Downloadable Content. Good or Bad?.

[KraZe]

Well i for one dont mind it but... Some people are saying companies are taking advantadge of it Particularly EA.

With all there microtransactions there giving out a lesser game same price and for those features which were included in the Previous installments they will charge you.

I think it gives the chance for devs to be lazy.. IE Motorstorm give one game mode then later on charge for new ones as if there really adding to the game. But more game modes shouldve been included in the first place.

But it also gives the chance to spice up things and make your games last Ex. Resistance stellar game doesnt really need whole addon's but the dev's really want to add them and the #1 thing is there FREE because the Dev's felt they shouldve been included in the first place.


Now im all for extras but if its things that should be included on release on the disc then this might turn out for the worse.

your thoughts?

Dont get me wrong here or say "Im Cheap" i dont mind paying for these extra's but if there things that shudve been released with the game. then count me out.

[airupthere23]

I hear what you're saying. If we end up getting charged for the stuff that should have been put in the game in the first place... It will become a huge problem.

[dannyphantom105]

Yea. Generally though I think add on content is a good idea. It can save developement time, for example if they wanted to include a versus mode in motorstorm they maybe would've had to release it a few months later. This way, they can just release it on an online update (it might be for free like the buddy list one was).

[-Zaku-]

Honestly depends on what it is.

I don't think we should be charged for new game modes because then it seems like the developer is alienating those who don't buy it. Take GRAW for instance. They released the Ch. 2 content with new modes, skins, missions, levels and weapons not too long after the game was released and charged roughly $15 for it. An additional $15 for some stuff that should have been in the game to begin with (some of the new levels were just different times of day ) The problem with this is it severely limited finding matches due to people with or without content so most of the time, you never got to use the new stuff anyway.

On the other hand, if you are offering something like say, a entirely new area (depending on the game), then I could see the reason to pay for that. But not like Oblivion did with the content before SI because most of that stuff is in the game, but you have to pay to unlock it / make it accessible.

It's really questionable though. I don't think special weapons/vehicles for use in online multiplayer should be payed for because that's giving some players an edge over everyone else who doesn't have it and not everyone is going to buy the content so it would seem kind of unfair. In that case, stuff like that should be free. If it's stuff like that added single player, then okay. Or at least have separate rooms for the content buying people so it's fair to say the least.

Sorry...kind of went off on the matter :P Well, that's my 2 cents...

[wh0]

Downloadable content is good until it's abused. Paying for stadiums and other content that should normally be included in the game is ridiculous.

[Pantyhelmet]

don't want don't buy..
whats so hard to understand about that..cheap people are always asking for freebies, yet don't want to play, thankfully i'm not cheap, if i want a piece of horse armor (for a horse that never gets a attacked) just to look at it, i'll do it because its an option, and i have the money to pay for it..

if you DON'T? Please stop bitching and moaning about how its a disservice to you, its not, its something they came up with after the fact and offer to you to expand your game a bit..nothing more nothing else..

[mastershake86]

Downloadable content is good until it's abused. Paying for stadiums and other content that should normally be included in the game is ridiculous.

I agree completely. Some games release really good stuff a while after release to keep things lively such as Halo 2. I loved those new maps and it was worth the extra cash, but with other games such as any racer HAS the resources to add these cars to the final game right away and madden 07 is a micro joke. Throwback stadiums cost money c'mon!

[gerrylum]

For the most part, I don't think any developer should charge for add-on content for their games. Add-on content should serve mostly to keep you playing their game, as well as to get new people to buy the game that might not have considered it before.

The danger I forsee with developers charging for add on content, is releasing a racing game, for example, with only 2 tracks and a handful of cars and all the other tracks and cars are downloadable packs that end up costing an arm and a leg.

[SpaceMonkeyDave]

its good i think
for example c&c3 on the 360

now every c&c game has had an expansion pack of some sort
in the past this would mean buying another CD

however on the 360 it can just be downloaded which is good
oblivion has taken this philosophy already

[A7MAD]

There's good and bad to this, also people have to remember that this attracks different kinds of people, the devs are after $ they make games and extras and prefer $ for it, last gen this form of distribution wasn't really available so this is begining this generation, all I can say is get used to it, because it'll become the norm.

