Current Events > We use to pay for games to get 100% game

(+) Yeah! (+)

Now there's DLC. And people give in. Lol...I've never wasted money on DLC.
---

Austin_Era_II posted...

Now there's DLC. And people give in. Lol...I've never wasted money on DLC.

I personally don't see anything wrong with pre-order bonuses. Other DLC unless it's story I've usually always stayed away
---

Depends on the DLC. Stuff with great additional content like Borderlands 2's DLCs is real nice.

DLC costumes are something that I'll never waste money on, but it's innocuous enough.

Pay-to-win DLC can fuck themselves sideways though.
---

So many incomplete games coming out now.

Of course developers are going to do it when they know stupid ass Fanboys will buy the DLC which then funds the completion of the base game.
---

Bonuses like that are cool. Add-ons are a joke. Like people playing Fortnite and getting things unless they unlock it.
---

Even new map packs are a joke. Normally it's like $70+ and at times the newer maps are meh. Might be only 1 that's actually good.

I wouldn't even pay for a new side storyline.
---

Games were generally shorter before DLC.

Games are longer and have more meaningful content than they used to. Furthermore, expansions were a thing for a long time, as were better versions of the same game, and sequels would complete a story.

People who hate DLC on principle make no sense to me. They're offering you X for Y amount of money, and you can additionally have Z for A amount of money. You CAN stop at X. You just think you deserve Z automatically or if they develop Z before they released X they should be obligated to give it to you.

That doesn't make any sense. It wouldn't make sense with literally anything else. Only gamers create rules that developers have never had to follow, and say that should be the industry standard. Especially considering gaming is a luxury hobby.

It's really, really, really, entitled.
---

I don't really get why a game without DLC is considered 80%, 90% etc of a game.

To me, a game with DLC is 110%, 120%, etc of a game. I mean, there are obvious counterexamples like Bonfire of the Vanities but in general, I find games tend to stand on their own without the DLC. In fact, I find half the time, the DLC is balanced horribly like the tacked on extra that it is.

Of course, there's a chance this has changed pretty substantially in the 8th generation but people have been whining this way since the inception of DLC so
---

AdviceMan posted...

Games were generally shorter before DLC.

This is true.

Remember all those 4-5 hour campaigns during the ps1/n64/Xbox/gc/ps2 era.

...
---

The absolute audacity of having to pay additional money for additional content just makes me see red.

specialkid8 posted...

The absolute audacity of having to pay additional money for additional content just makes me see red.

additional content demanded by fault of an incomplete base game

---

This complaint never made sense to me. I think there's like only a couple of examples of DLC that feels like it's cut from the game.

The issue with the far majority of expansion DLC in my experience is that it feels low budget and pointless.
---

AsucaHayashi posted...

This is true.

Remember all those 4-5 hour campaigns during the ps1/n64/Xbox/gc/ps2 era.

...

And we used to pay more. People forget that adjusting for inflation means those games cost more like the equivalent of $90.

---

God_Of_Entirety posted...

specialkid8 posted...

The absolute audacity of having to pay additional money for additional content just makes me see red.

additional content demanded by fault of an incomplete base game

You forgot to end your sentence with ",man".

I'm just waiting for the day you go out and buy a new game at $60+, take it home and start playing it then after 1-2 hours a message pops up saying "Thanks for playing the trial version of (insert title here)!!! To experience the full game please download the full version for $60+ more!!!"
---

specialkid8 posted...

nOn ReSpOnSe

---

You still do. DLC existing does not mean the content was held back just to sell separately to make extra money. Does this happen? Of course but it is not always the case. Believe it or not some DLC is actually content that was created after the game's launch. That does not mean what you bought was an incomplete game.

Did you ever play Pokemon as a kid? Remember how there were Pokemon you could only get in Blue and Pokemon you could only get in Red? Only way around it was to buy a link cable (extra $$$) and trade with somebody else or trade with yourself on another gameboy which again costs more money...then Yellow came out sometime later and you didn't have to worry about it..kind of like an old school "Complete Edition" in a way.

