Usually (at least in theory) Day one dlc is developed after the game has gone gold. In this time the company can't work on it anymore because it is being published. Thus working on the dlc gives the company something to do to which they can have a return on. So its not exactly a bad thing, unless content is being cut.DLCs in a healthy amount with fair price and great new content is great and I gladly pay for it. See AC. However, day one DLCs with basically 30% of the game being cut to sold separately is what hurts the industry. See Project CARS 2.
Because at least in ACs case, you're not only paying for the cars but also for the development of the game.My friend does not buy all the DLC's because he does not like some cars in a pack. Why would he want to buy something that he would never race, Waste of money...
I'm fine buying DLCs if it guarantees the development of the project for several years after the initial release.With the growing trend in the gaming industry to release DLC after DLC, has it now gone too far, and do you miss the old days of everything on a single disk?
I just decided not to renew my sub because I dont have the free time I used to. So now I have $500 worth of content I cant use.lolMaybe this makes me a hypocrite, but my answer is "it depends".
I have much less tolerance for large, well funded devs who sell millions of copies doing it (Microsoft/Forza, looking in your direction).
I have much more tolerance for indie devs (Reiza, Kunos, etc) doing it, cuz I feel like I'm helping a product that the big devs wouldn't touch.
The one that really gets my goat though is the iRacing model - content I've paid for that I can't use because it's behind a paywall.
pCars 2 does it the normal way. ''Pre-Purchase now and get 17% off!!'' But in some weird way that 17% brings the price excatly back to normal price, what a coincidence.....DLCs in a healthy amount with fair price and great new content is great and I gladly pay for it. See AC. However, day one DLCs with basically 30% of the game being cut to sold separately is what hurts the industry. See Project CARS 2.
With any DLC or expansion you are paying to prolong the future of the game, development wise or the studio for future products. I touched briefly on this in my first post on the thread. But I still stand firmly that AC does it wrong by locking out it's user base from interacting with the large majority because they have not paid to access it.Because at least in ACs case, you're not only paying for the cars but also for the development of the game.
Yes, you get the new features for free (and sometimes they even through some free content in like the Mazda 787B or the group B Quattro), but nevertheless the development over 3 years has to be paid one way or another.
At least in AC's case the DLC are very cheap and they are what keeps development running.
That's also why I strongly disagree with what @protonv5 said.
In that case we'd look at the state of AC 1.3 + DP1 maybe and that's it.
I can ensure you that just about nobody would drive it anymore. It would be forgotten rotting in some shelf.
Actually not even that, some virtual shelf …