February 23rd, 2011 
Glasenator First off if you haven’t read it yet, this is a response to Bruce’s morning post on DLC, go read it.
Allright let me get this straight here. There’s a lot of things I hate about video games and there’s a lot of things that I love. One of those things that I absolutely hate is Downloadable Content, a.k.a DLC. I understand the positive uses of DLC to help renew interest in a game, but there’s a difference between putting out DLC to keep sales up a little longer…from withholding content from a consumer. I also understand that game companies run on a tight schedule and don’t always have the time to get everything out before release dates a lot, but that is no reason to charge for content that couldn’t be included. If it comes down to it I would rather a company scrap their whole DLC project and instead focus on making the core experience of the game better.
How many of these came out again? 3?
Now if DLC for a game is made from start to finish entirely after the project is complete and they put some people from the original project back on to keep producing content, I am perfectly fine with that. This technically can be viewed as a separate game/purchase since all of it’s contents were produced after the main release. But it seems that more and more developers have come up with the strategy of : Let’s withhold this from the game and just make some money from it later. And Bruce is right, if we as consumers don’t like this scheme, you have to stop injecting it with your money and xbox live points.
People Can Fly, the developer behind Bulletstorm, in my opinion is extremely brazen for announcing their DLC ON launch day. Seriously? Obviously content was withheld from the game for the sole purpose of a greater revenue increase. I would like to know for sure if they had already finished the maps they are going to put out later or if they’re actually working on them right now. I’d like to think they’re working away, but that’s the hopeful side in me coming out.
I had my last straw with DLC when Ubisoft decided to release two expansion packs for Assassins Creed: 2. While I enjoyed AC2 immensely, what disturbed me was that some certain areas of the city were for some reason inaccessible. When I finished the game, two main memories were vacant on the chapter select screen. Although the game was a decent length it did feel a little bit short. DLC was released three months later that occupied both of those empty memory spaces. While I can’t find the exact quote, I did read a statement from the development team upon release of the DLC that said the reason why those two memories were not included was because they felt it made the game too long. If anything, the DLC for BOTH of them only took me about two hours to do. Two hours is not a lot when comparing it to a near 15 hour long game. So basically content was pulled directly from the game just to be thrown out later. Mind you, in these chapters important characters and mechanics were introduced, many of them carrying over to Assassins Creed: Brother Hood, such as Leonardo’s Flying Machine. There’s no reason to pull completed content from a game unless it’s pointless or not fun, and neither of those things applied to the the levels that were released in the DLC.
I seriously doubt that this post will cause worldwide DLC-cide, so it looks like I’ll just have to sit on the side as everyone plays their new maps.
Posted in 
Tags: 
First off if I actually motivated this then I have done my job and makes continuing to do it that much easier. Second You actually pretty much drew the line between where i care and where I don't.
If DLC hampers or is held back from the single player campaign then I find that to be very underhanded on the part of the developers. Your example of AC2 fits that mold perfectly. The one I ran across personally was in Dragon Age. There is an NPC in your camp who offers you a quest. To actually do the quest you have to buy DLC. I was stunned watching that bit of con artistry.
The bulletstorm example, while not nice is something I am willing to live with. It did not diminish my single player experience and never will. I can am also free to tell Epic and EA to stick in their ear and play the maps I already have, As I said in my morning mess, it is dumb for publishers to announce DLC at launch as it is not going to sit well with gamers.
I can't argue with Glaser on this one. Releasing DLC on launch day comes off as a cash grab, whether or not it is the case. It's hard to think of any other reason that could happen.
I also agree that it is much more appropriate to do it as a follow up for fans of the game who want to further their playing experience.
Fable 3 has clearly set up to do the same thing you pointed out in AC2. There are doors and spaces that are placed for some kind of DLC, but whether they were designed ahead of time, I'm not sure.
Oh and so far it appears that three weeks was the time between game launch and DLC announcement for both Black Ops and Reach. How does that time line sit in regards to taking out content?
*edit to add*
Okay so with just a few minutes research I found one of the games I was thinking of. Dragon Age II isn't even out yet and they already announced DLC. The thing with both of these is there is no release date yet. So if you wanted to argue pro industry one could say that they announced it and are now hauling ass to get it done. I am not saying I agree or endorse that argument, but might as well add that to mix.
I don't understand why any content should be taken out as long as it's fun and enjoyable.
It seems to me that at the rate at which these kind of releases are going, soon games may be released in bite sized episodes.
First off nobody has ever proven to my satisfaction that content has been taken out. We have a butt load of suspicion which developers don't do anything to decrease. To answer you question they can do it, because morons buy it. I include myself in that last group at times.
Really DLC to me is nothing more than a cost/benefit analysis. May sound far to economics nerd for some, but that is what it comes down to. If I think it's worth the price I will be a whore and pay it. Welcome to the free market is all I can say about that.
Nice articles from both of you and a good discussion here at wonderpodonline. !
Both Glasenators article and Bruces AM post pretty much sum up my LOVE/ HATE relationship with DLC.
As I explained earlier a part of me agrees completely with Bruce. DLC that comes out later ,after a game is finished , can add some great replay and fun to an existing game. I have no problem getting the new map pack for Halo reach that is being made by 343 studios, months after the game was released.
On the other hand there is my hate relationship for DLC. Developers that announce DLC the day the game comes out, or VERY soon after such as in the case of RE5 are just idiotic. I feel its a cash cow, kick in the ball sack, and obviously the content was a available at release, but withheld for the sole purpose of charging for it soon afterwards. It doesn't really matter if the content is for single player, multiplayer or both. if its left out on purpose its left out on purpose. If the content was "not ready because of time issues", as some developers such as capcom attempted to explain for their too soon announcement of DLC, then why not offer it for absolutely FREE when it is ready? Because its a cash cow, thats why.
And thus ends my love/hate rant on DLC. ! ha
I like DLC, but it should be expansions that enhance the core gameplay, not a necessity to beat the game in the first place or unlock certain achievements that you should be able to get without DLC. As it stands, AC2 is pretty bad, but there are various other games I've come into contact with (Kameo and Viva Pinata among them), where it literally feels like you're just not getting the whole game, like the $60 price tag is an admission fee of sorts and in order to access the rest of the game, you pay.
Now on the flipside, if they could make the core game $30 or less (and still be of high quality that's expected out of an official release title) and use that model, that might work. But $60? Goddamn, that means I OWN it, not that I have to buy MORE shit and piece it together like a creepy Frankenstein monster.
I won't go on and on about the quality of DLC…that would take an entire article or two to go over. However, yeah, the DLC should only serve to enhance, not rip you off with the initial product.
Nice post mate.
where the theme of