Pages: first prev 12 last
I am tired of Earth. These people. I am tired of being caught in the tangle of their lives.
One problem with DLC I also see is multiplayer games with DLC. If you have to pay for map-packs for a multiplayer game then the audience is split. If one person has the downloadable fighters or stages or maps will he not be able to play with people who don't have them? And how many servers will there be for the maps that only a few of the game's audience can play?
isn't this just the same issue as Expansion Packs were like 10 years ago? If you both didn't have the expansion pack, it defaulted back to the original version of the game.

(Here I am thinking of games like Starcraft, C&C and Diablo II)
On the other hand with there being a lot more DLC than expansions instead of one (or sometimes two) expansions there's dozens of variations you can have.
I recently got Mafia II and beat the storyline.. pnly to find out that the game ends on a cliffhanger. And to play through the rest of the story, you guessed it, I'd have to pay for DLC. I'm sorry, but that is fuckeded up. Needless to say, I traded in my copy of Mafia II. And then there's the case in Assassin's Creed 2(Which I think is an amazing game still) where an entire memory block was only available as DLC. That is a bullshit business tactic. Sure, it works, but it's messed up.

Mafia 2 ends on a cliffhanger, that's it. The DLC are not continuation of the story, they are the adventures of Joe during your time and jail and such moments. And the DLC came quite a while after the game released.

What I hate is when developper announce their game coming out on for example 14th of September and then says there will be a DLC on the 16th. I mean, how is that not spitting in my face ? You have content that could have obviously been included (and should have been) in the initial game but you decided to split it AND to keep the price of the initial game at maximum.

Any company that does that has me using torrents if you see what I mean. I have no respect for that. As for respectable developpers like CD Projekt (Witcher) they get my money on day one no question asked.
I am tired of Earth. These people. I am tired of being caught in the tangle of their lives.
well, a game needs to be packaged and shipped and ready to go MONTHS before the release date. DLC, on the other hand, can be ready to go in a week.

So, from the developers point of view, they had a deadline to meet, and the met it, but still wanted to fix up or include some things that didn't make the deadline. so they did so in the intervening months between shipping off their games to the distributor and the release date.
I'm not overly crazy about DLCs unless they offer a significant amount of content changes, new campaigns, etc. I just don't see much sense in spending 10 dollars for some new character models. Is it still a good option to provide a DLC? Absolutely. DLCs are easy to release, bring in revenue, and ideally generates interest towards the developers game. It all boils down on how much the consumer (i.e. the player) is willing to spend in order to gain new content to a game they enjoy.
i bet she's a diva with a potion popping problem
League of Legends. Everybody, go give Riot your money for offering a balanced game for free.

Seriously, you can't buy your way ahead. There are no $$$$-ONLY items except skins, which are purely aesthetic. You can buy an IP boost that increases the IP you earn... as you play the game and earn IP anyway. And, uh, the runes you buy only with IP only help so much. It's still very much a skill-based game.

Basically, RIOT DOES IT RIGHT. I've paid, what, $50 at this point for a free game?

Pages: first prev 12 last