Developers only care about money now. DLCs, addons, and in-game purchases. It wasn’t like that back then! – Or was it?
Hello everyone, happy Wednesday. Due to a lack of a greeting (which Schuhmann always finds silly), I’ll get straight to the point: The perception of DLCs, expansions, and their announcements within the gaming community.
Do you remember the glorious time when Blizzard announced “The Burning Crusade”? Or when Sacred got an expansion called “Underworld”? Or the joy we felt when we could finally date Liara T’soni again in the “Shadowbroker” DLC from Mass Effect 2?
Back then, announcements of expansions and major DLCs were something special. It was something new to look forward to. It was “more” of the known game world, “more” of what we liked. For that, people were happy to pay a few euros (or Deutsche Marks – if anyone still knows what those are).
But that has changed.
This topic became particularly noticeable to me with the announcement of the plans for new Hearthstone expansions. In 2017, Blizzard intends to release a total of 3 expansions – all of which contain around 130 cards each. They are distancing themselves from the “adventures” that existed before and instead want to include PvE missions for free in the expansions.
My first thought was “Cool, even more new cards per year, even more change, even more possibilities” – but many did not share my opinion.
Quickly, voices were raised that this was just “scamming”, Blizzard wants to boost the purchase of card packs, and they don’t care about anything else. The “greed” is clearly written on their faces. The fact that the PvE missions, the scope and design of which we cannot yet assess, will be “included” starting in summer is ignored by many players.
For me, a new expansion with many cards is great. Not because I will invest a lot of money – my account has managed without real money apart from the Explorer League expansion, but because I have a lot to unlock. For me, new cards in Hearthstone are what achievements are for other players. I can collect them, they are a reward in the arena or for playing and allow me to build new decks slowly. I don’t want to have all the cards on day 1 – I want goals to work towards.
However, I also do not want to be one-sided. There are some cases where DLCs have actually been nothing but “scams”. A prominent example is Mass Effect 3. This game offered the first story DLC “From Ashes” right at launch – the story included was even relatively important to the main story and provided valuable information.
At that time, the developers stated that the team responsible for the DLC had finished “earlier than planned”, which is why the release of the DLC coincided with the game’s release date. Shortly thereafter, however, it became public that almost the entire DLC was already present in the game files – a blatant lie then? This was never fully clarified, even though EA tried to appease the fans.
There are a few cases like this, and yet I am not “angry” at the developers in the true sense. I firmly believe that additional game content nowadays has a higher level and requires much more work than it did a decade ago. A “free map pack” for Call of Duty or Battlefield simply cannot be compared, in my opinion, to a story DLC that brings fully voiced quests.
The effort for the people involved in such content is much greater, and the number of necessary developers is likely also drastically higher. Therefore, I find it only fair to pay for such DLCs and do not feel “scammed” or have the expectation that “this should be free”. Especially those who have played the DLCs from Mass Effect 2 and 3 (including “From Ashes”), know how great they were. Worth every cent.
One of my friends swears by the “Europa Universalis” series. And the game has so many expansions that I must raise my eyebrows in confusion. Nevertheless, he is enthusiastic about each individual expansion and can talk for hours about how great the new features are – a rare enthusiasm that I cannot share when I see that the whole work must have cost more than 200 €. But he loves it – so that’s okay.
I also find it confusing when comments repeatedly say “Yes, back in the day, Blizzard/EA/BioWare/Paradox/XYZ listened to the players and was friendly, now it’s just about money.”
I’ll stick my neck out and say: No, that’s nonsense.
Developers have always had to plan for money and profit as a factor, not just in recent years when games have become a mass phenomenon. If that hadn’t been the case, EA, Blizzard, and “the others” would not be in the good position they are in today. They have worked economically. Back then, developers did not live off air, love, and the endless resources of publishers either. Back then, games were simply finished after release. “Finished” in the sense that “more than a bug fix patch wouldn’t come out anymore.” And that has simply changed and also fits into the “Games as a service” thought.
The fact that games are becoming more complex and often come to market somewhat “unfinished” is another topic that should not be discussed here (and certainly not the all-too-similar early access survival games).
What is your opinion on DLCs, addons, and revenue sources of developers overall? Has everything become so much worse and are all companies only money-hungry now, even though they once had the well-being of players in mind? Or is it actually just the same as always – only the perception has changed?
Last week was about multiboxers in PvP – the plague of World of Warcraft.
