Far Cry has had some pretty decent DLC ideas, Blood Dragon being a standout. What would you like to see?
Dinosaurs as a DLC will probably always get votes, Personally i'd love a post-apocalyptic vibe but more of a Walking dead scenario. Not that I want zombies, but I like that style of abandoned towns and overgrown foliage/forests. I'd love exploring an abandoned town surrounded by wooded areas sort of like The Last of Us, it could have an on-edge and creepy factor about it.
. Valley of the (Yetis) Bigfoot DLC as part of the season pass.
. Preorder to get the 3 "Save the Amish" missions, starring Hurk who became one after FC4.
. "Nighmare movie DLC": you are alone with your camera and must find your wife kept by a cult living in old towns and open cornfields... Oh, sorry, that's Outlast 2.
I had fun imagining those. ^^
You are very right. For example, seeing RE7 having DLC the very week after the release was rather disturbing.Originally Posted by HorTyS Go to original post
Yet I truly hope the game will get post launch SP DLC (half a year after) so we'll keep coming back with something fresh.
I dont want ANY DLC!
Give us the entire game for $60! instead of taking chucks out of it and selling them separately!
DLC=the biggest rip off scam in video games.
Imagine if Nintendo shipped Super Mario 3 but yanked out world 6 and 7 and sold them as DLC. Its stupid.
DLC = $120 game on average. and ill tell you 90% of games arent worth that, especially ubi games.
Probably the only games worth DLC if you had to buy it would be rockstar games, and look at GTAV for example, the DLC is FREAKING FREE!!! lmao
Can't stand most of Rockstar Games, so I guess everyone has his own vision of the "DLC you got to buy".Originally Posted by akilyoung Go to original post
Actually, without DLCs we would not have had wonders like The Witcher 3 DLCs, Minerva's Den from Bioshock2 and Burial at sea from Bioshock infinite, Left Behind from The Last of Us, upcoming Uncharted The Lost Legacy (originally meant to be a DLC that ended being a full game due to the devs planning on it) and a bunch of others. Even the whole undead thing from red Dead Redemption (Rockstar game) which was quite fun. So I'm totally for DLCs as far as they're built for some time after launch. Which was the case of all the ones I quoted.
Don't talk me about MP DLC. I'm not caring about these.
My issue with it is A) we don't even know what the game itself has, why would we already be coming up with what we want in DLC for it? and B) talking about it already just propagates the idea that DLC should be pumped out quickly after release, meaning they work on it alongside development of the game itself, therefore either reducing developers working on the full game or having ideas pushed into the dlc rather than the full game etc. I think it best to just let the developers focus solely on the game at hand, get a couple weeks vacation after working on the game for however long, and come back refreshed & then start working on DLC. The fact that DLC is in development before games get released these days is honestly fuggin' ridiculous.Originally Posted by JakeyChappers Go to original post
Just because there is no season pass does not mean they will not charge for DLC, it just means they won't charge upfront before the DLC is out...Originally Posted by CZ-BackPa Go to original post
This is a uber-cynical way of thinking about DLC, but not wholly inaccurate. I don't think most devs hold back portions of the game just for DLC purposes, I'm sure it happens to some extent but not the degree of your super mario example. I just think DLC out within 4 months of a game's release is where it is especially lame. that clearly indicates they were working on it before the game actually released. DLC should be iterative & fueled by fan feedback of the game it's based on, you can't do that before the game is in the consumer's hands.Originally Posted by akilyoung Go to original post
The DLC in GTAV is only free because they make so much money from idiots who spend real money on shark cards that they're still making massive profit even releasing all that content for free... not like those devs arent' getting paid for the work... However the success they've seen with that system makes me worried other companies will try to emulate it and but devolve rockstar's example in more greedy direction. i.e. still charging for the content, but maybe not quite as much so it seems like they're making it 'cheap' when it could just be free....