What truly makes a video game DLC "good"?

Members see less ads - sign up now for free and join the community!

  • This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Wazi the pa

Samurai Legend
Moderator
Site Staff
Oct 26, 2013
2,540
841
Australia
#1
I've been noticing some conversations all over the net with some describing what they see in DLCs, what content should DLCs bring to a video game and all that good stuff.

And it's got me thinking; what does it take for a DLC in a game to be per-say, good? Should it bring something new to the table? Should it be considered "free" for players? When is it considered when a company uses DLC to abuse the game e.g. ripping off content from the original source of the game and make it separate or putting a price on content that was once considered as in game unlockables way back when.

Personally, now that it's inevitable DLCs are here to stay, I believe for any DLC introduced to a game, it should be something that was not thought for the original content for the game but something "extra" and "new". A good example is The Witcher's 3 Hearts of Stone expansion where they've pretty much added to what is defined as an expansion to a game; add-ons that doesn't have 'direct' tie-ins to the game's original content. Something that reminds us it's the same game we're playing but with new content for us to venture in be it another story to tell, more locations to explore and so much more. The expansion doesn't feel like it was cut from the game's already complete set.

What's your answer to this question?
 

Lulcielid

Warrior of Light
#2
Personally, now that it's inevitable DLCs are here to stay, I believe for any DLC introduced to a game, it should be something that was not thought for the original content for the game but something "extra" and "new". A good example is The Witcher's 3 Hearts of Stone expansion where they've pretty much added to what is defined as an expansion to a game; add-ons that doesn't have 'direct' tie-ins to the game's original content. Something that reminds us it's the same game we're playing but with new content for us to venture in be it another story to tell, more locations to explore and so much more.
Pretty much this.

Something to add to this discussion that may tie with it.
How do we know if the DLC they are giving us is a "ripped off content from the original source of the game/cut content from the game´s already complete set" ? Because this is an acussation i´ve heard a lot agains EVERY DLC, from all gamers, even if the DLC is something as meaningless as aesthetic changes.

Cause an 'incomplete' game can be produced even if the dev/publisher didn´t intended.
 
Nov 7, 2015
37
19
27
#3
Everything mentioned so far. But i will add, what makes good DLC is something worth buying, not just skin packs or new costumes. although their good, their just part of the package.

I remember FFXIII-2 did mass effect costumes and assassin's creed, but it was the story related stuff that people wanted.
 
Sep 26, 2013
1,702
649
#4
I think it boils down to if it's fairly priced or not.

DLC tends to be compared and judged based on the amount of content the main game has.
 

Wazi the pa

Samurai Legend
Moderator
Site Staff
Oct 26, 2013
2,540
841
Australia
#5
Yeah, definitely the price to DLCs is a judging factor but then comes DLC pre-order bonus........ I just don't know. It's an act to draw more consumers into buying the game because of the "free" content the retailer is giving but....... I just know it's stupid but I don't have the words to describe it properly....
 

yeah_93

Warrior of Light
Sep 27, 2013
1,636
600
Venezuela
#6
Depends on what the type of DLC it is, the price, and the relationship of price/amount of content. I remember well the outrage over Call of Duty's $15 DLC Maps when it was getting more popular. Now we have season passes. How fun is that.