Slashdot Mirror
When DLC Goes Wrong
kube00 writes "Poorly done downloadable content is one of a gamer's worst nightmares right now. Where a publisher stands to make some money, gamers get screwed. Whether it's the overpriced extra maps/costumes DLC, on-the-disc-at-launch DLC, or DLC that is nothing more than a remake of other content, no game is safe from bad DLC. That includes Modern Warfare 2, Bioshock 2, Uncharted 2 and a host of many other popular games. Is there a chance to fix this system?"
When people realise this, and stop buying DLC.
If I pay for a game, it damn better be a COMPLETE game. But these days, they sell incomplete games now and the missing parts later. DLC is nothing but a scam.
Circumcision is child abuse.
As long as you approach the world with the attitude that it owes you something, there is no chance to fix the system. You will always be disappointed and feel "screwed".
Don't pay for the shit DLC, and Supply and Demand economics will take care of the problem.
I get the feeling someone is on the war path with video games lately. At least regarding the story trend and I'm not saying I disagree... just saying.
In any event, the issue isn't even as specific as DLC. Sure, there are plenty of awful examples and I would very much like to point the finger at Halo. Whole sections of multi-player simply disappear if you do not purchase the down-loadable map packs. This isn't even close to misrepresentation, but more like bandits along the highway. At some point, someone thought it would be a really good idea to cripple your current style of play unless you pay a few dollars. I believe someone's soul is headed toward damnation for that one.
Ignoring fire and brimstone, let's get back to the broader and real issue at hand. Bad game or bad content for purchase are not really the issues either. The fact is if we had more honest reviews floating around this would be a no brainer. The truth is we as gamers have been sold out countless times by these fan fiction writers who like to pretend they are writing a game review. In my personal experience, Red Dead Redemption was pretty much the worst multiplayer experience I have had in a while. It however managed to have a lot of good reviews. A more recent example of abuse of a good name is COD Black Ops. This is a good example of how to take something that wasn't terribly and just twist it into a hellish house of mirrors reflecting on a shadow of it's former self.
Having been in the broadcast world for a good while in the past there are important lessons I did learn there. What I happen to like or dislike may not necessarily be in tune with the populace at large. However, I would like to point out that the current early trend with user reviews seem to favor my opinion http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/call-of-duty-black-ops?rating_login=1.
I believe what has happened with both retail games and addon pay content is something very simple. It appears to be much easier to simply spend oodles on marketing and advertising rather then produce something original. (Well, original is probably a bad term... how about enjoyable). It cannot be argued these triple a titles have a fairly large budget, but in my horrid and unimportant opinion is that publishers have gone the McDonalds route. Seriously, how else would you sale poison the the people of our great nation.
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
Is Valve's DLC. Great additions to Left 4 Dead, Left 4 Dead 2 and Team Fortress 2, without costing the gamer a cent.
I bought Fallout 3 when it first came out. Had a blast, but was occupied at the time and didn't buy the DLC. In the intrim the GOTY edition came out, with all the DLC, for $50. Only problem is, the DLC hasn't dropped in price -- and there is $50 of it. Now I can either buy $50 of DLC, or $50 for the GOTY edition. Either way they want me to spend $100 on the game, and I can't justify that. Something is wrong here!
Now I just wait for the GOTY edition to come out.
Valve have the right idea, they don't charge for DLC as they realise that increased exposure and limited-time discounts on the full game actually make them money. You wouldn't catch Valve doing anything depressingly contrived as offering little virtual trinkets for real cash....
the humanity.
Nor were skins.
The first DLC map was free.
The next two maps were $3.99 for the pair.
The next two maps were in a $9.99 pack with an additional co-op game mode and six skins.
There were two skins packs, each was $6 (IIRC, I didn't buy either of them).
There was also a motion comic pack which came with two skins.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
I can't effectively counter the points you made with regards to what title has done this or that. But I'd like to point out a current example of something similar. It isn't exactly as described. But it is somewhere along that route.
Battlefield: Bad Company 2 was released earlier in the year and practically on Day 1, there was a "map pack" released. If you were to remove the PC platform from the equation, you could say that this is akin to point #1 to 2nd-hand buyers of the game. Those who purchase BC2 as a used product would not be able to get this map pack, along with 5 others (soon to be 6) released. As a result, a player who do want to play on these maps would have to cough up cash in order to get a feel for it. Even worse so is that there is no way to really try it out to see if it is worth the price.
As for point #3, DICE is now notorious for this. Their VIP Map Packs 2 through 6 are largely the same, and contains virtually everything that was already seen in-game and was on the game disc. However, they were largely either locked or needed a few additional files in order to fill in the spaces. The community for BC2 has since then coined the term "Mode Packs" as the maps are the same but only its layout are different. It is akin to remaking other content, when these content should have been either finished or released since Day 1.