Funny how I don't remember anyone complaining about being sold an incomplete game when content was literally held back and put on another version of the same game to entice you to buy two copies lol

MKScorpion posted...

Funny how I don't remember anyone complaining about being sold an incomplete game when content was literally held back and put on another version of the same game to entice you to buy two copies lol

Yeah because we were kids and in general far less privy to the underhanded tactics of devs. Doesnt retroactively make it OK
---

MKScorpion posted...

Did you ever play Pokemon as a kid? Remember how there were Pokemon you could only get in Blue and Pokemon you could only get in Red? Only way around it was to buy a link cable (extra $$$) and trade with somebody else or trade with yourself on another gameboy which again costs more money...then Yellow came out sometime later and you didn't have to worry about it..kind of like an old school "Complete Edition" in a way.

Funny how I don't remember anyone complaining about being sold an incomplete game when content was literally held back and put on another version of the same game to entice you to buy two copies lol

It's baffling to me that Nintendo gets away with that shit tbh. It's so damn scummy.
---

AsucaHayashi posted...

AdviceMan posted...

Games were generally shorter before DLC.

This is true.

Remember all those 4-5 hour campaigns during the ps1/n64/Xbox/gc/ps2 era.

...

You're almost certainly comparing the longest games from that era with the shortest games from this era. Like for example, Super Mario 64 is not a long game, and neither is Ocarina of Time, but if you do everything, they can be.

On the other hand, I can point out that even then, if you compare them to things like Ass Creed, or Persona 5, if you do everything in THOSE games, they're MUCH longer. The difference is, for some weird reason people will call stuff in the current generation bloat, but consider collectathon games "just a lot of content." You might get stuff for collecting things, but it's basically irrelevant, because almost none of it is necessary for the meat and potatoes of the game.
---

The point of Pokemon having different versions was to encourage trading with friends which would also encourage battling.

As far as I'm aware there has never been a single game with every Pokemon.
---

I hate tacky, immersion-breaking paywalls in my games. At the same time, I get that development costs have gone up, development is way more complex than it used to be and the $60 upper price point hasn't budged an inch for inflation in 30 years.

$99 should be the new standard for SSS, all-content-unlocked, all-future-DLC games, imo. Just let me rip the band-aid off and enjoy a complete game, please.
---

This certainly didn't go the way TC thought it would lol
---

God_Of_Entirety posted...

Yeah because we were kids and in general far less privy to the underhanded tactics of devs. Doesnt retroactively make it OK

No it's definitely not cool but my main point was this kind of thing has been happening for a long time and I wonder why games of the past seem to get a pass for it and then games made in the current era get a ton of crap for dlc even if the dlc was completed after launch and not intentionally held back for money.

pegusus123456 posted...

It's baffling to me that Nintendo gets away with that shit tbh. It's so damn scummy.

Yeah im not sure why or how they get away with it either. I loved Pokemon growing up but looking back they were the ogs of this held back content stuff and they weren't even subtle about it lol

everyone knows nintendo is the apple of gaming.

---

AdviceMan posted...

The difference is, for some weird reason people will call stuff in the current generation bloat, but consider collectathon games "just a lot of content."

I'd call that fair actually. Each collectible in a collectathon game is locked behind a different challenge. You have to collect 100 coins or do some platforming or defeat a boss. Compare it to, say, the comic books in the Last of Us. There's no challenge to it, it's just something that's semi-hidden.

Darmik posted...

The point of Pokemon having different versions was to encourage trading with friends which would also encourage battling.

As far as I'm aware there has never been a single game with every Pokemon.

...yeah, and that's super scummy.
---

DLC is cool but when games are cut apart on purpose to be sold as DLC I'm calling admiral bone to pick
---

Yeah the incomplete game argument really depends on the game and the dlc.

Games like Witcher 3, Borderlands 2, Skyrim, etc are dlc done right. Thats extra content added to a game.

