What is your general attitude toward downloadable content (DLC)?

[Joker99352]

I know a lot of people don't like the way DLC is used to force players to pay more later on for a game they've already pent quite a bit on. Personally, I don't mind it because I rarely, if ever, buy a game new. I can understand buying a game for full price and then being expected to spend even more money for additional content, but that's usually not the case for me. One example of DLC that I liked was the content from Mass Effect 2. I only played through about 1/3 of the first game, so my expectations for Mass Effect 2 were subsequently low (not because I disliked the first one, but because I was terrible at it and gave up way too easily). I ended up loving it, though, and immediately wanted to play more. I was reluctant to pay full price for DLC, but then all of it went on sale for either 25% or 50% off, and I bought all of it at once. Replaying the game was like playing an entirely different game, especially given the different choices that the player can make.

I suppose my basic outlook is that when I really like a game, I want to play as much more of it as a I can. DLC is the closest I can get to that, but of course it comes at a price. What do you guys think?

 

[Dr23]

My opinion is divided. Some games have created some fantastic DLC content which really enhances the game. Other games pump out content that appears to already be on the disc and is nothing more than an obvious money grab. Obviously, I have no qualms with a company pushing out DLC that adds something new and worthwhile to the game, thus making the price seem just. Then there's the Call of Duty DLC which takes maps that were probably cut from the disc and slaps a $15 price tag on them.

 

[ozadin]

I feel that a DLC is an added option that doesn't hurt anybody. Some can be fantastic, while others may not be so great though. DL. Buying DLC's are not mandatory, so I don't see the point of complaining about it.

 

[purpleguardian]

Yeah I think some DLCs are great and some aren't. Also it's not good for some gamers because some games only get DLCs on some systems and others have to wait a long time, which can be annoying.

 

[Lokitns]

If the content is worth the price, I am more than happy to pay for it. Like the Mass Effect games, it's DLC has always been rich and fulfilling with at least a few more hours of gameplay, which is worth the 10$ pricetag. But some games have DLC that are things that should be in the game from the start, like Metro last lights ranger mode being exclusive DLC, that stuff isn't the way to do DLC at all.

 

[Valentine]

Elder Scrolls: Oblivion > Horse Armour > Enough said.

Honestly there's some great examples of DLC, like when you know developers have really tried their best to bring you extra content, and not make you pay more for content that could have easily been in the game from the get go. What really grinds my gears with DLC is when you know for a fact that the content they were releasing was probably ready from launch date of the original game, but they bring it out as DLC to milk a further $15 dollars from you or whatever. Generally DLC should increase the longevity of gaming and the replay-ability of games; but I think its used in most cases for the wrong reasons.

Extra song packs for Guitar Hero was a great idea, but even then I think they were too expensive. Map packs were a great way of expanding FPS's but it was incredibly frustrating when you bought 'Black Ops' for example then the map pack was already out before you had time to complete the campaign.

 

[Joker99352]

Lair of the Shadow Broker was one of the best piece of DLC, if you ask me. It had a lot going for it: at least a few hours of additional gameplay, the chance to fight alongside a teammate from Mass Effect 1, and some other nice perks like the information terminals in the Shadow Broker's lair. The story was tied to the main Mass Effect 2 storyline, but it didn't feel like it was ripped out intentionally so the company could make money off of it. There's also the possibility to build on the player's relationship with Liara if that's the way they went in the first game, which is interesting.

That's just my opinion, though. I think it's a good example of DLC done the right way.

 

[JasonPL]

On the surface, DLC looks really awesome.

However, what we know now as "DLC" is something that I don't enjoy at all. I feel like you're cutting the game out from me and trying to entice me into buying something that isn't worth the money. It's especially annoying when they give you a taste of the DLC and then cut it off completely. It's a total buzzkill.

 

[Dubs420]

I think DLC is a good idea because it enables you to have more content for the game. The downside of course is all of the extra money it will cost after the game is bought. I think at the end of the day though, it's the gamer's choice what DLC they want so they do have a choice.

 

[Bigbenny]

Most of the DLC that I have encountered is usually of really poor quality and most of the time I regret ever buying it. Plus most of time it never really adds any value to the game. Plus most of the time, they never keep the supply coming, one time it's there, the next time it's nowhere to be found.

 

[BitesizeCrayons]

The concept is alright, but the way it is usually implemented is not. You usually don't get enough content for the price, and many times it is clear that the dev withheld content just to later release it as DLC for extra money, as if paying $60 isn't enough. Sometimes I find that the DLC truly enhances a game, and if there is enough quality content on the retail release, it's warranted.

