DLC is getting ridiculous - The rant

[Mouse droidz 21]

if you still buy the stuff, they won't care what you think

also, it's not even remotely like saying that

When I mean stand up against the company I mean don't buy anything from it. Do you really think people are going to stand up against something by continuing to purchase their product? In the UK we have something called Primark and they apperentley use child workers in India or something and people are standing up against them by not buying any of Primarks product. And yes it is like saying that, you're attempting to rebel against something but you think that we should ignore the issue

[Ad Bot]

[Foxscotch]

When I mean stand up against the company I mean don't buy anything from it.

you completemy misinterpreted my post

And yes it is like saying that, you're attempting to rebel against something but you think that we should ignore the issue

u think boycotting something is ignoring it? ok

[Rednakin]

1. Vote with your wallet. If it doesn't sell, a company that isn't planning on going bankrupt or taking major losses isn't going to sell similar products in the future.

2. Games still cost 60$ in the year 2016, which is the same number as in the year 1985, almost 31 years earlier. I'm no economist nor an insider in the gaming biz, but I speculate that
the reason why games are split up into DLC so much these days is that the value of 60$ since the 80s has pretty much halved due to inflation. If you sell a 50$ season pass on top of a 60$ game, it's basically 120$, which is what developers used to make back in the day.

3. Game budgets have blown up, the amount of people you need to pay, marketing, licenses for engines, music or development tools.. all those things have increased. You might say that games on the PS2 had more content, but the graphics are primitive compared to PS4. That's what the time is being spent on, because according to some hearsay, realistic graphics are the thing that markets a game to the masses according to some random publisher market research.

The Deadpool game had a budget of 200$ (GTA 5 was 320$ IIRC). The game got mixed reviews and since I can't find the sales figures on google, I suspect they broke even. These kinds of risks are what I speculate game publishers to be afraid of, so they want to make sure that a part of their consumers spend money on things like microtransactions and cosmetic DLC items.

I don't think your brown townogy with the paintings brown townogy is very appropriate, OP. Game graphics have evolved significantly, so saying that a painting today is just as detailed as a painting 10 years ago is a bit silly. The 99' Mona Lisa and the expansions should be painted in MS paint, the 2005 game should be all janky like a PS2 game and the Mona Lisa "now" should be as it is.

I feel that if publishers were ONLY interested in making money, they would've all flocked over to mobile gaming. There's much more money to be made there. Konami seems to have the "right idea" by jumping into pachinko, but they had pretty bad timing since it's currently being outlawed in Japan.

[Foxscotch]

The Deadpool game had a budget of 200$ (GTA 5 was 320$ IIRC).

pretty sure they were both far more than that, actualy

[KickFlow]

I hear this all the time, that's like saying "Someone punched you? don't fight back and suck it up, be a man"

except it's not at all. the big company isn't forcing you to purchase the original game, nor the DLC.

don't like it? don't buy it
your posts on an internet forum aren't going to affect these big companies' decisions. your best bet is to not support the decisions, and hope enough other people don't either

i don't think he believes his posts will affect any big companies. He's just ranting & having conversation lol.

[Timestamp]

i think this is relatable enough to put mcjob's quote in this since the de:mkd game went trashed

also the same opinion as mine as well as fox's

Here's a fun fact about AAA development; it costs a lot. You have 100+ developers (as well as administration staff and everybody inside the publishing office). You have computers for all of those 100+ staff, probably running dual-monitors and pretty high-spec, high-power consumption systems. Those PCs require software licences, some of which will be royalty based, some are yearly subscriptions. You have the cost of all the furniture in the building, all the paper materials used by the developers and administration staff, all of the business registration costs, all of the taxes and salaries, all of the water and internet bills, compensation for employees on paid leave or who are entitled to a severance package, marketing costs (which can skyrocket into the hundreds of millions), lawyer costs and so on, so forth (there's way more costs to cover). Then you have to remember that the longer it takes a developer/publisher to release a game, the more time it takes for them to both earn back the cash they've spent on development but also make some kind of profit to fund future projects (businesses can't survive if they're only ever equalling up on losses). Furthermore, every single year, the prices of just about everything increase. Taxes increase, the minimum wage increases, inflation increase and so on.

If AAA Publishers push their developers to continually make gradually smaller games that'll be at the same cost, gamers will (appropriately) bitch, moan and complain because the games aren't improving and getting bigger, as they should.

Yes, it feels like a stuffty practice and there needs to be a better way to cover costs, but there's a reason that publishers are trying to find new ways to make money. At the moment, these practices aren't really obtrusive to the game experience. Bullstuff yes, hindering no.

It isn't "a few dollars" on the line. It's the ability to pay their employees and keep making games that's on the line.

it's at least one of the reasons why people are releasing DLCs in not just games in general, but for AAA games and etc.

tl;dr for mcjob's quote, it's just business. it's there to most likely support developers and companies

[MoltenKitten]

I don't see what's wrong with this tbh. Multiplayer maps are fine in DLC if you ask me.

Say you're a kid and you don't have a job. You happen to have some $60 left over from your last birthday and you decide to buy a $60 game that all of your friends have so you can play with them. A couple weeks later a new dlc comes out which includes mp maps. All of your friends got the dlc and want to play exclusively these maps. If you don't get an allowance and your parents don't have much money to spend on stuff like this what do you do?

[Shift Kitty]

We're moving on from content cut from the game to make into DLC.
We're moving on to something worse.
Releasing unfinished games with the promise of free updates.

[Foxscotch]

All of your friends got the dlc and want to play exclusively these maps. If you don't get an allowance and your parents don't have much money to spend on stuff like this what do you do?

find more understanding friends

[Timestamp]

find more understanding friends

this

[Insert Name Here²]

I'd much rather have DLC that has optional content like sidestories and such, instead of them being core parts of the game that should've been included by default

[Willco2]

Honestly if I ever made a game I'd go with the route Rockstar and Ubisoft have with GTA V and RB6 Seige. Free "DLC" (really just updates) which you can unlock at no extra charge. In GTA V it might be a pain to grind, but I personally like grinding with so many fun to play jobs (free) and heist (also free)

[eboyblue10]

[Refticus]

i'm sick of people using roblox as the example of "dlc hell".
you gotta remember that the roblox creation tool is about 95% free.
the only part of it that costs money is uploading custom audio, but you can always use sounds uploaded by other people.

builders club/membership simply allows you to customise your character so you can be a special snowflake or trade with other players.
"but refticus you stuff forget, it's still pay to win/money grubbing!!", they have to make money somehow, and this was the best way to do it; they did not restrict the gameplay or creation tools, they simply put cosmetic stuff behind the paywall.
grow the forget up for once.
on the topic of dlc, i can understand it if the dlc package is worth the value (new story arc, new zone, new content and etc), but simple things such as loving horse armour is probably not the best thing to put behind dlc.
you have to remember that the company who was making the dlc package will want to see some kind of return in money spent so that their time was spent well.

[Donnies Catch]

that image in OP is like 4 years old
its been getting ridiculous for a while