DLC abuse will ruin the future of gaming

[Killer Killer]

There is no doubt that video gaming will ever be the same thanks to the online component that allows gamers to play titles with people anywhere in the world at the press of a button, but the video game companies may use this to exploit gamers for every penny with the abuse of their downloadable content. They’re off to a good start.

Downloadable content offers add-ons to games that have already released. If done right, DLC offers elements that got scrapped or weren’t thought of yet during the original production. It can range from a patch that give games new levels and modes to a simple fix of a glitch and the prices varying between under $1 to more than $50.

While all this sounds great on paper, there always seems to be a select few of game publishers that want to take advantage of the situation.

Among the gaming community, DLC has now been dubbed as disc-locked content because of its trend to companies urging developers to make an entire game, lock away 30 percent of its content that’s already on the disc and hold it for later release as DLC add-on.

Capcom has become the biggest offender of this because of its release of the franchise cross brand fighting game titled “Street Fighter X Tekken.” The company held back 12 characters and a huge set of costumes so it could release them at a later date for $20 and make players wait weeks to pay for it.

Another big offender of this is Overkill, when their first game had balanced DLC's, their second game, Payday 2, had an extremely amount of DLC's, giving the total amount of the whole game to be $80 - $90.

Many other companies continue to do the same and has become popular for them to offer downloadable content for fans who pre-order games. Games like the Square-Enix’s “Sleeping Dogs” offered different costumes and weapons for download depending on where you pre-order the game while “Persona 4 Arena,” released by Atlus, offered character accessories.

However, what gamers are getting is a code to unlock said content and not the content itself.

Now, the newest trend in DLC is the Online Pass, in which gamers who buy a game used or borrow it from a friend would have to pay an additional fee — around $10 — just to access its online content.

This is like saying that if someone wants to buy a used car, they would have to pay a road fee to drive it anywhere. It can be argued that companies are hurt by the reselling of their games, but it didn’t seem to be an issue before online accessibility.

With more video games becoming downloadable, these companies are given higher control. In the future, gaming fans may not even own the video games at all, rather they would be renting them for a set amount of time. They won’t be able to lend them out to anyone and may not even be able to complete it more than once without paying extra.

Call it extreme, but it’s highly possible.

Gamers are slowly owning less of the product that they are spending their hard-earned money on. Fortunately, Internet standards aren’t quite there yet in terms of speed to make this a viable option, but this doesn’t mean that gaming fans should ease their minds just yet.

The online gaming scene may still be in it’s infancy, but it won’t stop companies from experimenting with what they can and can’t get away with. Now is the time to speak out and put an end to this if fans want to own a video game again.

[supertrooper225]

引用自 Hoxton：

Most games before the 21's Century, sorry for being not specific.
Retro games that are fun like Pacman & Mario racked up more sales then other games combined with their in-game shops and DLC's.

This is true.....hell....Ms. PacMan was regular PacMan plus a bow on the head lol.

[Peter Pan]

If you are unhappy with those games, I recommend not buying them.

But this trend has already continued since the days of Dragon Age: Origins. A lot of people including myself told people to stand their ground and not buy overpriced DLCs. But their main argument was to the effect of "It only costs a cup of coffee". Fast forward a few years and DLCs are now the norm.

But DLCs are not the main problem. Early Access games are a bigger problem where you can pay even more money, and expect slow progress, bugginess, and unprofessional amateur development. Very few early access games are professionally done like Prison Architect.

So DLCs are pretty much the norm. If you want to stop bad game trends, you may want to start with certain Early Access games. But now you will face the same type of people who will tell you "Don't like it, don't buy it". Otherwise it will go down the route of DLCs, and bad development will become the norm because "the developers are people too, give them a break".

In the end the only thing you can do is vote with your wallet.

[Killer Killer]

People who likes Early Access and DLC's are people who i normally call "Has no life", why bother getting DLC's and Early Access' when you have a life? Its definetly better then Sims, and for those who say "The Developers are people too, give them a break", we gave Valve a 6 years break for HL3 and its still not coming out, and "Don't like it, don't buy it", its ok to say that, but dont rub it on someone's face.

[BuHHu Пуx BukTop]

Yes, and i am angry at Overkill when they keep on adding DLC's.

[Zukabazuka]

引用自 Hoxton：

People who likes Early Access and DLC's are people who i normally call "Has no life", why bother getting DLC's and Early Access' when you have a life? Its definetly better then Sims, and for those who say "The Developers are people too, give them a break", we gave Valve a 6 years break for HL3 and its still not coming out, and "Don't like it, don't buy it", its ok to say that, but dont rub it on someone's face.

Why bother playing games when you have a life? Its a hobby, people enjoy different things. Just because people buy DLC or Early Access doesn't put them in "Has no life" area. It just means they have more money than you and feel like buy what ever they want.

[WhiteKnight77]

引用自 Peter Pan：

If you are unhappy with those games, I recommend not buying them.

But this trend has already continued since the days of Dragon Age: Origins. A lot of people including myself told people to stand their ground and not buy overpriced DLCs. But their main argument was to the effect of "It only costs a cup of coffee". Fast forward a few years and DLCs are now the norm.

But DLCs are not the main problem. Early Access games are a bigger problem where you can pay even more money, and expect slow progress, bugginess, and unprofessional amateur development. Very few early access games are professionally done like Prison Architect.

So DLCs are pretty much the norm. If you want to stop bad game trends, you may want to start with certain Early Access games. But now you will face the same type of people who will tell you "Don't like it, don't buy it". Otherwise it will go down the route of DLCs, and bad development will become the norm because "the developers are people too, give them a break".

In the end the only thing you can do is vote with your wallet.

Where do you think many developers of "big name studios" came from? One of Steams biggest selling games started out as a mod and then Valve hired the 2 modders that made it to make a full fledged game out of it. Studios are more likely to hire modders than they are someone from a "game design school" due to actually knowing the software studios use and having actual content made from such.

[cinedine]

引用自 Hoxton：

Retro games that are fun like Pacman & Mario racked up more sales then other games combined with their in-game shops and DLC's.

Right ... that must be why EA is investing so heavily in retro-gaming and reviving old IPs instead of pursuing microtransaction and DLC which makes more than 3/4 of their revenue. The numbers are astonishing with some games pulling in 50+ Million dollars for Microtransactions alone. They are actually hoping for making ONE freaking BILLION in microtransactions this fiscal year. I can't wait for the earnings call.