|
|
Post by ┌༼ຈل͜ຈ༽┘ on Mar 10, 2013 18:31:44 GMT -8
So what are your thoughts on DLC. More specifically, paid DLC. Is it good? Is it evil? Does it represent all that is evil about the video game industry?
I never buy DLC. I cannot justify paying what is usually 1/6th or 1/4th the cost of the whole game for content that isn't even 1/20th of the total gameplay.
|
|
|
|
Post by LittleMissMidnight on Mar 10, 2013 18:35:13 GMT -8
The only DLC i ever got that I paid for was for Final Fantasy 13-2. There was one DLC where you play as Lightning again so i bought that. Oh, and I had to redeem a few things too but I never had to pay for that. xD
|
|
|
|
Post by ┌༼ຈل͜ຈ༽┘ on Mar 10, 2013 18:39:01 GMT -8
Day One paid DLC is especially bad. They're just robbing you in broad daylight.
|
|
|
|
Post by LittleMissMidnight on Mar 10, 2013 18:40:09 GMT -8
Day One paid DLC is especially bad. They're just robbing you in broad daylight. That's why I wait a few months so all the DLC's are released and also I look up reviews if its even worth it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2013 18:47:22 GMT -8
I'm neutral to DLC. DLC has been actually around since Atari, you call the hotline and using a connector to the Atari console, you get an extra amount of data. I forgot how it really goes, but that's the gist.
There are good and bad kinds of DLC.
The bad kind is like EA and Activision where they will charge a crap load just for a small pack of guns, cars, etc that might be worth more than the actual game over all. In Activision's case, they usually will charge USD $15 for map packs that are generally small in Call of Duty and without much in it. For EA, they will charge as much for any their games and then have the gall to add in microtransactions.
Another case is Capcom with their on-disk DLC. They had enough space to fill out the entire roster for Marvel vs. Capcom 3, but they locked at least 5 or so characters. In order to unlock them, you will need to pay an additional fee to unlock them. They had the audacity to say it was for experienced players to play with everybody else, who weren't as experienced.
Usually the bad kind of DLC is where they set it up a day or so after the game launches, when it could have been added in the first place. That means they just left a game unfinished, like 85%, and then want to sell the rest for a price. That, I don't like.
Next is the good kind of DLC, the ones where after the game is done; they will release something to hold you over until the next game. This is the case for Nintendo, since they're starting out, where they just put out new levels for players. In the case of NSMB 2, they decided to help those to fill out their gold coins by adding new levels so players won't get bored playing the same levels over and over. It also helps that they change it up for those who want an easy or hard as Hell level pack.
Ubisoft is where they just do it after the game is done and think they can pull off doing something similar to an "alternate dimension" thing. In Assassin's Creed 3, they have done a "what-if" story that mentions how George Washington got corrupted and became "King George I". It's not something that they should have added in the main story, it's a supplement to keep people playing after beating the game.
LittleBigPlanet 1 and 2 do it where they add new ways of playing the games by introducing $1.99 costumes or $4.99 costume packs that allow you to play new levels and have new items, blocks, etc to work with. Those are usually for creating new levels and whatnot, since LBP 1 and 2 focus on creating new levels and sharing them online.
In simpler terms, good DLC is where they have fully finished a game and decide to support the game with new levels or stories, at an okay price point.
|
|
|
|
Post by ┌༼ຈل͜ຈ༽┘ on Mar 10, 2013 18:52:13 GMT -8
Technically, even non-wifi event Pokemon are DLC since you need to go a Nintendo event or some game store to get the Pokemon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2013 18:54:51 GMT -8
Essentially.
|
|
|
|
Post by LittleMissMidnight on Mar 10, 2013 18:57:48 GMT -8
Technically, even non-wifi event Pokemon are DLC since you need to go a Nintendo event or some game store to get the Pokemon. Well Pokemon can afford to give out free DLC but the downside is half of them at gamestores and not all have the event. Like at my place, I have the stores that do it but they can't because the events are only in the major towns and cities only. Well What about Sqaure Enix? Their DLC's are not that bad. I got a whole new story and two minigames for only $6 and two huge add on stories for the price of $10 each. To me, it is worth it because they are all very well done and can add a few more hours of gameplay. But wow at EA. That is very mean of them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2013 19:13:59 GMT -8
Technically, even non-wifi event Pokemon are DLC since you need to go a Nintendo event or some game store to get the Pokemon. Well Pokemon can afford to give out free DLC but the downside is half of them at gamestores and not all have the event. Like at my place, I have the stores that do it but they can't because the events are only in the major towns and cities only. Well What about Sqaure Enix? Their DLC's are not that bad. I got a whole new story and two minigames for only $6 and two huge add on stories for the price of $10 each. To me, it is worth it because they are all very well done and can add a few more hours of gameplay. But wow at EA. That is very mean of them. Square Enix has a hit and miss when it comes to it, in my personal opinion. Though, I do believe they are good with it as a supplement. However, some of their DLC should have been in the game. EA is one of the worst offenders in this category; they've been doing it for a while and they're going to continue doing it. |
|
|
|
Post by LittleMissMidnight on Mar 10, 2013 19:22:33 GMT -8
Well Pokemon can afford to give out free DLC but the downside is half of them at gamestores and not all have the event. Like at my place, I have the stores that do it but they can't because the events are only in the major towns and cities only. Well What about Sqaure Enix? Their DLC's are not that bad. I got a whole new story and two minigames for only $6 and two huge add on stories for the price of $10 each. To me, it is worth it because they are all very well done and can add a few more hours of gameplay. But wow at EA. That is very mean of them. Square Enix has a hit and miss when it comes to it, in my personal opinion. Though, I do believe they are good with it as a supplement. However, some of their DLC should have been in the game. EA is one of the worst offenders in this category; they've been doing it for a while and they're going to continue doing it. Well I think 13-2 was their first game that really offered any DLC. Their first game did not have this and most likely LR (Lightning Returns. The third game in the 13 main series) will have it but much later on the track. their fans didn't like the DLC because, like you said, some of them could of easily been in the game. Well as long they have the money to do so we can't do anything. |
|
