Dan, joe and their guest Martini and Matt Discuss the topics of DLC and its effect on games and what the future of gaming might look like? Is the future in VR?
dlc is the only thing keeping the gaming industry alive, and also parity.
Hardly, it's one of the main reasons I haven't bought the new Mortal Kombat or Destiny
Nothing wrong with how destiny is handling content.
Put it this way....you don't see the post from the folks disagreeing, likely because they don't know enough to actually say against it. It seems to be an assumption on what they "think" dlc all is. With this idea that it would be better with "no" dlc as if that means the games would just come with the content that would be selling as DLC as free in the game. That is like saying if I had a value meal that had a Burger, Fries and a drink, that if I sold a new sandwich on the side, that it would be assumed that if this new menu didn't exist....it would also be free with the meal, ie a Burger, fries, a drink and the new sandwich. Just like any other business that contracts work out...they MUST BUDGET, the people who make those games need to be paid and they are only paid based on what they do. To pay for them to make MORE content, is to also lose money IF that content is to not be charged or put on a separate budget. Games factually take more money to make and actually make LESS MONEY then years prior. http://www.ign.com/articles... Games generally get bigger and longer each installment, not shorter. Thus...how can one claim "cut content" or DLC shortening a game when many games are just the opposite? Skyrim, bigger then,longer than Oblivion GTAV, bigger then ,longer than GTAIV Mario Kart 8, bigger then,longer than Mario Kart Wii Smash Bros Wii U, bigger then,longer than Brawl Arkham Knight, bigger then and longer than any other Arkham game. ....all have DLC. Thus...by default they are already larger, yet still have post launch content, thus your only getting MORE with DLC as the games have MORE by default. http://www.vg247.com/2015/0... http://www.gamercenteronlin... http://www.gamespot.com/art... The reality is...all this talk on "when" dlc is worked on or if its "concurrent" with development or after...means very little. You nor I own the IP. Those that own it are free to have other teams working on DLC WHILE the main game is being worked on, they budgeted for a certain game at $60, they also budgeted for extras as well. They can't afford to just put all that in a game for $60 and then have a whole team making more content for free. Either the team isn't getting paid or the publisher is making content for free. Would you work for free? Would you being a business owner hire workers to create free content? It makes no business sense. At the end of the day, gamers are getting MORE with each game, with or without DLC, you are buying what they are offering, you are not buying ALL that the team created. That is like saying when the Tekken Team made Smash Bros, they owe you Tekken 7 too as the worked on it during Smash Bros development. Wait? Are you buying the game, or everything the team put their hands on? How is any post launch content yours based on being worked on during development? What if they made a sandwich during a lunch break...that yours too? It just sounds like entitlement. People are mad because they are not getting something for free and others get a longer game because they PAYED FOR A LONGER GAME.
Awesome read man! I defiantly understand where you're coming from. I myself don't have a problem with DLC if done right. I don't even have a problem with pre order bonuses. DLC to me adds longevity to a game. Nintendo with Mario Kart 8 and smash, offer great content at a reasonable price. Even Rockstar with Undead nightmare! Yet day 1 dlc is something i cannot get down on. It just seems leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. For example of Evolve paying 60 bucks for the game an extra 25 for a season pass then the 100 plus dollar day 1 dlc for skins and shit. When the game itself lacked in the content department. Like i said, i am not against DLC in a whole as long as it offers me enough bang for the buck. The DLC the WItcher Devs offer seem like a great buy, where the call of duty dlc seems like a bit of a rip off. But that is just me!
Too me it's not because I have never bought a dlc unless it was free like the witcher at the moment ( who done it right, even if future ones you will might want to buy) but overall it's no concern for me unless they bring out games like evolve where future doc should have been there day one.
Nintendo seems to be doing it just fine... What is bad for the industry is empty hype. that causes a collapse.
I agree with your statement that over hype is what's killing games. Games like titanfall and destiny would have been a bit better if their respective publishers didn't try to make their games sound like they were so revolutionary. They got their messaging messed up, which is another major problem. that's why 2014 was such a "blah" year. As for 2015 I have hope with games like bloodborne, witcher, and hell splatoon (I'm having a blast with that game) I think this year is going to be better.
Yep. It's almost like the industry has selective amnesia and can't remember the what caused the gaming crash in the 1980s... Rushed/buggy games and terrible pricing decisions led to consumer distrust - then the ass fell out of the market for two years. I don't see how the current situation of spending gazillions on a game to the point that you need it to be a blockbuster just to get your money back, coupled with gouging on DLC and bug's everywhere is dramatically different.
well said both of you! And the biggest hype of them all not living up to being even an ok game... ET. The money is polluting the direction of the games. I love me some sony but they are becoming too much like MS in order to fight them. Nec, sega, SNK, even EA with the 3do, know that you can not count on 3rd parties eventually they will let you doing in order to take your place. Ms is only here to win but not be really good at making games. They do tools and middleware... that is it. This E3 I don't want to see a bunch of trailers. I want to see gameplay, no cgi for once.
It depends on how the DLC is done. MK8 is a perfect example of a really good DLC model.
Right, MK8 is a COMPLETE game worth full retail price. You could pre-order 2 dlc packs for 8 bucks, that included 16 new tracks and extra charecters, karts, etc. Now I think its $11.99. 12 bucks for adding soooo much more content is fantastic. I wish Sega would have added even more tracks via DLC for All Star Racing, I love that game. Its not as pretty as MK8, but it is allot of fun. Probably Sega's last good game.
While I agree that mk8 is a good game how many of the tracks are actually new and not just hd rehashed tracks? Most of them are not new at all? Any other game would be crucified for that. Mk8 doesn't feel like a complete game to me just an hd version of the wii.
GT6 is a perfect example of a better DLC model.
It's just the likes of EA and Activision who are giving it a bad name i.e literally asking devs to rip sections of the full game so it's sold later as DLC.
What kind of a question is that?
I don't know, people seem to apply the "don't like it, don't buy it" mantra to the recent influx of remasters, they should apply that same saying to DLC.
Dlc for the most part is a complete waste and a joke when it comes to games like evolve, 50 for advanced warfare season pass is also a joke, compared to Nintendo who does it right, 12.00 for Mario kart bundle doc which includes 16 maps 6 characters and skins vehicles etc,, compares to some of the bs other companies are doing,
I totally agree with you! Evolve was a great game. But, because of the horrendous day 1 DLC, it ruined the game's reputation. Batman might just be the next victim of over the top DLC with the price of $40! They announce this a month before the games even out. The best we as consumers can do is not buy into DLC. Viva la revolution!
Only if it includes something already promised in the core game or at an outrageous price.
Dlc is fine when its done right for example, wolfenstein old blood is a really solid title and def worth the $20 price tag, but I still feel ripped off for paying the extra 20 in mortal kombat 10 for 4 characters that come out once a month,
The one thing is games have not increased in price to mitigate inflation or the increase in development costs. Prices have been set since 05-06 when the previous generation launched. DLC is one way to keep new game prices at the level they are currently at. I don't mind if a portion of gamers are somewhat subaidzing the price for gamers. Assuming there continues to be quality for the $60 entry.
Give good dlc that's worth the money and hasn't just been chopped out of the main game, if so I will happily buy.
what ever happen to unlockable content. you dont get rewarded for finishing a game these days. atleast steam you could sell your achievements tho but point still stands.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.