As a gamer who plays PS3 games more often than 360 or Wii games, I’m no stranger to the “Exclusive Downloadable Content Coming Only To Xbox 360!” for quite a while now. I mean the year’s most prominent exclusive DLC has to be Grand Theft Auto IV’s still mysterious two DLC installments. We’ve recently learned that both Fallout 3 and Tomb Raider Underground will also have 360-exclusive DLC as well.
I posed the question prior GTA IV’s launch asking whether or not additional missions would matter to gamers if those missions came so much further down the road as 2009. Remember, GTA IV was supposed to come out last holiday season and got delayed. Now, going into this holiday season we’ve got a new batch of games coming out with the “if you want DLC, go 360″ mantra being chanted. After watching this trend for a while, I’ve pretty much concluded that the idea of system specific DLC can actually trump the DLC itself in terms of value to the platform the DLC is on… find out why after the jump.
Many folks considered last year’s holiday line-up to be a sort of “perfect storm” of gaming. This year, much to the dismay of many of those same gamers, it appears it could actually be worse with even more top notch games getting release. It only takes a casual trip to an online gaming forum to find posts where people are mourning the impending death of their gaming budget, bemoaning the cries of their wallets, carefully calculating just how little ramen they’ll need to eat to stay alive so they can buy just one more game… so I ask you, where does DLC from a game released many, many months ago like GTA IV fit into the financial equation? For most gamers that bought GTA IV, I’ll tell you where… it doesn’t. Sure, some people will buy whatever gets released, but arguably the DLC has done its job before it’s ever even released… no, before it’s ever even detailed!
Back before we knew GTA IV for the PS3 was going to launch with the hanging/freezing problem it did (and just to be consistent Rockstar, mine never stopped hanging/freezing,) people were generally really excited at the prospect of a giant AAA title coming out day and date on both platforms (some sites even reported the PS3 version looked better) but the two biggest reasons a lot of people sided with the 360 version when they had the opportunity to choose their platform were Xbox Live support and the two upcoming 360-specific DLC packs. DLC that we’re only now just possibly getting a hint about… DLC that’s not ready to be released and even if it was released today would still be up against some pretty steep competition.
Rockstar, Bethesda, and Eidos have all stated that the games they made (or are still making) are 100% complete, full-sized games and that the PS3 isn’t being shortchanged in any way. In other words, the extra content has been commissioned for the 360.
Put on your tin foil hats folks, it’s conspiracy theory time… looking at the big picture here, market-share is arguably more important than how an individual title sells. It may actually be worth Microsoft’s time (and dime) to secure exclusive DLC for as many games as possible even if that DLC doesn’t prove to be good for gamers, timely, or even a good investment in and of itself. Just setting the precedent that the 360 “usually” gets extra content might stick in the minds of multi-platform gamers to help solidify the notion that you should just get games on the 360 and not even worry about it. That, my friends, is careful and meticulous marketing.
I’ll be curious to see just how the DLC pans out for GTA IV both critically and sales-wise. I don’t begin to fully understand the reported deal Microsoft struck with Rockstar, so I’ll wait for someone more familiar with that sort of thing to spell it out long after it’s released, but my money would be on the deal not being “worth it” strictly speaking about the money required to secure the DLC and sales of said DLC. Third party exclusives are a dying breed and this is still something “the guy with the most money” can do to swing the balance in their favor. Make no mistake, if I were Microsoft and could do this, you bet I’d be doing this. I just wanted to get everyone thinking for a minute about how much DLC they actually buy (or plan to buy) and to think out loud whether it’s really affected your decisions in the past and whether it should in the future? I mean if you’re the type that doesn’t typically finish a Tomb Raider game, does it seem important to be able to play chapters of the story after the main game? I don’t know, tell me if it’s important to you?
What do you guys think? If you were forced to state it right now (based, obviously, on incomplete information, conjecture, and simple personal opinion) would you say that the “idea” of this exclusive DLC trumps the actual DLC itself? Is it worth it to pay more for the exclusive rights to DLC than will be brought in by sales of that DLC? If you bought/loved GTA IV, do you see yourself waiting with an open wallet to squeeze the DLC in between your other holiday purchases if it happens to be released this year? Sound off!
