90°
Submitted by Pandemic 1814d ago | article

Was Gaming Better Before DLC?

"Microtransactions as little as one cent" – these were Microsoft's immortal words when the Xbox 360 was building up to release and the concept of DLC was being championed as the future of gaming. One cent... what a laugh – if they had announced plans to have a Frog from Uranus Button on the controller, which when pressed caused frogs to leap gleefully from your arse, it would have been more believable. For the most part the Live Marketplace is a monument to unfathomable greed – it started with horse armour, and that sour debut looks tame in comparison to some of the disgusting tactics seen in recent times as publishers actively seek to undermine how you feel about your game purchase. It begs the question, was gaming better before DLC? (Nintendo DS, PC, PS2, PS3, PSP, Wii, Xbox 360)

« 1 2 »
Blaze929  +   1814d ago
yes
Mo0eY  +   1814d ago
I concur.

Now we have to pay to unlock maps, characters, costumes, etc. Last generation, did we ever do this? No.
vShinobi  +   1814d ago
I agree.

DLC used to be a nice addition but now its gotten out of hand with the exclusive BS, we pay for a game to have THE FULL EXPERIENCE not a half finished product that later has exclusive DLC you will never be able to get if its on a console you don't own, its gotten to the point of doing some research and such making sure you make the right purchase and the sad part is its going to continue to get worse.
#1.2 (Edited 1814d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
SlappingOysters  +   1814d ago
What is annoying
Is that a lot of the DLC ends up in box copy form eventually anyway. Just like the old days in the form of expansion packs.

I do really wish that DLC would at least get cheaper over time. Why not drop everything into the 'classics range' a couple of months after release, so you can go back to old games way down the track and get a bit more enjoyment out of them on the cheap.
GameForFame  +   1814d ago
both Yes and No
DLC can definitely prolong the life of a game and expand on the experience, but you also see the evilness of it all the time. Games dropping and then a week later some lame sh*t comes out that should have been in the actual game.

But you also see games lasting longer than they would have without it. Warhawk for example, didn't have that many levels but through time they added levels/weapons/new game modes that all fall into additional content - not just extra content that costs money. Some was free, others were not. That totally prolonged the life of the game.

It can both be beneficial and a big turn off. Makes me feel the same way about patches - while it seems that more games get rushed out with some minor to major problems they can be patched but the Devs sometimes seem to rely on the fact that they can patch a game. It goes both ways. Anyone who says simply no is probably too cheap to buy extra stuff anyways, so naturally they think down on it.
#1.4 (Edited 1814d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Information Minister  +   1814d ago
Hell no! I love paying full price for half a game. /sarcasm
QSPR  +   1814d ago
ok
change my mind :D
#1.6 (Edited 1813d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
DevastationEve  +   1813d ago
No
Because before DLC there were expansion packs, and whether you liked it or not you were going to get that pink and white stripped costume...

DLC let's you pick and purchase only the stuff you want.
Poopface the 2nd  +   1813d ago
I think a bigger propblem is taht gamers nowadays complain about everything
I dont like the Idea of exclusive DLC, or overpriced crap. But I have a choice. I really dont buy DLC much but I think things like the Fallout DLC or the oblivion shivering Isles are some pretty Good DLC that I may buy someday.

I think there are bad points and good points with DLC. Fortunatly for me I was blessed with a mind and I can choose to buy the DLC or not.

If you think a particular DLC sux then dont buy it. Maybe you should not buy the actual game too.

I really dont care about DLC because no one is forcing me to buy it. I dont feel like im missing out on anything by not buying a DLC>

If I think a game is worth it, Ill but it. If I think a DLC is worth it, ill DL it. If I dont think theese things are worth it, I wont buy it. Just like the other 99.9% of things that I dont buy in this world.

EDIT-- Is it just me or is it hilarious that people hate on DLC more than a RAPE video game. THe argument there was rights and freedom to make what you want. what about the right to make and purchase DLC. How would you people feel about DLC for the rape game?
#1.8 (Edited 1813d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
KingME  +   1813d ago
Not the DLC
The DLC is not to blame here, it the greedy a$$ software houses and publishers that are ruining it. They want to squeeze every single penny they can out of their customers.

And when I say "They" I mean all of them. (Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, Ubisoft,etc.)
Bnet343  +   1813d ago
Yes, it was. But sometimes DLC can be done well. Like Fallout 3 DLC. Everyone seems to like it.
ps3d0  +   1813d ago
Yes and no. Some companies really do take their time to make good DCL that as life to the game rockstar/GTA4, Epic/Gears, Lionhead/Fable and Bethesda fallout/elder scroll (noted the horse armor was a rip off) Before these game would of been re-released with extra content and you have re buy the game over again or just do with out.

Then there are the companies like Namco (I didnt buy sc4 cause of the whole vader/yoda thing) and EA that just sell you code to unluck content already on the disc
pain777pas  +   1813d ago
Of course it was better before DLC. DLC is now planned to get more money out of us. Patches should be all that we should want or have to download. Nuff said.
kaveti6616  +   1814d ago
Yes, before DLC I never had to worry about actually finishing a game that I purchased. Now, if I get a game like Fallout 3, which I have, I don't truly feel like I have completed the game because Bethesda decided to release extra content, most of which has been poorly rated, and one of which changes the story. How lame. DLC will become a mainstay, but it will force me to think twice before I make the initial investment in a game. Some people love DLC. Extra content for games they love. What could be wrong? My problem with it is money. I'm not made of it, and I don't want to feel left out of the gaming experience despite the fact that I actually paid for the game. The way most of you gamers felt about how Capcom screwed you over with the co-op DLC is basically how I feel about all DLC. Why can't they just add all the content on the disc. If there's not enough room, just give us the DLC for free for Christ's sake.
wiggles  +   1814d ago
I agree
Like in very few games it is cool such as Fallout3's DLC which come in at 5 hours...but when people take stuff out just to shove it up our asses later is terrible.
sirbigam  +   1814d ago
Yes
120FPS  +   1814d ago
I would say no, take DLC out of the equation and the games are far better than they were, DLC is just an added bonus for those who want more, its not like games feel incomplete without it (with the exeption of Fallout 3 who capped it at level 20 which was abit gay)
Sucks2BU  +   1814d ago
I do not know
I just spent the last hour playing tetris and it was rad.

Super mario kart, GoldenEye, Street Fighter II, Grim Fandango, Dark Forces.. not sure if games are better, they just look it.
ifhd  +   1814d ago
yes
Sucks2BU  +   1814d ago
Totally
I haven't shat right this whole generation thanks to EA and Activision.
Nihilism  +   1814d ago
and the comment of the year goes to....you!!!
SlappingOysters  +   1814d ago
EA's shaft has been hovering around uranus for more than just this generation
Sucks2BU  +   1814d ago
Nintendo
No DLC, better or worse.

The fact that there is no way that another 10 tracks are going to drop for Mario Kart kinda sucks
PirateThom  +   1814d ago
I remember when games were "complete", for better and for worse.

Nintendo, for all their faults, aren't milking consumers with DLC for anything (storage issue aside). You buy the game and it's done.

Capcom are the worst, simply because they're charging for costumes for SFIV, leaving unlockables definitely in the cupboard.
-MD-  +   1814d ago
I just hate when developers release a broken game and then patch it like it's no big deal. Up until this generation you never saw games release unfinished or broken (maybe rarely) but nowadays it's every other game that needs patching the second you buy it.
spunnups  +   1814d ago
I agree, Capcom is the worst of the worst. I remember how much fun it was to progress through a game and unlock additional characters. Where's the fun in having everything available up front?

I can proudly say I have not wasted one penny on additional costumes EX: LBP, Soul Caliber, RE5 ,SF4, etc.

