• Create Account

### #Actualfrob

Posted 04 December 2012 - 06:56 PM

No, I don't believe it "ruins the value of the game".

I first consider who is complaining, and the extent of their complaints.

Many players whine "these maps should have been included!", but these same players whine about just about everything:

The same people whine that games costing tens of millions of dollars should be free or cost just $1. The same people whine that the game is "horribly broken" and demand for a patch because of a single errant polygon allowing a good sniper position. The same people whine "How dare they take our money for broken content" when they simply don't like how DLC or expansion content happens to integrate. The same people whine "they Nerfed my character with a mandatory patch" while at the same time whine about how overpowered their opponents are. The wording of your post is almost the same mentality: You didn't allow for a 99% rating. You went for "completely ruined." Second, players have come to demand DLC. There are the haters on both sides. When Skyrim said they would have no DLC there was a very vocal group of people who wanted to boycott the game. So now we get Skyrim DLC and people want to boycott it for having DLC. The same complaining minority will whine either way. Third, it allows developers the ability to fit additional content in to their budgets and development time: As a developer you might have$10M total development money and 16 months to build the game. That is enough money for the game and enough money for three maps worth of content. You really want to make seven maps, but you can only afford three in that cost and in that schedule. So you build three because that is the budget you can get approved.

Since you know DLC is an absolute requirement from your bloodthirsty mobs, you design it in to the game. You come up with great ideas for all seven maps. You make the game complete with three maps and spend all your budget. Then when the game is late in production --- and only AFTER it looks like a blockbuster --- you can invest additional money on more maps as DLC.

Looking at bottom line numbers, DLC has a very high cost for very little return. They still require development costs. They still require extensive QA. They require even more QA to ensure compatability between patched and unpatched versions. There is community support that costs time and money. The content needs to be certified by Sony or Microsoft and ESRB and none of that is free. Finally, because it has the ability to be patched your players will actively demand for patches and (sometimes literally) call for blood if you don't deliver updates.

Many times the financial risk of DLC is greater than the financial risk of the base game. It is generally less likely to become profitable, and if it is profitable, the profit margins are generally much smaller.

Personally from this side of the desk I wish customers would quit demanding DLC. It would make my job easier and cost us less money. But customers want it, and it adds value, so it gets created.

### #1frob

Posted 04 December 2012 - 06:53 PM

No, I don't believe it "ruins the value of the game".

I first consider who is complaining, and the extent of their complaints.

Many players whine "these maps should have been included!", but these same players whine about just about everything:

The same people whine that games costing tens of millions of dollars should be free or cost just $1. The same people whine that the game is "horribly broken" and demand for a patch because of a single errant polygon allowing a good sniper position. The same people whine "How dare they take our money for broken content" when they simply don't like how DLC or expansion content happens to integrate. The same people whine "they Nerfed my character with a mandatory patch" while at the same time whine about how overpowered their opponents are. The wording of your post is almost the same mentality: "I don't like it, so rather than giving it a 99% rating, it is completely ruined." Second, players have come to demand DLC. There are the haters on both sides. When Skyrim said they would have no DLC there was a very vocal group of people who wanted to boycott the game. So now we get Skyrim DLC and people want to boycott it for having DLC. The same complaining minority will whine either way. Third, it allows developers the ability to fit additional content in to their budgets and development time: As a developer you might have$10M total development money and 16 months to build the game. That is enough money for the game and enough money for three maps worth of content. You really want to make seven maps, but you can only afford three in that cost and in that schedule. So you build three because that is the budget you can get approved.

Since you know DLC is an absolute requirement from your bloodthirsty mobs, you design it in to the game. You come up with great ideas for all seven maps. You make the game complete with three maps and spend all your budget. Then when the game is late in production --- and only AFTER it looks like a blockbuster --- you can invest additional money on more maps as DLC.

Looking at bottom line numbers, DLC has a very high cost for very little return. They still require development costs. They still require extensive QA. They require even more QA to ensure compatability between patched and unpatched versions. There is community support that costs time and money. The content needs to be certified by Sony or Microsoft and ESRB and none of that is free. Finally, because it has the ability to be patched your players will actively demand for patches and (sometimes literally) call for blood if you don't deliver updates.

Many times the financial risk of DLC is greater than the financial risk of the base game. It is generally less likely to become profitable, and if it is profitable, the profit margins are generally much smaller.

Personally from this side of the desk I wish customers would quit demanding DLC. It would make my job easier and cost us less money. But customers want it, and it adds value, so it gets created.

PARTNERS