Launch-day downloadable content is a bonus

Sunday, March 11, 2012
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Eduardo Moutinho

The days where we paid a flat fee to get an entire experience on a cartridge or disc are over. Even back then, we had expansion packs. While some have a real problem with day-one downloadable content, others see the benefits of immediately extending their experiences for a fee. I've accepted our new reality, and I know that this is just the beginning.

The only time I bought downloadable content for a game was an accident. I don't need more gameplay or story that isn't crucial to the core experience. But what if the developer strips content from the game and turns it into DLC -- on launch day no less? Word on the street says that is exactly what BioWare did with Mass Effect 3.

Of course, you don't believe everything you hear do you? Every time I've heard about launch-day DLC, I've also heard people complaining about it. So how about we examine the reasons behind launch-day DLC and why everyone needs to just RELAX about it. Sheesh. 

The first part of the analysis is simple. One of the reasons this type of DLC exists is to give people who immediately beat a game something that adds to their play time. This means publishers can make more money, and, as well all know, publishers like money.

 

For traditional games (ones with physical copies), a period of time exists after a game is "complete" and before it lands on store shelves and on services like Steam. To keep things easy, let's say this time frame is about one month (Deus Ex: Human Revolution took 27 days from "going gold" to release). This period accounts for printing disks, distribution, getting early copies to reviewers, and other miscellaneous things. 

Now, before you argue that substantial DLC can't be made in a month, we need to look at the development process. Knowing the timelines for how a game is made will help us figure out the amazing and wondrous truth behind how day-one DLC that isn't just cosmetic, and isn't cut from the final title, can exist.

Assuming a very, very short review period for a release, let's look at four major parts of development: writing, design, art, and programming.

Writing: I would expect all the story elements for a major production to be finished and finalized long before a game ships. Let's say in a two-year dev cycle this is done at least nine months before release. After all, you can't make a game without knowing where it's going.

Design: The design team implements the narrative and creates systems to support and allow the story to be told while making the game fun. They decide things like map layout, character stats, and balance. Generally in a major title, I would expect this stuff to be mostly done around two-to-three months before a game ships. You probably shouldn't be adding new systems that might break or ruin the balance just a couple short weeks before deadline. That is unless you want to end up like the team working on Diablo 3 of course....

Art: These people draw, model, and animate stuff. They collaborate with the design team to work on maps and other important elements. Most of these guys are probably done a month or more before a project's completion.  

Programming: These are the individuals who get really worried right up until deadline. They handle the review process and, along with quality assurance, need to make sure everything works before a game is shipped.

My, my, would you look at that? It seems that plenty of time is available for a side story to be written and new elements to be implemented before that all-important shelf date. Even with a super-short, one-month review time, all the teams, but the programmers, have at least eight weeks to create launch-day DLC. Ta-da, brand new content that isn't "cut" from the completed experience.

So please people, stop complaining about releases that have day-one DLC. It probably wasn't cut from the original game. If it's not on the disc, it wasn't done when the base game was done. If anyone should complain, it should be the dev team who probably had to push back their well-earned vacations just for you to have something nice. Would you rather get some more time out of something you enjoy or horse armor?


NOTE: As this document  from the Worcester Polytechnic Institute  and Nick Kummert's article point out, most review cycles are actually around three months, which gives devs even more time to make great launch DLC.

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (13)
Default_picture
March 11, 2012
March 11, 2012

While that seems like compelling evidence I have a few questions about it.

1) Is this from an entirely disc-based installation or a game download?

2) Does changing those two lines of code enable any/all the new audio, decision paths, what-have-you that come in the DLC?

Simply proving that there's a character model on the disc doesn't mean all the content of the DLC is on there. An artist could have finished the model in time to include it, but QA for the added character and other parts of creating the DLC wouldn't necessarily have been done.

Default_picture
March 11, 2012

/If/ you're actually trying to change anyone's mind, this was not the way to do it. Hostile presentation ('Everyone's anger over day-one downloadable content is misguided and poorly informed.') tends to make people even more sure of their previous opinion.

March 11, 2012

How would you propose changing people's minds other than informing them of the reasons why their prejudiced notions about day-one DLC are wrong? I can't very well sell them on the value of something they think should be free already.

Default_picture
March 11, 2012

I am proposing that you not be hostile and insulting. If you really want to change people's minds you have to ease them into it. It makes no difference whether you are right or wrong.

If you're just looking to rant then it doesn't make any difference!

Edit: Let me elaborate on that, since it's so key to why forums are so awful, and I've violated it myself - It does not matter how right you are. In fact the more right you are, the worse it is. People will immediately clam up as soon as they get a whiff of anything that outright opposes their opinions, and they will get a semi-orgasmic endorphin rush from rejecting it. You have to ease them into it. Your facts are strong here. Present them in a non-threatening way and people will be more likely to accept them.

