DLC and microtransactions are ok. Change my mind.

[DGCae]

I'm in the "If done right they're alright" boat here. Personally I like story DLC, it's a great way to get me back into a game I may have finished and moved on from and continue on with the story. When it comes to season passes I'll usually pass on them unless they announce just how much DLC will be getting released and that it's guaranteed a release or I'll wait until all of the DLC is released before purchasing the pass.

The only microtransactions I don't have an issue with are purely cosmetic items. Things like new outfits, hairstyles, etc added post release are perfectly fine in my book. If they spent extra time and resources to make additional content after the game has released then I think they're perfectly within their right to expect compensation for it. Any other transactions that either effect how you play the game, give you an advantage over another player (multiplayer), or boost you should be removed. If it's a singleplayer game then they should just have an option to boost you for free (like NG+ and make you have to earn it). If it's mulitplayer then there should never be any kind of RMT that allows you to boost.

[JackofTears]

Like anything, it's fine when done well and unwelcome when done poorly.

[Saskia]

Microtransactions are also a perfect way for developers to purposely put major inconveniences in the game and then sell you a way to bypass those inconveniences.

For example, in some games when you enchant your gear there is a chance for it to fail and completely destroy your gear that you've spent months grinding for. Or, you can buy a special material from the cash shop which guarantees 100% chance for your enchant to succeed, and it's only $30 for each gear slot! $$$$$$$$$$$$$

[zyzygy]

DLC could have been the best thing ever for video games. New content for gamers without having to wait for a sequel, regular income for publishers/devs. Unfortunately, some in the industry chose the Dark Side and the exploitational route. I don't have a problem with microtransactions, in theory at least, but the temptation to 'adjust' your own game to tempt people to buy MTs is just too great for some in the industry. I take it on a case by case basis, of course, but the presence of MTs always makes me wary of pre-ordering games.

[Irritablesquid]

I don't really care.
DLCs that add something like an expansion is great if priced appropriately but rarely are.

Micro transactions on the other hand are cancerous to gaming as a whole, when publishers make a game more of a slog just to sell micro transactions then that is a major problem.

Micro transactions in AAA games are designed to remove content and sell it back to you.

[MCORRActual]

When you have governments looking into microtransactions, there is a problem. It's kind of like gambling and Battlefront brought these issues to a head. I for one hate microtransactions, but enjoy story driven DLC. Provided it's not a complete rip off and I'm getting hours of gameplay for my money, I will consider buying.

[Hopeless Wombat]

Microtransactions and DLC are fine.

It's just that, almost all the time their implementation is "egregious".

[Matias]

i would say fortnite is a good example of microtransactions done right, It's free to play and only cosmetics. For a 60$ game you just end up thinking did the content get cut out of the original package just so they can sell it to you for extra cost. DLC should be extra content but there has been way too many times where you have to buy the DLC just to get the whole game. And EA with the sims series has showed us how business works, what used to be part of the base game is now DLC. So they are not bad ideas but implementation is usually really greedy and predatory.

[Cheeky]

I don't think microtransactions or DLC is bad. The problem I find is when a game developer releases a game with the DLC already embedded in the game just to wait 3 months to charge 20$ to access this "new" content. Also when it comes to MTX I believe it shouldn't enhance gameplay. I prefer cosmetic MTX, but I come from a history of playing TF2 and Dota 2.

[TheQuarianGuy]

Think of it this way.

You buy a burger menu for 60$, they say if you want pickles, it's 2$ a piece. Fries are Expansion Packs that cost as half as much the burger did.

You want chicken nuggets? Sorry those are Pre-Order bonuses, but if you wait a week you can upgrade your version of the game to "Digital Deluxe" which will cost 15$.

Coke is DLC worth 10$ and each piece of Ice cube is a Microtransaction fee of 2$.

To show you that they care and that you are getting your money's worth they give you 2 ketchup packets for your fries -But only if you bought them before- after you had eaten your food a month ago.

Then you remember the whole menu would cost 40$, fries and coke would come along with the menu.

