PS3 News: We Need More Single-Player DLC - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

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

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (84 posts)

BikerSaint
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:51:09 PM
Reply

Yup, developers need to start understanding that there's a lot of us single mode players that also need to be shown some love too.

I'm tired of feeling like their orphan bastard step-child!

Agree with this comment 15 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Dancemachine55
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:58:03 PM

Amen to that.

I'm a single player gamer through and through. I loves me a good story.

Uncharted 2 proved that single player can often be better than a good multiplayer experience.

Agree with this comment 11 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Orvisman
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:27:17 AM

Amen!

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?

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:34:18 PM

Warhawk will be available as long as at least one person has a copy of Warhawk and a working PS3. People can even host ranked servers.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:51:41 PM
Reply

You're not in the vast minority Ben, I'd prefer additional SP content also, of course, the majority of my multi-player experience takes place on PC, so I may also be in the minority with you.

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?

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

carl0975
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:53:51 PM

Apparently mod tools are hard to make for consoles, due partly in fact that sony and microsoft want their consoles to be as secure as possible(Sony's definitely doing a better job of that), and partially because of memory limitations. In other words, developers are too short-sighted to see that allowing mod support on consoles would significantly increase the sales, although it would also increase their work load.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nickjcal
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:09:30 PM

Ya just look at far cry 2 maps editor. Everyone loves to make maps. If halo had a map editor instead of forge i would love it but just using objects to make a map really blows im not gnna lie although people always find ways to make a good mod. Unreal Tournament 3 on the ps3 supports mods though dosent it? I believe i remember getting gears and masterchief characters in that game

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:20:19 PM

I really don't care about mods that much. They don't have anything to do with the story, either; we need the original writers to handle that aspect, and to have a bunch of random people making stuff for a game doesn't appeal to me. I say, leave that stuff to the pros. You end up with a lot of trash otherwise.

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.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:15:41 AM

Actually Ben, mods can have something to do with the Story. You're at a rather disadvantage here, because you don't PC game, and therefore, have no experience with good modding.

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.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:55:30 AM

By the way Ben, that was almsot borderline offensive. Let's be honest, how do Pro's, become Pro's? They're not hatched out of some super egg. It requires practice.

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?

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:20:03 AM

Dude, I think we all know you're biased towards PC (and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that) but can we please be realistic for half a second?

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

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Orvisman
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:38:23 PM

@Ben,

Well, that CTR mod for MNR is pretty sweet. And LBP has made its name on Mods.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:05:39 PM

@Orvisman

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.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Monday, August 09, 2010 @ 2:12:07 PM

@ Ben: My preference of platform has little to do with this at all, unless you mean towards my experience with highly skilled modders. I WAS being realistic, if anything, it's you who's being unrealistic. This whole thing was really not meant to call you out, or offend you, I offered up a far more likely solution to your issue. You shot it down like it was an unwanted parasite, because you feel modding is crap. You're wrong. Period.

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.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Monday, August 09, 2010 @ 2:19:56 PM



Last edited by Mornelithe on 8/9/2010 2:20:14 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Monday, August 09, 2010 @ 3:43:15 PM

@ Underdog15: That's kind of the point though, what works on the PC won't work exactly the same way on console, so new toolsets must be devised and refined.

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.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

main_event05
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:53:25 PM
Reply

Well said Ben. I think more and more Devs are starting to get back in the Single Player focus. Are at least that's what I'm hoping.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

aaronisbla
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:55:57 PM
Reply

I understand your point but Assassin's Creed 2 dlc was a complete rip off and waste of time. Not a great example of single player dlc done right imo

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gabriel013
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:49:48 AM

Mass Effect 2 is a good example of single player dlc done right.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Victor321
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 9:58:04 PM
Reply

Well said Ben, I agree! Although I believe the reason that most developers don't do it, is because as they're in pre-production for their game, when they're developing their story, it's usually from start to finish. Unless you're a Bethesda, Rockstar, or Bioware, etc. and you make entire worlds that have much, much more depth and "life" in their games, then singleplayer DLC is fine, as you can sink hours and hours in those games.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:06:21 PM
Reply

I agree 100% we do need more single player DLC.

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.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

godsman
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:21:55 PM

Excellent example.

