What would you rather have? A sizeable game that never gets supported or a smaller game with DLC for a couple years?

For me, I'd rather just have the sizeable game. I usually tend to call a game finished when I see the credits rolling, and I move on to another game, so I very rarely get DLC, because I don't like going back to games I already finished. I've made an exception with Just Cause 3, because damn if I didn't have so much fun with it!

I don't want paid DLC at all and never buy it. I miss when games were finished and complete at release. Those times are long gone and I wouldn't be surprised if some of our forum wasn't even born yet when that was the standard. I'm with you, when I am done with a game I have no interest in going back to it with DLC.

I like expansions upon large games, think The Elder Scrolls, Dark Souls, The Witcher, and many others to name.

The Evil Within being another example.

I'm not against DLC, but I like DLC being made after; and not being cut content.

Depends on the price of the games and DLCs. If the larger finished game and the smaller game are the same price, then obviously I'd prefer the former. If the smaller game is more fairly priced, but sell DLCs at inflated prices, then I'd still prefer the larger, finished game.

I don't mind smaller games with more DLCs, but the devs and pubs who would consider doing this would need to think about what they're selling me and what I'm getting for my money.

Directly answering your question - I'd rather have a large game with no DLC support rather than a small game with DLC support. But there are many other factors that jump in such as how good the game is, the price of the DLC, community (is it worth to come back) etc..

A great example would be Rockstar's GTA V. DLC comes to GTA V Online almost regularly (every few months) and in fact, the Biker DLC is coming next Tuesday at the date I'm creating this post. The best part is that you don't have to pay a single cent for Rockstar's GTA Online DLCs.

I don't mind DLC if it wasn't cut from the original game and its not too over priced. You should be able to experience a full game, then DLC add extra should you want more out of the world they put you in. However I'd rather have a big finished game.

Growing up on ps1/ps2 I grew a custom to getting more of a game for less, getting what felt like a full experience from beginning to end in most cases. Back then games cost considerably less to make thus they had a bigger margin for profit, but now games are multi million dollar undertakings, which sometimes need to factor in paid dlc to their profit margins.

To answer the question I prefer a sizable game leaving me full;Rather than a bite sized snack leaving me hungry for the next expansion sized snack. A publisher should always try to ship a full experience and then build upon that experience with a sequel or an expansion of substance. I feel far to many games today focus on creating a base game and future DLC simultaneously, instead of focusing on creating the full game by itself first.

Well as many other I prefer a complete game without any DLC. But I did replay many games like FF7 and Tactics.

No support as in no bug fixes? **** that, I'll take DLC over an unsupported game. Unless it's flawless on release, which is rare nowadays.

I would choose a large, complete game over a hacked-apart job anyday.

@mark1974: I replay games all the time. I've played games for almost 30 years and I loved going back replaying them. I get DLC's all the time. It just give me another excuse to return to the game and I love it. I also rewatch movies and reread books. I don't see a point in finish a game and never go back. What's the fun in that?

@heljar: that's a good point and I also go back and play older games. I guess I tend to play a game when it first comes out and usually I'm on to something else by the time the DLC comes out and it never seems like a big enough draw to get back into it. I feel like I have to relearn the game again. I prefer going back to games years later. I don't usdually pay for DLC though because it rarely seems worth it.

@mark1974: I usually buy them if there's some new missions or levels to play in SP. I liked the thing they did with GTAIV. I don't bother if there just some new weapons or vehicles. It has to be something worthwhile like extra missions. I haven't gotten around to getting any of the DLC for Just Cause 3 yet. but I do plan on getting them sometime.

I'd rather have a game whose developers actually did playtesting and bugfixing before release instead of going gold early to start working on DLC.

I want it all. :P

Seriously though I don't mind dlc so I like big games that also get dlc after release.