machomuu
Stuck in Hot Girl Summer
- 10,507
- Posts
- 16
- Years
- She/Her
- Take a left, turn right at the next stop, bear lef
- Seen Jun 16, 2024
I feel that we don't have nearly enough discussions about gaming in terms of design, the industry, or industry practices, so I've decided that every now and again I'll be posting a discussion topic about said topics. So let's jump in, shall we?
---
DLC. There has been many a debate about whether it's good or bad, whether the content should have been in the game in the first place, and whether the pricing is ever just.
Well good news, that's not what we're talking about today! Nope, instead we're gonna talk about Optional DLC. Now, obviously all DLC is optional, so I'll define it further. When I say Optional DLC, I'm referring to things that are aesthetic or provide level boosts, early/instant access to content already in the game, etc.- DLC that, when brought up in a discussion, will probably result in at least one person saying the line "Well no one's forcing you to buy it," therefore making it optional. For the sake of this discussion we'll mostly be talking about that aesthetic DLC, but know that what will be said here applies to all Optional DLC.
But first you may be wondering what that first bit of the title is- in particular, what do whales have to do with gaming? Well these whales aren't aquatic features; they're people who shell out a lot of money towards in-game content. This phrase was actually coined in reference to free-to-plays, as a reference to people who put exorbitant amount of money into these games and, generally, make up the bulk of revenue that a Free-to-Play will receive as a result. Moving from free-to-plays and on to paid games, this same definition could be applied (though generally they don't make up the ones who net the dev/publisher most of their sales, that would be the average consumer that does so). Whales are the type to buy lots or all of the DLC for games that they enjoy. So let's bring this full circle with an example.
Senran Kagura is a popular title, for better or for worse. It's an Action franchise (or a cooking game on certain days of the week) about well-endowed women that every now and again tend to have their clothes ripped off in-game. Senran Kagura, as one might expect, has a lot of DLC, some of which is characters, but most of it is clothing, haircuts, and accessories that you can dress the girls up in but don't actually have any effect on the game. It's optional- no one's forcing you to buy it and you don't miss out on anything by not having it since they're just aesthetics...right? Well, logically, yes, but in practice this isn't quite so. If it were that simple then devs and publishers would be making chump change off of this kind of DLC, because not everyone's going to buy it. The risk-reward ratio wouldn't exactly be in their favor.
So how do they make money off of these items exactly? Simple, they make the player feel like they need them, like they're game won't be complete without it. Pushing this further, they make them feel as if they are getting a lot for what they're paying and that they aren't paying that much. This is done in a number of ways, but surprisingly there's little that's done in the way of the actual content creator. Tactics to enforce this include having a small-yet-sufficient number of aesthetic choices on-disc or putting out aesthetics that work to be homages to other or past works, but really, getting people to feel enticed to buy your stuff is as simple as making it available as DLC. Those tactics can work, sure, but when you put DLC out, regardless of the type of the DLC, the fact is that if you put it out, someone will want it. This generally comes with one of three things: anger, desire, or a mix of the two. Those who are angry will likely take to the internet and kick and scream about how the content should have been in the game to begin with. Those who feel said desire will either jump right in or weigh the cost over how much they'll get out of it. But either way, the DLC's existence is rarely simply handwaved.
Thus is the irony of the Optional DLC. The argument that no one is forcing you to buy it holds up, but you also know it's there to tempt you. The publishers are whaling, and you're there target. While they aren't goading you into buying something like a costume or like, it wouldn't be a big purchase by itself and it gives you more to choose from. It makes your game fuller. It makes your game more complete. And it's only after you've bought a good amount of DLC under this mindset that you realize you've become a victim of the hunt.
Is this a criticism of the practice? No, it's actually quite clever. Optional DLC, be it aesthetic, level boosting, or just incredibly small content, is all about temptation in a way that more functional DLC isn't. But the kicker is that from an industry and even from a consumer mass standpoint, DLC like this is harmless. Unless the developers very clearly left content out to release it as DLC, as a developer how much money the consumer spends on the DLC you've put out is completely out of your hands. However, this can be very dangerous to your fanbase. Take Dead or Alive 5: Last Round, which takes this in pompous stride and is very well aware of it. Knowing that it has a good amount of costumes under its belt due to the amount of content it's amassed since the original DOA5, it decided to release some DLC. $319.94's worth of DLC, to be exact. But because it has so much content in-game, it could easily shift the blame to the players should they spend a good amount on DLC. Similarly, the price of all of the DLC is ridiculous (incredibly so), to the point that they walk a very, very fine line with this.
And though I don't want to go on about this much longer, I just have one more thing to say. Above, I said I wasn't criticizing the practice, and for the sake of this spiel, I won't. What I will say is this, though: DLC as it exists now is dangerous in any form. I have nothing against the addition of content to a game but in the past 10 years the practice has been criticized for being misused and mishandled, simply a means to get more money out of the player after they've already bought the game. In reference to Optional DLC, and this goes double for Japan thanks to the financial contribution of otaku that is unparalleled by most others elsewhere, whaling, catalogs of $1+ items, level boosts, item unlocks, announcer voices...these set a really bad example for other developers and publishers because, oftentimes, they're put out under the same mentality that I just mentioned. It makes the business look bad. It makes the business look gross. These games aren't free-to-plays, they don't survive on these items, and if not released in moderation you run the risk of dragging down consumer trust and sales, and worse, you drag down had-been ambitious idea of DLC and just make it look like a cutpurse practice. Very rarely is it truly harmless.