If developers are interested in Single player DLC, they should make games with stories that can stand alone without depending on the main plot.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Red 5
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:09:41 PM
Reply

Hi:

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.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 8 down Disagree with this comment

carl0975
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:56:27 PM

You don't understand DLC, do you? It doesn't have to be something that was meant to be part of the original game, it's just a little something extra to keep players interested, and to improve their experience(although, AC2 DLC was just stuff they didn't feel like giving to you as part of the original game)

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

kraygen
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:58:30 PM

Most ppl here will probably remember me often putting dlc down hard. However I disagree with you partially.

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.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:23:42 PM

Red 5: Please don't give into the conspiracy theories that every last developer is producing half a game at $60 just so they can release the rest later at added cost.

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

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

main_event05
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:57:38 AM

Wasn't Lost Planet release incomplete? I know quite a few "complete" games that for the life of me seem incomplete, anyone remember Alone in the Dark 5.

But my "theory" and Red's are completely different I guess.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Slimcere
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:05:10 AM

I couldn't agree more Red5,although if they kept DLC as free and just a pre order incentive then I wouldn't mind so much.

Last edited by Slimcere on 8/5/2010 10:07:53 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:21:31 AM

main_event: They weren't "incomplete;" they were just mediocre games.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Red 5
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:33:22 AM

"Ben: the extra content is almost always just that: extra content, developed at a later date."
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

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

main_event05
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:29:59 PM

Technically Red, Versus mode was already on the RE 5 disc. You just had to pay to unlock it.

@Ben, I liked AITD, I just couldn't stand to play it cause of the driving parts. And I only tried the demo of LP (it was ok).

Last edited by main_event05 on 8/5/2010 2:33:06 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

rjmacready
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:18:19 PM
Reply

I agree with you Ben. I ONLY play single player. Besides not having time to invest in multiplayer, and besides the fact that I don't want to deal with half of the clowns anyway, I play games to solve them, or to win the World Series or Superbowl for example. I loved solving Uncharted 2, and while the multiplayer is probably decent, I had no interest. When I play it again, I'll try to solve it again. That is fun to me! When I play MLB the Show, I play against the computer and try to win the World Series. That is more appealing to me than playing against someone online.
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.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

slayerkillemall
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:22:04 PM
Reply

Ben, i also thought ,i was in the minority.

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...

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 10:59:24 PM
Reply

Indeed sir! I would have spent another 60 bucks on Uncharted 2 DLC if they offered episodic content for the singleplayer experience.

Another thing that is missing is the DLC for God of War 3. I wonder what is up with that?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:07:12 PM

Yea see I wouldn't like Uncharted 2 DLC for the single player. That game is so epic, I dont think 1-3 hours of dlc would warrant it.

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.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:04:09 PM

Man do I disagree with you here brother. Adding some extra levels in the singleplayer wouldn't hurt the "epicness" of the game at all.

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.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Friday, August 06, 2010 @ 12:42:24 AM

Yea I see where your coming from. I see the need for SP DLC. But man I'd feel teased a bit, ya know?!?!

Either way as I said I'd probably pay for it so I could play it. I'll support my fav. devs. and games all day regardless which way I'd rather have it!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

kraygen
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:00:32 PM
Reply

I would definitely be thankful for some properly handled SP love. As long as it was handled correctly I'd be all for it, but I'm not paying extra for the last 10 minutes of the game, I'll just skip the game all together if they start doing that.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:03:34 PM
Reply

I guess I look at it from a different angle, while yet still understanding the need or want for more SP DLC.

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.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:11:12 PM

My point is. With a linear experience regardless if the story can be expanded, the Dev. told the story they wanted to. At that point that story is finished. They shouldn't have to expand on that story, because they told what they wanted.

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!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:49:13 PM

What if the "sequel" comes in the form of a half-dozen pieces of DLC that you can buy when you're ready to progress?

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

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Friday, August 06, 2010 @ 12:43:48 AM

I guess I just dont like the play a little, then its over... Play a little, then its over... lol IDK i mean its all good either way.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Hezzron
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:15:49 PM
Reply

SP is vital to gaming, and always will be. It's not going anywhere.

