I have a solution for DLC....

#1Dark SymphonyPosted 6/3/2011 10:04:02 AM
Ok, of course no one would agree to this, but I think I have a solution or two for the DLC issue...

We all know what the big downsides are...

Disc Locked content in games offering far less than they would have 10 years ago.

Companies creating "precedents" of support to encourage gamers to buy their games. And then not supporting them. Example: Putting "DLC" or "store" menus in their games or straight up advertising that they support DLC. Having release day or week 1 flimsy DLC to further entice customers to buy their games on the pretext that they will be supported and have a long life... Only for the developers to stop at day one disc locked content and a couple of avatars the next week and then release no further content.

So I'm thinking... What if there was some rule where you could not release DLC for 3 - 6 months? Only patches and fixes?

This way companies would have to sell the product they're selling on it's current merits and not some potentially possibly plausible maybe update.

If Capcom couldn't release DLC for MVC3 for 3 to 6 months, I guarantee Jill and Shuma would have been straight up in the game. No, F that, you're ridiculous for believing all that "Capcom would only let us have Shuma in if he was DLC because... yeah, it makes no sense" nonsense.

The laughable event mode and Shadow Battle DLC would not have been able to have been touted as "future DLC" to give players the impression they would be getting real content and things would be much better.


Another rule: You cannot advertise DLC with the core game. You can, of course, mention what the DLC goes with in advertisements exclusively for DLC but no more of this advertising X game using specs from the game including all DLC components. That's not the game you sold and that's not the game you get when you put the disc into the console.

This means no "stores" looking at players when they boot the game to make them think they'll be getting some hugely supported feature. No blatantly empty boxes (MVC3 was fine. SC4 was not). No titles or achievements that advertise future content.

Last rule: After one month, you can release DLC schedules for future content (no releasing any until at least the first 3-6 month gap has passed). There has to be at least a one month gap between the announcement of the finalized DLC content and it's release. This will encourage developers to announce more content up front as well as enable players to see what they're REALLY going to get instead of developers being able to say "we got some DLC coming for you guys in two weeks! Hang tight!" and everyone joys over it until they learn it was some stupid title pack or something.


Does this sound like too much? It should. Because it is. But I think it may be necessary so that people can PROPERLY DETERMINE what EXACTLY they're getting and are going to be getting from their products. Selling products on possibilities is tricky business. Imagine if Netflix sells you a membership so you can get the latest and greatest movies and then, after a week, just... stops getting new animated shows on it's direct service. Then stops stocking any new sitcoms. Then says that, due to a natural disaster, they're cancelling plans to rent out any DVDs released this summer and instead you have to wait and buy their NEW SUPER Netflix membership.
#2Kim KusanagiPosted 6/3/2011 10:40:49 AM
It needs a little bit more fixing. Why 3 months? Why not 1 year or 2? More than enough time to let the game to stand on its two legs, and the late DLC would inject new life to the game.

And second, you know TOWSNBN makes his company earn money by means of this new tactic of day 1 DLC scamming. How can we impose this rule to them?
---
Live to train. Train to fight. Fight to live. When you retire, think only on fighting.
Take me away, I don't mind, but you better promise I'll be back in time!
#3Missle LaunchPosted 6/3/2011 10:49:54 AM
I'd rather just stop supporting the folk that engage in such absurd practices, and work to provide alternatives; less overhead, more creative variety.
---
http://www.twitter.com/MadamLaunch
Yes, I am still working on Project Infinite (now Donnybrook World Fair).
#4burninyourgravePosted 6/3/2011 12:36:14 PM
It's sad to see this crap happening, that's why I don't buy games anymore.
---
With just a touch of my burning hand I send my Astro Zombies to rape the land. Exterminate. The whole human race.
#5bigbadharryPosted 6/3/2011 1:43:17 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]
#6Dark Symphony(Topic Creator)Posted 6/3/2011 3:34:12 PM
It needs a little bit more fixing. Why 3 months? Why not 1 year or 2? More than enough time to let the game to stand on its two legs, and the late DLC would inject new life to the game.

Well, you don't want the game to die completely which can very well happen to a lot of non-competitive games in the span of a year. A lot of people will pick up a game after a year if new content is added but some will forget. i'm trying to find a medium.

