Quote:
Originally Posted by mankycaaant
I don't tend to buy DLC either, as I see it as a bit of a mugs game, but I know there are many, many people who are suckered into parting with their cash by greedy developers.
|
This is a common misconception. First off it's the publishers that are greedy. To blame the developers is like blaming a musician for a decision their record label made. Depending on what's offered pay to play DLC can and is very much a viable and worthwhile content delivery method that can provide substantial life to an already existing game.
It's not like retail expansion packs weren't becoming a defacto standard in the late 90s / early 2000s for any pc game that achieved a substantial level of success. Shifting the distribution to the net for quicker releases at lower price points than retail expansions just makes sense. Unfortunately there were some companies who were moronic with some of their DLC... like the first DLC released for Oblivion which added useless armor for their horses. WORTHLESS.
On the other hand the Rockband franchise is pretty much the picture perfect example of what DLC can be about. The core game is pretty simple, with a full disc of content, but then for anywhere between $0.99 and $1.99 you can get a full song and charts for all the instruments. Every week there are new releases from both the parent company and from fans through the Rockband Network. You damn well better believe I was happy to pay $5.99 for the Rush 2112 pack that came out 3 weeks ago.
Also, if either of you were actually paying attention to the position of the industry rather than your position as a consumer you'd note that the industry is actually very much moving toward free to play models with extra content being sold to whoever wants it. They finally realized you'll get way more than 10 people willing to pay $5 for various chunks of content than it is to convince 1 person to pay $50 for all the content.