Jimquisition Downloadable Discontent

[Ike_009]

You don't have to hate downloadable content to avoid ever buying the stuff. Even heartfelt fans of the concept can be thoroughly turned off, and it's all thanks to the idiots trying to sell it.

Your old pal Jim loves DLC, as an idea, but never buys it these days because of alienating business tactics and companies trying to push their damn luck. Let us discuss the ways in which a publisher can stop even a willing customer from buying its wares.

Downloadable Discontent
Ok this week is about the use of DLC and how the concept has gone from an extension of the original game to a pimp my game attack on your wallet. His big example is Dead Space 3 selling rigs for $5, how do you justify charging for an extra costume, something you always earned for free by playing the game.

So my question is what games are using DLC effectively vs those attacking the concept.

I'll start with one of my fav games which has DLCs pissing me off. Grid 2 has the option to buy extra cars through race packs, nothing wrong there but at the start of each race you choose your car you want to use and there as the first pick, highlighted in blue are all the cars you have yet buy. It’s waving a flag in my face saying "missing" and I hate that.

 

[StaggerLee]

Disclaimer: I haven't watched the video yet.

I am not totally opposed to the idea of DLC, I actually like that I can add things to my games after a first playthrough, provided that it's done in the "right way". By that I mean that I generally like expansions, mission packs and map packs, but I hate microtransactions for in-game items. The Dead Space 3 microtransactions are a good example of this. Here are examples of DLC that I am ok with:

- Expansions that add on to the game substantially e.g. XCOM: Enemy Within, the Civilization 5 expansions, the Blizzard expansions.
- Mission packs like those included in the season pass of Borderlands 2, Bioshock infinite
- Map packs like those in Battlefield and CoD
- Aesthetic-ONLY microtransactions for free-to-play games like Dota 2

Here are examples that I don't like
- Microtransactions that are designed to monetise F2P games like most mobile games, Marvel heroes etc.
- Even worse: Microtransactions designed to monetise paid for games like in Dead Space 3, Diablo 3's auction house, Sim City etc
- Any DLC that is designed prior to a game's release and held back with the express purpose of making it post-release DLC so as to squeeze out a few extra dollars from the consumer (read: on-disc DLC).

 

[Grievous]

I don't have a problem with on disc DLC, as long is it a decent amount of content. We have no idea how much it cost to produce, to draw a line because its on the disc already doesn't make much sense to me. What if they had held back the release of Civ 5 until the expansion was finished? The timing of releases shouldn't define whether the dlc is valid or not, but rather the content.

 

[Ike_009]

I don't mind micro-transactions in free to play games, so long as it isn't in your face

 

[Grievous]

I don't mind micro-transactions in free to play games, so long as it isn't in your face

Yeah, and I find nothing worse than in game you think its a regular store, then try purchase something with in-game currency only to find out the currency you need, requires real money to purchase said currency. I prefer if they just open and clear from the start what requires real money or not.

 

[Ike_009]

Yeah, and I find nothing worse than in game you think its a regular store, then try purchase something with in-game currency only to find out the currency you need, requires real money to purchase said currency. I prefer if they just open and clear from the start what requires real money or not.

I remember one game had the 2 in separate menus so there was never that confusion, but I can't remember which since it was years ago.