---
So feel free to discuss or give feedback! I'd personally implore you not to just read the title and post and even more I need to stress that this is not a discussion of DLC as a whole, but rather it's a discussion of whales and Optional DLC as it's described here.
---
DLC. There has been many a debate about whether it's good or bad, whether the content should have been in the game in the first place, and whether the pricing is ever just.
Well good news, that's not what we're talking about today! Nope, instead we're gonna talk about Optional DLC. Now, obviously all DLC is optional, so I'll define it further. When I say Optional DLC, I'm referring to things that are aesthetic or provide level boosts, early/instant access to content already in the game, etc.- DLC that, when brought up in a discussion, will probably result in at least one person saying the line "Well no one's forcing you to buy it," therefore making it optional. For the sake of this discussion we'll mostly be talking about that aesthetic DLC, but know that what will be said here applies to all Optional DLC.
But first you may be wondering what that first bit of the title is- in particular, what do whales have to do with gaming? Well these whales aren't aquatic features; they're people who shell out a lot of money towards in-game content. This phrase was actually coined in reference to free-to-plays, as a reference to people who put exorbitant amount of money into these games and, generally, make up the bulk of revenue that a Free-to-Play will receive as a result. Moving from free-to-plays and on to paid games, this same definition could be applied (though generally they don't make up the ones who net the dev/publisher most of their sales, that would be the average consumer that does so). Whales are the type to buy lots or all of the DLC for games that they enjoy. So let's bring this full circle with an example.
Senran Kagura is a popular title, for better or for worse. It's an Action franchise (or a cooking game on certain days of the week) about well-endowed women that every now and again tend to have their clothes ripped off in-game. Senran Kagura, as one might expect, has a lot of DLC, some of which is characters, but most of it is clothing, haircuts, and accessories that you can dress the girls up in but don't actually have any effect on the game. It's optional- no one's forcing you to buy it and you don't miss out on anything by not having it since they're just aesthetics...right? Well, logically, yes, but in practice this isn't quite so. If it were that simple then devs and publishers would be making chump change off of this kind of DLC, because not everyone's going to buy it. The risk-reward ratio wouldn't exactly be in their favor.
So how do they make money off of these items exactly? Simple, they make the player feel like they need them, like they're game won't be complete without it. Pushing this further, they make them feel as if they are getting a lot for what they're paying and that they aren't paying that much. This is done in a number of ways, but surprisingly there's little that's done in the way of the actual content creator. Tactics to enforce this include having a small-yet-sufficient number of aesthetic choices on-disc or putting out aesthetics that work to be homages to other or past works, but really, getting people to feel enticed to buy your stuff is as simple as making it available as DLC. Those tactics can work, sure, but when you put DLC out, regardless of the type of the DLC, the fact is that if you put it out, someone will want it. This generally comes with one of three things: anger, desire, or a mix of the two. Those who are angry will likely take to the internet and kick and scream about how the content should have been in the game to begin with. Those who feel said desire will either jump right in or weigh the cost over how much they'll get out of it. But either way, the DLC's existence is rarely simply handwaved.
Thus is the irony of the Optional DLC. The argument that no one is forcing you to buy it holds up, but you also know it's there to tempt you. The publishers are whaling, and you're there target. While they aren't goading you into buying something like a costume or like, it wouldn't be a big purchase by itself and it gives you more to choose from. It makes your game fuller. It makes your game more complete. And it's only after you've bought a good amount of DLC under this mindset that you realize you've become a victim of the hunt.
Is this a criticism of the practice? No, it's actually quite clever. Optional DLC, be it aesthetic, level boosting, or just incredibly small content, is all about temptation in a way that more functional DLC isn't. But the kicker is that from an industry and even from a consumer mass standpoint, DLC like this is harmless. Unless the developers very clearly left content out to release it as DLC, as a developer how much money the consumer spends on the DLC you've put out is completely out of your hands. However, this can be very dangerous to your fanbase. Take Dead or Alive 5: Last Round, which takes this in pompous stride and is very well aware of it. Knowing that it has a good amount of costumes under its belt due to the amount of content it's amassed since the original DOA5, it decided to release some DLC. $319.94's worth of DLC, to be exact. But because it has so much content in-game, it could easily shift the blame to the players should they spend a good amount on DLC. Similarly, the price of all of the DLC is ridiculous (incredibly so), to the point that they walk a very, very fine line with this.
And though I don't want to go on about this much longer, I just have one more thing to say. Above, I said I wasn't criticizing the practice, and for the sake of this spiel, I won't. What I will say is this, though: DLC as it exists now is dangerous in any form. I have nothing against the addition of content to a game but in the past 10 years the practice has been criticized for being misused and mishandled, simply a means to get more money out of the player after they've already bought the game. In reference to Optional DLC, and this goes double for Japan thanks to the financial contribution of otaku that is unparalleled by most others elsewhere, whaling, catalogs of $1+ items, level boosts, item unlocks, announcer voices...these set a really bad example for other developers and publishers because, oftentimes, they're put out under the same mentality that I just mentioned. It makes the business look bad. It makes the business look gross. These games aren't free-to-plays, they don't survive on these items, and if not released in moderation you run the risk of dragging down consumer trust and sales, and worse, you drag down had-been ambitious idea of DLC and just make it look like a cutpurse practice. Very rarely is it truly harmless.
---
So feel free to discuss or give feedback! I'd personally implore you not to just read the title and post and even more I need to stress that this is not a discussion of DLC as a whole, but rather it's a discussion of whales and Optional DLC as it's described here.
