Are DLC releases getting worse??

reddjoey

reddjoey

CAGiversary!
Feedback
4 (100%)
I know it's a touchy subject, but the DLC situation is getting worse.

Lost Planet 2 (out 5/11/10) DLC just went on the market place for 400 points. Fortunately it's not an unlock key, but the DLC is now beating the games out. Do we care to discuss/beat this dead horse again?


EDIT: As others have noted, this content is available as apre-order bonus from Gamestop
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fuck. That. Shit.

Looks like I'll be holding out for the PC version this fall. Shame, was looking forward to getting this game ASAP.
 
Well of course it's going to get worse. I mean people are stupid enough to actually buy clothes for avatars. So why wouldn't publishers take full advantage of a market populated by lemmings?
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Capcom selling shady DLC at or around a game's launch? I am very shocked at this news.[/QUOTE]


Sarcasm noted? I haven't followed dlc releases too closely. At best i know they charge too much for SFIV costumes :cry:
 
So long as we purchase and demand it, it will be abused by companies wanting to make an easy buck.

Best way to counter it is to cut off demand by not purchasing it (or atleast waiting until it's severely discounted).
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Capcom selling shady DLC at or around a game's launch? I am very shocked at this news.[/QUOTE]

Ha I agree, they have done this with pretty much every recent game they have put out. I have a couple friends who are just slaves to street fighter, i like the game as well, but i refuse to be abused. they feel as though they have no choice. and ssfiv also was fairly discounted to begin with, so maybe all these suckers are helping us with cheaper games. whatever. People have to stop buying it, but it's up to the individual really, vote with your wallet.

i also like bfbc2, but this vip crap is lame, it should be a rule, if it's on the disc you get it. the crap of unlocking what's already on the disc is lame. selling stuff on the xb marketplace or psn the day the game comes out is crappy, but at least make sure it's an add on not an unlock.
 
I do think a lot of DLC is getting overpriced, but I don't necessarily get mad at DLC that comes out around or even before release. As one developer stated, they have to send a final version of the game to be printed, packaged, shipped, etc...and during the time that happens, they work on new content that can be released with the game. Sure, it could come with the disk, but we'd wait a few more weeks to get the game. I'd much rather throw $5 extra at DLC (if it is actually worth it) and get the game a few weeks earlier myself. Charging for costume changes/new colors is kind of shady though..which is why I don't purchase those kinds of DLC.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Capcom selling shady DLC at or around a game's launch? I am very shocked at this news.[/QUOTE]

I know. I was just thinking they were starting to come around with the small amounts of fan-service (SSFIV being $40 opposed to $60, MM10 being decent and lame-mode being free) but I guess it's back to same 'ol same 'ol. Being that the game's not out we can't tell, but it would suck if you have to drop another $5 just to play the multiplayer. Maybe it's a pack in DLC..... Still sad and shady.

EDIT: Are we sure it's the Gamestop preorder? If it is, it sucks that everyone else has to pony up for not buyinhttp://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=7161022g it at GS to play online.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='BackInBlack']Sarcasm noted? I haven't followed dlc releases too closely. At best i know they charge too much for SFIV costumes :cry:[/QUOTE]
They did the same thing last week for Super Street Fighter IV's release with new costumes. Then there's the whole RE5 online mode controversy and the SFIV costumes, but that's just what they've done in the past year or so.

At least some companies are using unlock codes as post launch DLC to potentially extend the life of the game (Namco with the last DBZ and Naruto games and Koei's Dynasty Warriors: Strikeforce), but those aren't exactly the huge games that would set any kind of standard for this type of content.
 
Personally I think it's OK to charge people for the costumes in SSIV if it means the game sells for $20 less then other games. I wouldn't need the costumes, so I'd save $20. Well, if I had any interest in buying SSIV.

