Originally Posted by
Neukifly
Unfortunately, I do have one weakness when it comes to games and it's the fact that I'm a collector (and I think like a collector), so if I bought one game that was designed as an installment of a series, I'd be bound to buy all the subsequent games as well. Suppose then that I had purchased Mass Effect 1 (launched in 2007, so essentially before DLC raised controversy to this level) and 2; then of course I'd want ME3 as well to complete the collection, which means I'm kinda screwed if it's highly DLC dependent. Since I did not want to get into that trap, I considered the thought of skipping the entire 7th generation as far back as its establishment, and yes, even subsequent generations altogether should future games be playable only through DLC. Furthermore, the numerous releases of dissapointing games (imo) between 2006-2010 turned that thought into a firm decision from 2008 (although, don't get me wrong, I've felt occasionally tempted to plump for a PS3, but I think it's too late now and ultimately I'd be wasting my money). But in any case, I don't feel like I've essentially missed out on anything, except what might have been 8 years of self-induced stress.
So I purposely chose to avoid the DLC era from 2006 so as to avoid becoming a potential victim of the very controversial issues referenced in this thread, especially those orchestrated by the likes of EA (I might as well tie a shackle to my foot). As far back as the 6th generation I suspected that DLC would be heavily pushed by the biggest games publishers and be used as an opportunity to assume full control of end-user access to games (and low and behold... look what's happening). The end result would be a reality where consumers no longer buy games of real substance in boxes, but simply endless digital keys (or passes) that "grant" pinpointed access to server-restricted game content, thereby allowing absolute control in the hands of game publishers - a future I'd neither want nor support. Providing DLC for multiplayer's sake is fair enough (e.g. a multiplayer map independant of storyline), but forcing gamers to pay extra for DLC in order to update/complete the main story of a game is blatantly taking the biscuit tin. Anyway, they say that they're doing this to protect "interlectual rights" and combat piracy, and yes arguably, they are fair defenses - but the methods being employed also have unregulated loopholes through which game publishers like EA and Activision can take advantage of their huge profits to kill off competition (i.e. buy up all the talented game developers and ultimately take ownership of their interlectual properties). Not only does this eliminate the threat of releases more competant than their own, but it ultimately leads to lack of consumer choice. The notion of a single path where all access to games is controlled by a single publisher is not that far from reality imo (the technology is certainly in place).
Well let's just say that I'm not going to entertain any arrogant publisher's delusion; that gamers are so helplessly addicted to (online) gaming that they'll pay and do anything to get their fix (At least, I seriously hope that's not the case with gamers in general reality, otherwise the publishers have already won). That's having said, I'm glad that EA have now been flushed out as the "worst games company in the world" and I only hope they'll now start thinking less about the size of their coffers and more about the real interests of their markets. Still, I won't be holding my breath...
Regarding the suggestion that I "might as well just quit gaming", well I've practically limited myself to playing only Nintendo games now, so you could say that I've already set one foot on that path - nonetheless I've felt much happier in gaming since making that decision. As far as I'm concerned, Nintendo is the only existant company that seems to have not forgotten the essential point of games - but that said, I'm quite preparred to quit gaming indefinitely (barring currently owned titles of course) if Nintendo ever attempt to do an EA on me.
Arguably perhaps, my attitude to gaming is old fashioned, as I'm starting to think that my golden era of gaming has passed (namely the 6th generation), but I believe that every gamer will feel the same at some point, including those who are happy with the DLC nature of curent games.
Bookmarks