Dr. D. Schreber wrote on Sep 8, 2010, 06:42:
itt people don't understand cost nor time of development cycles. Some DLC is a blatant rip-off, some is blatantly done before release day, but the idea that something like this one (as much as it still may be overpriced, if not by nearly as much as the anti-DLC brigade likes to pretend) should've been "part of the original game" is absurd.
Yeah, uh well...
I like DLCs when they are like the BAF DLC from Bohemia.
All others Ive seen so far
are blatant ripoffs and also instead of keeping me playing, they force me to buy the game about 1 year after release when they stopped releasing DLC, because it simply destroys the immersion in the game. I dont want to play the game once a month for 1 hour after I have played through already, neither do I want to play through it again every time a DLC is released. I want to enjoy it fully with all the content possible when I want. Not when the Publisher wants.
Thats where normal expansions were MUCH MUCH better. They offered a whole new story and lots of content
in addition to the original game. DLC only adds small minor fragments to the original game, which arent even a whole expansion if you put em together, but cost up to twice as much.
I have given up on waiting for BIS to come back to their senses and do a real ArmA 2 successor.