By Dave Snell
GameZone.com
With the recent surge in downloadable content for top titles, maybe it is time we take a step back and look at what we are buying and getting for our money. DLC generally falls into several categories, ranging from skins and weapons, to level packs, to entire new game modes. But are we paying for content that traditionally would have been included in the retail product, or is DLC genuinely extending the life of our favorite products? Are the prices a fair representation of what we are getting (remember the infamous Horse Armour for Oblivion?), and how do we judge that?
TES4: Oblivion: Knights of the Nine good, Horse Armour bad
Examples of DLC are rife across most consoles nowadays, and vary wildly. For example, Modern Warfare 2 released the Mapathy Pack with three new maps and two resurrected ones for $15. That works out at $3 per map, and two of those are basically recycled content. You could justify this in game hours: the average player who picks up this pack would likely play each map for at least three hours each, working out at a good 15-hour experience for the money. Also, as an actual expansion, the buyer has the choice whether to buy or not, and isn’t really losing anything by not purchasing. However, many could argue that the price is prohibitively high, offering just a few maps for the third of the price of the full game. Shouldn’t we be entitled to a little more for that kind of payout?
Next up is single-player content, such as the Assassins Creed 2 DLC that has two single-player chapter packs, weighing in at $4 each. For that, you get two previously locked chapters of the game, telling more of the story and slotting in neatly between the main chapters of the game. But hang on a second: locked chapters? Isn’t this a blatant way of closing off part of the retail title, and milking the buyer (who has likely already paid a retail price of $50 or more) for even more money? Many people (myself included) felt that this was so, and refused to buy the content as a result. One chapter even took place in a city that was hardly used within the game, proving that the “new” content wasn’t even a separate build. And in terms of value for money, each chapter weighs in at about two or three hours, actually making it more “expensive” (in terms of game time) than the MW2 pack. Again, no one is forced to buy the packs, but many do feel that the story is a little incomplete without it.
And then we have skin packs; Killing Floor (as an example!) sells packs of five skins at a price of about a dollar. They have no impact on the game itself, but allow players to be somewhat more distinguishable in a multiplayer (or even single-player) match. Again, you don’t have to buy, and people who don’t still see your shiny new suit, but they add a touch of personalization to your game. In all honesty, skins are the prime example of “take-it-or-leave-it” DLC; those who buy get their own enjoyment, and those who don’t play on quite happily. Weapon packs add a little more controversy, but generally, if well balanced, most new guns or vehicles are essentially simple re-skins for existing in-game items.
The big issue with DLC is somewhat highlighted by the Assassins Creed 2 example: is this just blatantly ripping people off? Seeing as AC2 ships without multiplayer, you could justify it by stating that it offers more game, but is it merely forcing people to pay for something that should be included? When the inevitable Game of the Year edition ships with the extra content in the box, is this really fair to early adopters, who paid full price on launch for less game? I would argue no; when you pay full price for a game, you should get a full game – no locked chapters, or at the very least give them for free when the GOTY releases. I would also argue that the MW2 pack is something of a rip off too. Yes, the price-per-hour ratio is good, but the price compared to similar packs on the Web is very high (cleverly marketed by the Battlefield: Bad Company 2 guys), and again feels like forcing consumers to pay an inflated price because the publisher (in this case, Activision) can get away with charging it.
AC2: Alas, poor Forli, we hardly knew ye (unless we buy the expansion pack)
DLC is certainly here to stay, and we haven’t even touched on avatars, wallpaper packs and the myriad of other products available. Where we (as consumers) need to be careful is in checking what we get for our money: some; companies offer great service, such as Valve and their Team Fortress 2 and Left 4 Dead support, but many don’t. Most major publishers put the bottom line first – they have stockholders and investors to appease, and wouldn’t exist if they didn’t – and we, as consumers, have to be wary of games becoming excessively priced through various means. And we can by buying the expansions that offer a good deal, such as Episodes from Liberty City, or the Borderlands packs. These really give you a lot more game for a significantly more sensible price, and should be used as an example of good DLC. Whether or not we are being ripped off is on the eye of each purchaser. One player’s good deal is another player’s overpriced pack, but even so, some “deals” are maybe a step too far. And maybe, if we ignore the seriously overpriced goods, developers will take notice, and offer a fairer deal to the consumer.
