GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

On-Disc DLC Outrage Is Off the Mark

Anger over post-release content locked away on the retail disc should be directed at nickel-and-diming business models, not focused on the logistics of content delivery.

632 Comments

In the last couple of weeks, gamers have expressed no shortage of outrage at finding downloadable content locked away on the retail release discs for Mass Effect 3 and Street Fighter X Tekken. They argue that by buying the disc, they own all the content on it and shouldn't be made to pay extra to access it at a later date.

No Caption Provided
On-disc DLC in Street Fighter X Tekken has many players spoiling for a fight.

The heart of the argument makes sense, but specifically attacking the practice of on-disc DLC is a tactical misstep. Publishers bank on DLC in their business plans, and putting it on the disc that ships is simply a matter of convenience for them. If the unthinkable happened and gamers rose as one unified front tomorrow and refused to buy any game with on-disc DLC forever more, publishers would simply leave it off the disc and force players to download it later (when it will use up a gamer's time and hard-drive space, in addition to money). At that point, it's a matter of semantics and logistics for the publishers, of carefully managing how the deal is presented to players to minimize outrage. And rest assured it will happen, as semantics and logistics are about the only two things at which publishers truly excel.

As a result, determining how to best combat the practice of on-disc DLC requires first identifying what's at the heart of the discontent. (Hint: As is so often the case, it's all about money.) When gamers spend $60 on a hotly anticipated new title like Mass Effect 3 or Street Fighter X Tekken, they rightfully want it to feel like a big deal. After investing that much money and anticipation in a brand new game, they expect the total package, the whole enchilada, the Full Monty, if you will. (But we hope you won't.)

The heart of the argument makes sense, but specifically attacking the practice of on-disc DLC is a tactical misstep.

Unfortunately, it's difficult--or simply more expensive--to achieve that these days, as a $60 purchase is rarely comprehensive. There's often an assortment of retailer-exclusive preorder bonuses, downloadable content, and perhaps a collector's edition at a $20 to $90 markup. And that naturally alienates gamers who feel that $60 is worthy of a first-rate, fully featured experience. And let's not even dwell on the avalanche of post-release DLC, the nickel-and-diming (or $5 and $10-ing) of map packs, modes, and costumes that can double the total cost of a complete AAA game over its life span. And with season passes, gamers have started preordering content that they don't know anything about, even though history has shown the quality of such add-ons varies wildly, even for the best games.

This trend shouldn't come as a big surprise to those who follow the industry, as publishers have been pushing gamers down this road for years. When the Xbox 360 launched, Microsoft kept its first-party titles at the previous generation's $50 price point because it was so scared of hurting sales. But by the time Gears of War rolled around the following year, consumers had embraced the $60 standard with nary a peep, and the race was on to find a gamer's pain point when it came to pricing. All the while, the soaring costs of high-definition game development prodded previously prudent publishers to risk running afoul of their fan bases.

No Caption Provided
Even if gamers stop buying titles with on-disc DLC, publishers will just keep it off the disc in the future, and the fundamental problem will remain the same.

The solution to the problem is to let publishers know that they've already blown past the pain point and to tell them we've had our fill. But it can't just be about on-disc DLC, or day-one DLC, or collector's editions, or season passes. It needs to be communicated to the publishers in sweeping fashion that gamers want a complete experience for a fair price or we simply won't pay. We need to tell them to present us with information on all extraneous content ahead of time--including pricing and release dates--so that we can make a more informed decision on whether to hand over our money. We need to tell them not to cut up expansions into a dozen $5 add-on packs, not to claim the retail game is a complete stand-alone package one week and the story-based DLC meaningfully fills in gaps the next.

