The Old, the Modern and the Future of DLC

These days I'm loving indie gaming with titles like “Braid”, “Castle Crashers”, “Bionic Commando Rearmed”, “Geometry wars 2”, “The Last Guy” and “Pixel junk Eden”, etc this trend of gaming has finally taken off with a wide range of creative original titles taking advantage of their low budget and small team development process. It's refreshing to see that this notion/approach is finally being taken seriously within the industry as a profitable and desirable game development form, giving indie gaming it's own identity away from traditional £40 game model. As Digital Distribution is becoming a more acceptable form of gaming, capturing the attention of both hardcore and casual gamers and possessing the vibes of art house and simplicity, games developers are becoming more ambitious exploring many avenues of this model. These games certainly have very promising bright future reflecting the latest trends and needs for a wide array of gamers.

Another digital download trend which is mainly pushed by Microsoft is DLC (Download Content) which hasn't got such a clean cut bright future ahead as it still has many hurdles to overcome, especially appealing to mainstream audiences. Also there is the challenge of placing DLC appropriately as many people feel that DLC is a con/gimmick to generate more revenue for less extra content, and to a degree I believe their argument is valid, but the real question here is, how can the approach towards download content change to broaden it's potential and change people's attitude towards this concept?

With indie games, the demand and profits are there and growing, therefore development studios can afford to become more adventurous with price models, content and game structure like “Sam and Max”'s episodic paced game structure. However, DLC lacks such options due to the demand and profits being limited primarily towards the first person shooter genre for hardcore gamers, to fund experiments for such concepts. Obviously due to this fact, the content itself is priced highly to cover development costs and DLC is typically customized towards multiplayer which benefits from a high volume of players. This works very well for AAA titles like “Halo 3” and “Call Of Duty 4” but with smaller titles like “Stranglehold” or “Timeshift”, DLC proves a risky option for both developer and player as there is no guarantee that there will be the numbers willing to invest to make a profit for the development studio and to create a worthy solid experience for the players. That’s why this traditional method of DLC only works for established titles and as a big Halo fan myself; I love DLC as I just want more, although I can see the cracks appearing within this system that requires reconstruction for modern demands for a new generation of gamers. The current method can prove to be very uninviting and intimidating unless you are part of the FPS gamer generation who grew up with such games in late 90’s and early 2000’s. You could argue that these new gamers who wouldn’t normally invest in DLC are the type who never will, or the games (genres) they play aren’t designed with DLC in mind. So therefore the concept doesn’t appeal to them but I think the concept itself is appealing to everyone as “human beings” we always desire more of things we enjoy, but in the case of DLC I think it’s down to how it’s delivered to make it desirable for users fitting into the subject of the game for their overall experience.

My next question is: why do certain genres like adventure games do not typically contain DLC feature? The design mentality towards the adventure genre requires a coherent structure within a game world and the FPS DLC model doesn’t provide that as it just attaches/adds elements to the game system (like a dessert with a meal) rather than placing them inside the game world (ingredients of a meal). This is where new forms of DLC need to be introduced to work with other genres and game requirements which introduce many new game design challenges and choices where the most trivial feature can make such a difference towards the user’s experience. For example, Halo 3 has separate matchmaking playlists for the new content/maps whereas Call of Duty 4 incorporates the new maps within the same playlists everyone uses creating a bigger number of players (always guaranteed a match) but mixing the skill levels of pro/casual players. These games have been developed with DLC in mind from day one that’s why their model works for the target audience whereas with experimenting with other forms of DLC is hard to determine and structure towards the impact of final product/ game playing experience without long term pre-plan or focused objective the game is trying to achieve. For example, let's say in “Metal Gear Solid 4” (minor plot spoilers ahead about MGS 4, if you haven’t played it yet) you could download alternative story arches about “Meryl” seeing more development of her relationship with “Akiba/Johnny” or how she really feels about “Solid Snake”, and this gameplay being based in middle east, covertly backing up “Solid Snake” without his knowledge. This could be great idea adding depth to the plot, etc but there are many consequences and design elements to consider for such a concept like wouldn’t this rid the surprise for the story for people who aren’t yet aware of this story event to come, what would this DLC explore gameplay and story wise without it feeling like an add-on?

Many gamers are looking forward to Grand Theft Auto 4’s DLC with the so far announced two episodes within the story universe of Liberty Island. I think this could be the game to break this attitude towards DLC making it commercially acceptable for mainstream, although the question is: how are “Rockstar” going to execute their DLC?

The title “Crackdown” (Sandbox game made by: Real Time Worlds – ex Rockstar) is a good example GTA may be inspired by which has evolved the design mentality towards DLC. Crackdown’s DLC introduces new features/modes which as an player I didn't expect see from such a title, like the access to an debug mode (Like Halo's Forge mode), co-op and competitive multiplayer modes that expanded the playing style scope adding diversity that creates a different flavor/side to the crackdown experience which you wouldn’t think would co-exist/work within such a title. This DLC also includes typical game elements that we all want from “Crackdown” such as extra cars, weapons, characters, etc it was designed to have a balance of filling in with more of the same as well as expanding the experience which creates an broad spectrum of freedom allowing players to play with this content in any way they choose making it feel very coherent within the game world. In a way, it is like adding toys to the toy box (game system/world) and this is very smart approach towards DLC allowing anyone to enjoy the DLC allowing the player to have their own experience via flexibility without requirements rather than to rely on linear structure of FPS DLC where huge numbers of players are needed to enjoy, required for competitive FPS gameplay.

Burnout Paradise is another title that has been built in such a way, its evolution of MMO design ideals within racing genre where elements like weather, bikes, extra islands are added to Paradise City seamlessly without charge (free, shocking isn’t it?) and even the radio DJ gives the player hints regarding future DLC, making the experience feel fresh and exciting every time you play it, organically inserting the DLC expanding the experience further without DLC feeling like separate unity. Even though I don’t like racing games, this design approach has added a whole new perspective to my thinking and feelings about how racing games and DLC should be produced in the future.

Imagine the possibilities with GTA 4’s DLC: each episode is about different character in Liberty City with different timeframes, before or after Niko Bellic’s (GTA 4’s main character) story arch within Liberty City and all their stories all interlink with each others like a Quentin Tarantino movie, or each character has completely different gameplay styles and not just the alpha male gangsters/ex-solder like Niko Bellic, therefore players could buy only DLC with characters that interest them with their personality. The design approach of DLC needs to change to suit the gamer's needs and requirements, as the FPS DLC remains suitable for the hardcore gamers for competitive multiplayer games as there is need to reach out to other demographics by addressing their needs as gamers. As gaming technology is constantly developing and progressing changing the way we interact with games and how we experience them so does the way content is imported into the game worlds, making the world feel coherent and organic with the extra content. The beauty of DLC you can explore many venues of gameplay, idea and business models without risk of high development costs, like indie games and also if a development studio can’t complete features by their deadline, they have no excuse to not release it at a later date as DLC. DLC certainly has a bright future and I look forward to it.

Written by: Jonesy