LG:
I’m going to be straight with you guys: I freakin’ adored Batman: Arkham Knight. Yes, the game was a massive mess on PC but for everyone else who played it on a PlayStation 4 or Xbox One, it was sublime. There’s so many moments in that game, that make it simply the best of the Arkham bunch. Sure, certain Batmobile sections may feel tacked on, but when you step back and see how much Rocksteady’s final caped crusader game got right when compared to a few missteps here and there, the good easily outshines the bad.
DLC is more common and controversial than ever. But are we really getting mad at the right things?
Thats not a bad idea to discount the price of DLC for early adopters once the complete edition drops which is usually a year later. So if you bought the game within the 1st 2 months of release you would get a 25% discount on all of the DLC. That discount would always be there so if you time it right, you could get the DLC at an even cheaper price if they have a sale on it.
A lot of games don't get complete edition's though. Most of the games i own that have DLC never had a complete edition released for it.
I don't mind DLC to some extent. It's just that the majority of DLC I've ever picked up has either been way too short, for example the Harley Quinn DLC for Batman Arkham City. And other times the DLC isn't even good.
I'm fine with DLC like what GTA IV and Red Dead Redemption has done. I'm even cool with some map packs here and there. I think season passes are the big problem, especially when some draw in the $50 price tag and don't really give out much.
HD:
'Batman: Arkham: Knight' has had a host of DLC since its release, most of it in the form of challenge packs and skins, with a smattering of small missions. 'Season of Infamy' may well be the last of the story-based DLC.
Was Batman: Arkham Knight a good game, now that the story is over? A writer for MONG reviews the final piece of Rocksteady's story DLC for Arkham Knight.
