Starker on 20/1/2014 at 01:57

---

If they did, at least they didn't have the audacity to sell them on release. The picture is not meant to be a serious depiction of DLC history anyway. However, there does seem to be a trend towards a more exploitative and anti-consumer business model from Tales of the Sword Coast to Warden's Keep.



Yes, I find exclusive game content unfair, including backer-exclusive content, if it affects gameplay experience. I don't want my money to be wasted on making things for just me and a few thousand people. I want my money to go towards making the game better as a whole and I think that everyone should be able to purchase a complete game, even non-backers. Cosmetic items are borderline okay for me.




The correct term is superpurist.

qolelis on 20/1/2014 at 04:49

---

@dethtoll (and, to a certain degree, Renzatic as well):
Thanks for the introduction, I really appreciate it and I'm processing the info...

What I meant with coming from another tradition of gaming is that I got into gaming by way of Myst and the likes, games without any immediate threats or any split-second decisions and solely based on storytelling, exploration and contemplation. I was into DooM (I & II) for a while, though; it was a great outlet at the time and also how I first got into modding. Fast forward a few years and I discover Thief, which was a happy medium with more depth than the action games and more interactivity than the adventure games. I still played a lot of adventure games for story and the intellectual challenges. Then DromEd took over completely as my new master, becoming a game on its own and I discovered that I enjoyed creating just as much or even more than I enjoyed playing. When TDM came out I got Doom III in some deal or bundle and started playing it for nostalgia's sake - and even though I enjoyed the intensity of the adrenaline rush, I just didn't feel the need to return, so I never finished it. There was nothing there for me to care about, no depth, just adrenaline, which only held for so long.

So, that's what I would be coming from if stepping into the world of Dark Souls; I would probably really enjoy the complexity, the unforgiving surroundings, the totally(?) non-contextual movement (as it should be), the architecture and landscaping, the freedom in deciding what to do and to take responsibility for my decisions, and the potential depths of the story being told, but I just might struggle a lot(!) with the fights (even if I got that gamepad controller as recommended), which could effectively rule out any and all progress on my part. These points, by the way, are exactly what makes me respect them for trusting both their own product and their potential players.

Another thing is that when I eventually get into something, I really get into it, which I may not have time for.

Renzatic on 20/1/2014 at 16:05

---

If you haven't spent much time with a gamepad, then yeah, DS would be your baptism by fire. You'll be using your thumbs and index fingers in ways you're not accustomed to to hit every single button available. I'll say this, though. If you spend about 2-3 hours playing it, you'll probably be comfortable enough with one to get through the game, and you'll only get better with it as you go along. And since the game is a good 70-90 hours your first time through, by the time you're done, you'll be an old pro.

Though if you want to acclimate yourself a little easier, but still want to play something similar, there's always the Kings Field games, specifically The Ancient City, since it's aged considerably better than the rest. Whereas DS is kinda fast and frantic at times, the KF games are slow and almost languid. You could get PCSX2 and a copy of the game easily enough.

qolelis on 20/1/2014 at 22:08

---

Thanks for the extra input. :D Now I have some thinking to do.

GodzillaX8 on 23/1/2014 at 03:08

---

DLC is essentially never "content clipped from the game that you would have had if it were made 10 years ago."

DLC is "This game is an increasingly expensive risk, we need to monetize alternate revenue streams in order to maximize the potential for profit."

The vast majority of DLC is developed with its own separate timeline and budget, and the sole purpose is to increase the average purchase price per copy sold. This allows people who don't care about having 6 more skins for their weapon to pay a lower price overall for their game. But again, let me stress that most DLC packages either have their own budget, or increase the budget of the game they are being developed for. Much of this is content that years back would have been on the cutting room floor, and would never have seen the light of day.

Despite the incredibly increased budget required to develop a AAA game, adjusted for inflation, the price of video games has actually plummeted in the past decade or so. Part of this is because lower price point increases demand, thus increasing sales, part of this is due to there simply being more people buying video games. But another big part is that DLC is subsidizing many of these lower prices. For every 10 people that buy a game for $50 or less, there is at least one who buys every scrap of DLC ever put out for the game, sometimes spending $200+ on collector's editions, season passes, etc. simply to support the game. In F2P games, people often refer to these customers as "whales." They spend greatly more on the game than most other people do because they wish the game to be successful and profitable, which will lead to more content being produced.

In my experience with DLC, you many times pay less and get more than you would have with an "expansion pack" back then. Diablo II: Lord of Destruction was over $30 (close to $40 after inflation adjustment from 2001 to now) when it launched, and you got a fifth act, 2 character classes, and a host of tweaks and fixes, essentially. Taking Bioshock 2 Minerva's Den DLC as an example, you got a brand new campaign that was about 1/3 the length of the original game for $10. Hardly a bad deal.

If you don't think a piece of content is worth the price, don't buy it. If you don't think a game is worth the price on the package, don't buy it. If you think it's "content clipped from the main game because of greed," 9 times out of 10, you're pretty much completely wrong.

If you want to wait and buy a game of the year edition with all of the bonus content included, then please, do so. But don't throw out blanket statements about DLC being some kind of villain ruining gaming. It's not true.