Games like Evolve, Destiny, or Street Fighter are dlc done wrong. If a game is designed around dlc and not the other way around it usually turns to shit.

---

pegusus123456 posted...

...yeah, and that's super scummy.

I don't know how else a game could give out that feeling of trading cards with friends. That's basically what they're going for. They didn't intend for people to buy two game boys and play the game twice. That doesn't make any sense.

It's not like you have an incomplete game because you can't catch every single Pokemon without trading. I'd say the far majority of people don't catch them all. On top of that they gave out rare Pokemon in stores so even if you bought both copies you aren't guaranteed to get every Pokemon.

Nowadays you can trade Pokemon online with strangers so they've made it easier as time goes on too.
---

MKScorpion posted...

You still do. DLC existing does not mean the content was held back just to sell separately to make extra money. Does this happen? Of course but it is not always the case. Believe it or not some DLC is actually content that was created after the game's launch. That does not mean what you bought was an incomplete game.

Did you ever play Pokemon as a kid? Remember how there were Pokemon you could only get in Blue and Pokemon you could only get in Red? Only way around it was to buy a link cable (extra $$$) and trade with somebody else or trade with yourself on another gameboy which again costs more money...then Yellow came out sometime later and you didn't have to worry about it..kind of like an old school "Complete Edition" in a way.

Funny how I don't remember anyone complaining about being sold an incomplete game when content was literally held back and put on another version of the same game to entice you to buy two copies lol

Hell, I knew kids who bought two Gameboys for Pokemon.
---

AdviceMan posted...

Like for example, Super Mario 64 is not a long game

https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=9364

This says youre wrong. It has the same length as most typical non-open world campaigns today.

Without dlc, of course.

Oot is like 20+ hours for main story. So again not a short game.
---

In fact, the PS1 had many RPGs that were too long.
---

Rememeber the time Asura's Wrath made its ending paid DLC? Good times.

---

AsucaHayashi posted...

AdviceMan posted...

Like for example, Super Mario 64 is not a long game

https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=9364

This says youre wrong. It has the same length as most typical non-open world campaigns today.

Without dlc, of course.

Oot is like 20+ hours for main story. So again not a short game.

https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=65882
https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=46453
https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=38019
https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=64993

Super Mario 64's length is only marginally longer than Odyssey's, half an hour to be an exact, but then Odyssey has a LOT more extra game content. And I don't know what your experience was, but a lot of games, specifically older games had the "you don't know where to go next and that's what's taking you so long".

The reason why I picked Super Mario 64 and oot is because they're some of the biggest (ambitious) games in that era. You have to compare them with games that are considered relatively short in todays era for them to hold up in terms of length and content. Nobody would play a game with a 13 hour campaign today and consider it long.

And if you're going to compare the longest RPGs of the past, then you have to compare them to the longest RPGs of the present. I'm trying to think of an RPG that meets Persona 5's sprawling 95 hour length.
---

We have always had Map Packs and Expansion Packs.
And we have always had content being cut out from games during development for different reasons.
---

AdviceMan posted...

You have to compare them with games that are considered relatively short in todays era for them to hold up in terms of length and content. Nobody would play a game with a 13 hour campaign today and consider it long.

Seeing as it was an aaa game Im gonna compare it to the aaa games of today, most of which are around that exact length. Just because odyssey has lots of extra content in this age does not mean sm64 is by any means a short game.

AdviceMan posted...

I'm trying to think of an RPG that meets Persona 5's sprawling 95 hour length.

You and I must have played different games then because what I experienced was a game with horrendous pacing, an absolute shit ton of needless filler, and revisiting the same areas in the overworld over and over and over again with next to no real progression upon each visit. Damn my stats are too low. Time to visit the burger bar for the 20th time.

A classic long game that can actually justify its length is BG2:
https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=810

And to a lesser extent its prequel because its a bit shorter
---

That's why you wait for the complete edition