
| Welcome to the PGRF gaming community! Everyone here is very friendly, so don't hesitate to say hi and engage in some video game discussion with all of us! From retro to modern, there's no discrimination here. If you have any questions, feel free to ask the moderators and administrators! Have fun. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free! Join our community! |
| When and what kind of DLC is acceptable? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 20 2015, 12:21 PM (624 Views) | |
| NinjaPenguin8969 | Feb 20 2015, 12:21 PM Post #1 |
![]()
I SUCK AT GAMES
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So my buddy picked up Evolve and I can't help but feel grossed out by this game due to the DLC model. I mean he paid $60 dollars and there's over a hundred dollars worth of extra DLC and he didn't preorder so he has to pay for a monster that was ready to go day 1. Now some defenders of this say that the DLC is cosmetic and not necessary but if you play Evolve getting anything is just a grind fest and the DLC content really would have made things more fulfilling. I just think this is the wrong way to do DLC since theres already so little content in it, same with the ending for Asura Wrath. Day 1 anything just seems wrong to me. For me I like how Borderlands does it where it's $10 bucks for about 5-10 hours of solid content. I'm also a fan of the season passes for COD and Battlefield since it adds a ton of extra hours for me. What about you guys? When is DLC acceptable? |
| |
![]() |
|
| stratamaster78 | Feb 20 2015, 04:39 PM Post #2 |
|
Level 6
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The only DLC I'm kind of okay with is new Mission/Chapters that are made well after the initial release. Like the extra stuff added to the original 2 Bioshock games, or say the Alan Wake epilogue DLC. The big no-no for me is making you pay for the 'Real Ending' that a few companies/developers have started doing. That's shady as hell. When you buy a retail game it should at least have the dang ending. I'm indifferent to DLC that is cosmetic like clothing, weapons, characters. I mean it would be nice if you got everything up front but most of the time that type of DLC has no bearing on gameplay and story. |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| NinjaPenguin8969 | Feb 20 2015, 08:14 PM Post #3 |
![]()
I SUCK AT GAMES
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oh man Minerva's Den in Bioshock 2 is like the gold standard for DLC. That was so fantastic and was basically its own game! |
| |
![]() |
|
| thewhitepenny | Feb 20 2015, 08:26 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Level 8
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm okay with character packs BUT only if it's a pretty substantial increase in a roster. Anything less than 6 or so characters to me is total bull shit. I'm also a big fan of DLC like what Borderlands puts together as well as The Last of Us. Those are some of my favorites over the last few years. However, the whole idea map packs through DLC... that shit is unacceptable! Why separate the community like that! Edited by thewhitepenny, Feb 20 2015, 08:26 PM.
|
![]() Currently Playing: Counter Strike Source, Dungeon Explorer (SEGA CD), Vay (SEGA CD) | |
![]() |
|
| Unclever | Feb 20 2015, 09:03 PM Post #5 |
|
Level 5
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So I have just kind of come to the conclusion that I don’t care about DLC. The game that clarified this for me was Borderlands 2. No because it has bad DLC but because I bought the season pass realized that I already moved on to other games by the time the second DLC came out and I didn’t really care all that much weather I went back and played them or not. I did eventually go back on play the last 2 but I don’t feel like I would have missed out on anything had I not done that. Even Tiny Tina’s Assault on Dragon Keep, it was good but not a necessary component of the game. This isn’t to say that I am against DLC like that. For anyone who wants more Borderland this is super, for people like me that are just fin playing the main game and stopping they don’t feel like they are missing out. Something I do have a problem with is DLC like Bioshock Infinite where there is a story element that seems important and maybe should have been in the base game. As for Evolved, I have never played the game nor do I have any interest in it but from what I have heard I have some mixed feelings. So when it comes of multiplayer DLC I feel like if you don’t buy it you are kind of left behind. Like in the case of Battlefield or Call of Duty, if you are not buying the map packs then you can’t play on those maps so if your friends are playing on them then you can’t play with them. It just always seems to me if you are playing an online multiplayer game and DLC comes out you kind of need to buy the DLC if you want to keep playing. So the fact that they have some not unimportant DLC on day one does put people in a tough position. I could end up being wrong but it seems to me that they are going to kind of play this like a DOTA. They are going to keep on adding new monsters and hunter, and if you want them you are going to have to buy them. If that is true maybe they should have gone call in with the DOTA pricing. Here is the game free, you get one monster and one class of each of the hunter if you want more buy them. |
