We Need More Single-Player DLC
The idea of expanding on the games that already sit in our collections is a relatively new one. Even though PC gaming has seen expansion packs for years, we're now talking about direct and almost instant delivery of continual upgrades and enhancements that enrich and lengthen the experience. However, while it's admittedly more difficult to provide single-player downloadable content, I think we're being absolutely inundated with multiplayer DLC...that I honestly don't care about.
Yes, I'm aware I'm in the vast minority. Everybody loves multiplayer. I get it. I also understand that if you were to continue to expand on the story and plot of a game, fans might feel really short-changed: they paid their $60 for a full adventure, which of course includes a story that starts and finishes. To charge for extra "episodes" all the time would probably wear thin, right? I can only imagine getting three-quarters of the way through Uncharted 2 and then being hit with a message that said, "play the rest of the story for only $9.99!" Yeah, that would suck. But that's not necessarily what needs to be done; perhaps a good example of some single-player DLC that adds to the experience without feeling cheap or unimportant is the stuff available for Assassin's Creed II. I don't need to play multiplayer and I already saw the ending. Sure, there were a few spots left in Venice I couldn't access, but it didn't affect the story.
And we need more. At this point, it might be fair to estimate that 90% of all DLC is multiplayer-oriented and while I'm well aware of the popularity of multiplayer, I'm not quite sure that 90% is indicative of the reality. Do 90% of all gamers really only care about multiplayer? Obviously, it depends a lot on the type of game; FPSs are certainly better suited to multiplayer, but those do have single-player campaigns, you know. Expanding on the Killzone 3 story would be quite interesting, as would adding more missions that give us new perspectives to the plot in Sucker Punch's inFamous 2. But maybe I'm alone in this. Maybe there are millions of people out there scoffing and going, "who the hell even plays single-player anymore?" If so, than I'm way more out of touch than I had initially thought. And I can accept that.
Won't change how I feel, though. Single-player is not dead and contrary to what many want to believe, it remains the backbone of this industry.
Tags: downloadable content, dlc, single-player dlc
8/4/2010 9:21:22 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (84 posts)
Dancemachine55
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:58:03 PM
Orvisman
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:27:17 AM
Thumbs up to more single-player DLC like Prince of Persia, Assassins Creed II, and Dante's Inferno. I would welcome more single-player DLC with an open wallet.
The thing with multiplayer DLC only, as well as multiplayer-only games, is that when the servers go dark we, in essence, own nothing more than a beer coaster to protect our coffee tables… I'm looking at you Warhawk, Socom Online, MAG, DC Universe, and The Agency.
The first three games are great, and I have high hopes for the latter two; but once Sony shuts the servers down for those games, and it will eventually, what am I supposed to do with those discs? Maybe some skeet shooting?
Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:34:18 PM
Mornelithe
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:51:41 PM
Reply
However, I think you're missing one vital piece that PC's still corner the market on. Mods. Mods do exactly what you're saying, without the need for the developer to lift a finger.
Take Stalker for example, the community surrounding Stalker, has made some absolutely incredibly mods for that game, that in fact, enrich the SP experience, and in many ways rewrite it entirely. Fallout 3 also has a MASSIVE modding community.
But...not for consoles...and that's a shame. Developers these days are so quick to jump onto the next project, rather than supporting/maintaining the relevancy of something they've already made. Which kinda leaves us with needing mod tools for console, so that the community can take care of itself.
I'm not really sure why it's still such a scarce thing on consoles, they allowed it with UT3...now why not do so for a game that's actually worth our time?
carl0975
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:53:51 PM
Nickjcal
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:09:30 PM
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:20:19 PM
I know gamers can make some great stuff but I think there's a definite difference between PC mods and actual expansions and upgrades from the game developers.
Mornelithe
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:15:41 AM
It's something that would expand upon single player quite dramatically, otherwise, Devs are just too interested in cash to really give a sh** about making more DLC for the SP portion of a game they made a year or two ago. That's honestly dreaming imo.
Only way for it to happen is if mods occur on consoles.
Mornelithe
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:55:30 AM
Didn't Media Molecule just hire a modder because of the professional and downright amazing nature of his work?
There are several mods to Stalker alone, that change so much about the game (in a 'professional' manner), as to warrant several new play throughs of the game.
I don't own Fallout 3, but I can have my friend Nate write up a list of everything wrong with what you just said regarding...Pro's.
And I take it you'll never touch an LBP2 creation, because it wasn't done by anyone at Media Molecule, and therefore, not professionally made?
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:20:03 AM
Most all PC gamers out there will tell you that 99% of all mods are junk. Thousands upon thousands exist and maybe a few dozen are really, really good. You know that. So let's not try to say this is some sort of solution to expanding on single-player content. LittleBigPlanet was initially designed for amateur player design; that's a terrible example.
You really think I want any random gamer making sh** up for Uncharted 2 and trying to put it into a game? Sorry, but forget it.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 8/5/2010 10:56:21 AM
Orvisman
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:38:23 PM
Underdog15
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:05:39 PM
That's a fair bit different. Creating mods in LBP and MNR is a major aspect of gameplay. In fact, it's the main theme. In MNR, you need 250k create points on the way to a platinum... which is really tough. You have to commit to creating and sharing your stuff.
In PC games, modding is an issue of altering lines of code. I don't think they're comparable.
Mornelithe
Monday, August 09, 2010 @ 2:12:07 PM
I could say you're being juvenile about having to use a 'search' function, or god forbid word of mouth, to find the best of the best mods. But, I think you might already realize that. Complaining about having to search for something spectacular, really? Have you gotten that self-entitled?
Gamers suffer the same shit, as every other consumer-type on this planet does, part of what you do HERE, on this very SITE, helps weed out the garbage. Does it not?
Now, developers _could_ do as you suggest, create SP DLC but at what cost? We know that only the highest tier of AAA Titles, could afford such a maneuver, as simply the costs associated with doing a whole new SP campaign that sells abysmally due to the core having already moved on, could very well cause a developer to collapse. I'm not against the idea, seriously, I just don't see it happening.
Modding, is the next best alternative, sure the devs really have to think about the toolsets they produce, and I'm sure there will have to be SOME layer of oversight, and even a ranking system for those few who hate having to do any research on the game...they spent $60 on.
Now, most people I know who play modded PC games, know how to use the internet, and are actually part of communities solely bent on modding. It's where that research factor comes into play. Yes, 99.9% of mods aren't worth your time, but the other 0.1% are absolutely AMAZING. To miss out on them, simply due to laziness is rather sad.
LittleBigPlanet was a prime example, whether you approve or not. It's a game that encourages modding (are the levels the same as the core game? No? It's a mod), on consoles. It's different from what PC modders are used to, but are you entirely surprised? The LBP controls have to be more intuitive, due to controller use. Obviously there will be some differences. However, I'm highly encouraged, it means more developers will likely attempt to create toolsets for other games. That'd be great.
Whether you like it or not, I really don't care Ben, I offered an alternative to what you were suggesting, and you jumped down my throat over it. Not cool, and completely unnecessary.
Mornelithe
Monday, August 09, 2010 @ 2:19:56 PM
Mornelithe
Monday, August 09, 2010 @ 3:43:15 PM
But...just because some work has to go into it, doesn't mean it's impossible, and certainly doesn't mean it's a useless road to travel. A great deal of entertainment could be gleaned from having modding abilities attached to some games. LBP just found a way for it to be done easily, on console. I find it hard to imagine that that's the ONLY way to do it, let alone that that particular approach would work on certain other genre's of games.
main_event05
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:53:25 PM
Reply
aaronisbla
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:55:57 PM
Reply
Gabriel013
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:49:48 AM
Victor321
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:58:04 PM
Reply
Highlander
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:06:21 PM
Reply
As for how to do it, if anyone dares to deliver a game which tells the majority of the story but forces you to make an extra payment for the final chapters, I would hope that reviewers will critique that game back to the Stone Age and beyond. For an example of how to do it, I would suggest Ratchet and Clank Quest For Booty. It was a stand alone game that built on Tools Of Destruction and led into A Crack In Time.
I think any SP DLC needs to be a self contained story that reuses certain characters and elements from the original game but takes it somewhere else along a different path that doesn't interfere with the exiting game or any sequels that they might have planned.
godsman
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:21:55 PM
Red 5
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:09:41 PM
Reply
Ben, MGS4 and THIS "wish" are two thing where I disagree 100% with you. Try to understand people: DLC is a piece of CRAP! It doesn't matter if it is for Multiplayer or Single Player. When someone buy a game at FULL price, that should be exactly that: Full GAME.
People wrote something similar on another article: Several months before the Game is on stores, companies are "proud" to announce DLC... Forgive Me but, that's for MORONS.
Why don't you write an article about the times where Released games were "Full Games".. It's not so far, our memories still remember that GOOD days when our money worth it.
Red 5.
carl0975
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:56:27 PM
kraygen
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:58:30 PM
Not all dlc is wrong. If a game dev makes their game the way they really want the story done, then it sells well so they want to continue. So they get the team together again and make some side quests or some new content that will go well with the original. I don't see a problem with that.
The big problem is that devs tend to not handle dlc that way. I usually bash dlc because companies make the dlc before the game is finished and they release part of a game with dlc available at launch which is just consumer gouging.
If more devs handled dlc properly it probably wouldn't be shed in such a terrible light. DLC itself isn't bad in itself, just how the majority of devs handle it.
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:23:42 PM
For the most part, we ALWAYS get complete games, so don't complain. I very rarely see instances of so-called half-games with necessary DLC; the extra content is almost always just that: extra content, developed at a later date.
Don't freak out. What you're saying is a slippery slope; you're basically saying there can never be any such thing as DLC because you will always believe the extra stuff should've been included in the game.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 8/4/2010 11:24:18 PM
main_event05
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:57:38 AM
Slimcere
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:05:10 AM
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:21:31 AM
Red 5
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:33:22 AM
Hi:
Ben, let me do the Homework:
*Alan wake: Release (May 2010); DLC (July 2010),
*Lost Planet 2: Release (May 2010); DLC (JUNE 2010, even a DLC PRE RELEASE),
*Resident Evil 5: Release (March 2009); DLC (April 2009 [Versus Mode]), (February 2010 [Chapters]),
*Grand Theft Auto IV: Release (April 2008); DLC (February & October 2009).
*Red Dead Redemption: Release (May 2010); DLC (June 2010).
We have more games with DLC, a LOT more. In this tiny list, only GTAIV is what you want about DLC, everyone else is what I said about it.
CRAPCOM and EA are the worst companies, I think. The REAL problem is all the people who still buy DLC as a "later" Add On.
Red 5.
Last edited by Red 5 on 8/5/2010 10:34:29 AM
main_event05
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:29:59 PM
rjmacready
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:18:19 PM
Reply
I would love more single player downloadable content for games like Uncharted, Resident Evil, GTA, etc. I feel I got my money's worth with those games already, and would gladly pay for more of the great single player games that I love.
slayerkillemall
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:22:04 PM
Reply
although unlike you my main focus is fps,every now and again i may buy something else like lair,deadspace,etc,and it be nice to get single player downloads/expansions for those games.
one game that comes to mind,is the expansion campaign for fear 2 called reborn which i bought first day,think it was $10 for 2 hours gameplay which was not bad...
maxpontiac
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:59:24 PM
Reply
bigrailer19
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:07:12 PM
I'm glad they never released any DLC for it, as well as GOW3, because those games need full length games to back them up. GOW3 obviously in a different situation being that the trilogy is over but... At the same time, I would have still played it and payed for it lol. I just would rather see time and expenses put towards a full length game, rather than a couple hours worth of something.
maxpontiac
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:04:09 PM
In fact, I saw plenty of locations in which they could have gone into greater detail with the "who-what-where-when" facet of the game.
Not asking for plot twists or anything, just alittle bit more.
bigrailer19
Friday, August 06, 2010 @ 12:42:24 AM
bigrailer19
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:03:34 PM
Reply
For me if a developer is going to take the time and expand on a game that could warrant a sequal, spend the time and expenses on a true sequal rather than a couple hours of dlc. Thats just my opinion. I dont really know what to make of it but I guess It would also depend on the price and the length. I would much rather pay $60 for a full length game, than $10 to $20 for a couple hours. Granted it may be worth it, but I think in most cases if they were expanding the story I would feel like it was missing something.
Now a game like AC2, or RDR with an open vast world which the dev. could throw some extra quests, or missions in, to fill that open world that makes sense. I guess more or less it pertains more to the linear experience for me.
IDK again its hard to make sense of it, but I still think if a sequal is warranted spend time on that rather than pumping out bits and pieces of a game. I think thats why most DLC is MP, because the devs. can add maps, or game modes, characters, etc. more easily.
bigrailer19
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:11:12 PM
And then if they took the story in a different direction or went to a different story situation, I personally say just focus on something larger, and making a new full length game.
Again open world games I accept because it's easy to just throw in a few missions, rather than try and conclude or add a story the length of a couple hours!
Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:49:13 PM
I won't discount the benefits of a new game engine that comes with a "proper" sequel, but I'm partial to the idea of episodic DLC as a way to continue the story, especially if the original game saves continue to be used.
Plus, you wouldn't have to wait two or three years for your next fix.
Last edited by Fane1024 on 8/5/2010 7:50:06 PM
bigrailer19
Friday, August 06, 2010 @ 12:43:48 AM
Hezzron
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:15:49 PM
Reply
I think GTA4 handled SP DLC the best. It gave us a good amount of the same great gameplay, but done as a spin-off using other supporting characters from the main story.
Taking that angle doesn't interfere with the already established story, and it certainly doesn't give off the impression that it was just some extra leftovers lying on the cutting-room floor.
I enjoy MP, but there's only so many games you can commit to properly online.
bigrailer19
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:23:51 PM
godsman
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:26:53 PM
godsman
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:32:15 PM
totally true. The DLC in GTA reused the HUGE open-world map, with some adjustments.
If something like Final Fantasy XIII has a spinoff with a different character and story, it'll feel like Deja Vu when the character goes in a same cave of a recycled map. If that's the case, developers will need to scrap the whole thing and make new maps, mind as well make a new game than DLC.
Hezzron
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:01:32 AM
To make some significant amounts of extra SP for the purpose of DLC would probably be counter productive to them just making a whole new game.
NoSmokingBandit
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:34:14 PM
Reply
FM23
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:10:24 AM
Reply
StangMan80
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:34:52 AM
The X Factor 9
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:48:26 AM
Here are some examples of DLC done right. There are FAR greater instances of DLC gone wrong, but let's point out the most essential DLC purchases.
1. Fallout 3 Broken Steel and Point Lookout- The first time you get sucked into Fallout 3's world will have you to level 15 about 12-15 hours into the game. You can hit level 20 and barely scratch the surface of Fallout's world. The level cap raise should have been free, but props to Bethesda for fixing the problem and giving us some cool side quests to go on.
2. GTA IV: Episodes from Liberty City- Haven't played it, but its reputation and pedigree precedes it.
3. Oblivion: The Shivering Isles- Those who have played this know that it can be constituted as its own game. It's absolutely massive.
4. Little Big Planet: Metal Gear Solid and Pirates of the Caribbean Packs. The ability to add the paintinator (paint gun) and water to levels greatly expanded the diversity and amount of activities available to do.
5. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2- The Stimulus Pack. Just kidding guys...
DLC has its benefits, but truth be told, most of it is a rip off. FIFA's Live Season is a rip off, but it's cool and I like it. Should be included for all new copy buyers. Like, all the leagues. Not just one.
Single player is the core of video gaming, but the demographic has changed and it is now aimed at being a much more social activity.
frylock25
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:31:48 AM
Reply
Heavy rain was gonna have the single player dlc but that was cut. so disappointing. i want more story for my favorite games not more places to shoot idiots online.
this small community here at psx seems to really appreciate the single player experiance and the story telling that draws me into all my favorite games.
Ole_Gunner
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:15:32 AM
Reply
Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:54:09 PM
Lawless SXE
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:58:16 AM
Reply
Assassin's Creed 2 DLC is an example that I like to use. Yes, it added to the story, which is what I want, but when the devs come out and say that we cut this from the game because we didn't have time to put it in, here pay us ten bucks for it, that's just price gouging. It's an Activision thing to do. If a development house admits to cutting content, then release it later, it should come very cheap, if not for free.
Another incorrect (from my point of view) way to do SP DLC is to split the team to work on it while the game is still in development, regardless of whether or not it pertains directly to the story that is offered in the game. If they want to do it, that's fine but wait until the game has been released.
The way I see it: You can add to the story of the game, provided work doesn't start until the game has hit the market, or feel free to write it during development, but don't start actually devving it before release. For example LittleBigPlanet. Sure, it may not be directly a part of the story, but it helped to advance and extend the single player experience. Imagine if the Assassin's Creed 2 episodes been implemented into the game as half chapters, or better yet, adding extra techniques for Ezio/Desmond to learn and adding them onto the end of story, implementing them properly if you're starting a new game, rather than unlocking so-called corrupted data.
Another good example is GTA IV. The episodes may have been announced before the game was released, but the fact that together they were essentially the length of a new, full game is a good thing. Not only that, but the way they focussed on different characters than Niko really helps me to think that I made the right idea by supporting R* in this endeavour.
I know that I'm ranting, but it needs to be done right, or not at all. That being said, I'm also sick and tired of the hullaballoo over multiplayer. Sure I enjoyed it in the two months that I was able to play it, but so far as I'm concerned, that's not what gaming is. I think if I keep going I'm going to really lose it.
Peace.
Lawless SXE
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 3:09:35 AM
Peace.
Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 8:00:47 PM
Also, if they don't start working on the DLC before the game is released, the DLC won't appear in timely fashion and then you get what happened with the GTA DLC on PS3: gamers fail to buy it because they've "moved on".
BikerSaint
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:58:40 AM
Reply
___________
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 3:16:59 AM
Reply
i just finished the signal the first DLC to alan wake and absolutely loved it and it also left me pissed!
they leave us on such a cliffhanger, and the next DLC is not out till chrissy.
BASTARDS!
how the hell am i supposed to keep the story fresh in memory for another 4 flippin months?
i could barley remember what happened at the end of alan wake not even 2 months after so how am i suppose to remember 4 months after?
i love DLC as long as its released close to the games release, theres no point releasing the game than releasing the DLC 6 months after release because 99% of people would of A lost interest or B sold the game for another one.
i cant sit there saying no i wont play that, no i wont play that, no i wont play that either, im waiting for x DLC to release.
its just stupid!
if your going to release DLC for your game, release it maximum 3 months after the release of the game and make sure the DLC has a back story so people can remember the story in the game.
thats one thing i was shocked to see in the signal, alan wake at the end of each chapter has a previously on alan wake trailer reminding you what previously happened, but the DLC had nothing like that!
so during the DLC when you trigger those memories, most of them i could not remember where they were from or when in the story they occurred.
just make sure its not the BS ubisoft pulled in assassins creed 2 that sh*t really freaking pissed me off!
you cant lead a player up to a certain part, than leave a massive gap in the story and charge people to fill it in!
its like selling someone a car, than charging extra for seats!
they have to be way longer too, the signal DLC only took me not even 50 minutes to finish if i had paid the 15 bucks M$ were asking for it id be pissed!
im seriously in 2nd thoughts to weather ill buy the writer or not.
Last edited by ___________ on 8/5/2010 3:18:56 AM
Highlander
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 9:17:31 AM
___________
Friday, August 06, 2010 @ 9:22:05 AM
allot of games are finished months before release, halo reach for example is done, dusted but its not out till mid september!
uncharted 2 was finished in late july, even though it did not release till late october.
GOW3 the same, i think they said it finished in jan in there unearthing the legend documentary.
what is the point of releasing DLC so late after the game releases?
i dunno about you but i cant sit there waiting for them to release the DLC.
ill move on to other games, get stuck into those.
im not going to replay through a whole game just so i can remember the story so i can play the DLC.
id love to replay some of my favorite games, im itching to get back into alan wake but i simply dont have the time for that.
this week alone i had 3 programming assignments, a MAYA assignment and 2 SQL assignments due!
Ultimadream
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 3:31:06 AM
Reply
MadPowerBomber
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 6:43:21 AM
Ultimadream
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 4:22:09 PM
LittleBigMidget
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:09:51 AM
Reply
JackC8
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:32:40 AM
Reply
As far as creating DLC for single player games, I don't see what the confusion is. Most stories have a main plot as well as subplots. You have the DLC expand upon the subplots, making them into the main plot of the new story.
TheOldOne
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:53:22 AM
Reply
Amazingskillz
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 9:06:03 AM
Reply
Highlander
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 11:31:27 AM
Alienange
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:47:01 PM
SirLoin of Beef
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 11:23:02 AM
Reply
Highlander
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:52:26 PM
SirLoin of Beef
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 11:26:28 AM
Reply
Shivering Isles for Oblivion was awesome DLC. Heck the Knights of the Nine, or whatever the heck it was called, wasn't too bad either.
SP DLC is a welcome addition in my opinion. Some of it is crap but that doesn't mean all of it is.
Last edited by SirLoin of Beef on 8/5/2010 11:27:06 AM
Luiscosmo2
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:53:55 PM
Reply
But I guess SP people need some DLC Love... oh wait...then Devs r gonna get carried away and release half finied SP...
Last edited by Luiscosmo2 on 8/5/2010 12:55:33 PM
Highlander
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:52:55 PM
Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 8:13:56 PM
sirbob6
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:52:44 PM
Reply

Assassin's Creed II









BikerSaint
Reply
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:51:09 PM
I'm tired of feeling like their orphan bastard step-child!