EDIT: you could even look at that as charging people less who just want the game, and then for fans, who want to give the maker of the game a little more for a great product, they get costumes in return. I mean, think of it like the paid Trials HD premium theme. Who the hell thinks its worth paying $3 for a theme? It's just a handful of background pictures. I suspect nobody. Everybody I read the words of who said they bought it, said they bought it because they loved Trials HD so much that they just wanted to give the developers a little more money, and in return they get a theme.
 
DLCs, when done right can greatly enhance a game and any gamers' experience.

my take:

  • Fallout 3, 5 expansions, done right.
    DeadRising, various costumes, done right.
    GTA IV, 2 episodes, done right.
    Resident Evil 5, additional chapters, done right.
    Burnout Paradise, Big Surf Island, done right.
    Gears of War 2, All Fronts map pack, done right.

    Assassin's Creed 2, 2 delayed missing sequences, bad taste.
    SoulCalibur 4, system exclusive characters, marketing gimmick.
    Street Fighter 4 and Super Street Fighter 4, alternate costumes, pure greed.
    Call of Duty: World at War, multiplayer maps, greedy bastards.
    Ace Combat 6, additional planes, are you friggin' kidding me?!
    Resident Evil 5, removed online feature, what is this BS!!!
    Dead Space, additional suits and weapon skins, way to nickel and dime your customers eh?

it's subjective for each person of course, but most would probably agree along these general lines.

removing original or intended content to sell back to the consumer is a NO NO. system or retailer specific exclusives are also frowned upon. small bonuses are just that; bonuses for customers who have already bought a copy. so simple or minor freebies would be nice.

Anyone wanna bet Capcom's going to release an alternate costume pack for Super Street Fighter 4 'Turbo - Hyper Fighting?'
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The only kind of DLC that really, truly irritates me is the DLC that is required if I want to play certain online modes (Map Packs, etc) that I would be able to play if the DLC otherwise never existed. In that case, the value of my game at purchase is lessened, and requires the DLC to gain back. It can (and eventually will) use DLC as a form of subscription services.

Lots of people tend to bring up unlock codes. For single-player content, oh yeah, they suck definitely. For multi-player content, they act as a necessary evil. Otherwise, the content I paid for would only be usable by others who purchase the content, and thus the userbase is split. Even when it's on the disc, I don't mind as much, as if the content was ready at launch, it's better than needing to download a patch day one.
 
Mos, for the most part, Borderlands had great DLC. Island and Secret Armory added alot onto the game. Mad Moxxi sounded like a huge 10 dollar ripoff


Resident Evil 5 had that cheap unlock key $5 dlc when the game was first released.
 
The geniuses at Capcom are also bringing us the $10 Dead Rising 2 Demo... er... I mean, prequel.

This concept is a splippery slope.
 
yeah thats a little weird. ive only bought like 4 DLC "packs" im really picky about what i buy for DLC, but capcom needs to chill
 
[quote name='mogamer']Well of course it's going to get worse. I mean people are stupid enough to actually buy clothes for avatars. So why wouldn't publishers take full advantage of a market populated by lemmings?[/QUOTE]
This!
 
I agree, I hate the DLC shenanigans that publishers are pulling these days.

However, the other option is for publishers to make additional money by increasing the cost of games altogether. I guess I'd rather have DLC that I can choose to skip when the alternative is paying more for games.
 
My annoyance with the situation is largely mitigated by the presence of many, many "GOTY" releases for games. I played a bit of Dragon Age Origins and had some fun. Happily, in (probably) less than a year, I'll be able to buy a deluxe version for ~50 that will include all the bonus stuff that would have been nickel and dimed out of me had I tried to keep up with the releases. It will presumably be the same with Mass Effect 2.

In short, the era of DLC has simply resulted in me buying games later. It might be a disadvantage when it comes to FPS' but it works pretty well for anything that is primarily or solely single player.
 
I've never really had an issue with this DLC nonsense. Either you wanna buy it, or you don't. If you don't want to buy it, why do you care if they release it? Or when they release? To me, as long as the main game you are buying is a quality title that has the length and features of similar games in the genre, it doesn't really matter what they do beyond that.
 
