Free DLC for all

[Long Knight]

if you made free DLC available to everyone even if they don't own the game would be great for sales. I do not always have money available for new games so this would let me get the free DLC while available and the game later, when I have cash. this would add motivation to buy the game. you might even create a list like the wish list to help people remember what they need to buy. If you want to hurry things along out a time limit on owning it without the game, like 60 days to get the base game. It seems like this could benefit both steam in sales incentives and the users for less frustration and free DLC.

[Mad Scientist]

Giving out DLC is entirely up to a Developer, and you can often get DLC Keys in things like Humble and simply claim them at any time, unless only redeemable within a certain time frame. Some Developers do exactly that to; give Keys to DLCs you can redeem on Steam, so when you DO get the game you can them redeem the DLC.

Simply, the options exist as-is, but you'd still need the base game, so key giveaways are usually best for such scenarios.

[nullable]

I'm not sure most business decisions relating to non-essential luxury entertainment products center around trying to appeal to people who don't have $50 to their name. And trying to lock in potential future sales "when they have the money" I'm not sure will pay off as well as you imagine. Memories are short... and destitute isn't a demographic that's very interesting.

Although giving away free DLC most people aren't going to use may not be harmful, it may simply be pointless.

[Gwarsbane]

引用自 Long Knight：

if you made free DLC available to everyone even if they don't own the game would be great for sales. I do not always have money available for new games so this would let me get the free DLC while available and the game later, when I have cash. this would add motivation to buy the game. you might even create a list like the wish list to help people remember what they need to buy. If you want to hurry things along out a time limit on owning it without the game, like 60 days to get the base game. It seems like this could benefit both steam in sales incentives and the users for less frustration and free DLC.

Ahhh a "I want free stuff" thread... gee haven't seen one of those in 5 minutes....

Anyway, no giving out free stuff doesn't mean you will get sales, how do we know this? Epic.

Epic gives out free games, it doesn't translate into sales. They are losing hundreds of millions of dollars a year (something like 400+ million last year). The only thing that is keeping them open is fortnite money.



Also Valve can't just give out other companies DLC for free, thats 100% upto the developer to do that. "But you just said Epic gives out free stuff" I hear you say and yes, they give out other peoples games, that they pay for... which is one of the other reasons why they are losing hundreds of millions a year.

Valve doesn't need to pay companies to give away stuff to get more sales or more people. Every year they keep breaking records for how much they are making and how many people are playing at once and monthly. Valve is doing just fine as is.

If you want free DLC go ask the developers of the games to provide it, Valve won't.

[Black Blade]

I think this may be a nice option for developers to be able to enable for DLCs, for one example music that someone may want to own even without the game regardless

How ever I will say that it may be messy to do, seeing that DLC's are very much connected to the base game currently, may be messy to disconnect them

I will also say some developers at least I think are trying to use the idea of free DLC for a limited time to get users to bite, and buy the game on a higher price for the DLC, or as gift for early buyers, both cases will go away if the suggestion will be active by default... even that as an option may be nice

引用自 Gwarsbane：

Ahhh a "I want free stuff" thread... gee haven't seen one of those in 5 minutes....

Anyway, no giving out free stuff doesn't mean you will get sales, how do we know this? Epic.

Epic gives out free games, it doesn't translate into sales. They are losing hundreds of millions of dollars a year (something like 400+ million last year). The only thing that is keeping them open is fortnite money.



Also Valve can't just give out other companies DLC for free, thats 100% upto the developer to do that. "But you just said Epic gives out free stuff" I hear you say and yes, they give out other peoples games, that they pay for... which is one of the other reasons why they are losing hundreds of millions a year.

Valve doesn't need to pay companies to give away stuff to get more sales or more people. Every year they keep breaking records for how much they are making and how many people are playing at once and monthly. Valve is doing just fine as is.

If you want free DLC go ask the developers of the games to provide it, Valve won't.

I think you may have miss read the OP
His asking to allow users to active DLC even if they don't own the game, so you be able to buy the game later and get possibly the DLC early (even if its useless then)

[Nx Machina]

Except OP you missed you need to have the base game to get the dlc's.

[Long Knight]

thank you Black Blade, you are exactly right. and Nx Machina I didn't miss that, that was what I was suggesting should be changed. As for people who can't afford $50, Snakub Plissken, I'm disabled so only get paid once a month, and around my payment time, I can afford new games if I choose. Others may also have reasons and budgets that make it hard to buy games in the middle of the month. That doesn't mean they can't afford games. Mad scientist, I was not suggesting changing what DLC they were giving out just how. And I know it wouldn't guaranty sales, but it would incentivize them and this is a different approach than epic uses.

thank you all for your input.

[Long Knight]

Oh and if it's that hard to disconnect the games from the DLC, they could give out a coupon code for the DLC they are offering for free, good for say 30 days If/when they buy the game. this would offer the same benefit in a different and possibly easier way to implement.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

It is a marketing incentive to make you actually purchase the game.

[Ducks on Fire]

引用自 Long Knight：

thank you Black Blade, you are exactly right. and Nx Machina I didn't miss that, that was what I was suggesting should be changed. As for people who can't afford $50, Snakub Plissken, I'm disabled so only get paid once a month, and around my payment time, I can afford new games if I choose. Others may also have reasons and budgets that make it hard to buy games in the middle of the month. That doesn't mean they can't afford games. Mad scientist, I was not suggesting changing what DLC they were giving out just how. And I know it wouldn't guaranty sales, but it would incentivize them and this is a different approach than epic uses.

thank you all for your input.

Look, I really do get being in a less than ideal financial situation, and I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to buy things for yourself, but if you are having to wait until you get your paychecks/payments to make such a purchase then maybe you should change how you handle your money. Just save up a bit so that you can always have some money ready to spend if something comes along that would require you to make the purchase in a given time-frame. There is no reason why you need to spend all your money as soon as you get it if some of it is disposable, and there is no reason for businesses to change how they do things to accommodate for people who just don't want to make any responsible decisions with their money.