The only alternative is to keep paying full price for less-than-full games.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 632 comments about this story
632 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for Mire2k3
Mire2k3

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By Mire2k3

The sad thing is that they will release an ultimate version of the games for $40. Makes me think if when they do so they will just re-release these titles with new box art, same disc but with the DLC content unlocked. BS

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dman123_1
dman123_1

292

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dman123_1

@Nodashi, so because of the title, you should just disregard what the article is saying? I guess I see why when employers see a name like Shaquisha, they just throw their resume in the trash. They explained in the article why it is off the mark and it makes perfect sense to why, then they offered a solution to the main problem.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for shingui5
shingui5

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By shingui5

The problem with on-disc DLC is that it feels like we have basically been completely cheated out a certain part of the game that - without any proof otherwise - can simply be assumed it was ripped away from the game pre-launch, and then locked away inside the disc to force us to pay for a a $10+ unlock code, so in essence all we are getting on pre-dlc purchasing is a shredded husk of a game we paid full price for. (and with the absolutely awful ME3 roster, an additional character is almost necessary) It's bad business ethics and GS and anyone who even wants to think of themselves as a gamer should condemn in the strongest terms possible.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Simsyas
Simsyas

184

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Simsyas

@supertom221 Nintendo was indeed overkilling with the high prices for SNES games, especially here in Europe. I remember everyone praising Sony when the PlayStation arrived because the games were like less than 3/4th the price of a SNES game, it was a major difference indeed. There were so many SNES games that I wanted to have, I was 8 back then and even as a kid I realized that they were expensive and that I had to choose wisely. There have always been dark times throughout gaming generations and while this one brought good things (for example, cheap and fun PSN/XBLA games that you'd never see in retail stores) there are also a lot of negative things that keep getting worse and worse. Doesn't really help that a large amount of customers are indifferent or actually cheer the companies on for nasty practices, giving them more incentive to keep it up. I guess all we can do is support games that don't have bullcrap attached to them, like the often mentioned Witcher 2. Money is more important to me than gaming, this generation and financial crisis made me realize that. I'm glad that people with common sense still exist, thank you all for speaking up. :)

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Nodashi
Nodashi

1124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

Edited By Nodashi

@dman123_1 GS is doin it to themselves. Notice all their headlines are over the top for the last months? When you bother people BEFORE they read, they don't.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Nodashi
Nodashi

1124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

Edited By Nodashi

The logistics should be discussed. If they are using the customer as burden mules for their products (mind you, the consumer did not buy the DLC, may never buy it and have no CHOICE if he's carrying the damn thing home or not), then it's not OK. Specially in the Xbox 360, with so limited media space, where the whole game could have lower rez or worst skins to "create" space for the extra content. Also, since nowadays pretty much everything is an xbox port, this may leads to worse versions to all of us.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for sublime4927
sublime4927

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By sublime4927

It's amazing how many people seem to be misreading this article. All the author is saying is people ought to be mad about the substantive issue (the fact that core elements are sometimes being left out of games and charged separately as DLC) rather than the delivery method (on-disc vs. downloadable). If people only have a problem with day-one downloadable and/or on-disc locked content, the publishers will have the devs make the content at the exact same time, hold onto it for 3-4+ weeks, and then release it as DLC. Complaining about the content being on the disc and locked won't result in publishers simply unlocking the material for free -- they'll just hang onto it for later and release it as DLC further down the road. I don't see how that benefits anyone - same cost, gamers have to wait longer to get the material, publishers have to wait longer to get their money, and gamers lose the space on their hard drives.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Deadly_Nemesis
Deadly_Nemesis

306

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Deadly_Nemesis

@IgotEpixx Read it and you will see they don't support the current DLC methods.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for supertom221
supertom221

12391

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Edited By supertom221

@sublime4927 In that case, you completely forgot how games used to be. The standards were much higher back then, despite the less advanced technology. A game that didn't have at least 25+ hours worth of gameplay was often not worth the green. And $60 is pricey. VERY pricey. Maybe not for you in the home of the rich and spoiled (Northen Europe and America), but at certain, actually, many parts of the world, that price-tag, when translated into a different currency and has added taxes, results in an incredibly pricey number. Let me just tell you this-- Over here, buying 4 brand new games will cost me about the same if not more than what it costs for you to get a brand new console. Now at what position that leaves me in? I'll tell you what-- Spending money on games isn't a given. It's a privilage leisure I often don't have. Therefore, when I DO buy a game, I want to be sure I get the best of the best, a game that can satisfy me for years to come. ME3 can't satisfy me for a weekend. Aged engine, story gone haywire, less-than-impressive characters (Jessica Chobot? REALLY??), and a crap ending that spits at your face no matter what you accomplished, and after all that dares to ask me to pay MORE for it to get somewhat better? NOT. GONNA. HAPPEN.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for supertom221
supertom221

