Preorder DLC: Good or Bad?

Personally I don't mind it at all, but what are you guys thoughts?

I used to think that it was just another way that companies tried to milk players for more money out of their products. But now I'm actually starting to see it as a valid tactic to help attract more purchases, especially in the form of pre-orders. Reason being is that a lot games which have all of their content already on the disc make it more likely for a consumer to decide on waiting to purchase a used game, which means that the retailer gets all the cash while the developer will never see a penny from that customer. Yet if a company were to hold out some particular goods and make them pre-order only (at least for a set period of time), then it means that customers are more likely to buy the game brand new rather than used. Same case with the other forms of DLC.

As long as it isn't restricted to any specific store, then I don't really have a problem with it.

DLC is one of the worst trends in gaming along with DRM, so any DLC is bad. I want to buy a finished, complete game. Not a skeleton of a game with the meat of the content coming in the form of overpriced mini-expansions.

It depends on whether or not I have it.

You do realize thats an unfair strawman, given for a lot of games, DLC is developed after the game is out and can add tons of hours of new content.

Look at Dragon age or Disgaea 3 . Both had quite a lot of extra scenarios and play modes added via dlc.

Though I agree cutting content to add as dlc is an awful idea and takes away from the good ideas behind dlc.

edited 26th Sep '11 9:03:58 AM by Midgetsnowman

Bad. The whole point of DLC is adding new content to an existing game. This, however, is just cutting out part of what's already there and charging extra for it.

I mostly agree with Ricko's assessment. As long as the sheer amount of DLC goes nowhere near Hyperdimension Neptunia levels, it's fine. As such, pre-order DLC is OK because it attracts more quick sales. Just don't put it on-disc... >___>

Note that having more people buy the game new instead of used would give the developer more of an idea of whether or not their game is popular.

edited 26th Sep '11 9:05:38 AM by burnpsy

I get that the majority of a game's profit is from the first few sales when the price is at its highest, but there's no way in hell I'm paying thirty-five or more dollars for ANY game. Preorder DLC therefore does not affect me, save in the sense that I feel annoyed that they decided to arbitrarily cut some piece of content off to milk more money out of it. Nonetheless, I understand that it's simply creating standard preorder content in a more streamlined way, so I can't get too angry about it, even if it is tacky and a little disrespectful. How else are you going to translate preorder bonuses into digital distribution?

Now, when they do that with DLC content that's not even a preorder bonus, but clearly just held back for the sake of holding it back until after the game is released so they can slap another price tag on it... THEN I get seriously pissed.

edited 26th Sep '11 11:18:22 AM by Karkadinn

I don't like preorder DLC. Sure, it'll probably be released separately later on, but if it isn't (like with Dissidia Duodecim), I don't like having to pick between several different DLC's at different stores, and I don't like having to buy it at a specific store just to get the DLC I want.

Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad Bad

At best they withhold content gamers should have access to normally (If its preorder DLC it means its always been available)

At worst it allows a monopoly for Gamestop by making them go "Hey you want all the content? Preorder from our store! And only ours!"

I like it if it's universal, so you get it no matter what store you buy from. Once you get stuff like every single store having different DLC it gets irritating.

Even so, it still punishes gamers for either playing smart and NOT buying based on hype. Or those who rent or buy used.

The only way I'd accept preorder DLC if it was content that was unlocked normally but given early.

Withholding all those skins for Batman Arkham City because you didn't buy it from a specific store is a disservice to gamers.

Bad. Especially if it's exclusive to pre-orders.

Why? Because said pre-orders are almost never available here.

I think dissuading gamer from renting or buying used is sort of the point of this whole thing.

And I think people are terribly overreacting to this. When has it ever happened that preorder DLC was ever of any importance to the enjoyment you could get out of the games? Aren't we talking about stuff like a single extra armour set or a skin for the main character or something? What's the big deal?

^ There's been a few examples lately of stages/missions/levels/whateveryacallems being reserved for pre-orders.

I'm not against DLC that's exclusive to new copies of the game (the developers just want to make sure that the money from the purchase goes to them), but restricting it to pre-orders, certain retailers, or just packaging it separate from the game itself is dumb.

edited 26th Sep '11 11:43:34 AM by RTaco

That bad? Could you name a few?

It's rare, getting rarer, but it still happens.

If I made Preorder DLC, I would make it stuff that can still be unlocked in-game so that later players won't feel disappointed that they didn't buy into the hype and thus missed some of the bonuses.

That's a good idea! And for bonuses for buying new games, I'd do what Bio Ware did for Mass Effect 2 and have them be available for everyone as paid-for DLC.

As long as the DLC not added to the disk costs the same as if you pre-ordered it + the original price of the game, it's fine.

But if it's more or less, you're screwing players out of their money. They should both be the same amount to prevent this problem.

Mind you, I never like the pre-order bonuses, since anybody who can't get their console online has to actually depend on this in order to get a full version of the game.(since many companies leave out content as is)

That too. I hate it when they put content on the disc, but make you have to pay to unlock it. It shouldn't be there in the first place unless you can unlock it via a difficult task. You already payed for everything on the disc when you first bought it.

edited 26th Sep '11 12:05:50 PM by Hydronix

Overall, I'm indifferent to DLC. I'll agree that I hate how it has to be divided between several stores, especially if it's going to be released in a bundle at a later date. Those kind of choices are never fun, doubly so if you get the short end of the stick. If it's not planned from the start, then I'm fine with additional content (of course, at a reasonable price) extending the life expectancy of a game, but I loathe on-disc DLC because then it feels like the developer was just cutting corners to rush the game out for a release, instead having us essentially re-buy content we technically already had from the start.

It's fine as long as it's not store-restricted, and is downloadable separately.

edited 26th Sep '11 1:04:23 PM by Yinyang107

Personally, I'd rather have this than invasive DRM. That was you're at least rewarding the player for buying legitimately, instead of trying to punish them for possibly trying to pirate. And if, said DLC is inconsequential in the long run (an extra skin or something).

I dont know why renting and buying used has become so taboo.

Every other industry gets by with used sales. Why is the video game industry the only one throwing a fit?

How about this? Lower your prices, then people won't feel the need to buy them used.