Possibly the best analogy for launch DLC

[Syntaxvgm]

I found this on PC master race subreddit. 

Don't know who this is, but you won the internet for today. 

[XTankSlayerX]

DLC is a double edged sword. The way (of all people) EA has been doing a great job for DLC for PVZGW and BF4.

It makes the game every few months fell new and fresh.

[Syntaxvgm]

I think what makes me the angriest is games used to allow mods maps made by the community. I played CS and COD2 for years simply because there was so much content. One of the reasons why PC gamers hated MW2, Activision did away with that during the IW debacle. But now they are reducing the replay-ability of their games simply to get you to pay a bit more. 

[Sauron]

DLC is a double edged sword. The way (of all people) EA has been doing a great job for DLC for PVZGW and BF4.

It makes the game every few months fell new and fresh.

 

In bf4 it's still day one dlc. Content they already developed and are locking behing a 50$ paywall. If they had developed it after release, it would be fine. But they already did the job, they just want more money for the game.

 

 

I think what makes me the angriest is games used to allow mods maps made by the community. I played CS and COD2 for years simply because there was so much content. One of the reasons why PC gamers hated MW2, Activision did away with that during the IW debacle. But now they are reducing the replay-ability of their games simply to get you to pay a bit more. 

 

Oh my this. Just this.

[Syntaxvgm]

In bf4 it's still day one dlc. Content they already developed and are locking behing a 50$ paywall. If they had developed it after release, it would be fine. But they already did the job, they just want more money for the game.

 

 

 

Oh my this. Just this.

They'd rather kill the longevity of their own games for a few extra bucks. That's not game development. Game development is a passion of pursuing the best game you can make. This is purely profit motive. 

[Semper]

I couldn't agree more. I had plans to pick up this game until I found out they were doing this. I enjoyed Far Cry 2 and loved 3 (never played the first) 

 

Not that I approve, condone, endorse, or participate in it, but he(she?) is also correct with the P.P.S. I remember reading that Ubisoft games were among the highest number of pirated titles, and that study said it was in large part due to UPlay and all the paywalls that their games have now-a-days. I no longer know where I read this, however, so I can not provide a source.

[Syntaxvgm]

I couldn't agree more. I had plans to pick up this game until I found out they were doing this. I enjoyed Far Cry 2 and loved 3 (never played the first) 

 

Not that I approve, condone, endorse, or participate in it, but he(she?) is also correct with the P.P.S. I remember reading that Ubisoft games were among the highest number of pirated titles, and that study said it was in large part due to UPlay and all the paywalls that their games have now-a-days. I no longer know where I read this, however, so I can not provide a source.

I bought games on launch from Ubi and people who pirated it had less problems. Cough watchdogs. 

Not doing that again. 

[XTankSlayerX]

In bf4 it's still day one dlc. Content they already developed and are locking behing a 50$ paywall. If they had developed it after release, it would be fine. But they already did the job, they just want more money for the game.

 

 

 

Oh my this. Just this.

China rising took a month to get out the door.

 

I wouldn't consider that First Day DLC.

[Syntaxvgm]

China rising took a month to get out the door.

 

I wouldn't consider that First Day DLC.

They make it ahead of time, and act like they made it later. 

Plus they lock out user content in a lot of titles just so you have no other choice. 

[Semper]

I bought games on launch from Ubi and people who pirated it had less problems. Cough watchdogs. 

Not doing that again. 

Oh, yeah, i'll NEVER buy a ubi title day one, let alone pre-order. It's been many, many years since i've seen a working title from ubi at launch.

[Syntaxvgm]

Oh, yeah, i'll NEVER buy a ubi title day one, let alone pre-order. It's been many, many years since i've seen a working title from ubi at launch.

I payed for watchdogs and pirates were playing it LONG before I was. Plus it didn't support xfire. And with a single AMD card it would crash if it went fullscreen. 

[XTankSlayerX]

They make it ahead of time, and act like they made it later. 

Plus they lock out user content in a lot of titles just so you have no other choice. 

Idk, I personally do like DLC... Oh well.

[Sauron]

China rising took a month to get out the door.

 

I wouldn't consider that First Day DLC.

