SchollA from Console ControllUs - where the console controls us writes:
I have a new concept called the “Should series”, this is a series in which I tackle various game trends, among other things from last gen and ask if it should be a part of next gen ehm ehm…now this gen of gaming, first up DLC.
PC Aficionado: "Obsidian published a survey in early October, asking for responses from players concerning DLC. Now, 55,000 responses have been noted, and the final results are out."
Nobody wants to pay for DLC... Tell that to the idiots who are killing gaming by buying into the current microtransactiin trend without a fight.
I'm willing to pay for expansions. Those things we used to get that were of proportionate price to the base game's content and was worth the money.
Exactly, I'll happily pay for DLC that actually adds to the base game, new areas, enemies, etc.. Actual chunks of gameplay. I'll support developers that actually put in work to enhance the base game.
This bullshit MT crap that takes no effort from the devs and paying real money for things that are left up to RNGesus just needs to stop.
They'll use this to plan future DLC. Yep, lots of small games with loads of DLC is incoming. Just MT's to get them used to now. Nearly, there guys. Way to kill the industry.
Fvck DLC. Either put the content in the base game or piss off.
Yeah I'm talking to you EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc.
i think you are mistaken, DLc in the forms of expansions are welcome, its the stupid MT that needs to crawl into the corner
Been wondering where that Champions Ballad DLC is for Breath of the Wild? Well, Nintendo confirmed it's coming December...on the European eShop only.
Good timing - other than Xenoblade 2, nothing's really coming out during that time.
awesome.. I would expect it to release around the same time in NA too. Can't wait!
December, eh?
Guess I'll likely be taking a brief break from Xeno mid-to-late December, then.
No way am I missing out on the very first ever post-game content that the Zelda series has ever had.
Looking at the industry trend of charging for DLC after a game is released and if it is justified for companies to do so
This is tricky. In my opinion, I feel like DLC should be free because we purchased a game, a finished product, for 60+ dollars, so things like Day One DLC shouldn't exist. On the other hand, I understand this is a business and that development is expensive, and expanding a product instead of making another one is good capital.
What I think would help is if the community was met halfway with a reinvention of the downloadable content system. Give the content we purchase certain standards, kind of like Day One DLC isn't permitted. If Season Passes are purchased, then the customer must have an outline of what they are purchasing, and if the individual didn't want everything in the outline then he/she could drop what they didn't like for a cheaper fee. Also, while I'm in the land of never ending possibilities, a rewards incentive is made for a certain amount purchased from all the developer's games released (which can also be carried over from system to system or gen to gen), like buying 10 DLC packs gives you one free. This way we both get what we want: they get some money and we don't feel taken advantage of.
Wish we got some dlc free, at least get some of it free by getting platinum. Wish some dlc was priced good cause costume prices high as hell. If we can get dlc on sale alot like the games then I would buy dlc at that cheap price. At the end of the day it's best just to wait for goty/complete edition or price drop of the ultimate edition to combat them.
Completely agree, blackblades. Waiting truly is the best option these days, and speaking with our wallet tends to work. Just wish it worked faster.
Given that companies used to release DLC back in the late 90s and early 2000s for free as "supporting their product" for extended appeal? No, it's not justified, and never was.
Full on expansions are entirely different, but this bite-sized DLC bulls**t became popular with the biggest caner of them all, Call of Duty and their bulls**t map packs.
Once these companies discovered just how stupid the average "gamer" (and I use that term loosely) was, it was straight to the bank. Now look at where that first step has gotten us to today.
Microsoft started the bite sized DLC trend. They had a marketing strategy that they pushed back when live was founded and they stated that they believed more money could be made selling things in pieces rather then a full on expansion. The first Xbox live title released had paid DLC and cut up in this exact fashion back in Nov 2002.
Of course, as consoles have inched closer and closer to PC, in recent years, it makes since when considering the existence of expansion packs. Why should they not, as it is always an option not a requirement.
It really depends on the quality and value of the DLC, but last gen it was 99% 'crap' where the gamers were being nickel-and-dimed, and it was a big reason for me to refuse to buy those games which (ab)used it, waiting for a cheap 'complete' release a year later instead.
IF I was still interested in the game by then.
DLC should be free. It would mean a HUGE weapon for publishers against the 2nd hand market, cause it would keep people from selling their games when they're done with it. They would hang on to it, because there's some quality free DLC announced for 3-4 months later.
It would also mean people would be more willing to buy a game at full price when it's launched, cause they know they'll be getting the complete experience, instead of being nickel-and-dimed 10 seconds after launch by DLC-milking.
So many customers now decide to just wait it out until there's a complete release a year later, for a fraction of the price. And rightly so.
I vote with my wallet and I'll never support DLC-milking.
Its gonna b the gen of microtransactions. ..so rest easy...no more dc rape!
Not in the way that it has been handled most of this generation. There is room for micro-transactions, even if people hate them. There is room for smaller content that is not quite an expansion, but they need to be priced accordingly - based on quality and length in comparison to the game proper.
That is all fine and good, in my opinion.
What we really need to nip in the bud, however, is content that is already finished during the game's development then being stripped, or left just slightly incomplete, and then sold to us shortly down the line. That is complete BS. That content was made under the budget assigned to the game itself and is reflective of hours of development spent during the game's production. It is a disservice to your consumers to nickle and dime them in such a way.
Whoever idea it was for DLC need to be kicked in the rib cage by a Thai boxer.
If gamers stand against it, it'll never happen, but im sure it'll happen, gamers eat whatever shit thats on the market so i wouldn't be surprised.