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.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:23:51 PM

I like your stance on it. But mind you That works well with an open world game., rather than a linear experience.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

godsman
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:26:53 PM

Yeah, the problem is that not every time Microsoft "sponsors" Rockstar 50 million+ to make the DLC.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

godsman
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:32:15 PM

@bigrailer19

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.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Hezzron
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:01:32 AM

I believe the purpose of a lot of add-on DLC is just a way to make a quick, easy extra buck without much financial risk to the developer. Throwing out some cheaper MP trinkets is the safest bet.

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.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

NoSmokingBandit
Wednesday, August 04, 2010 @ 11:34:14 PM
Reply

NOOOOOO! Now they'll start gimping single player (even more) just to sell it back to us. Its pretty bad that Activision charges $15 for 3 new MW2 maps for multi-player, what would they charge for a side-mission in the campaign?

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

FM23
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:10:24 AM
Reply

Thanks for this article. I am 100% backing you up on this one. GTA IV episodes are also a great example of single player DLC. Too bad RDR won't take that route. I am shocked Bioshock 2 didn't even take advantage of this because they could have released some DLC to fill in the holes produce by the story...but no, we get DLC for the pointless MP add on and trials for protecting little sisters (just play the game again). Thank god for PS3 exclusives, they deliver on every front of the single player experience.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

StangMan80
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:34:52 AM

100% with you FM23. PS3 is were the true gamer is, as I see that in single player, The story line is all that matters for me if it an't got it then I'm not buying. All though WarHawk is am exception.
I just don't understand how MW2 sold so well.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

The X Factor 9
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:48:26 AM

Amen brother.
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.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

frylock25
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:31:48 AM
Reply

i was just thinkin about this the other day when i was clicking around in the store. Bioshock 2 is one of my favorite games this year and it is supposed to have that single player dlc comin. can someone remind me when that was comin? are there any more details on what that was?

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.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ole_Gunner
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:15:32 AM
Reply

*Starts slow clap*
Absolutely brilliant Ben,standing ovation!And you are not in the vast minority of gamers wanting single player DLC.
Honestly expansions on story's is what is really needed.Thanks for being one of the few gaming journalists with the gall to say it Ben

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:54:09 PM

LOL @ "vast minority"

That's an oxymoron I sometimes use myself.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:58:16 AM
Reply

It may not be a vast minority, but I would assume that those that wouldn't care for it does outnumber us. That being said, I'm torn on single player DLC for games. It isn't just that I can't get it (again, no broadband, I'm seriously considering it for when GT5 and LBP2 release though), it is that so often it is done incorrectly.

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.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 3:09:35 AM

Unrelated but HOLY CRAP! I just read about the Signature Edition of GT5 for Europe and Australia. I think, no. I MUST HAVE IT. But 300 bucks, that's a big din squeeze. Aww, hell, for the chance to win a Mercedes SLS AMG, it's well worth it, even if my chances of winning it are all but none.
Peace.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 8:00:47 PM

FWIW, those chapters of ACII would probably just have been gone forever if not for the ability to sell them as DLC. They would not have delayed the game to allow for them to be finished.

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".

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 2:58:40 AM
Reply

Although the next 3 DLC's have been nixed so far for Heavy Rain, at least the Taxidermist was DLC done right.

I'm still hoping for the 3 missing DLC's to be made after QD's annouces that their newest game, "Horizon" has gone golden.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bentl78
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 3:08:03 AM
Reply

You are not alone.. I dont play much multiplayer either... and i think DLCs are good, but only if they are a bit longer.. some of the DLCs ex: dragon age (except awakening), are well.. too short..

i dont really care for MP either.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 3:16:59 AM
Reply

BLOODY OATH WE DO!
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

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 9:17:31 AM

Um...you do realize that to release DLC within 3 months of the initial release of a game, the developer pretty much *has* to be working on the DLC before the game is released which is precisely what many commenters here have and would castigate a developer for doing? In fact I believe you yourself may have suggested that a developer that says before release that they are working on DLC already is conning the gamer (or words to that effect). You can't have it both ways. The reality of software development is that with development, testing and eventual approval for release, DLC will take more than 3 months to bring - unless it's little more than skins for the game.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Friday, August 06, 2010 @ 9:22:05 AM

mm, whats the problem?
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!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Vivi_Gamer
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 3:31:06 AM
Reply

I don't want more single player DLC for one reason alone, it should already be in the released package of the game. I have nothing else to say on the matter.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