[Beemer]

If their free then yes. If they should have been in the game but couldn't fit (cough*UT3*cough) and they cost extra, then no. Even if it wasn't in the original game, but still costs extra, still no. Once you pay for a game you are entitled to the entire game, extras and all. I paid for it, I want all of it. The Devs should be dedicated enough to their work to not get greedy.

[Scoup]

I know im sort of new posting here but let me play devils advocate for a second.


Who are we to say what should or should not be in a game. The game is developed and sold as is. whether or not the developer held back content or not is not an issue because the game released was the game the developer wanted to release. How do we really know that that level 49 game really was supposed to have a level 50 that they decided to charge for a month later. We dont, unless we work for the developer in question or have insider information.


On another note I dont like the fact that this is the way the buisness is run now but I really have no choice in the matter other than to boycott those expansions and add on content that they sell or pay for it like everyone else.

[dwoodwo1]

its all about the money... as long as people are willing to buy content (like horse armor for oblivion or something) they will keep releasing it. If you dont want it to be abused, make sure you never buy anything like that.

[hisame]

Actually if you take the stick on the other end.
This gives developer a chance to release a not finished game at very low price.
Then charge you later via download contents if the game sold well,
or they can drop the whole project if it went bad, without taking as much risk.

[Ubersnuber]

Many things could have been in the game in the first place, that's the problem about it, because I think some games will get undeserved bashing since the dev's added some pretty ordinary stuff later (I'm not talking about obvious game modes here).
I think the smart dev's knows that if they give the player a full package game experience, they'll end up buying more stuff.

I'm all for dl content and I will probably end up buying lots of it, but if I even get a little hunch that this should have been included in the original package, I'll back off.

Basically:
If the game has terribly few tracks/levels, I won't buy the track/level package..in fact, I won't buy anything to that game because I won't give people who think I'm stupid money.

But I'm afraid common sense isn't very much used by casual gamers, hell look at how much Cars sold! Not that it had anything to do with dl content though, but you get my point.

[shambles2]

I can see what you're saying. When you buy a game you buy it for how the game is exactly how it appears on the disc. I think micro transactions are bull and I'll never use them. If it takes post-release updates to turn a crappy game into a good game than I won't bother with buying something from a company that is not dedicated to quality. I just won't buy it at all in the first place.

It's nice that R:FOM had some online patches but i don't expect that. I expect it to be fairly glitch-free from the start. Since that last update now when i leave an online game my game menu is bogged all to hell, not sure if anyone else has noticed this.

[ShadowMagios]

for me It all depends on how its done. .25c a car screw that (take that GT5 HD!!!!) A huge amount of content and charges accordingly. I have say the samething before in a threat about the samething

[Kougaiji]

It is 2-fold. If a company, ANY COMPANY ON ANY CONSOLE FOR ANY GAME, is charging MONEY to download something to unlock part of a game or add to it (aside from a full-swing expansion pack), it is bad. It is a horrible trend, I don't like not having physical versions of these things, and it's a RIPOFF! Any company that charges you to download something to the console when i can get the same game for regular price with that content already available PLUS all the advantages of modifying and user created content on the PC - why the **** should I spend money for the console version?

Now, that aside, I have bought a couple of games online (WoW and Guild Wars being 2), which I guess I don't mind too much. It's only when companies give you an incomplete product for complete price. Also, the whole idea of paying for the same thing over and over again - such as buying songs for a soundtrack for a game when you have the songs on another format - or buying anything for any media player of any kind in more than one format. I refuse to buy the same product TWICE - that's when I, and others, resort to pirating and hacking.


Updates are all fine and dandy - companies should know to release a full game from the start and not plan any major updates if they want a good review and good sales - I do not buy under ~8.5/10 games, and people on these forums can complain that a game is unjust all they want - it takes some serious convincing to change my mind.


I refuse to take part in microtransactions, and I will continue to boycott them. If they ever become "regular" then I'm afraid I know a few too many people who will resort to illegal means to "acquire" them. What results then is developers giving BS excuses of pirates stealing their money when it's their own fault for being too greedy.


I find, however, that I have become somewhat lenient - I do not mind MMO games engaging in microtransactions for things like extra character slots - or in games like Second Life and in the future Home - furniture objects. Simply because I know they have a running cost and typically are cheap or free when nothing is purchased.

[wh0]

Some people are asking for too much. If a dev puts in the work to give you more content to play that wasn't originally part of the game you should pay a reasonable price for it.