Opinion – Please Accept Our Apologies: DLC Doesn’t Cut It

A sincere apology can go a long way, and these days publishers and developers have had to say a lot of them to gamers over botched launches. As we're finding out more and more, launch day isn't the end of the game's development. Instead, it's just another step in a title's continuing development.

Companies have heard gamers' cries and worked to fix titles' problems, and in the case of DriveClub and Assassin's Creed Unity, tried to make good with consumers by giving away free DLC. I understand that game development is difficult and I don't expect a flawless launch, but giving away DLC isn't a salve.

I'm sure companies are contrite in their offering, but as a player I believe that most DLC does not represent adequate recompense. To the company offering the DLC, the content certainly has a monetary value in terms of what it would have earned if it was actually sold as originally intended (as well as the time it took for the devs to make it).

However giving me something – albeit for free – that I wasn't necessarily interested in and which does not address the problem at hand is like getting a bad steak at a restaurant and receiving a free orange as an apology. It doesn't matter if I like oranges or not, and it does not sate my initial craving for a steak.

Besides, with many games offering so much content to begin with, what's the real value of getting another mission or handful of cars? There are already plenty of side missions, weapons, customization items, or vehicles that I never touch anyway.

What's the worth of another that goes untouched? This also brings up the age-old question about most DLC – if it was really vital and worthwhile wouldn't it have been included in the main game in the first place?

Even if the DLC is attractive, it may be a victim of bad timing. An online-dependent game like DriveClub might never recover from its poor launch because by the time it's fixed, the online community of gamers willing to play that title may have moved on.

Thus, getting a new track, for example, might be great, but is anyone there to race on it with you? There have definitely been times when my enthusiasm for a game or feature cooled if the experience wasn't initially up to snuff. That's especially the case in a holiday season packed with other titles to fill the void.

What is adequate compensation? First, I don't expect anything from a company other than the swift and thorough remedy to the initial problem. Or better yet, the prevention of it in the first place.

Of course, that's not always possible, and this post isn't an attack on the many hard-working people developing games and earnestly trying to fix bugs. But should compensation occur, I'd love to get some or all of my money back. It's a direct settlement when fixing things outright isn't possible.

Having said that, I have a feeling refunds are not something that any company wants to offer. It's a direct loss of revenue (particularly anathema to a publicly traded company), and I wonder if it could leave a company legally vulnerable in the future.

Beyond that, software sales have for many years been "all sales final" once you open the game up, and this would throw that out of whack and bring into question of when a title is actually a finished product. It's a worthwhile discussion, but not one I think that any publisher wants to willingly wade into. Add onto that the fact that in digital sales, players have to petition a digital seller like Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Steam, etc. They are even more reticent to give you a refund, which also causes friction between them and publishers.

In its recent free game offering to Assassin's Creed Unity season pass members in particular, Ubisoft has come about as close as we may get to offering an actual rebate. The listed games include new ones covering different genres, which addresses the problem of the content offered not being attractive enough. It's a commendable move and when judged in monetary terms, it goes above and beyond a calculable amount of trouble for Unity's bugs.

Barring refunds or make-up DLC, there needs to be a way for gamers to have less initial skin in the game in the event the title is a mess. A lower box cost would surely be one way, although companies would likely not agree to this given the loss of revenue, the need to cover development costs in general, and that it's unrealistic when we're used to the current cost of doing business. DLC and microtransaction costs could rise to compensate for a lower initial cost, but this would unfairly soak a particular segment of consumers.

Nobody likes navigating rocky waters, and I'm not just looking for a handout when a game has a few bugs. But as a consumer I also don't always feel like I'm getting all I paid for – whether you give me free DLC or not.