All right so here we go again. In case anyone missed my last rant about digital distribution, here it is. In the past few months I have been breaking my current trend this console generation of waiting until games drop in price and buy them used, and have even picked up a few on launch day! Now being unemployed at the moment I have done this by trading it tons of the games I have accumulated over the past 2 years of playing the 360, leading back to the whole first rant about having a hard copy of the game being worth something. That however is not the issue with my current rant, what I am now trying to explore is the other form of digital distribution we are seeing in this console generation: DLC or Downloadable Content if you live under the proverbial rock.
Now unlike my last rant I want to explore the upside to DLC before I turn my wrath upon MS and greedy developers. DLC is a great new feature to this generation of console gaming: you can download new content for a game that was not available at the time the game was released. This is a wonderful thing allowing developers the ability to add new content to a game to do a few things: first increase the value of the game, second to give gamers who enjoyed the game more content and third to make a few extra bucks down the road. Now in many of the games we have seen my personal opinion is that the content is generally worth the extra 5-10 dollars spent on it (even if it is using MS points). I loved playing Halo 3 and did not feel ripped off purchasing the new map packs as they came out, and it has allowed other games like Gears of War 2 to add tons of maps to what was available at launch. All kinds of games including role-playing games and especially the singing/guitar/band game genre have benefits from the DLC - don't like the songs on Rock Band? Download some that you do like! Even the XBLA games have DLC and can benefit from it, I personally enjoyed The Maw immensely and immediately bought the DLC for that game and it was at a good price as well (a whole $1.25 or 100 MS points). However the nature of any business is to make money and try to make the most money possible (except for non-profit of course).
In my opinion DLC in games has started trending towards cash in pocket opposed to value for gamers. Now I will not knock any developer who is trying to add value to the purchase of a new game by giving "free" DLC to those who buy the game new. Gears of War 2 basically enabled the developer to net a nice 400 MS points for purchasing the Flashback maps if someone bought the game used. This is a great idea! Make the new game worth something so people are at least a little less likely to buy used, and if they do and want the content, then they still pay for it. Kudos to the person who thought up that idea, this is a good business practice that really does not hurt the gamers. If you buy the game used and don't want the DLC, don't buy it! Problem solved.
Now the problem I am having is what is going on with said DLC available at launch and there are two main problems. First is the fact that DLC is available at launch which isn't free with the purchase of the new game. Second is the fact that so many deals are being made with "exclusive" content that some gamers are unable to get all the content for a game unless they purchase multiple copies from multiple vendors (admittedly not on the 360 but you have to order God of War 3 from multiple vendors to get all the "skins" for Kratos).
Lets explore the second one first as it is a bit more cut and dry. Game developers are now making deals with vendors of games to give them exclusive content that is not available anywhere else and frequently is not available to purchase later as DLC. I am NOT against this in any way as long as deals are only being made with one vendor. When I bought Assassin's Creed 2 I got myself a nice extra map when I bought it at Gamestop. Now I am not aware of any other vendor who had a deal for other "extras" so this is cool. I get a benefit for buying the game on launch and I don't have to worry about someone else getting something different. Now the flip side to it is that it does suck if I did not have the ability to pre-order it and I now lose out on some extra content that I could have had. This is business and you know what, business sucks sometimes, but I don't feel the developers are trying to screw the gamer in any way with this practice, just reward those of us who purchase the game right away. If they ever start adding gamerscore or trophies for said exclusives, I will change my tune drastically. The worry is that more developers will start making MULTIPLE deals and you will be screwed out of certain things if you buy them from one location or another. At least to my knowledge there aren't any on the 360 that currently have made multiple deals.
The real problem I have with the DLC is the quality of some DLC for the price and mainly Day 1 DLC. Let me reiterate that DLC that is a bonus for buying the game new is not a bad thing, however some "free" DLC is starting to come with a time limit. Dragon Age: Origins "free" 1200 MS point DLC is only good until April 30th, 2010 - six months after the game came out. That's a new twist on the screwing the gamer if they don't buy the game new, heck if you buy it new on May 1st, 2010 you now have to shell out $15 more dollars to get content that was available on day one. Personally I thought the DLC was worth 800 MS/$10 but not more than that. That particular DLC added about 2-3 hours of quests and one playable character, not really worth the 1200 IMO. To continue to pick on Dragon Age, there was not just one but TWO different DLC available on day one. The second one cost 560 MS points and I felt was worth the price but what the hell people? I just paid $60 + tax for a brand new game and I don't get everything that was made with it? Look, DLC is supposed to be an addition to a game later on, not an "upgrade" that drives the overall price above the industry standard. So basically I paid $67 + tax for all the content on Dragon Age on day one. Sounds to me like another way for the industry to get more money out of games instead of just raising the price. Below I added a funny (albeit crude) comic pulled from Kotaku in regards to the DLC that was not free in Dragon Age.
