One of the worst trends in the gaming industry - the lack of proper pricing on DLCs. Not only are they poorly priced IMO, they are also barely on sale or discounted.
Case in point - my wife just finished Assassin's Creed III and I was looking forward to picking up the DLC (Tyranny of George Washington costs a whopping $28 and the other single player missions cost a total of $10 across two pieces of DLC). Yet the game itself is normally priced $20. How could a full game be cheaper than its' DLC that is, at best, a few hours long?
Another case - I'm playing through Mass Effect 3 at the moment (bought the collector's edition back then) and I was shocked at the amount I had to pay for the overall single player DLC cost me a total of $50!!! That's almost the price of a brand new game :/!
True, they are optional, but having played through plenty of them they don't always feel like they are. With Mass Effect 3 I felt like the DLC I played so far (From Ashes, Leviathan and Omega) are very pivotal to the plot and experience.
It is one of the worst trends in the gaming industry IMO that many gaming publishers get away with time and time again. On top of the pricing problem, you can't tell if the developer intentionally creates content for DLC rather than include them in the main game. It is deceptive and easy to get away with, especially when it comes out on the SAME DAY as the game's release (From Ashes DLC, $10). With the prices of games these days it is a total joke in my opinion.
On the other side of the hill, I'd like to tip my hat off to a couple of developer who makes EXCELLENT use of DLC.
1) 2K marin for their excellent Minerva's Den DLC for Bioshock 2 which came out a whole 6 months later and provided 5 hours of excellent plot and entertainment that improves the overall Bioshock 2 package.
2) Red Barrels for their incredible DLC for Outlast titled Whistleblower which continues and ends the plot in a very satisfying manner, provides a lot of new content, areas, plot and is downright more disturbing AND scarier than the original. This piece of DLC came out 8 months after the PC release.
Case in point - my wife just finished Assassin's Creed III and I was looking forward to picking up the DLC (Tyranny of George Washington costs a whopping $28 and the other single player missions cost a total of $10 across two pieces of DLC). Yet the game itself is normally priced $20. How could a full game be cheaper than its' DLC that is, at best, a few hours long?
Another case - I'm playing through Mass Effect 3 at the moment (bought the collector's edition back then) and I was shocked at the amount I had to pay for the overall single player DLC cost me a total of $50!!! That's almost the price of a brand new game :/!
True, they are optional, but having played through plenty of them they don't always feel like they are. With Mass Effect 3 I felt like the DLC I played so far (From Ashes, Leviathan and Omega) are very pivotal to the plot and experience.
It is one of the worst trends in the gaming industry IMO that many gaming publishers get away with time and time again. On top of the pricing problem, you can't tell if the developer intentionally creates content for DLC rather than include them in the main game. It is deceptive and easy to get away with, especially when it comes out on the SAME DAY as the game's release (From Ashes DLC, $10). With the prices of games these days it is a total joke in my opinion.
On the other side of the hill, I'd like to tip my hat off to a couple of developer who makes EXCELLENT use of DLC.
1) 2K marin for their excellent Minerva's Den DLC for Bioshock 2 which came out a whole 6 months later and provided 5 hours of excellent plot and entertainment that improves the overall Bioshock 2 package.
2) Red Barrels for their incredible DLC for Outlast titled Whistleblower which continues and ends the plot in a very satisfying manner, provides a lot of new content, areas, plot and is downright more disturbing AND scarier than the original. This piece of DLC came out 8 months after the PC release.