12391

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Edited By supertom221

@keichimorisato9 LOL, You don't even know what you are talking about are you? You are blindly following UbiSoft out of pure lack of knowledge. " i hated the fact that DE:HR had DLC that was taken directly from the story..." Really man? Let me tell you something. AC2 had it worse. AC2, at launch, just a few days later, was bombarded with TWO DLC's that linked to the story and were Sequences in-game. TWO sequences were taken out of the main game, and left players in disarray as to what happened and why did Ezio suddently get a beard out of nowhere. THAT was one of the dirtiest moves pulled off by Ubisoft. Count that with the fact PC version was months delayed just because Ubisoft did not trust PC users to buy their game, and add to it the DRM, Ubisoft's strongest way to say they hate PC gamers. There was also the Black & White editions of Assassin's Creed 2, and each had different launch bonuses to it completed by paid DLC. So no matter which version you bought, you still needed to pay more for the full experience. And whaddaya know? Ubisoft are Aholes too. So unless you got the Game Of The Year or PC edition, I suggest you keep it to yourself. Sticking up to corporations so blindly is what got us here in the first place.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dman123_1
dman123_1

292

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dman123_1

I'm not understanding how you guys think that the staff GS are supporting these methods. Are you guys reading the article, or just skimming through it??

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Koushin
Koushin

1563

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Koushin

Since these publishers will do anything for a buck and there is no way to stop them (too hard to huddle the masses to protest this money making method). Ever since the current generation has started I've been startled how far DLC has come. (Boy do I miss the PS2 days...) It's the lesser of two evils, but I'd much more prefer they just raise the price of their game and add all content completed at launch then release DLC over a period of time. DLC tends to divide the community anyhow and I honestly feel ripped when they have all this content to sell me after I've payed full price (thats why I tend to wait for "GOTY" or "Complete" versions of certain games). At least it will stop that from happening.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for IgotEpixx
IgotEpixx

1929

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By IgotEpixx

Sick of GameSpot's recent sucking up to the "big almighty overlord" corporations like EA and Capcom.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Krelian-co
Krelian-co

13274

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Krelian-co

seriously how much are they paying gamespot for all these articles defending publisher's and developers bs practices

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ThAdEa82
ThAdEa82

2298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

Edited By ThAdEa82

Cant call it dlc when its already on the cd...nothing to exactly "download" now is there? if its on the CD, its not like they thought of it later on and decided to release. No, this is just greed

Upvote • 
Avatar image for steve4532
steve4532

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By steve4532

I AM NOT SPENDING 20 dollars on the 12 DLC characters thats why im not buying the game and it sure as hell is taking a LONGGG time for the 12 characters to come out wen i already seeeeeeeen them in gameplay on youtube SO WHY DO WE HAVE TO WAIT 7 MMOONNTTHHSS ? IF CAPCOM IS GONNA TAKE LONG THEY BETTER ADD ANOTHER 12 TO THE 12 BECAUSE WE SHOULDNT HAVE TO WAIT THAT LLLOOONNNGGG

Upvote • 
Avatar image for daveg1
daveg1

20405

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

Edited By daveg1

people should refuse to buy dlc full stop! all this stuff should already be in the game considering the prices were paying these days.. ps vita games are the worst ive seen yet full price for a vita game like a console game then you need to buy an online pass lol.. i can tell you now i wont be buying many games for it and they can keep the online..

