PC

From: cody4783 | #008

Because..honestly...$15 for 4(?) maps and 10 guns that aren't exactly all that different from EXISTING guns (Because everyone would cry about them being "Unbalanced" if they were the least bit different) seems a bit steep. Especially if the person buying had ALREADY dropped $60 on the game.

Apparently you never bought the BF2 Special Forces expansion. $30 for 8 maps and a handful of new weapons which were mostly completely worthless. In fact, the only good part about the expansion was the grappling hook and zipline.

Or better yet, the 2 "Booster Packs" for BF2, 3 new maps and a handful or COMPLETELY USELESS WEAPONS for $10 each.

And I doubt you even know about BF2142 Northern Front, 3 maps for $10 and they were mostly mediocre.

We could even look at BF 1942 with its $20 expansion packs for 6 maps and a few new weapons that came with the new armies but only Secret Weapons of War was really good.

Needless to say if you're a Battlefield fan bad expansions are nothing to complain about, they've been around since the first title and honestly, from what I've seen the Close Quarters DLC actually looks good. It brings back the Tavor and AUG A3
---
Deth Pen

It's called rhetoric

/eyeroll
---
Deth Pen

I'll admit I am hugely against DLC, even though I actually really liked the old expansion formula. Hearing the word DLC just instantly rubs me the wrong way. At this point, the term DLC associates in my mind with pre-planned on-disc content, content intentionally withheld to siphon more money from gamers, or potentially full expansion packs split into micro-pieces so there can be a bit more markup and companies can ultimately suck even more money from gamers. If you split what could have been a $20 expansion pack into 3-5 pieces and charge $7.50 each, you're getting an extra $2.50-17.50 out of identical content. That's the sort of thing that pisses me off. I see DLC as intentional, calculated price gouging. It takes something that really enriched gaming and cheapens it. Costumes and glow ponies and all used to be *free* extras for years, often included as bonuses in the full expansion packs.

People also defend Blizzard's new business model for StarCraft 2, claiming "it's 3 totally separate games, so they're fine charging a full $60 for each of them." Anyone remember Brood War? $30 ($20 less than the cost of a full retail game), built on the StarCraft engine, contained a full-length campaign, new units usable in MP, and new MP maps. It added *exactly* what Heart of the Swarm adds to StarCraft 2, but it cost $20 less than a full retail game. It was an expansion, and an excellent example of what an expansion was. It deservedly cost less because there was no cost to the company to develop a new engine - they *expanded* on the existing one. It was good for everyone.

Companies these days are just plain greedy, and they don't respect gamers at all any more. I was gaming on PC for at least 2 decades before this DLC nonsense took off, and I really do see it as a HUGE black eye on what PC gaming is all about. DLC makes me sick. Bring back the true expansions.
---
"How do I get rid of a Trojan Horse?" -Sailor_Kakashi
"Leave it outside the gates of Troy overnight." -Davel23