All this talk about DLC debacles and no one mentions Bioshock 2? The $5 on disc unlock code that was put on the disc so as not to "split the playerbase." I actually found the Collector's Edition for a mere $35 but after reading about that bullshit I didn't want to give them one dime of my money so I returned it.

Its that kind of shit and Capcom's "we're gonna charge for costumes" bullshit that really has me turning toward a negative attitude when it comes to DLC.
 
DLC is still a hot trend, it's hot right now and some ppl are doing it right...while a lot of ppl are just doing it wrong. Since there wasn't any real DLC market for the console prior they're going to try and milk it while they can. Granted a lot of the quality is affected by it, but we're all trying to make/save a buck some just have a poor reputation for doing so.

If you don't feel justified spending on a particular DLC, don't do it...but if you'll enjoy beating the pants off someone while wearing a cowboy hat is worth it to you? then by all means, it's your money after all.

As for capcom? Boo on capcom...my main beef with them is, I didn't really need to hang onto my physical copy of SFIV only the save file. I could have saved an extra $12 bucks with the TIV at the time. Oh well, more's the pity. I only feel bad for the mom's who spent all that dancing money on the collector's edition for their kid's birthday last year.
 
[quote name='Corvin']The geniuses at Capcom are also bringing us the $10 Dead Rising 2 Demo... er... I mean, prequel.

This concept is a splippery slope.[/QUOTE]

The right thing for Capcom to do would be to give out 'Case Zero' for free to owners/players of Dead Rising 1; using an established criteria, perhaps a minimum gamerscore (or a specific achievement) on the first game or something similar to that effect.

Microsoft's gamerscore really has no other effect, except comparing cock sizes. Ubisoft's attempt with Uplay on Assassin's Creed 2 made a lot more sense. I thought the initial implementation of gamerscore would be along Uplay's current concept. You'd think obtaining a predetermined gamerscore or a particular milestone on the game you are playing would net you some neat/cool/useful rewards..., but nope, it's a stretch huh?

Here's 2 more pennies to add:

Progress in the core game: unlocks more characters, weapons, modes, and galleries (cool features or easter eggs.) [offline mode]
Progress of gamerscore: unlocks bonus free DLC content, themes, avatar items. Spend it on future expansion packs. [online mode]

Remember developers and publishers: your customers have already decided to purchase your software and even perhaps the sequel. let's go for long-term win-win situations.

imagine...how cool it would have been if your combined gamerscore from Gears of War 1 & 2 allowed you to download the All Fronts Collection for FREE? what if every 200 or 250 points of your hard earned Fallout 3 score gave you a FREE download expansion chapter?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Capcom is by far the worst DLC offender.

I love me some SFIV/SSFIV, but theres no way in hell I'm paying to unlock costumes on my disc.

I just wait on Singleplayer games now. All these games will be $20 within a year. I try to only buy multiplayer games on day one.
 
In my opinion DLC doesnt always extend the life of the game for everyone. Example: I bought all the Kz2 dlc and bought all the warhawk dlc. Well there are like 2 warhawk servers when i refresh the list.And most people i talk to never bought the dlc.

And KZ2 i bought all of it and have still never played a new map because none of the newbie servers have it running :(. Because I haven't played enough to rank up.

Maps should be free to everyone to keep everyone playing
expansions or bonus stuff should cost (dont care when its released)
 
[quote name='Puffa469']Capcom is by far the worst DLC offender. [/QUOTE]

...I'd add Activision and EA, too.

I'm viewing Lost Planet 2 more as a Gears of War 2.5, so if Marcus and Dom aren't 'on disc,' and are later revealed to be more DLC BS, they'll just have even more pissed off fans.
 
