

Also, I think Bioware is the only team that knows how to put out worthwhile DLC. Sure, not every piece of DLC for, say, Dragon Age, will tickle your fancy, but there's a LOT of DLC to choose from and each one offers good value for the price.....and it wasn't cut from the game or lying in secret on your dvd

wis3boi
wis3boi

im all for extra content after release, but when its half-assed, or just something simple like a skin or a rehashed map, charging for it is just robbery.

noobzoer
noobzoer

DLC = FREE! 30mins of gameplay for 15$; or a new map, new gun, new skin, etc? No thx! If you want to make more money make a good hmmm... what did we call it in the good old pc days, oh yes EXPANSION!

Muteki_X
Muteki_X

@ Tiwill44 Yeah, and if your system isn't connected to the net, well, you're just SOL. I'm starting to really miss the days when I could just plug my system into my TV, buy a disk or cartridge, and have a complete and full entertainment experience.

Tiwill44
Tiwill44

@gogly Exactly. Also, ever notice how new games sometimes have bugs? And then they need to release patches to fix them? Well, that shouldn't happen. Back in the days, when they released a game, they had to make sure it had absolutely no bug and that the game was deep, because after releasing the game, it was too late to modify it. Now they rush games, put the 60$ price tag on it, and a few weeks later, they patch or update the game, and add DLC to get even more money out of the game.

FyreHeart
FyreHeart

Story content/Expansion pack = paid DLC Skins/Weapons/Map = free DLC 'nuff said

dwithrow
dwithrow

I dont mind buying DLC's if they are good! but if they are going to leave stuff out I would hope they would drop the price of the original game. I wont buy DLCs that are just maps and packs they need to be episodes or expansions

gogly
gogly

i don't like DLCs. its just a way for publishers to tax us. instead of making the best possible product, they try to sell us half baked crap at regular price, and charge us more for the rest.

BotZakafein
BotZakafein

They should get back to expansions, where they can just add all the lil crap from the dlcs in there... unless the DLC's are like free ofc after like buying the game u get a code or something to dl them off the websites.

eria79
eria79

DLC needs to get just plain get better. Things like new weapons or skins are really really terrible. It really doesn't add anything to the game imo. I think games should get back to expansions. Usually the price of expansions are justifiable, and they continue the story in which we became hooked on. I have been very careful about buying DLC lately. Don't get me wrong, I love DA:O, but all the DLC up to now has been total garbage. Stone Prisoner was ok, but it was free since I bought it new. Warden's Keep was decent, it had a decent story behind it. Return to Ostagar...terrible. And for me, that was it...until I got the most recent one where you go back to the deep roads...and again, terrible. Now I don't know if I want the Morrigan one next week. ME2 on the other hand, has done a better job with the DLC, except they put out skins and weapons. The new Shadow Broker one looks great...and the Overlord one was great imo. I just don't get how a studio could cut content though to release later, that really ticks me off. But honestly, skins and weapons probably take next to nothing to do, seeing as moders can do them for free...when that's your job for 8+ hours a day...you can put those out very fast with little cost, but they charge lame prices sometimes.

asouthwood
asouthwood

I don't agree with DLC, most games a ridiculously high priced and now

Kanten
Kanten

Remember when 'DLC' were called expansions and needed to have enough content packed in to justify the manufacturing/packaging costs?

BiggEdd32
BiggEdd32

i think dlc should be something that isn't stripped from a game...it should be EXTRA (like a .5 version of something)...that i would support...leaving stuff out or planning dlc that u could have put in the game is what pisses me off...give me a full game and then put out something that wasn't put to the side to be release a week later for $10....basically games = $75(with tax) including DLC.... and the more i read about microsoft the more disgusted i get