March 11, 2012

I thought I avoided hostile and insulting pretty well! Maybe 'sheesh' and the caps 'relax' got you though. I thought they were playful. :)  

I was trying to figure out where your quote came from and just realized it's from the description I wrote! Unfortunately, the article is locked now so I can't change it to something more inviting. Thanks for your thoughts!

Default_picture
March 11, 2012

It was mostly the short summary/caption before I even saw the article. The main article wasn't so bad that way. Just something to think about next time - I do generally agree.

March 11, 2012

And thanks for editing/promoting this Eduardo. :)

Default_picture
March 11, 2012

From what internet sleuths (grain of salt) have been able to uncover, the character included in the "From Ahes" DLC that's in the Collector's Edition of the game ($20 more than standard) is already on the disc and is simply locked away.  The actual DLC is a little over 600MB, which contains all the story and quests for the guy, including his unlock/introductory quest.  Whether or not EVERYTHING associated with the character, which is a Prothean, btw, very important to the ME lore established up until this point, it's incredibly obvious that this content was intended from the start to be added incentive for the CE.  BioWare didn't suddenly decide to make something extra.  The public has known about the character since last year.

You can, however, argue that BioWare gets to decide what's to be in the main game, and it's their decision what goes on the master disc.  And you know what?  That's fine.  You can make that argument, but how far can we as consumers really afford for this to go?  Day-one DLC is one thing, but what happens when publishers and developers start purposefully holding back content because they know they can charge extra for it?

Also, I have to say, quite a few people I've talked to who have played the game, pirated and otherwise, have told me they can't understand why Javik (the Prothean) isn't included in the standard edition.  They're baffled.  Apparently his story quests are very important, and greatly expand upon the universe's lore.  I understand incentivising CEs is a big deal, but maybe they should have just thrown in, you know, COLLECTOR'S items, like physical things, and not actual game content most would deem crucial to the overall story.

March 11, 2012

I think planning out what to add as DLC is a pretty important bit for a publisher. They want to know if they'll be able to monetize the game after its initial launch. I might even argue that planning DLC in the initial phase is better; it means it will feel less like something tacked on and more like an integrated experience. 

I like to look at it like this, if DLC wasn't even an option, would they have made that content and put it on the disk?

Default_picture
March 11, 2012
Most definitely. They certainly had the time to develop it, especially seeing as how the character is already on the disc.
Comic061111
March 12, 2012

I disagree, DLC in that case is specifically created for profit, and would not otherwise have had time devoted to it- it would have been cut as non-essential.  The proof is that it isn't in the standard edition- it was considered incentive, not essential.  

Quality and time devoted to something doesn't mean it was entirely made for profit.  (The whole game was made for profit)

Ironmaus
March 12, 2012

I do not understand the frustration some people have over this issue. When you buy software, game companies are (usually) upfront about what content your purchase licenses you to use. If they choose to exclude some content for lower purchases, then that should inform your decision whether or not to purchase it. Whether or not the content exists on the disc is immaterial. If the amount of content that you are purchasing access to for the lower price is not suitable for you, wait for the larger package to go on sale. You are in control of your purchases and can refuse to purchase games until they offer you a sensible amount of content for your dollar.

One of the oft cited examples of content locking is Beautiful Katamari, which sold for $20 but allowed you to unlock more content that was on the disc through DLC. I LOVED this release because I didn't have to pay $60 for the game and then I could pick and choose which levels I wanted to add to my experience. The idea that I shouldn't have had to pay for that additional content because it was already on the disc is bizarre. I didn't pay $20 thinking I'd get access to 20 levels, I paid $20 thinking I'd get access to 13 levels, and the option to unlock more was nice to have.

The alternative, as I see it, is for the developer to keep that content off the disc. That way, people who complain about purchasing crippled content will be able to access everything they paid for and not a lick more, no matter how many hacks they perform. The problem with this is that anyone purchasing additional content (which will surely be offered) will have to waste bandwidth and harddrive space to accommodate content that could have easily been burned to a disc.

No one seemed to have a problem when different editions of games were pressed and sold for different amounts, only when companies started pressing a single version and offering different levels of access. It's perplexing to me that, instead of graciously permitting companies to save themselves money and their customers bandwidth, time, and harddrive space, consumers want to see the whole system made more complex because they feel entitled to everything that is physically in their possession. Personally, I'd rather see my money for a game go to the developer rather than to my ISP (screw you, Comcast), the hardware manufacturer (Microsoft harddrives are overpriced already), or the disc manufacturer, which are exactly the places the money would go if we reverted to burning multiple, stripped-down editions.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.