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Jaga_Telesin
Jaga_Telesin

431

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

Edited By Jaga_Telesin

The "tactical misstep" in this case GameSpot, is repeatedly trying to do damage control for a game publisher who made a poor game, and pays you to advertise for them. You are losing clout with your readers.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DraconisRex
DraconisRex

163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

Edited By DraconisRex

Uh, that's what it was about. Having to pay full-retail for crippleware then another $10 to fix it.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9eb5f4f32de
deactivated-5f9eb5f4f32de

396

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Why is everyone complaining' for?? Who cares that it's on the disc, like the article said even if it were online you'd still be paying the same amount Actually this DLC on the disc is actually a GOOD thing cause now all you have to do is hack your game instead of paying $5

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dbene
dbene

237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dbene

@Msirbono....I think YOU are missing the point of the article. They are simply stating that whether or not publishers put games on the disc or not they can still stick you. For example, they could have a completely finished game.....just remove a few missions OFF the disc and then call it DLC on release day. No real difference in that and actually including it on the disc.....either way you are getting screwed. I think most gamers have zero problems with paying for DLC like 3-4 months down the road when it is obvious the team programmed things AFTER the game was actually finished.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dbene
dbene

237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dbene

If Developers really hate used game sales so much....they should simply make it where buying a new game allows all the DLC available (except for possibly large "true" expansion packs)....and then nickel and dime the used guys.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Karjah
Karjah

1415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

Edited By Karjah

Um Billy. It's called a downloadable patch. It's pretty easy in this day and age to ensure everyone's system has all the data it needs to draw up all the costumes that are in DLC. The excuse Capcom is giving to us is total and utter bullcrap.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deathman00789
deathman00789

397

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By deathman00789

Pokemon red and green had the best dlc ever!!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Damien_o
Damien_o

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Damien_o

I wonder how much gamespot employees get paid to write this tripe.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for angelbless
angelbless

8475

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

Edited By angelbless

I wont defent DLC at all!!!!...While its true that gamers are doing this to ourselves too -by buying DLCs, hardware, plastics, etc-, this is only encouraging publishers to release unfinished games and less than average concepts. In the past, they used to spend 2 -3 years in the process of making an excelent game, because we were important to companies. Nowadays, they release a game without progession unlockables, content locked on the CD, DLCs worth another game, etc. I feel sad to see that every year seems to be less and less GREAT games. Money over quality doesnt seem to be a good policy at the end...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Msirbono
Msirbono

359

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Msirbono

Also, because it didn't fit with my prior comment, just to add about "But by the time Gears of War rolled around the following year, consumers had embraced the $60 standard with nary a peep," : Gamers made a peep, in fact gamers are still peeping.. Industry doesn't care however, because they use their development costs as a way to justify the $60 price tag AND the costs/sale of DLC.. the Those who roll over and accept it, and mock those who don't, do so because they don't feel like they can really get the industry to change and be more flexible with us -- Yet they put their energies into less intelligent ventures, like trying to get the ending of a game changed....

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Msirbono
Msirbono

359

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Msirbono

Why do I get the feeling that at least parts of this article are completely missing the point that its not that we don't want to buy the DLC at all, but that we don't want it to be on the disc (IE Already paid for with the game, just to have us pay again to unlock it) or that some of us don't want to be told they need to get the first super-awesome DLC pack the same day they got the super-awesome game that its for, for another $5-$15. Waiting a few weeks (I suppose 3 weeks to a month is optimal) and making us download the entirety of the DLC isn't going to break their business model one bit. They can still nickle and dime us without making it seem like they're completely ripping us off.. In fact, what I just mentioned allows them to do that far better, and will stop people from complaining about this, while extending the life of their games by a few months more if people really care enough. In fact.. one of the things they should be working on most is making people care enough to keep playing the game past its ending at all -and I don't mean through a multiplayer experience.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-6243c8d601b22
deactivated-6243c8d601b22

239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Simsyas
Simsyas

184

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Simsyas

This is indeed pathetic. Do you guys want to know why companies keep doing this? http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=466815 Because of idiots like these. They are fine with paying an extra $20 for disc-locked characters.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-6243c8d601b22
deactivated-6243c8d601b22

239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-6243c8d601b22
deactivated-6243c8d601b22