 

They had it on release date, then delayed. That's day one dlc.

[XTankSlayerX]

They had it on release date, then delayed. That's day one dlc.

Didn't know about that bit. Oh well...

[Syntaxvgm]

Didn't know about that bit. Oh well...

Ignorance is 

?

[XTankSlayerX]

Ignorance is 

?

Im sorry... I just like good DLC. As a person who gets bored easily... its nice

[Syntaxvgm]

Im sorry... I just like good DLC. As a person who gets bored easily... its nice

Right but they literately had it done already, and just removed it from the game most of the time. So you aren't getting more content. You are paying more.

[XTankSlayerX]

Right but they literately had it done already, and just removed it from the game most of the time. So you aren't getting more content. You are paying more.

Paying more isn't a problem for me personally (Although it can be a problem for some for different reasons.)

But there are different ways of viewing DLC, as a rip off, or as an addition for the game

[Briggsy]

the restaurant analogy is pretty good, but it should be in regards to dessert being sold separately, which in fact took place at some point in history. before my time, you got dessert at a restaurant as part of the meal, but at some point they decided that separating it from the meal and charging ridiculous prices (like 5 dollars for a slice of pie) was the best way to make a buttload of money, while keeping the price of the main course from going up. then they came up with appetizers, which is like day 1 or pre-release DLC.

[Syntaxvgm]

the restaurant analogy is pretty good, but it should be in regards to dessert being sold separately, which in fact took place at some point in history. before my time, you got dessert at a restaurant as part of the meal, but at some point they decided that separating it from the meal and charging ridiculous prices (like 5 dollars for a slice of pie) was the best way to make a buttload of money, while keeping the price of the main course from going up. then they came up with appetizers, which is like day 1 or pre-release DLC.

I think what the analogy is saying is that you paid more than a reasonable amount for a burger and they withhold the toppings. Even though you pay for dessert separately, you don't pay for a desert you don't get with your meal in a restaurant. You literally just pay for them separately. Plus the restaurant doesn't empty your fridge at home (doing away with user made maps)

[Guest Kloaked]

Paying more isn't a problem for me personally (Although it can be a problem for some for different reasons.)

But there are different ways of viewing DLC, as a rip off, or as an addition for the game

 

All of my what

[Briggsy]

I think what the analogy is saying is that you paid more than a reasonable amount for a burger and they withhold the toppings. Even though you pay for dessert separately, you don't pay for a desert you don't get with your meal in a restaurant.

 

thats my point though, at one point in time you did expect dessert with the meal. now its just accepted that its separate. Gamers will eventually accept/not accept DLC as just par for the course, just like dessert at a restaurant.

[Syntaxvgm]

thats my point though, at one point in time you did. now its just accepted that its separate. Gamers will eventually accept/not accept DLC as just par for the course.

In a restaurant, they don't made a dessert as part of your meal, then throw away if you don't order it. DLC is no longer an additive experience, but rather planned cuts from games, pay gates. And like I edited in after you quoted

 

Plus the restaurant doesn't empty your fridge at home (doing away with user made maps and mods)

[Sauron]

Paying more isn't a problem for me personally (Although it can be a problem for some for different reasons.)

But there are different ways of viewing DLC, as a rip off, or as an addition for the game

 

There's an easy way to distinguish:

 

- The content was developed after the game as a consequence of good sales: the title sold well, might as well give it an expansion, by which I mean basically a full new game that uses the same graphics engine and continues the story/ adds a LOT of new content if it's a mp only game. This is an addition to the game, the good dlc, the dlc that we used to get in the shareware era and for a few years after that.

 

- The content is ready before game launch, but it's not in the box so they can sell it to you later via a season pass or in small chunks OR they charge you 5 or more $ for minimal content such as a single new map or a skin set. This is a rip off.

[Syntaxvgm]

What I think irks me is the fact that in a lot of cases, at least on console games, it seems that the DLC is included in the game files already and you have to pay for this content that is already using up a ton of space on your hard drive, which for consoles is limited. I know for battlefield on the PS3 this was the case. That's shady, that that's where the "pay  for the toppings" complaint comes from