When DLC Goes Wrong
Written by Erik Kubik Wednesday, 10 November 2010 05:00
For gamers, downloadable content usually means more content for their favorite games. For the publishers, DLC means more money in their pockets. But what about when the publisher gets greedy and starts taking advantage of the gamer just for a few extra costumes or weapons? Welcome to a gamers’ worst nightmare: DLC gone wrong!
Here is the perfect example of bad DLC. This type of DLC can irritate the most steadfast gamer, it is known as “on-the-disc-dlc.” Gamers are most likely to see this within a few days, or a week of a new game's release. The publisher announces they have DLC ready for their AAA title and they want $5 or more for it. Someway, somehow gamers discover this DLC was left out of the final cut of the game, but it was included on the disc for whatever reason. The most logical reason is so the publisher can make some fast money after the initial sales. Two games I can think of that are guilty of this crime against their fans with this on-the-disc garbage DLC would be Resident Evil 5 and Bioshock 2; both games included ready-to-go overpriced DLC on their game discs. This DLC should have been free.
Here is a second example of failing to use DLC properly. The game developer releases poorly-put-together-but-not-on-the-disc DLC a few weeks after the game is out in an effort to beef up the game’s content. As much as I love Uncharted 2, this game is at fault. What did gamers receive? A few extra maps and skins for $9.99 a piece? Come on Naughty Dog give your fans some love, this stuff should have been free or bundled cheaply. Battlefield Bad Company 2 is another good example. EA cranked out “new” DLC that turned out to be remakes of other game modes.
What about overpriced DLC? Gamers everywhere despise this. Most of us are on a budget and in this economy we can’t afford everything. Overpricing DLC goes to show the companies don't care about their fans and are there only to make money. Call of Duty World at War and Modern Warfare 2 are prime examples. Don’t get me wrong, they are great games, but Activision was asking $10 to $15 apiece for each DLC pack--which only included 4 to 5 new maps apiece. Isn’t that a bit much? Activision has already sold millions of copies of the game and now they want even more money. Why not show some gratitude and keep the prices between $5 to $10; ensuring gamers’ wallets don’t dry up or risk that they move onto something else.
There is still hope in the gaming world. Here is an example of DLC done right. Take a look at Alan Wake for Xbox 360. The first DLC was free if you bought the game new and it was very cheap if you bought the game used. This DLC was also released in a timely manner for a reasonable price. In the end, whether gamers bought the game new or used, everyone won.
Rockband is another game doing DLC right. The game keeps fans pumped up with the weekly releases of new songs. This is the kind of content that works to a game’s advantage, ensuring its longevity. Fallout 3 is another good example. Bethesda cranked out 5 DLC packs over 2 years giving gamers at least another 30 to 40 hours of game play for a very reasonable price.
Companies, if you are going to release DLC, think for a minute about your target audience. Do you want to keep your loyal fans? Or would you prefer to push them away by making greedy, poorly thought-out decisions?
Amazon Video Game Deal of the Day
Comments
They get their DLC ideas from the Korean Free-To-Play-But-Pay-To-Have-Fun AKA "Feemium" MMORPG's where the cash shops sell parts of the game content, time-limited (yes RENTING,) or customizations that aren't available to people who don't want to pay to play the game. What's infuriating is that the Subscription MMO's have taken up this willingness to rob the player to have fun, and now it's seeing feature creep into single player games.
The simplest, most fair use of DLC is to "expand or extend the existing game" not "cripple game and pay to unlock" which is what the original post is about.
1$ = 1hr of play.
Ofcourse, it will take a while before they stop blaming piracy for their drop in sales.
Everyone likes to say that but that's not the case. That may work for overpriced DLC. But in the case of on the disc DLC or DLC released shortly after the game, it makes no difference to the company. The "DLC" was made during development. The company didnt spend any extra money on it. So the only person who stand to lose is the consumer.
Think about it this way. I have a machine that makes jeans which cost me $10 a pair. I sell them for $30.
Then one day i tear off the beack pockets and tell you you can have them for only $5 more. Whether you buy them or not i'm not out any additional cost.
When these guys are instead put to work on DLC before the game is complete, it means that the company retains a stronger workforce and the extra hands keep their jobs. If the DLC is finished before shipping, would you rather download 500MB of content or 50kb of unlock codes? The hatred for this type of DLC is only going to make studios wait to release the (already complete) DLC just to make you happy.
People outside of the games industry don't understand how hard it is to keep everyone in the studio busy during game development. If DLC-on-disk protects jobs, then I'm all for it.
It is easy to decry that sequences were cut from the master and such things are not ideal but the real fact is that if those sequences would have been included on the master the game would never have been released in time. Believe me. Those sequences were cut a few months before shipping in a very preliminary state and artists resumed work on it only after the ship date.
As for the sequence taking 10 minutes to complete I don't know where was your chronometer but you probably started it 10 minutes before the end of the sequence. While not a very long DLC it wasn't 10 minutes.
Even Team Fortress 2 has regular updates, with new items or maps that technically are free DLCs which are applied automatically. Batman Arkum Asylum is another example of the developer/publisher giving free DLCs. Of course i refer to the pc versions, as if you own the games on Xbox or PS3, the DLCs may not be free - another reason to go with the pc version.
Can't totally confirm this, but supposedly I've heard similar reports about Microsoft's DLC offerings with regards to other companies.
BioWare gave away a special card with a code to register on their website for some free DLC when Mass Effect 2 launched. Later on, they began charging for certain DLC packages (usually major additions to the game).
Terrible DLC doesn't exist because publishers are mustache-twirling villains. It exists because people buy it. The only possible way terrible DLC will ever end is when people stop buying the garbage and start demanding actual quality.
There's PLENTY of times when that content should be included, but just cuz it's on the disc doesn't mean it's automatically wrong. The main consideration is if it's "extra" or "should be in the game".
I had to pay to incorporated my RB1 tracks into my RB2 game. Same for Lego and ACDC Rock Band stuff. I bought ACDC, why should I have to pay to transfer the tracks over.
I know what you *MEAN*... I'm just taking issue with the literalness of what you say. You should try to refrain from incorrect rhetoric in the future.
RSS feed for comments to this post