[quote name='dork']
Maps should be free to everyone to keep everyone playing
[/QUOTE]

you mean like growing the installed base, instead of an admission pass? yeah, those were the good'ol days.

unfortunately, corporate greed and creative marketing set in. these bastards want to set up the entertainment software model in the same format as ERP B2B licensing, with annual updates and modular partitioning.

would you prefer?

1) $50 now, and nothing more.
2) $50 now, plus $10 and $5 more after the sale.
3) $50 now, $40 again next year.
4) $50 now, plus $20 for each year and on.
5) $50 now, plus $10 and $5 more after the sale, plus $40 again next year, and $20 each year annually. ++ $$$ ++

or

6) give them the middle finger, and take your $50 elsewhere. :whee:

yeah, it's like that. be thankful we have CAGs, and freedom of speech and choice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Mospeada_21']...I'd add Activision and EA, too.[/QUOTE]

I'm wondering if there are any publishers with good DLC track records? Take-Two/2K had the ridiculous Bioshock 2 disc unlock. Ubisoft had Assassin's Creed 2's overpriced DLC (which was apparently removed from the game) with no achievements.

Including Activision and EA, those are pretty much the biggest four publishers for Xbox 360. It seems like DLC is viewed as a cash cow by the publishers, and, generally, a waste of money by CAGs.
 
Free DLC is nice and all, but the developers need to make money off of it somehow (not to mention, to pay for server hosing). Unless the DLC comes out in the first two-three weeks of a game's release, it's pretty easy to get a used copy, and then efforts to "grow the installed base" still doesn't actually make them money (if it does come out within the first few weeks, then people will complain about why it wasn't on the disc or something).

Maybe I'm thinking about it in a far more abstract sense than other people, but as long as the presence of new DLC does not hurt or hinder the stuff I currently have, I see no problem with it. Just as with any other purchase, I just see it as a matter of "is X worth Y dollars?" No ones forcing me to get it. As long as the DLC wasn't something advertised as a feature, what's the issue?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Mospeada_21']The right thing for Capcom to do would be to give out 'Case Zero' for free to owners/players of Dead Rising 1; using an established criteria, perhaps a minimum gamerscore (or a specific achievement) on the first game or something similar to that effect.
[/QUOTE]

That's a pretty solid idea from a gamers perspective, something that would likely have to be worked out under the hood of a future Live update. Unfortunately those that finished the first game will likely already be buying part 2, and probably Case Zero. There is no incentive for a company to take this route.

[quote name='dork']
Maps should be free to everyone to keep everyone playing[/QUOTE]

Maybe not free, but certainly not fifteen fucking dollars(MW2). $10 for 3 maps(Halo) is also pretty absurd.
 
[quote name='Salamando3000']0Maybe I'm thinking about it in a far more abstract sense than other people, but as long as the presence of new DLC does not hurt or hinder the stuff I currently have, I see now problem with it. Just as with any other purchase, I just see it as a matter of "is X worth Y dollars?" No ones forcing me to get it. As long as the DLC wasn't something advertised as a feature, what's the issue?[/QUOTE]

Exactly, exactly, exactly. Company wants to sell costumes or skins for absurd amounts? Let 'em. Doesn't bother me in the least bit. It doesn't take anything at all way from the game I bought.
 
I have tons of MS points that i got dirt cheap, but I am still VERY picky on what kind of DLC I buy.

I LOVE bioshock and just about everything involving it, but I refused to buy the unlock key for multiplayer content. They say they didn't want to split the playerbase, but the Metro Pack that is coming out soon WILL split the player base.

There is also the way games handle DLC. Halo 3 handled it miserably, as they removed nearly all the DLC restrictions on the playlists, so all that DLC I paid for day one I never get to play anymore since other people didn't buy it.

DLC on xbox1 was so much more reasonable. Most of the content was free as you were paying for it with your live subscription. In cases where they did charge (like Halo2) the content came out but was scheduled to be free after several months. Thats the best model for DLC IMHO. Charge for the content for about 3 months, and then make it free after that. Hell PDZ still has a map pack at 800MSP and it was a launch title.