For me, this is the best and the worst generation of gaming combined. PSN and XBL integrating players with some fantastic online games makes it great, but all the nickel and diming and paying for extra content that should have been on the disc in the first place makes it the worst.
PirateThom  +   1814d ago
@Murderdolls
Seriously! It's like once developers/publishers realised they had internet connections and hard drives they could cut down on QA and let users beta test and patch them if anything is wrong.
-MD-  +   1814d ago
I'm gonna say yes but just because if you want the full experience for some games you have to pay upwards of $100 (Fallout 3, GTA 4) etc.

DLC needs a major pricing adjustment, $10 for 3-4 new maps is pretty insane when you factor in that nearly every game you own has or will have DLC at one point.
#9 (Edited 1814d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Saaking  +   1814d ago
I actually agree, DLC is just a way for developers to basically charge more for the "full" experience.
-Mezzo-  +   1814d ago
Agreed DLC shouldn't exist.
-MD-  +   1814d ago
It should, but it should either be extremely cheap or free.

Free DLC is always welcome.
-Mezzo-  +   1813d ago
i welcome free DLC's with open arms, i was talking about PAID DLC.
koehler83  +   1814d ago
Yes, with the exception of the theoretical Rock Band 'platform' model. Since that never actually happened.. Just yes.
TheLaughingMan  +   1814d ago
I never thought of them as "DLC" Just down loadable expansions. I mean we weren't whining about expansion packs and the such. Why are we whining about it now that its disc-less and more convenient?
Oh wait...that's gaming journalism....whining
DelbertGrady  +   1814d ago
Exactly. And there's difference between DLC.

Lost & Damned > Horse Armor, for instance.
-MD-  +   1814d ago
I face palmed for days after hearing about the horse armor thing.
#11.2 (Edited 1814d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
TheLaughingMan  +   1814d ago
All this new slang throws me off to be honest I'm still like "I bought the new Wipeout expansion...oh wait "DLC"" lol Horse Armor was BS but there is those certain things I don't mind paying a couple bucks for...don't buy a bag of chips...theres your DLC!
-MD-  +   1814d ago
DLC is a nice idea on paper but developers just abuse it and turn it into a new way to make a quick buck.

"Oh we can release this game broken on time and then fix it later? Lets do that"

"Oh we can remove some of these maps and sell them later for an additional fee? Lets do that"

I don't even want to know how much I, and the rest of the world has spent on DLC that was originally on the game.

**********A perfect example of DLC abuse is Resident Evil 5's multiplayer. It was on the disc, they removed it, and sold it back to players.
#12 (Edited 1814d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
spunnups  +   1814d ago
You are 100% correct and any developer that states otherwise is lying through their teeth.
wiggles  +   1814d ago
Yeah that pissed me off so much. I hate living in fear of wondering if I bought a full game or if I bought half of the game at $60
divideby0  +   1814d ago
UNQUESTIONABLE HELL YES IT WAS

DLC has just ushered in an era of games cut short only to be charged later for it. DLC is all about $$$ for the developers, NOT the gamers.

I have purchased 1 DLC item (Warhawk map pac) and will not purchase others for any system
TheLaughingMan  +   1814d ago
proven case of "expansion pack". We use to have to buy them all the time back in the day. Now it's just something to b!tch about
divideby0  +   1814d ago
most dlc are must maps left out or keys to unlock stuff.
expansion pacs were way more than most of the DLC we see today
wiggles  +   1814d ago
Yes
I mean...every time I purchase a new game I always have that fear...what DLC will it be....regardless, some DLC is legit such as Fallout 3's, but how in the hell is Vs. Mode in RE5 a DLC! That should have came with the game....

Yeah the developers will tell us it was to big for the disk...but how much can we believe...it's a cut throat buisness out there! As the amount of DLC starts to go up...I start losing faith in my $60 I paid originally for the game.
NexGen  +   1814d ago
I'm all for appropriate DLC
Such as Fallout stuff, Lost & the Damned, Shivering Isles, etc. Horse armor, costumes, maps that were already made, should be free. I can understand new maps made a year after launch being cheap, but what they did with RE5 was plain robbery.

