[ALL] how long before you stop caring about DLC?

[Maynard]

I lose interest in games pretty much right after i finish them. and in most cases before i even finish the game. But some games, like BL2 which has been out for a year is still releasing DLC. i know some people here will be all over it, but i would find it very hard to play that DLC even if its free....the game was awesome, but after awhile, it just loses its luster.

so i guess the point of the topic is do you reach a point when you lose interest in a game and will the DLC draw you back in?

 

[jms493]

I rarely ever buy DLC.

edit - I did buy Forza DLC in the past...I havent bit on Forza 5 yet.

 

[Houston]

Only time I buy DLC is for online map packs.

 

[ThomasTomasz]

I buy DLC for map packs, and the games I really care about. Mass Effect and Assassin's Creed were the only games like that, but I don't think I purchased any of the DLC for ACIII.

I did buy The Old Republic planet expansion, but that's a little bit different when you are talking about an MMO offering expanded content.

 

[JOHNNYTHECLOWN]

DLC doesn't make me go back to a game, if I'm done with it I really don't care about the DLC

I'll play a game longer because of it but most dlc is just garbage anyway

 

[padman59]

If it's a game I enjoy playing and the DLC has enough content to justify its cost (which varies a bit depending on how much I enjoy the game), I'll consider buying it. It doesn't really matter how long after the game's release. I don't care about purely cosmetic stuff or short and meaningless pre-order missions.

 

[tigstah]

already there.....the only dlc i bought was for gta iv and red dead redemption.

 

[dope]

only time i've ever gotten dlc is with la noire and that's cause it was all free when you pre ordered it.

 

[Pitty]

Skyrim, Fallout 3 are really the only games I've ever bought DLC for.

 

[JOHNNYTHECLOWN]

Best DLC ever: Freddy Krueger in MK

:golfclap:

 

[Swarley]

Time =/= interest for me. TLOU came out 8 months ago and I'm very excited for the single player DLC that comes out tomorrow. Other times a game could have come out a month ago but I wouldn't be interested in its DLC. It just depends on the game.

 

[JayDizzle]

It depends on the game.

If it's an RPG like with the Mass Effect or Dragon Age series, I'll plunk down a few ducats if I dig the previews I see for the DLC.

I've seen everything from the awesomesauce Shadow Broker to waiting for MONTHS for some bullshit cosmetics of the Defiance MMORPG.

Now if it's "free" DLC like map packs for ME3 or the stuff for Killzone? I'm all for that.

Can't beat free.

EDIT:

On-topic: If the game can hold my interest for the duration of me playing it (story-wise or if I have a crew to roll with), I'll play it longer than if it's just myself.

This has led to my enormous backlog in the past that only gets worse if a game's on clearance and it's a title that's familiar.

If the game discounts it's DLC (even down to 0), I'll look at that to.

 

[Primetime]

Can't say I've ever bought any DLC.

 

[buckeye]

If the DLC comes out while I'm playing the game or shortly after I'm probably gonna buy it.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

 

[Buzzman]

I buy DLC whenever I see it on sale for PS3 or 360, but I seem to rarely go and play them.

 

[MVPete]

I only do map packs for shooting games, I don't even really consider that DLC though, just a huge scam that I fall for everytime.

 

[Herm]

The only DLC i have ever bought was on Rock Band. i refuse to pay for it for some reason. Ive gotten plenty of map packs on FPS via gamesharing on PSN over the years though :shifty:

One of the main reasons i would buy RockBand DLC was i had 3 guys that we bought stuff and shared between the 3 accounts.

 

[dope]

shit how could i forget rock band....ya i dropped a bit of money on that shit for sure!!

 

[Twigg4075]

It all depends on the game. Multiplayer-centic games like Battlefield can easily get away with releasing maps and modes for a game well over a year after release. It takes a special single player (or co-op) game to get away with that policy. But if you're going to do it and be successful you need an approach like Borderlands where you release the first content with a month or two after release and keep the content evenly spaced out.

Games like Bioshock Infinite and Last Of Us have really dropped the ball. Nine months to a year after the initial release of the game? Give me a break. A very small percentage of people are going to give a shit. While I was thoroughly unimpressed with Infinite and wouldn't have cared either way but I absolutely loved LOU and at this point I still don't care about the DLC that finally released today. I'm sure I'll get it when it goes on sale but had it released within three months of the game's release I would've been salivating over it. I understand why because a development team like Naughty Dog is sacrificing all of their resources on two games, LOU and Uncharted, so it probably isn't even possible to start work on DLC until after the main game is complete. Although, from what I hear, the LOU DLC is a pretty significant chunk of gameplay, more in line with "expansions" like the PC world has had for ages. Releasing a major expansion for a game in nine months seems pretty acceptable. Whereas you have the Burial At Sea expansion for Infinite, which appears it should've been ONE piece of content that they separated into TWO and is still only about three hours of gameplay, is not acceptable in my opinion.

There may be no real solution for teams like ND, which is unfortunate.

 

[dave]

I buy extra courses for Tiger Woods golf, I bought those retro stadiums in MLB The Show, I intend to get the GTA5 DLC when it comes out.
Don't regret any of those purchases, but I'm not a big DLC guy and have never purchased an Ultimate Team stuff for sports games.