Another reason is that there ARE companies that legitimately want to consistently extend the life of their games with actual new content and are itching to truly support their games. A 3 - 6 month embargo on DLC content keeps companies from using DLC "potential" as advertising, from using DLC to advertise their base game but still let's them actually support their game with DLC in a reasonable amount of time.

Holding content back would be FAR stupider if you have to wait 3 to 6 months to release it because it clearly exposes your game for what it is at retail and you can't boast all these other things you held back from the now incomplete game until much later. Companies would have to sell their game on it's actual merits.

And second, you know TOWSNBN makes his company earn money by means of this new tactic of day 1 DLC scamming. How can we impose this rule to them?

I.... I wish I knew who you were referring to. I don't get it.


I'd rather just stop supporting the folk that engage in such absurd practices, and work to provide alternatives; less overhead, more creative variety.

Me too. But how do we accomplish this? There is too much ignorance in the world and there are actually people who believe that the company is trying to HELP them when they say "we are going to strip content away from our online play and then charge you to get it back because we need the money to support the game."

Those people have to almost be FORCED to see what they're really getting as opposed to what they are told they're getting. They have to learn that the current VG industry/customer relationship is adversarial, like dealing with cell phone companies and banks.
#7Missle LaunchPosted 6/3/2011 3:52:22 PM
Dark Symphony posted...
Me too. But how do we accomplish this?

DS, I want you to stop. Stop and think.

Think about what you just wrote.

Think about the person it was a response to.

Give it a minute.
---
http://www.twitter.com/MadamLaunch
Yes, I am still working on Project Infinite (now Donnybrook World Fair).
#8DigitechXPosted 6/3/2011 5:46:51 PM
There is too much ignorance in the world and there are actually people who believe that the company is trying to HELP them

We wait.

These same people (the mainstream, or casual crowd) are going to cause the market to crash when they all leave in droves, because the rest of us (the "hardcore" demographic) have already stopped catering to this nonsense.

It's not a matter of if at this point, just when, and I stand by that conviction.

In the mean time we pay attention to the little guys while the big ones run out of options.
---
Petition: Separate Downloadable Games Into Their Own Sections.
Success!
#9Dark Symphony(Topic Creator)Posted 6/3/2011 6:45:52 PM
DS, I want you to stop. Stop and think.

Think about what you just wrote.

Think about the person it was a response to.

Give it a minute.


I'd love to sound super smart right now, but I'm not sure what avenue you're going down. Is it that you're a person who makes things happen and fits directly into the mold you proposed?
#10Dark Symphony(Topic Creator)Posted 6/3/2011 6:52:05 PM
We wait.

These same people (the mainstream, or casual crowd) are going to cause the market to crash when they all leave in droves, because the rest of us (the "hardcore" demographic) have already stopped catering to this nonsense.

It's not a matter of if at this point, just when, and I stand by that conviction.

In the mean time we pay attention to the little guys while the big ones run out of options.


Dude, I was right on board with this sentiment a couple of years ago. I remember the big E3 crash where the event collapsed into itself and it was almost not even going to happen one year. I thought that was the beginning of the end and I couldn't wait.

Then the Wii happened. And it fell right in line with the rest of the idiocy in the world with everyone wanting to seem "with it" and "tech savvy" with their phones and whatnot. Gimmicks prevailed and took over and continue to take over. Blinders and diversions run amok and I see no signs of it slowing down. Heck, in this current drear market 3 effing D has managed to catch a decent foothold. 3D! Something we've balked at, like, twice before. Something that allows you to see things... the way we already do... has found traction.

I really do hope the industry implodes or everyone collectively realizes how goofy they've been or maybe even just tires of the fad but there seems to be an endless supply of new suckers. Hearing kids these days try to profess a game's popularity to me by quoting PRE-ORER numbers... What the F?

I was comfortable waiting. But I started seeing too many casualties. Good games (or potentially good games) saddled down with gimmicks or stupid DLC tactics... Franchises dieing due to not being able to keep up with the GOTM (gimmick of the month). Small developers collapsing, being bought out or merging in attempts to hang on and ending up just churning out the usual crap.

And those that used to be our defenders, those in the gaming media, are all bought and paid for with too much invested in the idiocy to speak out against it.