So is this another new trend for the gaming industry to raise its prices and (remember this is an editorial) IMO screw the gamer? Maybe. Dragon Age also has had its 3rd DLC announced that will be available this holiday season. Look, I'm not against companies trying to make money, but this is ridiculous. Is the average gamer supposed to be too stupid to think that most of this content couldn't have been just, oh I don't know, PUT ON THE RETAIL DISC? Message to EA - if you want to screw us with massive amounts of DLC - at least pretend not to have had it ready at launch. Wait like 2-3 months before you release any and then make sure it is freaking good content and not overpriced!
Now all this being said I am not hating on Dragon Age, I personally loved playing the game and will probably buy the 3rd DLC (priced at a more reasonable 400 MS points) and enjoy it. However I worry that this will become more of a trend than the exception. I mean I get tired of this whole charade that these video game companies don't make any money, they make plenty and they want to make more. Companies go out of business all the time, and there are two reasons, one they are sold, or two they are using more money than they are making. Better business management people, better business management......I personally will punch in the face the president of Activision if he ever pulled up in his limo and his suit probably worth more than my car is worth and told me directly that I should pay $70 or $80 or more for a new video game because he wasn't making enough money. Business in general in the US are hurting because of the economy being in a slump but raising the prices of games will not make that better, that will just drive us more and more to purchase used. So this is the video game industries' smoke and mirror trick. Oh well we won't raise the price of the game, we will just make the game "customizeable" so you can upgrade your game to what you want it to be. What I want it to be is a complete game that is good.
If/when Assassin's Creed 2 comes out with DLC I will be ALL OVER IT. I loved the game (review to come shortly) and will rave to anyone who will listen about the production value of that game and how freaking great it is. Hell the whole time in the game I saw them getting you ready for another sequel and still didn't care. I can already see a few points where they can easily insert DLC without screwing up the story line.... If a game is good, people will buy additional content. Don't diminish the value of your game by making content available from day one. I'm sure many people who have played Modern Warfare 2 will be happy to purchase DLC for the game in a few months - from what I have heard it sounds like a great game, but would you have wanted to pay oh say another 5-10 dollars for a few extra maps on day one even if you bought it new? My guess is no, you wouldn't want to.
I might have to eventually change my personal claim on completionist in the near future if too many games pick up this trend. I realize most people won't join me, but I would personally boycott any DLC (achievement points or no) that is available on day one that is not a "bonus" for buying the game new.
So the long and short of my article is a few pieces of advice to any developer who will probably never read this:
Please don't treat us gamers like we are stupid.
Make a good game and we will shower you with money for additional content, but that content sure as hell better not have been ready to put on the retail disc.
Make the DLC worth it, don't just put crap out there, or overcharge for decent DLC.
Don't let the president from Activision talk about anything money related when he has more money than most of us will ever see in a lifetime.
All right folks, that's my rant for now. Feel free to post in here any comments about how you feel about DLC in general, or just post and tell me I'm a nut.
Now unlike my last rant I want to explore the upside to DLC before I turn my wrath upon MS and greedy developers. DLC is a great new feature to this generation of console gaming: you can download new content for a game that was not available at the time the game was released. This is a wonderful thing allowing developers the ability to add new content to a game to do a few things: first increase the value of the game, second to give gamers who enjoyed the game more content and third to make a few extra bucks down the road. Now in many of the games we have seen my personal opinion is that the content is generally worth the extra 5-10 dollars spent on it (even if it is using MS points). I loved playing Halo 3 and did not feel ripped off purchasing the new map packs as they came out, and it has allowed other games like Gears of War 2 to add tons of maps to what was available at launch. All kinds of games including role-playing games and especially the singing/guitar/band game genre have benefits from the DLC - don't like the songs on Rock Band? Download some that you do like! Even the XBLA games have DLC and can benefit from it, I personally enjoyed The Maw immensely and immediately bought the DLC for that game and it was at a good price as well (a whole $1.25 or 100 MS points). However the nature of any business is to make money and try to make the most money possible (except for non-profit of course).
In my opinion DLC in games has started trending towards cash in pocket opposed to value for gamers. Now I will not knock any developer who is trying to add value to the purchase of a new game by giving "free" DLC to those who buy the game new. Gears of War 2 basically enabled the developer to net a nice 400 MS points for purchasing the Flashback maps if someone bought the game used. This is a great idea! Make the new game worth something so people are at least a little less likely to buy used, and if they do and want the content, then they still pay for it. Kudos to the person who thought up that idea, this is a good business practice that really does not hurt the gamers. If you buy the game used and don't want the DLC, don't buy it! Problem solved.
Now the problem I am having is what is going on with said DLC available at launch and there are two main problems. First is the fact that DLC is available at launch which isn't free with the purchase of the new game. Second is the fact that so many deals are being made with "exclusive" content that some gamers are unable to get all the content for a game unless they purchase multiple copies from multiple vendors (admittedly not on the 360 but you have to order God of War 3 from multiple vendors to get all the "skins" for Kratos).
