Love/Hate DLC

I like Pinball...

I mean "real" pinball with flashing lights, flippers and a big "Tilt!" if you manhandle the machine too much. I don't need some weird video adaptation of it either, it's not the same.

When I was younger there were lots of video arcades around. It was a fantasy land for a kid like me but there was always at least a couple of pinball machines around. Sure I played the classics like Galaga, Pac-Man, Spy Hunter and BattleZone but there were always at least a few quarters reserved for pinball. Yeah it was a 50's throwback but it was physical, tactile and existed in all 3 dimensions. 

That and I always felt kinda cool playing it.

The other thing I liked about it and any game in the arcade for that matter was that you had the whole story there. That game was everything it could ever be until Midway or Namco came out with a sequel. I didn't have to pay anything extra to get every byte of the experience. My only limitation was how skilled I was at the game. If I was really good I could get to levels only dreamed of and when I finally beat the game that was it; I was done with it and looking for something new.

So decades have gone by and now most gaming happens in the home. PC's ( I Include Atari and Commodore by the way) started the phenomenon and consoles made it more accessible to the masses. For awhile personal gaming followed the classic gaming model. You bought a game, beat it then moved on to something else or waited for the sequel if you really liked it. The quintessential arcade at home.

Fast forward to an age where the internet is ubiquitous (for most, not all) where you don't need a PC to enjoy high-resolution gaming. Consoles are not only connected to the internet but they can play Blu-Ray movies, stream content, and even update your game with new content of fixes.

It's that "new content" part that I'm interested in.

In the past 8 years or so with delivery channels like Steam and Origin (Boooooo EA!) You can purchase, install and keep your games updated without ever touching you optical drive. If you have a decent broadband connection you can get a couple of DVD's worth of content in about an hour. 

Having suffered through the "before time" where a game install could involve half a dozen disc swaps and at least a few downloads I can say with confidence that a lengthy download from Steam usually takes less time.

Great! So all that nasty installation BS is pretty much a thing of the past. I can just log into my gaming portal of choice and all my stuff will be ready to go.

Ah! but what's this. Steam says there's something new available. I enjoyed my time with Call of Duty" Black ops but the zombie Co-op was a bit weak and a poor competitor to the co-op in Modern Warfare 2. So after completing the single player mission I was pretty much done with it apart from a couple of decent new zombie maps in co-op.

So what's Steam offering up? Most likely another part of a trend that I both like and hate.

It's all in the execution...

My first exposure to DLC actually had nothing to do with Steam, Origin or anything anyone tried to charge me for. It happened with a game that used to be a staple on Saturday nights, Battlefield 1942. The game came out in 2002 and still rates in my top 10 for Co-op gameplay.

Set in World War 2 with a limited amount of maps it was fun but it ran its course somewhere around the 15th time we'd taken Wake Island. But something came along that breathed new life into a game we were otherwise done with. It was a mod. Specifically the Desert Combat mod. After a lengthy download of additional game files and some tweaking to game settings we found ourselves with an entirely new game on top of an old favorite.

Now strictly speaking a mod is not really DLC. For one thing DLC usually has a price associated with it. Mods are usually produced either by an enthusiast community or a group of independent developers. Such was the case with Desert Combat produced by Trauma Studios with some members of that group going on to produce the followup to 1942 or Battlefield 2 as it's commonly known for a larger game development studio.

The big difference between a mod and DLC can be likened to the difference between Linux and Windows. Windows is a tightly controlled sandbox and you have to pay for it. Linux is usually free of charge and produced by independent developers making their work openly available to the public.

So now we're back to my little Steam surprise. Turns out Black Ops has a new DLC pack available called Rezurrection. Seems it's added a couple of co-op zombie maps that look interesting and it's "only" $14.99. I noodled the buy decision for a few weeks and finally decided to pull the trigger. What did I get for my efforts? About 5 new zombie maps but 3 of them are updates of zombie maps from CAll of Duty:World at War. I enjoyed that game but I'm a little PO'd that $15 bought me little more than some updated maps from a 4-year-old game and one new map that looks kinda cool if I can survive more than 45 seconds.

Then I see there are 3 more DLC packs available...

I didn't buy those...

I'm not really upset about the purchase. The new map does seem to be interesting but I'm wondering if it'll be worth the $15 in the end. This is the Love/Hate part of the story. I appreciate having more content for a good game but if half of it is rehashed I don't see the point. If there really is something more to the story then by all means, serve it up!

Fallout New Vegas has a bunch of DLC as well. It looked interesting while I had the game installed (I'm still angry at Bethesda so I uninstalled it) and the DLC I got basically gave me a new world or 2 to explore. Borderlands DLC gave me new maps and new missions to complete. Black Ops? I get more zombies on maps I've already played 3 years ago.

The problem with DLC is that it's usually overpriced unless it's on sale or bundled with the original game. You don't really know what you're getting unless it's been out for a while and people have had time to complain about it. It doesn't pay to be an early adopter.

I like creativity, I like extending a good franchise like Call of Duty or Battlefield. I don't like the trend to milk a franchise like a it was another Rocky movie, however. If you really have something new to offer forget the double-digit DLC pricing and invest all that development time into a decent sequel. 

Most games reuse the same underlying game engine for years. The Unreal Tournament 3 engine is still used today and it's 5 years old. I can think of at least 3 games that used it and none of them look a thing like UT3. Just clean up the untidy bits of the game engine, throw on some new maps and BAM! Sequel! Instead there's this trend to sell DLC that amounts to stuff swept up from the cutting room floor.

Good DLC enhances a good game and sometimes can make up for the failings of the original. Bad DLC, on the other hand, is like a crappy sophmore album from an 80's pop band. I mean did you even know that Kajagoogoo even made a second album?? I didn't and I still don't care just like I don't care about bad DLC.