![]() |
|
| HeavyMetalGamer | Feb 21 2015, 02:40 AM Post #6 |
|
The new guy here
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Right now, for the most part DLC is used poorly, the whole idea was executed just in an awful way. Not all developers, but a lot of them release DLC that is not worth it. Now there are expansion pack style DLC's (more missions, adds more to the story etc) that are worth it. Capcom hiding DLC on disc was a huge issue obviously. DLC for extra character costumes in fighting games is ridiculous. DLC for hats in TF2 is a bit ridiculous, good thing is, you can actually unlock some of those hats in the game (atleast I have). DLC for adding characters to the game should be a lot more reasonable, 10 characters, $4 or $5. Including stages. I think that is a reasonable price. Map packs, COD did 3 maps for Black Ops back in the day for $15. That is bullshit, 3 maps? $3. $1 a map, that's a lot more reasonable. Although in gaming, you would think unlockable characters in fighting games would still be around, and the DLC for characters should be for newly created characters, and map packs should be unlockable too, and if they make maps later on, then make it reasonable, like I mentioned above. |
![]() |
|
| KingJames88 | Feb 25 2015, 09:27 AM Post #7 |
|
Ds Games!
![]()
|
I get a bit irritated with map packs because I really enjoy battlefield games and find myself having to get them all to fully enjoy the game and keep playing with the established community. I remember back when Street Fighter 4 came out, there was a lot of controversy first with the DLC and then with added additions having things that should have been included in the vanilla version of the game. I usually do not purchase DLC, map packs for battlefield are the exception. To answer the question, costume packs I feel are acceptable because you can still fully enjoy the game, all its maps and characters and story, you may just want to pay extra to look fancier online. When a game gets a bunch of map packs and the online community gets messed up, it's too far. Maybe wait a few extra months and have some of these things included in the game? I suppose that wouldn't make as much money though. Edited by KingJames88, Feb 25 2015, 09:29 AM.
|
![]() >>My DS Collection Here<< 194 games and counting! | |
![]() |
|
| NinjaPenguin8969 | Feb 25 2015, 02:24 PM Post #8 |
![]()
I SUCK AT GAMES
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I kinda have to disagree regarding the maps in Battlefield and Call of Duty. I guess technically it does segregate the community but it's not like you can't play on the vanilla content with a ton of people. People definitely seemed to adopt Premium in Battlefield so it's probably a 50/50 split where there's tons of servers for vanilla and DLC. Call of Duty on the other hand you're pretty much in the minority if you buy the Season Pass. They don't show the number of people playing in Advanced Warfare but Ghosts on PS4 had on average 50k people playing, and I never saw the DLC numbers go above 2,000 people. The majority of the COD community stays with the vanilla content. I like this explanation from Jim Sterling. |
| |
![]() |
|
| majinpowers | Feb 25 2015, 02:48 PM Post #9 |
|
Sega Does What Nintendon't
![]()
|
The only DLC I find acceptable on full retail price games are expansions or packs that adds lots of content to expand on the game. I think costumes and extra characters are stuff you should of got for buying a full price title! If companies want to nickel and dime me to death then the game needs to be free or at least a budget title much like how free to play MMO's make there money. |
![]() Click here to check out my game room and a closer look at my collections! Check me out on DinkyDana.com! | |
![]() |
|
| iHodor | Feb 26 2015, 05:34 AM Post #10 |
|
Level 1
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Does it not add major amounts of new content? Is it on the disc, only needing an unlock code? Does it provide an unfair advantage if the game has online, but no segregation/checks for DLC? Is it just a bunch of costumes/colors? Do you HAVE to pay to get it, even if it's on disc? If the answer to any of these is yes, it's garbage DLC. It's nothing more than nickel-and-diming the players, and treats them with no respect. I'm not going to support a company that does this sort of thing- it's why Capcom is crap now, and is part of the many reasons hardcore enthusiasts hate EA and Activision. On top of this, hard drives DO eventually go bad. In a few years, systems that have the DLC pre-installed are going to sell for high money because of this. There's nothing that ensures that the player actually OWNS the DLC. |
![]() |
|
| eSkilliam | Feb 26 2015, 07:29 AM Post #11 |
![]()
Gamer. Graphic Designer. Geek.