The convenience of DLC is great, and I don't mind spending money on it if it is for genuine new items, or content. Basically, if used right, it can be a good thing.
MetalGearBear  +   1814d ago
I wonder, what I do with horse armor?
DanteLinkX  +   1814d ago
I can only imagine.....
A game like Castlevaina Symphony of the night having been released this gen, look at DLC...

-Upside down castle 9.99, explore the exciting and misterious Dracula castle, this time upside down with new enemies and weapons. Only for 9.99, get the complete castlevania SotN experience!

-Alucard's Sword 1.99, the games most powerful weapon, use it to vanish the evil night.

-Axe armor 4.99, explore the castle in this true challenging for hardcore gamers that live in basements mode, you only get to play as Axe Armor.

-Ritcher mode 4.99, got what it takes to beat this game a la old school, using only your trusty whip? this is the true old school gamer experience, including leaderboards and rankings.

Ok, Konami hire me now, I think I know how to make some money for ya.
table  +   1814d ago
Aye was it

I prefered the days when down the line you could expect a fantastic expanison pack. For example MGS:Substance, MGS:Subsistance, Age of Empires:Conquerers and so forth. We used to get some awesome expansion packs but now we just get an overpriced multiplayer map that should have been in the game in the first place. On top of that it has zero value since it doesn't come in hard copy.
#18 (Edited 1814d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
keysy420  +   1814d ago
i hate dlc
besides full games and demos dlc blows and we dont get full games
-Mezzo-  +   1814d ago
DLC is just a cheap way to rack in some extra cash.
RAM MAGNUMS  +   1814d ago
YEs it Was better before dlc.
DLC is a dvd thing. Sony has the bluray for these devs but why work harder when you can work less? Thats why alot of devs pretend they dont know about the extra space on a bluray. Sony gave you the moves now you gotta play them. vote with your wallets.
Baka-akaB  +   1813d ago
what the fudge are you babbling about ? Even if all games were on blu-ray , they'd cut out stuff for dlcs . They'd just find another excuse than the fake and usual "there was no space for more "
Riddicrash  +   1814d ago
Depends On Certain Things!
I think DLC is a good and bad thing, it depends on hows its used, I like the idea of buying extra content a little while after the release of the original game, for example the DLC's for Grand Theft Auto IV, Rockstar already released a full game then they started working on their DLC, but other developers are trying to rob us of our money by having content on the day of the release of the game or just a little after and then expect you to pay for it, its even more annoying if its already on the disc, for example the Resident Evil 5 multiplayer DLC, the download was just a few kilobyte which means it was already on the disc of the game and then they expected us to pay for what should have already been accessible! So in conclusion, yes and no, DLC can be either, it just depends on how its used!
#22 (Edited 1814d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
NotSoSilentBob  +   1813d ago
I have to agree with you. The had a full game and then added content that was needed to lengthen the game. Then you have people like Cyber Connect(Naruto Ultimate Ninja Storm) who "support" their games with 100kb files to download(for free) but have to wait 6 months to get all the chars that should' have been there at the start.
Lou-Cipher  +   1814d ago
Saving Ideas for a later date is complete bull$hit. (not to mention they charge you for it.)

They should always put every single idea they can think of on their retail game, and if after that game has shipped, if they want to start working on additional content(ideas they just thought of) then I would welcome it.

Greed sucks, and always will suck, and btw screw you Mr kotick
#23 (Edited 1814d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Unicron  +   1814d ago
DLC in theory is great. In practice, 99% of it is overpriced things that should have already been on the disc.
RadientFlux  +   1813d ago
Hard to say, since it really depends on the developer/publisher. Some overcharge for minor additions while others spends months creating additions that add hours of playability to their game.
Fr0ZzZeN  +   1813d ago
DLC
DLC that the devs spend time and money preparing is fine.