 

[Joker99352]

I just played through The Citadel on Mass Effect 3, and I have to say that it's probably the single best DLC I've played. It's a bit more expensive at $15, but it's a massive file with a ton of content. It's also clear-cut, meaning that it doesn't look like it was ripped from the core game and made into DLC. It was clearly an after-the-fact effort that was meant as a fan service, and added a lot of story content as well as different mini-games and that sort of thing. I remember one of the reviews saying "this is DLC done right," and I'm definitely inclined to agree.

 

[CrispyEggos]

I guess it could be a good idea, but usually the DLC is not very good. It's just an easy way to make money for the game companies. Halo 4 released DLC very soon after they released the game....if you're going to put out new maps right when the game is released, just put them in the release.

 

[cliverederson]

I think I tend to agree with what seems to be the general consensus here, I like the concept when it's done well and is a good value for your money. I honestly don't think I've experienced too many DLCs, I usually don't stay into a game long enough to bother with them, I played Borderlands 2 and Skyrim in the recent past, but I was bored with them before the DLC even came out. Well, except the Pirate Booty one, I played that a little since it came out so close to the release, but I didn't play any of the other ones. I remember when I was really into Halo 2, it could be frustrating because it would exclude you from certain playlists if you didn't buy the map packs, which I didn't like, but they also became free eventually, which was nice. Most of the newer maps felt like phoned-in Halo 1 map remakes though, but some were great.

 

[LALucien]

For me it really depends what the DLC is.

I mean, if its just new costumes and little bits and bobs like this then I don't think its worth paying for. These should be unlockables in game in my opinion, not money spinners.

However, if the DLC is a good few more missions and an actual extension to the game like we've seen from Rockstar in both GTA IV with, ' The lost and the damned & The Ballad Of Gay Tony' and in Red Dead Redemption with The Undead Nightmare ad-on, then yes. These are worth a few extra pounds to me.

 

[Pickicool]

The DLC is a good thing because they help the game to be sold. It pushes the players to keep the game as long as possible so as not to encourage resale.
But sometimes it is incomplete games that we sell. I do not like this kind of thing. DLC, it is used to add bonus content.

Sometimes lesDLC are jut a few costumes and accessories. It is useless this stuff.
But as long as it is profitable, publishers do not hesitate.

 

[sc_shark]

Ei am ok with dlc I just hate how a 60 dollar games is 100 with the season pass. Games like cod have so little multiplayer they cash cow the dlc.
If you look at it as a hole it's ok but 100bux for a game they pump out yearly and make little to no changes on just is ehhh.... I didn't buy the cod season pass but I also am not buying ghost. It looks like a refresh not a reboot like advertised. I'd pay 50 a year if they kept adding on to the game but not 100 every year because they are milking it

 

[Joker99352]

For me it really depends what the DLC is.

I mean, if its just new costumes and little bits and bobs like this then I don't think its worth paying for. These should be unlockables in game in my opinion, not money spinners.

However, if the DLC is a good few more missions and an actual extension to the game like we've seen from Rockstar in both GTA IV with, ' The lost and the damned & The Ballad Of Gay Tony' and in Red Dead Redemption with The Undead Nightmare ad-on, then yes. These are worth a few extra pounds to me.

Undead Nightmare was excellent. It was a little out there, but it was a heck of a lot of fun and definitely worth my time and money. The only thing that bugs me is that they eventually released the complete edition of the game for a fairly low price, but I guess that's the price you pay for playing the game when it's relatively new. I love the idea of complete editions in general, though.

 

[Esperahol]

I buy GOTY so I generally have no complaints about DLC. My stance is that DLC is like junk food or cigarettes or fantastic lap-dances that end with you snorting cocaine off a truly wondrous behind - you don't have to shell out the cash to make it happen, but it is an option and most people are going to take it. Sure you might regret it, but then again it may well become THE story you persist in telling your friends over and over again.

But like I said I buy GOTYs and Platinum Hits... so my DLC tends to come with the game all in a fairly economic package. That said Shivering Isles makes up for a lot in regards to Oblivion. Dawn Guard was a wonderful addition to Skyrim. And of course Fallout 3 GOTY is completely fantastic - the game breaking Chinese Stealth Suit, new critters, three entirely new land sites to explore, 72 achievements in total, extra perks to discover, etc. I like DLC... especially when I'm not getting ripped off for it.

 

[sillylucy]

I usually don't even care about DLC, but there are a few games that I really love and want that extra content. It feels like the fun doesn't end with just what is provided on the disc. It's the reason why I buy collector's editions.