![]()
|
I hate DLC that breaks the game for non purchasers... For example, the Halo 3 Multiplayer map DLC that made half of multiplayer online unplayable unless you bought it. That is not cool. Otherwise I'm cool with DLC provided they gave me a full game to begin with. I never usually buy DLC at full price anyway. I wait for free or buy it at a price drop or just never get it. I buy games late a lot of times and by then the GOTY edition with all DLC is usually out anyway. Edited by eSkilliam, Feb 26 2015, 07:29 AM.
|
|
eSkilliam on Steam - eSkilliam on Wii U - CetiAlphaVI on PS4 eSkilliamgaming on Youtube - eSkilliam on Twitch - eSkilliam on Twitter | |
![]() |
|
| NinjaPenguin8969 | Feb 26 2015, 12:14 PM Post #12 |
![]()
I SUCK AT GAMES
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^ Oh man I forgot about Halo 3. Yeah that was the worst use of map packs ever. I even had the DLC and it was so wonky because there were so many weird algorithm's to where it would matchmake you, and I remember not being able to play with friends at all who didn't buy map packs. That was terrible but luckily BF4 and COD aren't like that. BF just pick a server, and COD the majority of people are in vanilla anyway. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Death by EMP | Feb 26 2015, 01:57 PM Post #13 |
![]()
Level 4
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If a DLC feels like an expansion pack, I'm all for it. Bethesda did a great job with it's Fallout 3 DLC and I feel Fallout 3 is still one of the best examples of DLC to this date. As for multiplayer DLC, I despise map packs. Not only do they split the community but I never feel they meet bang for buck standards. The Napoleonic Wars DLC for Mount & Blade: Warband is a fantastic example of multiplayer DLC. It's a multiplayer only component that adds new maps, changes the game from medieval era to imperialist era, adds new game features and only costed a third of what the base game costed. I also really like CS:GO's way of implementing multiplayer DLC, where they release timed map packs that everyone has access to, but release a $6 mission pack along with them that allows you to complete challenges for aesthetic items exclusive to that map pack. |
![]() |
|
| Unclever | Feb 26 2015, 09:38 PM Post #14 |
|
Level 5
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Maybe something is getting lost in my interpretation of you questions but is there any kind of DLC you are OK with. I seems to me that you have a problem with any kind of major or minor DLC. Going along with my Borderlands DLC I have been using, I would consider that I major amount of new contact. At the same time I don't think the DLC diminishes the base game or that if you haven't played the DLC that you really haven't played the complete game. |
![]() |
|
| iHodor | Feb 27 2015, 07:44 PM Post #15 |
|
Level 1
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm pretty fine with things like DLC that adds new areas and characters- The Dark Souls DLC strikes me as a great example of it. For 15 dollars, you get four new areas, three new bosses, and new armors and weapons. Two of those three bosses are harder than the base game's final boss, which further enhances the game's appeal. Same thing with the DLC for, say, Fire Emblem Awakening- those are wholly new maps. I don't like it when there's content on the game disc that I bought that I have to pay more for. Dragon Age Origins springs to mind instantly- there's an NPC that literally only exists to sell you the Return to Ostagar DLC, which is already on the game's disc. Why is that there? Imagine if you got that at launch day- it's basically telling you to give EA more money to get content that is already there on the game you bought, content that's just waiting for to pay 5-10 bucks for 500kbs of code to unlock it. That is unacceptable. Capcom does a similar thing with costume packs, but at least those usually aren't on the disc. They're just really overpriced. |
![]() |
|
| browland1 | Feb 27 2015, 08:39 PM Post #16 |
![]() ![]()
|
Only DLC that adds substantial single-player content. I'm not really into multiplayer games and I never go for skins, costumes or "exclusive guns" that acts as a dangling carrot for pre-ordering. Borderlands has fantastic DLC and it adds hours of gameplay, so I would consider that the benchmark, same with Skyrim and a couple of the Assassin's Creed games. Most of the AAA shooters focus on multiplayer maps, which isn't my thing. |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Modern Gaming · Next Topic » |






![]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v633/PDorr3/forum/endingpip.png)
















11:37 AM Jul 13