However pulling bullshit like capcom and charging for stuff ALREADY ON THE DISC is complete crap.

Sadly games are not made with hard work and attention from the devs anymore. They all use the same friggin engine and they all take shortcuts in hope of making more money.

I remember a time when games came out finished and were enjoyable, colorful and FUN! Now there just eye candy with a few good games shining through(MGS4) the crap. This generation sucks.
Harry190  +   1813d ago
It was
cheaper.
NotSoSilentBob  +   1813d ago
Gaming was because we had full games. You would actually have to play the games to unlock the stuff, now companies like EA and Song have the pay for unlock DLC, which makes it easier to just pay little extra and have it all. You also have companies who ship half assed games and then try to say that it was an unknown bug and thats why patchs happen. Never had that problem with PS2/xbox/game cube because the quality testing was there.
omegaheat  +   1813d ago
We're being robbed and don't even know it.
I am a very big fan of Microsoft, but I will never be biased just to support my fanboyism. That would be stupid. I'm quite suprised this hasn't stirred more of an argument amongst marketplace users. I really really believe that Microsoft prices most of the content above or below for sinister reasons. I'll give you an example. Recently I wanted to purchase the maps for Halo 3. The maps were priced at maybe 600 and 800 microsoft points. Instead of being able to purchase exactly 1400 microsoft points, I had to purchase the 1000 microsoft points bundle and then 500 microsoft points bundle. Here's where it gets tricky. After purchasing the maps let's just say that I now have 100 points left over. Now I'm wondering to myself what do I do with these left over points. Oh, guess what? There's virtually
nothing on Live that's valued at 100 points. Even a theme will run you 140 points. The point I'm trying to make here is that everything is priced the way it is so that buying content will always leave you with left over microsoft points from every purchase. If you wanted to buy content you will always be forced to buy one of the four bundles of microsoft points regardless of how many you really need to make a purchase. It will be an ongoing cycle inwhich you will always get the feeling that if you don't use the points that are left over, it may feel like wasted money. I like Microsoft, but that's pretty damn sinister if you ask me.
SlappingOysters  +   1813d ago
I had not thought of it like that - awesome point!!!!
Poopface the 2nd  +   1813d ago
the other day ther was a story about the RApe game
My argument there wasnt to try take away their rights to make the game or that it leads to real rape. I just thought the developers themselves need to make more responsible decisions about whats appropriate, and that it makes gaming look bad. I got attacked because people thought I wanted to take their rights away or some ridiculous sh@t. They said "if you dont like it dont buy it" over and over again.

And now people attack DLC and completely ignore their own advice.

Funny that they ignore something that would primarily negatively affect women, but the second they think a ripoff DLC is released they get their pitchforks.
#30 (Edited 1813d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
20°

Sonic Boom: Shattered Crystal (3DS) Release Date Announced

8m ago - Get ready Sonic fans. Sonic Boom: Shattered Crystal officially arrives on Nintendo 3DS on Tuesday... | 3DS
30°

Halo at SDCC 2014

24m ago - Bravo: Survival is a Choice Earlier today at San Diego Comic Con, we shared lots of new inf... | Xbox One
20°

Sacred 3 Preview | One Angry Gamer

25m ago - One Angry Gamer "The game is gearing up to land on retail shelves and digital distribution for PC... | PC
10°

Ascension Expansion Rise Of Vigil Released On iOS Platforms

26m ago - Stone Blade Entertainment and Playdek released the latest, and perhaps greatest, expansion for th... | iPhone
Ad

Sniper Elite III (PS4) Review

Now - Ken holds his breath and takes the shot with the latest Sniper Elite title. | Promoted post
10°

Sokobond Review | TheFinalGen

27m ago - Is Sokobond a chemically sound game, or is it just another bad reaction? | PC