There's a clear difference between quality downloadable content (DLC) and a hastily thrown together expansion that acts more like a money vacuum for the developer than an enjoyable add-on to the game. To the dismay of many gamers, the latter form tends to happen a large amount of the time.
Take for instance the upcoming DLC for Epic's Gears of War 3, releasing on Nov. 1 – barely over a month after the game dropped. Amongst a few other things, this DLC pack will include new weapon skins to customize your guns. I'm not sure why it's labeled as DLC, though, seeing as the weapon skins are already on the disc.
What you would actually be downloading is the key to unlock them. So essentially you will be paying for something that you've already bought. This is a blatant attempt to scam gamers into coughing up a few more bucks – as if paying the initial $60 wasn't enough. I know I won't be buying this.
This isn't the first time something like this has happened either. Last year 2K Games did the same thing with their release of Bioshock 2. Justifiably, gamers went into full-on rage mode and began posting their complaints anywhere on the Internet that would house them.
Granted, you can still get the most out of the game without buying DLC. It's not mandatory and you don't lose anything by not buying it, but if the content is on there, then why hold it back? I understand that these are companies and they have to turn a profit, but in this digital world they won't be able to keep it a secret and ultimately the fans are going to turn rabid. In some cases, gamers have sworn off of developers entirely because of this. How does that help the business?
Still, as annoying of a marketing move as this is, it shouldn't be taken as a representation of all DLC. There are plenty of companies that put out amazing content for gamers – sometimes even for free.
When it's used in a way that isn't trying to obviously rip off gamers, DLC can potentially mean unlimited enjoyment out of any title. Most multiplayer map packs for games like Black Ops or Halo: Reach are great examples of this. Just when you feel like you can't take playing the same maps anymore, up pops some fresh ones to get your fragging on.
The same thing goes for campaign DLC. Thanks to DLC, games like Fallout 3 and Mass Effect, that lack any multiplayer component, are able to expand their shelf life quite a bit longer, and really make the gamer feel like the game was a worthy pick up.
The only time that could go bad is if the DLC is required to get the full campaign experience. As long as the DLC is side quests or post-campaign, then this shouldn't be an issue.
So what this all boils down to is the fact that DLC can be an awesome add-on for any title and make the game infinitely better, or it can make you want to teabag the head of the studio responsible for more or less stealing your loot. As long as you use your head, and maybe a little research, you should be able to keep developers from squeezing every penny out of you.
Email: james.twigg@ubspectrum.com
