This topic is locked from further discussion.
This is a disturbing trend to only get worse before it gets better. Who knows where the video game industry will be soon, but It seems we could be forced into owning a sytem just to get DLC
^^^^^^^ lol are you serious this topic was a joke right?
I prefer the amazing 1st party exclusives over the add-on DLC 3rd party offerings.emitsu97Same here. New games > DLC any day.
[QUOTE="Mr_Alexander"]
Not really a big loss imo, I hated GTA4, the fallout 3 DLC was 2 hours long and really boring etc.
lolfaqs
Agreed. We also got UT DLC from Epic that 360 gamers don't even get if it really matters that much.
whoops, I agreed to the wrong post. I meant I agree with the guy that said new games > DLC.
I haven't felt left out with the DLC, but probably becauseI don't have the majority of the games youlisted. Yes I have GTA4, but could've cared less about The Lost and The Damned. GTA4 is plenty long enough for me already. I bought a XBox360 when it was released and sold it when it started hardlocking on me but before it Red Ringed. I always planned on getting another one, but haven't. My 360didn't have HDMI's...something I absolutely wanted when I got the LCD HDTV.To be perfectly honest my 360 sat dormant after I got the PS3. I just liked the PS3 hardware better. With the 360's "big exclusives" hitting the PC as well (Gears of War, Mass Effect, Halo, etc.) I saw no reason to buy another console because ofmy gamingPC. Plus I like the fact that PS3's online is free as opposed to paying for Live. All my old high school buddies have 360's and play Live multiplayer together, would I like to be able to jump on Left for Dead and play with all my old buds?, sure I would, but that's not enough to justify me buying another one when there's no software making me want to do so. I'll just persuade them to by PS3's when the price drops. Will I end up with another 360 at some point?, probably. I have nothing against it, I'm not a fan boy. I just haven't felt a need to own another one yet.
Ya it does suck.
But don't blame the publishers. BLAME cheap a** SONY.
Microsoft is paying for the exclusive DLC. Also, they have a much bigger install base.
So why wouldn't a publisher bow down to the company that sells more games for them and pays a big chunk of change for the rights to exclusive DLC.
I would do the same thing. It is just good business for them.
And no I am not an XBOT (I can hear the fanboys at my front door already). Playstation has been my only console since the PS1. I just own other portable systems.
Well I don't care about Tomb Raider but I probably would have got Fallout 3 and GTA 4 DLC if they were availible.
Still like people have said, plenty of DLC is available exclusivly for PS3.
As our good friend on the Gamespot forums, Emitsu, said earlier, Sony is spending their money on developing top notch exclusives in-house rather than locking down exclusive DLC. That said, I agree that it is a disturbing trend. I loved Fallout 3 enough to trade in my PS3 version for the superior Xbox 360 version. What a letdown the Fallout 3 DLC was though...here's to hoping that Broken Steel is an expansion the size of Shivering Isles.
DLC is a great thing for games when used correctly. I think the Call of Duty 4 maps are a great example. I also think DLC can be used the wrong way, Resident Evil 5 I'm looking at you....Clearly these companies crunched some numbers before making exclusive DLC deals with MS...they figured the money MS gave them would be greater than the potential sales from PS3 owners. Also remember that used game sales play a big factor into this. The developers don't make a penny off of used game sales, DLC is pure profit for them....
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment