NKD wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 15:07:
We short-sighted fucks would apparently rather pay for a $50 box and $50 more in DLC over a year than pay less than $100 up front and get everything. Go figure.
Obviously this isn't true for every bit of DLC released, but let's just take your statement as pure fact for argument's sake.
I would actually rather pay $50 upfront and potentially spend $50 on DLC as opposed to spending (what shall we say? 80?) bucks all upfront.
Why? Because with the DLC, I have the choice not to buy it if it sucks. I can pick and choose which DLCs I want. I like DLCs which add missions and content. I don't like DLCs which add "alternative outfits" or "one pistol and one assault rifle." (unless they're like 50 cents or something.)
So the DLC route lets me pick what I want, spend money on that, and not spend money on the stuff I don't want.
Your scenario is really much the same as the Season Pass stuff. "Get all four DLCs for the price of 3!" Sounds like a great deal, until they release a shitty DLC that you'd have never gotten if you had to pay for it piecemeal.
So far the games for which I've bought DLC are games that I've always felt were complete without the DLC and which gave me tons of value straight out of the box. (I realize that From Ashes for ME3 was literally a chunk of content they cut to sell as DLC, but since I preordered I got that for free anyway.) If I really enjoyed the game itself, and feel like I got great value out of it, I'm far more enclined to buy some DLC/more of the same.
If the game I bought is a piece of shit that lasted 8 hours and was a rip-off, the odds of me buying DLC become basically zero.
Either way, with the DLC route, the choice on whether to buy it or not is mine. I prefer it that way.