Is this the first console to get two types (Content from Bungie, a Shooter/mmo and from Ubisoft, an adventure) of exclusive content before the console has even been shown? or released? Not games, just in game exclusive content.
most buyers of the initial game don't buy DLC, and in case of BF3 it was only 2 weeks in advance for the PS3. DLC doesn't shift consoles, maybe only the decision of gamers who already have multi-platforms.
and it is unlikely money is paid directly for the DLC, most likely a lower licencing fee or special promotion in the digital store.
Sony knows what MS is doing with third parties. You think devs and publishers don't talk to each other? Sony knows whats going on with MS and MS knows whats going on with Sony. Nintendo, Sony, and MS are the kings of the game industry (PC is a lawless land lol), they know whats going on in their kingdoms and they know whats going on in each others kingdoms.
They may not know specifics but if third parties know, then they know. Long before journalists or any of us hear about it.
Sony will have exclusive content for both PS3 & 4 But this will only be weapons, clothing and a level maybe. I bet M$ will also have their own exclusive content also but just different to Sony platforms. This way all gamers will be in a win situation and no one will lose out. Gaming at its best...
Compared to exclusive games, exclusive dlc's aren't much of a loss if you think about it. It also tells me which developer actually cares for it fans if they don't impose it.
Edit: Also wasting 50 million dollars just to get a certain exclusive dlc is an awful waste, you can develop a whole game with that budget.
I think something small like this is possibly acceptable.
It's the bigger DLC that is the problem when it's exclusively timed.
I actually find it more insulting when DLC in timed instead of permanent. That might confuse some of you, but let me explain.
With perm DLC, either sony or ms has funded that DLC and so of course it's only fair that it's just for that system.
However, in the case of timed DLC, ms (to my knowledge ms are the only ones that do this) basically pays a developer to withhold the DLC for a predetermined amount of time. In simple terms, instead of paying to make the 360 better they pay to disadvantage the ps3. I find it rather pathetic.
In a perfect world there would be no exclusive or timed-exclusive DLC for multiplatform games but are you seriously telling me exclusive DLC benefits gamers (on all platforms) more than timed-exclusive DLC?
350°
60°
340°
90°
Ad 
80°
30°
10°
10°
10°
20°
and it is unlikely money is paid directly for the DLC, most likely a lower licencing fee or special promotion in the digital store.
They may not know specifics but if third parties know, then they know. Long before journalists or any of us hear about it.
But this will only be weapons, clothing and a level maybe.
I bet M$ will also have their own exclusive content also but just different to Sony platforms.
This way all gamers will be in a win situation and no one will lose out.
Gaming at its best...
What if Skyrim's DLC was never released on the PS3? Would be okay with that too?
Halo armour on the Xbox is a given...
Edit: Also wasting 50 million dollars just to get a certain exclusive dlc is an awful waste, you can develop a whole game with that budget.
just hope it doesn't screw the gamers over too badly, and hopefully gives us some advantages
competition is good, but paying developers to screw over people who bought a different system
not cool man, not cool
It's the bigger DLC that is the problem when it's exclusively timed.
I actually find it more insulting when DLC in timed instead of permanent. That might confuse some of you, but let me explain.
With perm DLC, either sony or ms has funded that DLC and so of course it's only fair that it's just for that system.
However, in the case of timed DLC, ms (to my knowledge ms are the only ones that do this) basically pays a developer to withhold the DLC for a predetermined amount of time. In simple terms, instead of paying to make the 360 better they pay to disadvantage the ps3. I find it rather pathetic.
Your logic is very odd.
In a perfect world there would be no exclusive or timed-exclusive DLC for multiplatform games but are you seriously telling me exclusive DLC benefits gamers (on all platforms) more than timed-exclusive DLC?
edit:
Just looked through your comment history...
Something wrong with my comment history? I'm glad to know at least someone is reading it.