I have played the game on the PC end for many months. It is irritating at times that these so-called "new maps" are nothing more than the same thing but just in a different mode. Many of the players in the BC2 community also feel the same as well. We do want new maps but the same maps designed and played differently isn't our definition of "new."
You say that games are products w/ big teams. I've no issue with that. A game being worked on by a large development team will definitely be working hard to make it as good as possible. However, the growing issue at hand is the lack of content being shipped with the game. More and more games are becoming less complete or less fulfilling because they lack the content that long-time gamers have wanted. PC players are becoming more left out because of how games are being designed today due to the overwhelming market of the console platform. And with DLC, the developers and the publishers are using that option to rake in as much cash as possible in order to keep players playing their games.
I personally do not mind DLC as a whole, as long as the game itself is fulfilling, enjoyable, and has plenty of things to do in it. But this is not the case any more. DLC is stifling the modding community and the PC players are getting shafted and ignored. The devs and publishers are too narrow-minded to focus on anything else.
~ Old Warriors Society
It's interesting to see how DLC is detested in computer games. In boardgames, expansions are popular and sell like wildfire, even if they tend to hurt the game experience (the basic game is often sleek and elegant, and expansions add lots of extra crap). But when people love a game, they love to pay to get even more of it. In RPGs it's even worse: a game is considered unsupported if there's not a regular schedule of source books and other stuff prying money out of our wallets. But here, more stuff usually gives the game more viability. The basic rules are nice to get you going, but we want more setting, more adventures, more careers/classes/abilities/spells, etc.
There's no real reason for it. There are lots of excellent games that have a complete and very enjoyable game in a single package, but the big sellers are the ones that keep releasing more and more stuff.
Why wouldn't this work for computer games? A big part of it is of course the way in which the game is released. If the basic game is broken and no fun at all, you'd be crazy to spend money to get more. Releasing an incomplete game and finishing it in DLC is a terrible idea. But releasing a small but fun complete game for a reasonable price, and then selling expansions and more content to those who love it so much they want to get more out of the game, that sounds like a very sensible approach. A company might make the last game you'll ever need, and live from continued support, expansions and new ideas for that game, and of course the new customers that are attracted to such a well-supported game. But yes, it needs to be about honest support, and not merely teasing some extra money out of your customers' wallet.
I think there's also a collector's itch at work with boardgames and RPGs, though. That's probably less the case with computer games, simply because they're not physical products.
With Modern Warfare 2 it gets worse,
you need the DLCs or you won't get matched into a multiplayer game or when you do you get kicked out after a couple levels
The correct reference point for how long a game should be is "Elite" on the BBC Micro by Braben et al.
kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
I just wait a year or so for the Gold/Ultimate/GOTY edition of a game which comes with all addons and DLC built-in for £20 or less. Money saved, disaster averted.
Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
Look at what Rockstar has done with Red Dead. First DLC pack is free and adds totally new capabilities to the game.
Now, one might argue this pack has content that should have came with he game in the first place and all it means is the game was rushed...
Well, that explanation does not hold water with the Red Dead Undead pack, because it really is a totally new storyline and side-plot of the game, where you kill freaking zombies. It is also VERY well done and well worth the $10.
I cannot belieeeeeeeeeeeve how quickly gamers fell for DLC. Or maybe I should say, I can't belieeeeeeeve how quickly I have turned into one of those old codgers saying, "back in my day..." - but a lot of the guys I grew up playing games with are now in the DLC trap, so it's not just a case of newbie gamers not knowing any better.
Remember when you'd get a game, and then there'd be a level editor and maybe some mod tools? And then a few weeks after the game was out and you'd played the shit out of it, the first crappy maps would come out? And maybe a proof-of-concept mod?
Then a month or so later, a mate would tell you about this great new map, and you'd fire it up together and play it. Then someone would tell you about some crazy new mod with a funny name like "Team Fortress" or "Counter-Strike" or "Desert Combat" that was a bit hacky, but still really good fun. Then more people would play, and it would grow, and change, and mature, and turn into a solid product all of its own.
All the new school games just don't follow this model. They're cutting out almost any possibility of this process occurring by closing their development environments and charging $5 for every map under the guise of premium DLC, when they could create an ecosystem of nearly unlimited potential that would not only virtually enslave their player base and lead to more sales, but also lead to these entire amazing new brands for them to cash in on.
Team Fortress started as a free mod and turned into TF2 (with a very long lead time), one of Valve's most successful brands now. Counter-strike is still ludicrously popular. Desert Combat (mod for BF1942) evolved into Battlefield 2. Red Orchestra turned into a successful standalone game.
Sure, not every mod turns into a huge amazing thing, but if you create a remotely decent game with well-thought out multiplayer and throw in decent development tools, you can STILL create premium DLC and sell it to users, but you'll also get vast amounts of free content for your game. And as long as you have a vaguely decent management system for your online CD keys, pretty much each game will be a sale.
GET OFF MY LAWN