Bottom line, most things I wait for DotW on unless its just something I can not live with out. You will probably never see me buying avatar clothing, costumes for in game characters, or unlock keys. Too bad the other 90% of the xbox fanbase doesn't feel this way.

/endrant
 
[quote name='Nico0020']Halo 3 handled it miserably, as they removed nearly all the DLC restrictions on the playlists, so all that DLC I paid for day one I never get to play anymore since other people didn't buy it.
[/QUOTE]

Huh? The first Halo 3 map pack was free after some months, so everyone had it at that point, and it was required for all playlists from then forward.

More recently, since the release of ODST, pretty much everyone has all of the maps, and there are plenty of playlists that require you to have all of the maps.

I think the Halo franchise has done a good job with DLC. It's often priced reasonably, becomes free after a while, or is bundled with a later retail disc (Halo 2 Multiplayer Map Pack & ODST). And the fact that they always have playlists available to those who have or have not purchased the DLC is great (unlike Call of Duty: World at War, which would bump you from a game if you didn't own the map pack).

Bungie is one developer that doesn't completely abuse DLC.
 
[quote name='freshzen']I wonder if this is the map pack that comes as a free bonus for pre-orders through Game Stop.

edit: Yes it is.[/QUOTE]

DLC releases aren't getting worse, bonuses for pre-ordering or buying new are becoming a bigger deal to try and combat used game sales and/or piracy. Gears of War 2 Classic Map Pack, Quantum of Solace Multiplayer Maps, Shale DLC for Dragon Age, Zaeed DLC for Mass Effect 2, VIP code for DLC content Battlefield Bad Company 2, etc. These are just ways of the developer/publisher trying to provide an incentive for pre-ordering or buying the game new and then recouping costs in case the person buys it used later.

It isn't the most customer friendly thing to do, but it's better idea than some of the DRM practices that go on for PC games.
 
[quote name='Corvin']The geniuses at Capcom are also bringing us the $10 Dead Rising 2 Demo... er... I mean, prequel.

This concept is a splippery slope.[/QUOTE]

Case Zero will be a day one purchase for me. I'm so weak. :cry:
 
[quote name='BingoBrown']Huh? The first Halo 3 map pack was free after some months, so everyone had it at that point, and it was required for all playlists from then forward.

More recently, since the release of ODST, pretty much everyone has all of the maps, and there are plenty of playlists that require you to have all of the maps.

I think the Halo franchise has done a good job with DLC. It's often priced reasonably, becomes free after a while, or is bundled with a later retail disc (Halo 2 Multiplayer Map Pack & ODST). And the fact that they always have playlists available to those who have or have not purchased the DLC is great (unlike Call of Duty: World at War, which would bump you from a game if you didn't own the map pack).

Bungie is one developer that doesn't completely abuse DLC.[/QUOTE]

social slayers is blogged by last resort and valhalla

also if you have mythic map pack 1 but not 2. you cant play the mythic playlist AT ALL so i payed 10 dollars for maps i physically can not use EVER in matchmaking unless i get odst or mythic 2
 
[quote name='Kevlar281']Case Zero will be a day one purchase for me. I'm so weak. :cry:[/QUOTE]

:lol: I'll be waiting on feedback for that one. I have this gut feeling that it will be about as big as a demo with about 90 minutes of playtime. Far too short for the $10 pricetag. And this is coming from a huge DR fan who has already pre-ordered the 2nd game.
 
[quote name='whiptcracker']DLC releases aren't getting worse, bonuses for pre-ordering or buying new are becoming a bigger deal to try and combat used game sales and/or piracy. Gears of War 2 Classic Map Pack, Quantum of Solace Multiplayer Maps, Shale DLC for Dragon Age, Zaeed DLC for Mass Effect 2, VIP code for DLC content Battlefield Bad Company 2, etc. These are just ways of the developer/publisher trying to provide an incentive for pre-ordering or buying the game new and then recouping costs in case the person buys it used later.

