DLC: Enhance the players experience, not the bottom-line

MWEB GameZone writes: "Activision, EA and Ubisoft are examples of AAA developers that increase their bottom-line with paid DLCs to the detriment of the gaming community.

Additional content after a game’s release is supposed to enhance the player experience, not cause a split in the game’s community."

[lord zaid]

The video game industry is expert at taking great ideas and turning them into crap. DLC is prime example of this in action

[Sillicur]

Exactly, sad but true. Recently it has become more and more obvious that they are doing just that :(

[thereapersson]

Remember the days when DLC added full gaming experiences and not just unlocked skin packs / weapons / etc.? The days when all that stuff could be unlocked via a cheat code now give way to keeping content on lock down unless you pay $9.99 for a 10KB download magically freeing up content already on the disc you paid for.

Shoddy DLC practices by companies such as UbiShaft and Electronic Assholes are a cancer on the gaming industry and have spread throughout to all companies once thought to offer gamers the most content possible upon the end user putting down hard earned cash for a half-assed gaming package.

[user5669510]

The days of expansion packs and free content is over. Every thing is getting consolized now.

[HanCilliers]

Gamers already pay a pretty penny for a game, then it's broken, then they have to dish out even more to get DLC, which perhaps should've been part of the game in the first place.

[Sillicur]

Definately, it is the worst when game developers do this. Content that could / should have been in the game's release has to be. A few dlcs months after launch is fine however.

AC:Unity you could pre-order the season pass before the game was released!!>!

[CongoKyle]

Blizzard is another example. I think they've learnt their lesson now with StarCraft II releasing the final expansion as a standalone.

[Sillicur]

Yeh blizzard is starting to learn, hopefully. However, at least those are full expansions with a ton of content, still bad if players cant play together when not buying an expansion, or in Destiny's case an "Expansion"

[HanCilliers]

Very true that, I was so surprised by their move. Hope it brings new players

[SonZeRo]

Companies are there to make money, gaming companies are no different. I'm ok with DLC's but i would prefer companies to ship working games first and then add on, not sell half the content and then the other hal as interest in the game wanes just to up your profit. It's shortsighted, but gamers seem to be suckers for punishment.

[schmoe]

Remember the times when DLC was just extra free content included in a patch?

[Sillicur]

Those days were glorious! Not so long ago though, The Witcher 2 actually had so many free updates in patches just because CD Projekt loves us :)

[Summons75]

Yes. New weapons and skins? Free and already unlocked. Dlc? Nearly a full games worth of content, tons of new maps, weapons, armors, story content, characters, options, all for an extremely low and justifiable price also available via physical for those who don't have good or any internet.

[Ogygian]

Why can't DLC do both?

Looking at economic theory, once we begin to expect certain things of DLC, we will pay less for the base game, meaning profits remain the same either way.

We do, of course, pay more for more content, and for games which we expect to offer free DLC.

Thus in the long term, we will always pay for games based on how much we value their content. No matter what EA or anyone else does, it won't matter.

[ABBAJESUS]

This why people love GTA V!