[GentleHands McCoy]

issed:

Seriously. Its not that I'm cheap, if you're game has more content, I'll pay more money for it from the outset. I may be in the minority here, but I'd gladly pay $100-120 up front for something that has 100+ hours of content. It just breaks up the entire experience for me, I like to play a game over the span of two weeks-month and than have a nice sense of conclusion. It feels like reading a three hundred page book over a year, skipping selective chapters, and than going back and reading the ones you skipped. From now on if a game is heavy with DLC/episodic content I'll probably just wait till the GOTY edition comes out.

Alot of the fun of CRPGs is that in the moment attachment you have to your characters/NPCs. When you think your done and then come back to the game a month later to do some BS side quest with minimal plot it just lessens the overall experience for me. By that time you are no longer engrossed in the game and it just feels tacked on IMO.

issed:

 

[stealthtastic]

I do, it's really fucking annoying.

 

[The Dark Wolf]

Hmm. I actually like DLC stuff. I like that a game doesn't have to be 'finished' when you beat it.

 

[Naren]

I fucking can't stand it. It pisses me the hell off. I was just complaining about this yesterday with someone I work with.

 

[Tom]

I like DLC, but I guess I haven't played much of it in an RPG context. It just depends on how it's implemented. I'll use the Left 4 Dead DLCs for reference since the new one just came out yesterday. They add new elements that don't feel tacked on and that add to and even more cohesively tie together what's already there. They did a damn good job with their DLCs, and that's a game that basically boils down to, "Shoot zombies. Then shoot some more zombies." I guess it's more difficult to add onto an RPG that doesn't leave much space between events for additional plot development.

 

[79]

I like DLC, but I guess I haven't played much of it in an RPG context. It just depends on how it's implemented. I'll use the Left 4 Dead DLCs for reference since the new one just came out yesterday. They add new elements that don't feel tacked on and that add to and even more cohesively tie together what's already there. They did a damn good job with their DLCs, and that's a game that basically boils down to, "Shoot zombies. Then shoot some more zombies." I guess it's more difficult to add onto an RPG that doesn't leave much space between events for additional plot development.

The DLC's for L4D are free though, which makes them an even better deal. I'm downloading the entire thing right now for Mac.

 

[343]

Video games finally have adopted the old PnP RPG model of flooding the market with countless addons for profit.

 

[The Dark Wolf]

So you guys would rather a game be over, and that's it? :shrug:

Like originally stated, you can always get the GOTY edition in most cases. Just wait. When I beat Fallout 3, I was like, "Aww, man." Then when they released the the DLC stuff, I was like "Yay!"

 

[Drew]

I kind of feel like "expansion packs' have been around for a LONG time in the game industry, though. Is this somehow any different, where you have a game that stands alone, but after some time you can go out and buy an "expansion" for a modest fee that adds another quest or two to the action?

 

[Professor Squidbeard]

DLC or expansions have been around forever and are(in my opinion) a good plan. Look at diablo or WOW, if wow was over after Molten core, that game would no subscribers anymore. But with 2 expacs and a 3rd coming, they rake in the cash and players get new content. I don't understand what your butthurtedness is about.

you'd rather have more content at first for more money. sure, i can see that but if you can have more content later for the same amount of money split up, whats the big deal?

 

[1]

So you guys would rather a game be over, and that's it? :shrug:

Like originally stated, you can always get the GOTY edition in most cases. Just wait. When I beat Fallout 3, I was like, "Aww, man." Then when they released the the DLC stuff, I was like "Yay!"

I like DLC, but sometimes (often) you pay $15 for what turns out to be an hour or two of gameplay. It's not the DLC that bugs me, it's the oft-absurd pricing.

 

[1]

DLC or expansions have been around forever and are(in my opinion) a good plan. Look at diablo or WOW, if wow was over after Molten core, that game would no subscribers anymore. But with 2 expacs and a 3rd coming, they rake in the cash and players get new content. I don't understand what your butthurtedness is about.

you'd rather have more content at first for more money. sure, i can see that but if you can have more content later for the same amount of money split up, whats the big deal?

There's a huge difference between an xpac and most DLC though. Each WoW xpac was hundreds of hours of play. Like I said above, a good amount of DLC ends up being play once, beat in two hours, $15-20 out the window.

 

[The Dark Wolf]

Ahh. I can see that.

For myself, since I a) don't buy very many games typically and B) research the shit out of any I actually do buy (game reviews, metacritic scores, etc.), any time there's a game I'd actually buy,. and even more so, if I actually wanted to keep playing, by that point, since the game is so 'valuable' to me, I don't usually mind paying a 'premium' if you will for more content of something I love. It's like, what? I spend a couple a hundred a year on games tops, so dropping $15 or $20 on a DLC for a game that I adore, and that I can get... shit, 5-10 hours out of, hey, well worth it to me.

That's me. But I can see your point.

 

[The Dark Wolf]

FTR, I got, like alluded to above, probably 5-10 hours out of my FO3 DLC. Especially Point Lookout and Mothership Zeta.

Then again, I'm notoriously slow about playing RPGs I love. I am always surprised when someone beats say, Morrowind in what, 80 hours or something? I had well over 200 hours into that game, and still haven't beaten or discovered everything, I think.

 

[1]

RPG DLC tends to be a bit better of a value. One of the DLC's for Force Unleashed was something like $15, and literally took me less than half an hour to run through at max difficulty.

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

DLC or expansions have been around forever and are(in my opinion) a good plan. Look at diablo or WOW, if wow was over after Molten core, that game would no subscribers anymore. But with 2 expacs and a 3rd coming, they rake in the cash and players get new content. I don't understand what your butthurtedness is about.

you'd rather have more content at first for more money. sure, i can see that but if you can have more content later for the same amount of money split up, whats the big deal?

I like expansion packs, something like say Throne of Baahl is a logical continuation of the story and alot of fun to play. And I like the content in alot of DLCs too. I'm just saying that I would rather pay more for a finished product upfront and get everything at once, than pay $15 to go back to the game two months after I'm done with it, and completely out of the mood for it.

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

RPG DLC tends to be a bit better of a value.

Horse Armor :lol:

 

[1]

Horse Armor :lol:

Point. :lol:

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

Point. :lol:

I actually take an abstract view on the Horse Armor debacle

Was it worth $5? No, it should have been included in the original game.

The entertainment value was actually provided by the RPG community's butthurt reaction to it. :lol:

 

[The Dark Wolf]

:lol: See, I never spent my money on any of that horseshit... er, armor.


I don't generally buy a lot of DLC stuff, because I don't generally buy a lot of games.