Poll of the Day > paid DLC should be banned!

(+) Yeah! (+)

especially in multiplayer games yesterday arv bought a character in some fighting game no one plays. and this kid was like saying he wishes he has that character with the insanley big boobs. and arv said HEY WATCH HOW YOU TALK ABOUT ARVS WAIFU LIKE THAT!

---

Digital content should be free? Huh.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

Digital content should be free? Huh.

Nope they should stop gutting content to be charged and use the rest of there dlc or whatever to make a sequel Arv would rather buy a sequel than buy each part for 15 dollars then have to wait for the next part just put it all out at once in a 60 dollar box and Arv would buy it

---

Someone has to make it so there has to be a small fee. What I'd rather see is an end to $100 season passes and any prices over $10-$20.

---

season passes are the worst thing to happen

---

ArvTheGreat posted...

especially in multiplayer games yesterday arv bought a character in some fighting game no one plays. and this kid was like saying he wishes he has that character with the insanley big boobs. and arv said HEY WATCH HOW YOU TALK ABOUT ARVS WAIFU LIKE THAT!

LOL Why are you referring to yourself in the 3rd person? But I agree and I miss the days before consoles especially were connected to the internet. I miss the days when you bought a game and played it without needing time consuming updates or additional content for that you have to buy etc.

---

ArvTheGreat posted...

season passes are the worst thing to happen

I agree but like most other businesses and companies, the game companies just found ways to milk your money. I play NBA 2K20 a lot mostly my team and that can be addicting when they release new packs every week with a chance for an Opal Jordan, Bird, Magic, Kareem etc and people spend like crazy hoping to open a pack to get an Opal card.

---

ArvTheGreat posted...

Nope they should stop gutting content to be charged and use the rest of there dlc or whatever to make a sequel Arv would rather buy a sequel than buy each part for 15 dollars then have to wait for the next part just put it all out at once in a 60 dollar box and Arv would buy it

That depends on if they gutted. I agree that they shouldnt gut games to get DLC. But paid DLC in itself isnt bad.
---

ArvTheGreat posted...

season passes are the worst thing to happen

Not really as they often save money on digital content. Plus some of them are actually worth it. Witcher 3 and it's DLC/pass comes to mind.

---

BUMPED2002 posted...

LOL Why are you referring to yourself in the 3rd person? But I agree and I miss the days before consoles especially were connected to the internet. I miss the days when you bought a game and played it without needing time consuming updates or additional content for that you have to buy etc.

I mean, DLC has been around for a long time now. It was just called something else. Like an expansion pack. Many PC games had them. Like WoW and The Sims. Expansion packs were just the old versions of DLC. As for added stories for games, its fine because Id rather have DLC instead of a shitty sequel that they made because they had one good story they wanted to put in, but had to make a whole new game around it instead of a small story. Or one of those shitty $5 games that took like half an hour to complete...
---

Arv doesnt mind loot boxes and stuff as long as they are free which most have been

---

LinkPizza posted...

I mean, DLC has been around for a long time now. It was just called something else. Like an expansion pack. Many PC games had them. Like WoW and The Sims. Expansion packs were just the old versions of DLC. As for added stories for games, its fine because Id rather have DLC instead of a shitty sequel that they made because they had one good story they wanted to put in, but had to make a whole new game around it instead of a small story. Or one of those shitty $5 games that took like half an hour to complete...

Expansion packs make sense in MMOs

---

ArvTheGreat posted...

Expansion packs make sense in MMOs

Sure. But what I was saying was that it's basically the same as paid DLC. And so it's been around for a long time. BUMPED2002 was saying that he missed the days where you could buy games without additional content that you had to buy. But it been around for a while...
---

There is good DLC and bad DLC, but the majority of the DLC nowadays is bad. I used to love when you bought expansion packs that cost 1/2 the price of the base game, and at the very least gave you 2/3 more content on top of the base game. Blizzard and ID were awesome with that. Valve too with the original Half Life expansions. Nowadays you are lucky if DLC gives you 1-2 hours of content, and that is for the $10 - $20 stuff.

---

Dikitain posted...

There is good DLC and bad DLC, but the majority of the DLC nowadays is bad. I used to love when you bought expansion packs that cost 1/2 the price of the base game, and at the very least gave you 2/3 more content on top of the base game. Blizzard and ID were awesome with that. Valve too with the original Half Life expansions. Nowadays you are lucky if DLC gives you 1-2 hours of content, and that is for the $10 - $20 stuff.

This, man.

Paid DLC is, by and large, terrible. Low quality additions with production costs that round down to zero, sold for a massive markup to schmucks who think this is something the game devs put together just on a whim of passion and don't realize that for any game of appreciable size, the amount, nature, and price of the DLC is something that's worked out at the start of production of the game itself.

At least expansion packs typically added enough content to make them worth their price tags. With DLC, you can sell faster firing guns or different coloured costumes or 100,000 in-game currency for five bucks and call it a day.

---

LinkPizza posted...

Sure. But what I was saying was that it's basically the same as paid DLC. And so it's been around for a long time. BUMPED2002 was saying that he missed the days where you could buy games without additional content that you had to buy. But it been around for a while...

not for almost every single game though

---

I say give all games the devils cutting board. That way when they offer the hot meat buns dlc they can charge double!

---

ArvTheGreat posted...

