Evolve, Assassin's Creed: Unity, Titanfall.
All games with more DLC than should be counted, and of the Candy Crush or Horse Armor models.
Yet they all sold, or will sell, well.
So why do we buy them? Why do we tell the developers it is OK?
Nintendo is getting corrupted by this ideal of screwing over consumers.
Who is this "we"? It's mostly people who get easily tricked into buying into hype AND NEED TO OWN EVERY BIG GAME AT LAUNCH BECAUSE REASONS. Which is sadly way too many people.
also to be fair probably 2 of those games are technically good and the audience probably likes them and didn't feel the need to buy more (or are rich)
That being said, I've officially gotten sick of this stuff too. It's not even how the DLC is done as much as publishers disrespecting their customers and yet selling more than vastly better games. Tired of it. I'll just buy good games and maybe I'll get those games used someday (but not Unity, **** Unity).
Anyway, I only buy Nintendo's DLC and for the most part, it's been pretty fair:
Hyrule Warriors I am considering, but I hear it gives you a lot.
Fire Emblem gave me $40ish worth of content that can count as a new game on top of a crap ton of new free content.
Also, Nintendo being corrupted? Hell, their conservative practices actually helped them in some regard. They are hesitant about cashing in on bad DLC...let alone DLC in general. They aren't nearly as anti-consumer as other publishers (in terms of software quality)
Anyways, I...don't buy DLC that often (unless it has a lot of content and I like the game a lot), but I have no problem buying a game so long as the content I'm getting seems worthwhile. I got Assassin's Creed 4 and 5, and while I'll probably get Freedom Cry, I'm most staying away from the DLC of those games. AC is long enough and doesn't change enough to warrant getting little add-ons and stuff most of the time.
You had to buy DLC to see the ending of Final Fantasy XIII-2, which is completely ridiculous.
I was upset about that, but it's actually untrue. The DLC was mostly worthless mini-games with a few cutscenes. The most wost story-worthwhile one was the one with Sazh where we get to find out more about Chococolina..bacause apparently we're supposed to care about her or something. Yeah....and it's also the most worthless gameplay-wise, since it's just a terrible, repetitive Casino mini-game.
Seriously, that was the most worthless set of DLC ever. Thankfully I watched most of it on Youtube instead of paying for it all...
Pay to waste less time can be harmless, at least, unless the whole game is structured around it. (which is rare outside of F2P games, but I'll admit that's the reason F2P games tend to be terrible).
@BinaryFragger - I wasn't interested in Evolve once I saw the gameplay (looks like something that would get boring fast). That said, $60 for skins is pretty okay in my book. It's little stuff most people want to pay a dime for, especially not for all of it.
No. Domestic assault is abusive. Paying for DLC is not.
QUEEN OF SASS
It's like, I just love a cowboy
You know
I'm just like, I just, I know, it's bad
But I'm just like
Can I just like, hang off the back of your horse
And can you go a little faster?!
^ The Forza series. You go and select a car only to see that it's part of a DLC car pack.
Oh. That's right, Microsoft. Nevermind then.
But other companies that actually have brains tend to leave that stuff in the shops and don't bother you about it. Usually. Though now that I think about it, EA makes up most of the other exceptions, so...
I've never played evolve, AC:U, and Titanfall. I don't understand why in the world would developers rush their into their own deadline if that game is not finished? I'm sick of developers making pointless and useless DLC and not finishing their own game. Are gamers SERIOUSLY that idiotic and pathetic? (Too negative?)
Forums
Topic: Why do we still support games with abusive DLC policies?
Posts 1 to 14 of 14
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.