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
no, to be honest even though having exclusive DLC has a nice ring to it, its never been a factor in the decision making.
Theres been no game-boosting DLC that I have bought for a game so far and I can’t really see myself doing so. However, I think it depends on what it adds to the game. For example, Burnouts updates were incredible and I would definately paid for those, as they went above and beyond what I had ever expected for the game, equally with Rock Band tracks. I doubt I would buy extra levels for a game as I would ask the question, why was it not in there to begin with? With the storyline being a key part of my enjoyment of a game (see Bioshock) I doubt that stuck on levels would have the substance to warrant my cash. If they were important they would have been in the game originally and if not why not? For further replayability, with most of the games I intend on getting now having trophies, this is all the replayability I feel I need. If I’m not enjoying the game enough to play it through again normally, why would I want extra content?
DLC isn’t important to me at all. I rarely buy any unless since I usually play a game as much as I want pretty quickly and then move on to the next thing long before the DLC is released. The exception to this was Forza 2 and the extra cars & track DLC that have been released. I bought those since Forza is the one game that I actually played regularly online for many many months & so it was worth it.
I will probably get the DLC for GTA when thats released since I really enjoyed the game and would like to play more, but when its released will determine whether I so actually end up getting it or not. If I’m skint or playing other new games when it comes out then maybe it will slip by and disappear off my radar. I can’t see myself bothering purchasing it at a later date or anything. Will either be an immediate on release time purchase or not at all for me.
Well, you have to look at it this way:
There are people like us (SGC) that are informed on what a game has, what aspects of it are good, bad, etc.
But if you look at it from John Smith who buys games at Wal-Mart or someplace non specialized in games, this means a lot, mostly because lets say he has the money to buy ether an Xbox 360 and a PS3 and a copy of GTA IV, if he does not know the specifics of it and goes by what he sees on a commercial or a billboard or something, he is more than likely to say:
“Hey, the makers of GTA4 decided to make stuff only for the 360, that must mean that the 360 is a better console”
Which means he will buy a 360 and a copy of GA4 for the 360 and any other thing he can find.
This is a really good marketing choice for Microsoft because even though we should not see people as such, is a good chance for Microsoft to secure the $ of the John Smiths of the world.
I agree that the idea of DLC is more important than the content itself. The whole idea of exclusive DLC is to say “i’ve got something you haven’t” to get an edge over the competition.
If you are faced with the choice of buying for PS3/360 and one of them has exclusive DLC it makes it feel like the other one is incomplete in some way, like you are missing out on some of the game. I know that DLC is actually something extra to the game itself (or is meant to be) but I think the impression most people get is that if you’re not going to get it then you’re version of the game is missing something that someone else is getting.
This is a very clever stratergy for microsoft. For games that come out on both consoles simultaneously it may appear at first sight that PS3 would get an advantage as it is more powerful and this may mean better graphics etc. but by exclusive DLC Microsoft are turning the tables by presenting what many people will consider to be a tangible advantage over PS3.
Of course whether the DLC is worth it or not is another matter…
Exclusive DLC hasn’t bothered me so far. I only have a 360, so it really hasn’t been an issue. For Microsoft and Sony, paying for exclusive DLC helps get gamers to buy their games. For the game developer it works because it moves a sale from one side of the aisle to the other, and they still get the extra money from Microsoft or Sony. The person with both consoles it does not effect unless they have a strong preference for one. It really only effects the gamer that has the console the DLC is not on. And they not everyone that owns that game, would buy the DLC anyway. I assume the game developer sees that a small number of potential sales missed on, but is more than taken care off by the money recieved by comission. I also agree that DLC could help sway a person who has yet to buy a console in making a choice.
I really do not feel that any of the DLC that has come out is anything someone should lose sleep over if they miss. In the end, I do not mind exclusive DLC because I know that console makers and game developers are all companies that have to make business decisions for their bottom line.
So it seems I may not be the only one to feel that folks can largely just ignore the “exclusive DLC” game that Microsoft is playing as it doesn’t really seem to matter very much. It’s certainly not as big of a deal as the platform owner (buying the DLC) would have you think…
dlc has always simply been, and will stay, a nice perk. never have i looked at dlc, or its promise for that matter, as a real factor to a purchase. to do so would be selling yourself an incomplete game.