MadPowerBomber
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 6:43:21 AM

But... what if it's stuff developed after the initial release...?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Vivi_Gamer
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 4:22:09 PM

Should have been in the original game.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Godslim
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 5:34:45 AM
Reply

i do love a good singleplayer game but dlc always seemd a bit weird for it....whereas new maps are in addition

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LittleBigMidget
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:09:51 AM
Reply

More Heavy Rain DLC.....Oh wait, nevermind.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JackC8
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:32:40 AM
Reply

I buy single player games that have a nice long campaign. If they have DLC, that's great. If not, I've probably experienced enough of the game that it's time to move on to something else. There are a very satisfying number of games out that fit my preferences, so I guess I don't really care too much if everybody else wants to dish out ten bucks so they can do continue doing the exact same thing on three new maps or whatever.

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.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TheOldOne
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 7:53:22 AM
Reply

Yes please, more single player DLCs! I think the only multiplayer DLC that I got have been of games with a big multiplayer community (like MW2 and Battlefield:Bad Company 2). For the rest of my games, I would definitely buy their single player DLCs if made (Demon Souls, Red Dead Redemption, Valkyria Chronicles, Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, etc).

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Amazingskillz
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 9:06:03 AM
Reply

How about a long, full, well written and drawn out single player game with no loose ends unfinished plot sequences or questions to be answered. Just skip the DLC and come with the sequel if necessary? Just a thought.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jeej
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 9:24:51 AM
Reply

Ben, I couldn't agree more. Well said!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mamills
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 9:55:42 AM
Reply

well, we r the minority (The guys who replay the single player over and over).
i guess thats y they dun invest too much into SP DLC.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gone
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 10:20:55 AM
Reply

Burnout Paradise did a good job with DLC.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 11:31:27 AM

Yeah they did. They had a plan from the beginning to incorporate what they called game changing content. That's why we ended up with the Island, online modes like Cops and Robbers and the motorcycle mode. These add-ons were more than new car models or skins, the island expanded the game map considerably. The new online modes extended the replay value of the game enormously.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Alienange
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:47:01 PM

Burnout Paradise certainly stands alone as a champion of proper dlc.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SirLoin of Beef
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 11:23:02 AM
Reply

horse armor

best single-player dlc ever

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:52:26 PM

LOL! Your avatar deserves this....

Hyperbole is no substitute for thought!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SirLoin of Beef
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 11:26:28 AM
Reply

BioWare has done a decent job with DLC I think. They've been releasing stuff for ME2 and DA:O on a decent schedule. Some of it is pretty fluffy (gifts, weapons, etc.) and the prices are low (DLC-wise) for them. They've also released some actual content to add to the story as well, with more on its way.

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

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Luiscosmo2
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:53:55 PM
Reply

I still play SP cuz it came with my $60 u damn sureIma play it...But SP DLC I'll rarely pay 4 it, Same goes with MP DLC unless if its new maps..

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

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Alienange
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 12:56:29 PM
Reply

I liked it when we used to call single player dlc "expansion packs." They used to add LOT to the game. SP dlc is so trivial these days.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:52:55 PM

Perhaps the trick is to call them expansion packs and only call trivial re-skins as DLC?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 8:13:56 PM

Technically, Warhawk and Burnout Paradise and Siren are DLC, if you download them instead of buying them on disc.

Today's coinages are so poorly conceived. They actually knew how to create new words in the Eighteenth Century.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

sirbob6
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 1:52:44 PM
Reply

If more games would release DLC like Fallout 3 I'd be a very happy guy. However I can see this working with a couple games, primaraly open world ones. Otherwise like in the case of Uncharted I can't really see them working more story into it without messing it up. Anyways I really hoped they would've released inFamous dlc, but I guess I will just have to wait for 2

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

RebelJD
Thursday, August 05, 2010 @ 9:15:32 PM
Reply

I don't even play multi-player and I have over 20 PS3 titles with LB2 and GT5 on pre-order. Single-player isn't dead if a "single player" can invest that much into his PS3.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

The PS4 exclusive(s) reveal in December will be...
MEGATON! Biggest thing evah!
Pretty great, but not mind-blowing.
Something decent but that's it.
A waste of hype.

Previous Poll Results