239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

I have said this before in another post a few years back. We gamers are huge consumers. Think about it, we pay $300.00 or more for our brand new PS3's and 360's (some of us have multiple systems in our home). We pay hundreds if not thousands of dollars for our big @$$ HD-TV's to play our games on (with a nice sound system to boot). We invest thousands of dollars for our gaming rigs. And we pay $60.00 or more each for games. And for these reasons is why publishers will continue to present Add-ons in this manner. We will continue to allow ourselves to get nickel and dimed. Yes, a minority of us may stand up and say enough is enough. But it won't be enough. Look at how well Activision is doing. EA is now following suit as well as other publishers. As a gaming community, we have buying power, but we use it recklessly. This reminds me of movie theater popcorn. We all complain about how expensive movie theater popcorn is. But we (as a majority) continue to pay $8.00 for a tub of popcorn. It's been going on for so long we just accept it.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for accesdenied
accesdenied

485

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By accesdenied

@polybren Like many have said, for the most part I to enjoy many of the articles posted; however this in my opinion is very incoherent. I understand that maybe your opinion is limited since you are a staff member I assume. This is misleading I dont know if the article's main purpose is to illustrate "outrage" about DLC or nostalgia about how game have done DLC, or your point of view on the issue. The closing sentence, "The only alternative is to keep paying full price for less-than-full games." sounds very much like thats a solution you are suggesting.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for theshonen8899
theshonen8899

592

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By theshonen8899

I completely agree. The problem isn't that the DLC is on the disk, it's the fact that the DLC is being sold on release date. Remember when we had expansion packs that had almost the same amount of content as the original games for half the price on PC? Remember when developers tried to cram everything they possibly could and fix as many bugs as possible for this console games? Online gaming is really fantastic but publishers are abusing this aspect of it so much. Pretty much the only game where I've appreciated DLCs is Fallout 3/New Vegas, where there's a good amount of quality content for the price. I'm going to speak with my money. The reason I haven't bought Arkham City yet despite the rave reviews is because I knew there would be DLCs and now I'm waiting for a GOTY edition. I'd rather buy a full package like GOTY or Ultimate editions than have to buy little turds separately.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dreamfist11
dreamfist11

148

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dreamfist11

It would be cool if there was a group of gaming hackers whose goal was to unlock these nickel-and-diming dlc for everyone....yeah

Upvote • 
Avatar image for MetricBilly
MetricBilly

74

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By MetricBilly

First of all, the DLC characters on SFxT we're given for free on the PS3 (Mega-Man/Cole/Pac-Man). Second, the reason why they include those characters on the disc with no access to them yet, is for online multi-player reasons. When one person has the character and the other doesn't, it causes issues selecting those characters during online games; for example in UMVC3 the costumes the other gamer did not have when playing online, would appear all in silver like Terminator T-1000. No big deal but it can be annoying. Now if they start asking for money for the remaining 8 or 9 DLC characters (like Blanca, Sakura etc) then we will have a real problem on our hands. Capcom has become a money hungry whore especially with the American market and they will make this rise of 2D fighting games in the last few years diminish once again (like in the early 2000's) so they need to make sure they listen to our complaints.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for 6yadayada9
6yadayada9

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By 6yadayada9

I never buy DLC on principle. The only DLC I've ever bought is the GTA Liberty City Episodes but that's how DLC SHOULD be. I've never bought COD maps and I never will, but I've heard that Activision is going to be including GUNS in upcoming DLC. That is just total BS if it's true.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dreamfist11
dreamfist11

148

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dreamfist11

Thats why I buy used or new on ebay or gamefly for really cheap, its a way of sticking it to the man

Upvote • 
Avatar image for OutlawPunk
OutlawPunk

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By OutlawPunk

If capcom doesn't correct the street fighter x tekken issue, I will simply wait and buy the game used when it's down to 12-15 dollars, then I will pay for the DLC if I REALLY feel like it(most likely not). That way I can get the game cheap, and not support their behaviour. However, if they just make all the DLC available for free, I will happily buy the game new.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for PerditionZero
PerditionZero

968

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By PerditionZero

This is why I always wait to buy new games. Thanks for informing the less informed, GS. Saves me the time, money and a headache or two.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kenmanius
kenmanius

