This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

*Sigh.* DLC discussion...AGAIN...

#11RawfullllPosted 7/21/2011 8:30:33 AM

From: perijah | #006
Well, that is what I believe DLC is. If you release a game while working on a so called unfinished "DLC" it looks more like you release a game missing content for the same price and ask more money for it later.

That is my opinion.


games are finished like a month before they're in stores, so they have time to work DLC then, and finish it up a couple months after the game releases.
---
GT: iJesseee
i dont know an real life thank you god. - heerohart
#12RockguyKevPosted 7/21/2011 8:30:59 AM
I have not been unhappy with any DLC I've bought. I'm simply wise enough to only buy good DLC. I bought it for Oblivion, Fallout, Borderlands, MW2 and Rockband.
#13GeistPosted 7/21/2011 8:31:22 AM
Good is a term for the individual to decide for them selves and no amount of arguing here will ever change the fact that what is good to one is not to another and vice versa.
---
Trapped in time. Surrounded by evil. Low on gas.
#14bigphil2003Posted 7/21/2011 9:12:10 AM
What does it matter *when* the DLC was made?

If it was made at the same time as the game it's probably because they extended their budget to do so based on the fact they'd get extra money back for it. It'd be different if they took stuff out of the final game to sell it as DLC, but if it was something that you wouldn't have got if DLC didn't exist then who cares when it was made?
---
Rest In Peace Stretch - We miss you homie
#15NeoLegoPosted 7/21/2011 9:19:56 AM
For me, "good" DLC is anything that is an extention of the story, no matter when it was made.

Good DLC are things like Undead Nightmare (Red Dead Redemption) and Lair of the Shadowbroker (Mass Effect 2) and The Disappearance of Leonardo (AC Brotherhood). They take everything great about the game's they are in and expand on it. Whether they are flashing back to something ealier or continuing the story or, in the case of Red Dead, a unique retelling of the same world. The DLC like those and other like Fallout and Oblivion, add hours of gameplay to the story and world that you've already invested time into.

Bad DLC I think is just about everything else. New skins for fighers or cars, new modes that are listed on the retail product but "locked" until DLC (I'm looking at you Bobblehead Pros!!), or guns or stat boosts.

In the end, I LOVE the idea of DLC when done right. To be honest, I would still be playing Mass Effect 2 or Red Dead Redemption or Oblivion right now if they kept releasing DLC packs. I'm actually looking forward to the day when there is a console game that is following the current mobile structure. Angry Birds for example, they continusouly release FREE DLC that adds to the core gameplay every like 3 or 4 months. Having a Fallout or Red Dead game that released new story driven content every 3 or 4 months would be amazing, like playing episodes of a tv series every few months and it wouldn't even have to be free, I'd pay for it. We will get there one day, and I'm excited! neo
#16Gold UrsaringPosted 7/21/2011 9:35:17 AM
Good DLC compliments a complete game.

GTA IV and Red Dead didn't add new places, but took you on a new journey. Fallout and Oblivion gave you new places. Burnout Paradise had excellent DLC, expanding the game with new features.

Bad DLC tries to complete an incomplete game for money.

If it's free, I'll forgive it. Otherwise it's sort of insult to injury and all too many games are guilty of this.

Good DLC gets interested people into things that licensing might otherwise have prevented.

I like a song, I want it in Rock Band, but the world may not yet appreciate the group. Rock Band sends royalties via the DLC. That's fine. The costumes and stages in LBP.

Another aspect of DLC is that the price has to be right. A fighting game with 30 characters, shouldn't have you paying $5 for a single additional character. Pricing should be reasonable.
#17SragentThomPosted 7/21/2011 9:37:21 AM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#18EucliditePosted 7/21/2011 9:44:38 AM
Rawfullll posted...
games are finished like a month before they're in stores, so they have time to work DLC then, and finish it up a couple months after the game releases.

There's more to it than that, even.

The last month or more of a game's development is typically only fixing bugs, which tends to heavily occupy programmers, but not as much other members of the development team (such as artists and designers). In the final weeks, even the programmers are only working on it if there is a specific bug they are addressing, so they have available time as well.

In the past, during that period those people would be moved onto the next game. Now, they often work on DLC. Even if it were completed before the game released, though, adding it in would add easily weeks if not more to testing, and delay the release. The DLC can be tested and put through certification separately without affecting the core game's release schedule.