More thought is put into DLC scheme than games themselves

Don't you think it's true? I mean, game developers and publishers seem to put more time and resource into devising the most anti-consumer DLC schemes rather than focusing on delivering the best product possible?

Evolve is a fun game, for example, but lacking in content and for 3 hunters you have to pay 24 bucks and for a SINGLE monster whooping 14!

I'm not sure if it's 2k's doing or Turtle Rock's. Anyway, they recognized that the main hook of the game is unlocking new characters and monsters, and while this element hooked me too there's no way I'd pay that much for any of these add-ons, but I'm sure there'd be plenty of impulse buyers who would. Well, in my case I got the game for free, and I'm still holding out for some sorta discount...but how sick can you be with inventing these hooks and schemes while forgetting the fact that this is a perfect way to alienate the audiences? I mean not so much here, as you can still play all games, but there are some games which do.

I would say they aren't putting ENOUGH thought into DLC. There is a way to do DLC properly, fairly, and pro-consumer. I.E. Just look at how Nintendo does it. We're back to charging for horse armor and in the worst way.

Things that are wrong about DLC:

1. Day One DLC is the mark of the Asshole. You should want people to buy your game and put the best product you can on the shelf. Day One DLC really is stuff that should have been in the game but they decided that selling more games to more people is less important than soaking their customer. It's a hideous practice.

2. Incomplete games. If only this were as tied at the hip with the first point as a first glance would tell. However, it is not. These days, there are broken, boring, half-baked games that go up for sale that really don't tell a complete story or even a satisfying experience until you shell out $30 a few months later. That is some bullshit and gamers do not forget who sells them a half-assed game. Good DLC will continue an already good story and give you more of a world you already love exploring. Bad DLC completes the picture laid out in a main game that really just serves as an appetizer.

3. DLC in general. I mean, let's be real here. For all the resources that developers and publishers put into DLC, throughout the course of a generation, could easily go to fund a whole new game or two. I mean, I get it, from a business perspective it just makes so much more sense to squeeze the life out of an already successful game rather than create a new game that may or may not do well. BUT THAT IS JUST THE THING. We're called GAMERS not DLCers. Parking remasters and DLC up our rears isn't going to get you very far with us in the long run.

Here is how you do DLC right.

Release a FULL COMPLETE BUG FREE GAME worth $60.

Three months later announce DLC that is reasonably priced and ADDS to the experience.

Is that so hard?

Don't cut up the experience. Don't charge per pixel. Don't announce day one DLC or crazy priced season passes. Or DLC that's not included on the season pass. Don't release a half finished game. Don't don't don't don't don't.

Be fair and people will GLADLY hand over cash. Get greedy and you kill your brand and customer trust.

What about the years of forethought put into the building of the game? DLC is just the afterthought.

Been saying this for awhile. In a slightly different manner--they've got consumers by the balls on a subscription model without even knowing it.

Ubisoft outright admitted next generation was focused on bleeding the consumer.

I like how Nintendo does DLC. I think DLC is fun on multiplayer type games. The games have an extreme replayability and can last 10 years, so DLC is a nice way to spice up Nintendo's epic multiplayer games.