It isn't the most customer friendly thing to do, but it's better idea than some of the DRM practices that go on for PC games.[/QUOTE]

Can't it be both?

I'm fine with "Project Buy Our Game New" since almost every game I have an interest deep enough to concern myself with DLC I'll buy it new.

This particular DLC is just rubbing me wrong. They have "split the playerbase" and for no reason. Since it's not out we can say how it changes multiplayer, but now you have 1) people who preordered it from GS and those willing to shell out $5 2) people who bought it elsewhere and didn't get the DLC. I just think that the 30 day exclusivity is a better idea or something else that doesn't hinder the multiplayer.

I'm sure we all agree unlocks suck. Sometimes I can justify bad DLC (Madd Moxxie) just to support a developer or IP, but don't piss on my leg and say that it's raining. You wanted to milk the fanbase so just say it. I'd probably be more inclined to buy crap if it was pitched: "Buy the Costume unlocks to support us bringing new/better content x for game y".

As far as price points go, I agree whoever thinks 1200 should be the norm should be shot. After 800 points you aren't talking about throw around money anymore.
 
They split the playerbase between those willing to preorder, those willing to spend and extra $5 and everyone else. Depending on how they handle the playlist settings it will likely not effect most people, no moreso than the classic map pack did from GoW2, or the people who have the VIP codes from Bad Company 2 to those that don't. The argument that it splits the fanbase could apply to any DLC multiplayer content.

As far as price goes, if whoever is willing to pay for it finds it worth it, I'm not going to judge. I'm too cheap to do so, but I'm sure that there are people who spent 1200 points have played more of the new MW2 maps than I have played the $10 game I bought because I saw a deal on CAG.
 
Criterion was good at least about Burnout Paradise. Supported a bunch of free DLC for around a year and then charged a reasonable fee for a whole other island. They did enough to show the customers they weren't just saying "Hey f... you!" and then gave a solid piece of game people could buy, without crippling those who didnt.

[quote name='BingoBrown']I'm wondering if there are any publishers with good DLC track records? Take-Two/2K had the ridiculous Bioshock 2 disc unlock. Ubisoft had Assassin's Creed 2's overpriced DLC (which was apparently removed from the game) with no achievements.

Including Activision and EA, those are pretty much the biggest four publishers for Xbox 360. It seems like DLC is viewed as a cash cow by the publishers, and, generally, a waste of money by CAGs.[/QUOTE]
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']I've never really had an issue with this DLC nonsense. Either you wanna buy it, or you don't. If you don't want to buy it, why do you care if they release it? Or when they release? To me, as long as the main game you are buying is a quality title that has the length and features of similar games in the genre, it doesn't really matter what they do beyond that.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='mogamer']Well of course it's going to get worse. I mean people are stupid enough to actually buy clothes for avatars. So why wouldn't publishers take full advantage of a market populated by lemmings?[/QUOTE]

Mogamer hit it on the head with his last sentence....

BigDaddyBruce, sorry man, you really need a better understanding of how economics and marketing work to understand how DLC pricing/quality/release timing/etc currently affect our favorite hobby.

To get you started, consider this, you said: "as long as the main game you are buying is a quality title that has the length and features of similar games in the genre, it doesn't really matter what they do beyond that".

What about innovation? So, while games are becoming more and more complex, so are the tools to help developers. So now there are entire kits/API's to help get games off of the ground, to help cut development costs.... Shouldn't that mean that we should EXPECT some innovation or at least more features each time we SUPPORT their game ? and yes, I mean expect that innovation right out of the box (considering this generation already picked up a $10 MSRP increase !).

But then again, it's not like these honorable companies to charge us for something stupid like horse armor or features already pressed onto the disc......right ?