6 piece of chicken nugget along with apple pie and salad would be considered an expansion pack that cost $15

Their reason for these new practices is that they cannot stay a float without these microtransactions and DLCs yet their profits dwarf their days of old.

[Saskia]

DLC and microtransactions are ok. Change my mind.

How about this one for The Sims 4. Keep in mind most of these DLC packs contain extremely minimal elements which could have easily been included in the base game.

$50 The Sims 4

DLC:

$30 Outdoor Retreat
$50 Get to Work
$15 Luxury Party Stuff
$15 Perfect Patio Stuff
$30 Spa Day
$15 Cool Kitchen Stuff
$15 Spooky Stuff
$50 Get Together
$15 Movie Hangout Stuff
$15 Romantic Garden Stuff
$30 Dine Out
$15 Kids Room Stuff
$15 Backyard Stuff
$50 City Living
$15 Vintage Glamour Stuff
$30 Vampires
$15 Bowling Night Stuff
$30 Parenthood
$15 Fitness Stuff
$15 Toddler Stuff
$50 Cats and Dogs
$30 Jungle Adventure
$15 Laundry Day Stuff
$15 My first Pet
$50 Seasons
$50 Get Famous

Total cost: $740 <--WTF!!!

[Gemini73]

Microtransactions and DLC in of themselves aren't the problem, the problem stems from the aggressive (and greedy) way that many developers/publishers, particularly from the AAA side of the industry, now implement them.

[Slvrbuu]

I don't mind DLC. However I would prefer that it be productive DLC. Take Paradox Development for example. They happen to be the most notable, to me, for DLC. Paradox is quite renown for their games being incredibly easy to mod, and overhaul. Games like Crusader Kings 2 have mods which put you in the world of Game of Thrones, or even Elder Scrolls, while games like Europa Universalis 4 can put you back in time to the ancient era of Alexander the Great, or Focus itself entirely on Japan, or Turkey, or just deeply expand the base game like MEIOU and Taxes. Not only are mods possible, but they are heavily supported by Paradox. You've got a mod manager built into their newer launchers, support for Steam Workshop, you've also got sections on their forums for mods, they patch in new scripting abilities specifically for modders.

With all that in mind, what I would consider a productive DLC for Paradox are the ones which add new mechanics, and features to the game that are otherwise incredibly hard, or impossible to add via mods in a useful way. What I don't consider a Productive DLC are the DLC which are heavily focused on Events, and narrow spots on the map. Sure it makes the base game more expansive, but these are all things that have been done by mods. So adding in one or two minor features like the empire of China doesn't really feel like a productive DLC. People were already manipulating the HRE or papacy to do that. So the price often feels like more than you'd want to pay, because it doesn't feel like it adds much.

Perhaps this is a bad way of looking at it, but it feels like Paradox relies on mods to maintain interest in their games, and thus be able to sell more DLC. So DLC which does not also support mods, does not feel like a Productive DLC. Basically, know your game, and what keeps it alive, and support it. Support your community, and then the DLC feels worthwhile.

[Jokerthefoolio]

I mean DLC and microtransactions are only scummy if the devs and publisher are

[etheras]

Ryan I won't say that there's something _wrong_ with "as they go" DLC - but I don't like it personally.

Perhaps I'd still buy if they did "roll up" packages every so-often. That way, superfans who want the new 10 items can spend $1.99 each for immediate access. But those who are okay with waiting, get a discount.

It just bugs me, as a full completionist, to look at a game, want the full experience, the game costs $60. But if you add all DLC its like $250. Unfortunately I can't remember the specific cases of this. Payday2 did something like that, but it appears as though they've rolled-up all their DLC now into the base game. Warhamer Total War did the same. Today, the combined DLC costs more than the base game and there's no season pass to get all of them.

The most egregious that I've seen is... there was some model train simulator, where the combined price of all DLC was like $800. For something that niche, maybe its not a dealbreaker? Maybe players are expected to buy just 1 or 2 trains? But I don't know. Unfortunately I don't remember its name either.