Lets explore the second one first as it is a bit more cut and dry. Game developers are now making deals with vendors of games to give them exclusive content that is not available anywhere else and frequently is not available to purchase later as DLC. I am NOT against this in any way as long as deals are only being made with one vendor. When I bought Assassin's Creed 2 I got myself a nice extra map when I bought it at Gamestop. Now I am not aware of any other vendor who had a deal for other "extras" so this is cool. I get a benefit for buying the game on launch and I don't have to worry about someone else getting something different. Now the flip side to it is that it does suck if I did not have the ability to pre-order it and I now lose out on some extra content that I could have had. This is business and you know what, business sucks sometimes, but I don't feel the developers are trying to screw the gamer in any way with this practice, just reward those of us who purchase the game right away. If they ever start adding gamerscore or trophies for said exclusives, I will change my tune drastically. The worry is that more developers will start making MULTIPLE deals and you will be screwed out of certain things if you buy them from one location or another. At least to my knowledge there aren't any on the 360 that currently have made multiple deals.
The real problem I have with the DLC is the quality of some DLC for the price and mainly Day 1 DLC. Let me reiterate that DLC that is a bonus for buying the game new is not a bad thing, however some "free" DLC is starting to come with a time limit. Dragon Age: Origins "free" 1200 MS point DLC is only good until April 30th, 2010 - six months after the game came out. That's a new twist on the screwing the gamer if they don't buy the game new, heck if you buy it new on May 1st, 2010 you now have to shell out $15 more dollars to get content that was available on day one. Personally I thought the DLC was worth 800 MS/$10 but not more than that. That particular DLC added about 2-3 hours of quests and one playable character, not really worth the 1200 IMO. To continue to pick on Dragon Age, there was not just one but TWO different DLC available on day one. The second one cost 560 MS points and I felt was worth the price but what the hell people? I just paid $60 + tax for a brand new game and I don't get everything that was made with it? Look, DLC is supposed to be an addition to a game later on, not an "upgrade" that drives the overall price above the industry standard. So basically I paid $67 + tax for all the content on Dragon Age on day one. Sounds to me like another way for the industry to get more money out of games instead of just raising the price. Below I added a funny (albeit crude) comic pulled from Kotaku in regards to the DLC that was not free in Dragon Age.
So is this another new trend for the gaming industry to raise its prices and (remember this is an editorial) IMO screw the gamer? Maybe. Dragon Age also has had its 3rd DLC announced that will be available this holiday season. Look, I'm not against companies trying to make money, but this is ridiculous. Is the average gamer supposed to be too stupid to think that most of this content couldn't have been just, oh I don't know, PUT ON THE RETAIL DISC? Message to EA - if you want to screw us with massive amounts of DLC - at least pretend not to have had it ready at launch. Wait like 2-3 months before you release any and then make sure it is freaking good content and not overpriced!
Now all this being said I am not hating on Dragon Age, I personally loved playing the game and will probably buy the 3rd DLC (priced at a more reasonable 400 MS points) and enjoy it. However I worry that this will become more of a trend than the exception. I mean I get tired of this whole charade that these video game companies don't make any money, they make plenty and they want to make more. Companies go out of business all the time, and there are two reasons, one they are sold, or two they are using more money than they are making. Better business management people, better business management......I personally will punch in the face the president of Activision if he ever pulled up in his limo and his suit probably worth more than my car is worth and told me directly that I should pay $70 or $80 or more for a new video game because he wasn't making enough money. Business in general in the US are hurting because of the economy being in a slump but raising the prices of games will not make that better, that will just drive us more and more to purchase used. So this is the video game industries' smoke and mirror trick. Oh well we won't raise the price of the game, we will just make the game "customizeable" so you can upgrade your game to what you want it to be. What I want it to be is a complete game that is good.
If/when Assassin's Creed 2 comes out with DLC I will be ALL OVER IT. I loved the game (review to come shortly) and will rave to anyone who will listen about the production value of that game and how freaking great it is. Hell the whole time in the game I saw them getting you ready for another sequel and still didn't care. I can already see a few points where they can easily insert DLC without screwing up the story line.... If a game is good, people will buy additional content. Don't diminish the value of your game by making content available from day one. I'm sure many people who have played Modern Warfare 2 will be happy to purchase DLC for the game in a few months - from what I have heard it sounds like a great game, but would you have wanted to pay oh say another 5-10 dollars for a few extra maps on day one even if you bought it new? My guess is no, you wouldn't want to.
I might have to eventually change my personal claim on completionist in the near future if too many games pick up this trend. I realize most people won't join me, but I would personally boycott any DLC (achievement points or no) that is available on day one that is not a "bonus" for buying the game new.
So the long and short of my article is a few pieces of advice to any developer who will probably never read this:
Please don't treat us gamers like we are stupid.
Make a good game and we will shower you with money for additional content, but that content sure as hell better not have been ready to put on the retail disc.
Make the DLC worth it, don't just put crap out there, or overcharge for decent DLC.
Don't let the president from Activision talk about anything money related when he has more money than most of us will ever see in a lifetime.
All right folks, that's my rant for now. Feel free to post in here any comments about how you feel about DLC in general, or just post and tell me I'm a nut.