Arv doesnt mind loot boxes and stuff as long as they are free which most have been

I hate lootboxes. Took me so long to get certain characters looking how I wanted in injustice 2. And still havent with joker. I wouldn't mind them as a free option for players but I would have loved a shop to by the individual outfit parts I wanted. They probably coulda made a killing selling them like a dollar a piece

---

ArvTheGreat posted...

not for almost every single game though

While it is out for more games than before, that doesn't change the fact that it's nothing new in the slightest. It's just that more games have them these days...
---

I wait for complete editions a lot, so I support other people funding the creation of additional content for games I like. I'm good with the model, I pay less and get more. Others pay more and get more earlier. Everyone wins except completionists, who need to deal with their own demons.

Id rather buy new charactera in a fighting game than the days of old. Sf 2 super sf 2. Super SF 2 turbo etc. Yeah capcom technically still does that but you could keep the base game and just purchase the characters as they come out then eventually you get a patch that changes your base copy to thr latest version.

I have base SF V but when i boot it up it says championship edition.

---

LinkPizza posted...

That depends on if they gutted. I agree that they shouldnt gut games to get DLC. But paid DLC in itself isnt bad.

That's about my philosophy. So long as the game is sufficiently entertaining to justify the purchase without buying DLC, I'm fine with it. If I want more of the game, then I'll buy the DLC (provided it's reasonably priced, of course). If I'm fine with the base, then I move on and don't buy it. It's really only a problem when the base game suffers for not having the content.

---

adjl posted...

That's about my philosophy. So long as the game is sufficiently entertaining to justify the purchase without buying DLC, I'm fine with it. If I want more of the game, then I'll buy the DLC (provided it's reasonably priced, of course). If I'm fine with the base, then I move on and don't buy it. It's really only a problem when the base game suffers for not having the content.

Mtx, on the other hand, can pretty much go die in a fire...

With publishers answering to a Board that seeks an increase in revenue and margins...you can count on paid DLC to remain in gaming forever. I agree that content shouldn't be gutted from a game to then sell at a later date, but if you've developed an engine and your game is popular...DLC is an effective way to extend gains for your product. Even if someone purchases a used copy of the game, the publisher can still bank on DLC. Now, loot boxes, on the other hand, can go to heck. :-|

---

LinkPizza posted...

While it is out for more games than before, that doesn't change the fact that it's nothing new in the slightest. It's just that more games have them these days...

well its mostly been that way more in the ps3 xbox 360 era most of the time back then they were expansion packs and it was mostly for MMO's totally different arv didn't have to buy all these weapons via DLC in FF7 on the psx. so arv understands games werent 100% free from added content back then especially on pc had added content but you can't lie that it isnt any different than what it was before

---

ChaosAzeroth posted...

Mtx, on the other hand, can pretty much go die in a fire...

Conceptually, there's no reason microtransactions can't be like decent DLC, just on a smaller scale. In practice, however, in order to be profitable they pretty much inevitably have to either be overpriced for the improvement they provide, or the game has to be designed such that you need them to have a good time and players are thereby manipulated into buying them. Done reasonably, they're fine in F2P games (Warframe and Path of Exile are good examples, though PoE's cosmetic stuff is probably too expensive to actually qualify as *micro*transactions), but they have no place in games I've already paid for.

---

ArvTheGreat posted...

well its mostly been that way more in the ps3 xbox 360 era most of the time back then they were expansion packs and it was mostly for MMO's totally different arv didn't have to buy all these weapons via DLC in FF7 on the psx. so arv understands 100 % of games back then especially on pc had added content but you can't lie that it isnt any different than what it was before

Of course it's different. Technology is always advancing. And it's much easier to do it differently these days. Like you don't have to go to a store and buy the expansion or whatever. You can do it straight from the device. But just like everything else it the world, it's different. You can say the same thing about games, though. Games are also different from what they were all those years ago. Whether is graphics, control, story, or gameplay...
---

ArvTheGreat posted...

especially in multiplayer games yesterday arv bought a character in some fighting game no one plays. and this kid was like saying he wishes he has that character with the insanley big boobs.

was it narmaya in gbvs

---

mooreandrew58 posted...

Id rather buy new charactera in a fighting game than the days of old. Sf 2 super sf 2. Super SF 2 turbo etc. Yeah capcom technically still does that but you could keep the base game and just purchase the characters as they come out then eventually you get a patch that changes your base copy to thr latest version.

I have base SF V but when i boot it up it says championship edition.

capcom gives championship edition for free which arv likes and you dont have to buy the DLC characters you can earn them with BP which takes forever but atleast you dont have to buy them if other companies did that where you can unlock them by playing their game arv wouldnt care but if arv has to keep shoveling out 10 dollars for every character it gets hefty

---

agesboy posted...

was it narmaya in gbvs

arv was referencing doa

---

ArvTheGreat posted...

arv was referencing doa

kula diamond dlc?

ArvTheGreat posted...

capcom gives championship edition for free which arv likes and you dont have to buy the DLC characters you can earn them with BP which takes forever but atleast you dont have to buy them if other companies did that where you can unlock them by playing their game arv wouldnt care but if arv has to keep shoveling out 10 dollars for every character it gets hefty

I had to pay for CE. But considering all the alt outfits the two characters and whatnot it gave me it was very reasonably priced.

---