Don't you miss stuff like unlocking characters in Super Smash Bros. by doing different tasks? Beat the game without dying, beat everybody's mini-games with record times, or whatever it was you had to do. Doesn't seem like you have that kind of stuff anymore. Now it's, "You want this hidden character? Give me $5."
Or could you imagine playing through a classic like Ocarina of Time and having to wait for DLC to get into the next dungeon and collect certain items? Or how about, "Pre-order Final Fantasy VII at GameStop and get a code for Cloud's Ultimate weapon for free." Pre-order with Amazon and you get a free Blue Chocobo. Wal-Mart gives you an extra All-materia right at the beginning of the game. Etc...
I get why developers and distributors are doing it. They're making fuck-loads selling full versions of games for $120 or whatever it is. I don't blame them. But, man, I hate the model personally.
By the way... what's the difference between content locked on a physical disc that you have to pay to unlock later - and DLC that you pay to download later? Shouldn't you dislike both if you dislike one? I know nothing about Destiny; but if they had the locked on-disc content ready to go, but instead they held on to it at their studios and you had to download it later.... what's the difference? (I think both suck)
There's a pretty significant difference. When you are paying for content locked on disk it means they have already completed the work and likely have covered their development cost both time and money to create the content. The only reason for them to keep it from the customers is to make more money off of it. Even worse is sometimes withholding the content prevents the game from actually being complete which means in a lot of cases if the customer wants a complete game they have to spend more money than they had originally intended to.
This is significantly different than a developer who releases a game that's complete on day one and promises to continue to develop content for it. The idea is that they will continue to support the title by adding content that you will have to purchase in the future. When DLC was originally introduced in the industry this was the premise for it, you would get a complete game and then have added replay value because the developers would continue to support. Before this, some games employed such practices with subscription models. In recent history the only game I can think of that's done it right is Dark Souls 2. They released a full game, and later added an expansion that they needed time to develop post release.
The problem is customers have continued to allow big AAA developers to take advantage of them and now the industry has evolved to where the development has gotten lazy. By using DLC as a crutch companies knowingly release incomplete games knowing that they can charge more for the complete experience later or they can finish games but carve up the complete version to nickle and dime the consumer more.
The disturbing part is that there are people who think this is okay, it's just the status quo and should be accepted. That's a pretty disgusting outlook and I feel sorry for such people who so openly accept being taken advantage of.
All of that said, on the flip side. It comes down to supply and demand. And clearly the demand is being met for such practices to continue. So I completely understand the perspective of hopelessness of things ever changing. But, it's one thing to understand current circumstances and another to verbally accept and try to justify such circumstances.
Fanboyism is alive and well. Hopefully as some people mature they will learn it's okay to like something but still be critical of some of its flaws.
At the end of the day I detest some of the things Bungie has done with Destiny, but I still enjoy the game and think it's worth 60$.