Now, when DLC is done properly, it is a wonderfull thing to help add on some life to the games we love, but right now this 'DLC industry' is so young and the sheeple are so unaware of it and the pitfalls. Look at everyone who bought a map pack for Lost Planet v1.0 - once the Colonies Edition came out, it completely splintered the MP community. How could I have forseen back then that could have happened ? Now, the colonies edition wasn't that expensive ($20 I think or maybe $30) and it did have all the DLC, but now once I buy it there, I now own 2 copies of the DLC, but I can't even resell either one - so now that lessens the value even more so (think about that when gaming goes all downloadable - your consoles won't be worth crap, but those gaming profiles....$1000's). Again, this is a young industry and either these things were not considered or we are being bamboozelled. Take a guess which....correct answer is Both. So, now, do I want to buy Lost Planet 2. Hell yeah !, but.... now I am thinking NO on day one since what happened last time. LP2 has 'DLC whore' written all over it and since it is a Capcom game, well, even a bookie in Vegas wouldn't take those odds. So, now gamers suffer since I end being being a 'smart' shopper and waiting for a sale or something, to help make up for the DLC raping I know I will get or just wait it out til the GOTY edition shows up. The gamer suffers since I end up not enjoying the MP community on day one (and lets be real, on most games those communities thin out fast) and retailers don't get my monies on day one either and that means less copies of the game are ordered so now the retailer takes a hit. The developor just goes on issuing more DLC - now making more off either content that normally would have been included just a few years ago or for content that costs pennies to make, yet sells at 1000%+ markups. Again, this is not directed at those companies doing it right....

*coming down from soap box*
 
you are all bitching about capcom, but at least they didn't pull what EA did with some of their newest games
Godfather 2 had paid dlc that was already on the disc,
ps360 version of Tiger Woods PGA 11 had 60$ dlc that was cut out of the game(50$ wii version had all that dlc already on the disc unlocked and more),

everyone is doing it.
personally i think that Bad Company 2's unlocking content was good idea - it keeps experience fresh.

i don't mind dlc. i only buy titles that are worth my money(without any dlc etc) and i buy dlc to my favourite games when i know that they will keep me busy for hours so i never had "they are ripping me off" issue. so far the only dlc i bought was singleplayer campaign for Fear 2, every DLC pack for Race Pro and every DLC pack with Hardcore Mode(now i'm replaying this game with a wheel) for Test Drive Unlimited. i don't feel shafted at all.
 
[quote name='BingoBrown']Huh? The first Halo 3 map pack was free after some months, so everyone had it at that point, and it was required for all playlists from then forward.

More recently, since the release of ODST, pretty much everyone has all of the maps, and there are plenty of playlists that require you to have all of the maps.

I think the Halo franchise has done a good job with DLC. It's often priced reasonably, becomes free after a while, or is bundled with a later retail disc (Halo 2 Multiplayer Map Pack & ODST). And the fact that they always have playlists available to those who have or have not purchased the DLC is great (unlike Call of Duty: World at War, which would bump you from a game if you didn't own the map pack).

Bungie is one developer that doesn't completely abuse DLC.[/QUOTE]

Not long after ODST and Mytic 2 shipped they removed DLC restrictions off nearly all the playlists. Only ones that require DLC are the weekend playlists, and a few of the random ones like action sack and team snipers. Even worse, the "team mythic" playlist, the one dedicated to mythic maps, they removed Longshore from it entirely. I go into Big Team Battle with 4 of my friends who have all the maps also, yet we are plagued with playing the same maps that are on the disk already.
 
Sidetrack but it's bullshit to have achievements tied to certain maps and then pull those maps from the rotation.
 
[quote name='Corvin']Sidetrack but it's bullshit to have achievements tied to certain maps and then pull those maps from the rotation.[/QUOTE]


That's to get you to play when they add the map back in.
 
I get that, but to pay $10 for maps and then pull them from playlists at all is kinda bullshit as well. Every map should be in the hopper for matches once they are available, not just certain ones at Bungie's discretion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top