286

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By kenmanius

Full sized expansions used to be the way to go, though that was primarily a pc trait. Even a lot those weren't worth the asking price (FEAR expansion, Dragonage, Half Life 2 episodes were iffy.) These steak bit pieces of DLC are a complete mystery to me as to why anyone would pay the asking price for them (ROFLMAO @ all the online SFIV players with costume packs!). Question though: A lot of PC games were essentially high definition or better with high rez textures even before the current console generation. Were they that much bigger of an investment back then?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for BladeStrike1234
BladeStrike1234

190

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

Edited By BladeStrike1234

@fluffmajster Sure, no one is forcing me to buy dlc but so many games continue stories now in DLC and some even give extended/new endings. Maybe I should wait for the sequel and not know whats going on...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for samad5
samad5

338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

Edited By samad5

akumous - very valid points. I look back at the cod series and see how the IP is now being milked for every penny possible. Skins, costumes & additional maps aren't the problem it's when the DLC on a disk covers entirely new levels - which have to be purchased separately. I suspect this may be coming our way sooner rather than later.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Doomguard3
Doomguard3

915

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 121

User Lists: 0

Edited By Doomguard3

There's more alternatives, wait for a GOTY edition and THEN get the full experience.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Freethinker101
Freethinker101

139

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Freethinker101

I agree with this article and think that publishers are biting the hand that feeds. For example why not introduce advertising banners while playing online, or even during loading times. Sure I wouldn't be happy about it, but if it meant free updates, and no online pass I would be happy. The online pass, and DLC puts me off to be honest as I prefer single player story games, and this is driving me away from utilising the full scope of the games I buy.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for oldschoolvandal
oldschoolvandal

207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By oldschoolvandal

If the DLC does not add to the main story I think it's OK to charge for it. Regardless of the fact that it is on disc or not. If it was on the disc and I decide I should get it, all it does is save me some download time. The tricky part will be how to set the rules to decide if a DLC is or isn't "relevant". Personally, as long as the game is good and the story / single player feels "complete", DLC is OK as it is up to ME to buy it or not.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Brokazaki
Brokazaki

30

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By Brokazaki

Most pre-order bonuses nowadays aren't that great. I love "making of" dvds but a lot of games have stopped doing those, like Halo Reach. I remember if you pre-ordered Windwaker, you got Ocarina of Time and Master Quest for Gamecube. Gaming really has changed since the launch of current gen consoles

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Kero100
Kero100

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Kero100

I miss the days when we have to insert cheat codes instead of DLC :)

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DraKKuLL007
DraKKuLL007

28

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By DraKKuLL007

Well... lets see something cool. This "thing" is called CDPR ( The Witcher 2 ). There's no DLC, there's no IN DISK DLC, all new content for The Witcher 2 is always coming for free... think with me. You already spent $60 in a new game ( I pre-ordered The witcher 2 for $ 44 on steam ), and amother company say to me: "Look, we have new features in our game, do you mind pay more $15 to see how good is it?" ----- CDPR says: "Hey man, you bought our game, right? So we have more for you, FOR FREE" ALL companies, learn how to please your customers! Hail CDPR!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for akumous
akumous

130

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

Edited By akumous

Here is a fact, newly produced IP has all of its content intact and if there is any DLC in mind it will be post game and it won't be masked on disc and deceivingly labelled DLC. Ironically, when that game becomes a major hit then the shady business comes into play because they know the majority of users will yield to the shadiness. There are some games that don't worth the $60 price tag but yet they are priced that anyway. They are other games that should have not been released due to severe bugs, for instance Skyrim, especially the PS3 version, but they do it anyways. Publishers are messing with their fan base and they trying to coerce us in believing their nonsense about huge development cost and lack of development time and other crap. If they lack of development time was an issue then why all of the supposedly DLC content is on the disc in working fashion, I am looking at you Capcom. Thanks to the community and the internet, I have been become a more informed consumer and I refused to support shady practices because there was a time games were released complete. And if there were extra content it was given to free, but if the content was an expansion base then it was worthy of that title.

Upvote •