What was the first dlc ever

Several theories concerning its popularity sprang up in order to understand this new phenomenon. All of these theories, whether they be psychological or financial, reflect modern gaming development.

Consider Business Insider's analysis on FarmVille 's popularity:. So users are rewarded for their work. Of course, people can sidestep the harvesting process entirely by spending real money to purchase in-game items.

This is the major source of revenue for Zynga, the company that produces FarmVille. Zynga is currently on pace to make over three hundred million dollars in revenue this year, largely off of in-game micro-transactions.

Clearly, even people who play FarmVille want to avoid playing FarmVille. Zynga is constantly adding new items and giveaways to Farmville , often at the suggestion of their users. What fun. FarmVille was not a fun game by its very mechanics.

It wasn't nearly as polished as console games. None of that mattered. FarmVille advertised constantly, within the growing social platform that birthed it. It provided regular updates, required constant participation, and grew through a constant social insistence. Mental Floss speculated on why the game was so popular:. It's an amazing system: these game designers have devised a way to addict the player, then monetize that addiction by encouraging the player to bring in friends and hopefully pay real money to get ahead.

To a certain extent, calling a game casual is like calling a small house cozy. Casual games, which largely dominate both mobile and social media platforms, often tie in as much addictive game design as possible, requiring even more consistency than a regular console game. What's worse, the current top mobile game rankings all follow the path FarmVille laid out back in to some capacity.

When gamers complain about DLC, they aren't so much admonishing the concept. They are annoyed by the cash grab -- the obvious plot to squeeze money from a game. Do these techniques, first laid out with casual games, ooze their way into the large-scale development market? Quick tidbit: overall, Candy Crush Saga is the 9th top mobile game. ThinkGaming ranked Candy Crush Saga the top grossing game available.

This is to say: there may be less of a distinction between casual gaming and competitive gaming or console releases than most gamers realize. The advent of paid DLC isn't new. It's also surprisingly choice-based: if you don't want a DLC, you often don't have to buy it. Pay to play -- the strategy wherein developers will grant players tremendous power in exchange for monetized items -- is largely frowned upon, no matter the release. The issue, however, isn't solely DLC. There is a definite circle of profit that exists in gaming culture which, in its individual elements, seem to benefit the user.

As a whole, however, it's difficult to avoid the obvious financial thrust behind them. The circle goes: pre-order , release, in-game currency, micro-transactions, paid DLC, and season pass. While the quality of this content often depends on the developer, most games nevertheless occupy a few slots in the rotation and at times one is indistinguishable from another.

Not all games run through the complete motion of the profit circle. Nevertheless, most take part in at least a few. More than possibly overcharging consumers for frivolous content, these advents have created uncharted waters in the form of widespread subscription-based gaming.

This isn't a surprise, as blockbuster franchise releases inevitably have a profit motive in min. But it's interesting to note that any given popular game has a secondary, paid counterpart in the form of paid DLC, micro-transactions, in-game currency, and so on.

Have you bought a weapon skin lately? How about a loot crate? If not, you've probably at least seen an offer for something along these lines. It seems few games from notable developers don't continually offer new content, making the purchase of games seem like a down payment for the developers' future creativity.

More than small purchases, however, DLC drive competition within the gaming market. The more often developers release DLC, the more often potential customers will learn about the content. The gaming market is over-saturated. Release upon release -- tied with a consumer's limited time, money, and attention span -- can make a game released a month ago seem like old news fast. How does a developer compete with a constantly shifting gaming world? Add more game to your game!

No, seriously. Consider the following statistical data showing the growth in sales of Grand Theft Auto V , in tandem with major DLC releases and micro-transactions. Most consider DLC as minor updates meant to enhance the overall quality of the game. What DLC actually does, however, often falls short of providing users with new and exciting content. Instead, they appear as calculated bargaining chips in order to extend a title's financial lifetime.

Developers therein use DLC not as in-game polish, but rather as market leverage. Time and time again, we see the trend of calculated DLC releases enlivening games whose five minutes of fame are all but over. Just like it is for DLCs, expansion packs serve to further a video game.

What you expect to find from an expansion pack is new objects, weapons, and an expanded storyline to an already existing game. What this means is that for you to play the content of an expansion pack, you must having the base game.

Notable use of expansion packs is the game The Sims by Electronic Arts. The Sims franchise has capitalized on their vast expansion packs for each new Sims version, adding more and more objects, interactions, holidays and more. This is why the game has become so popular. In recent memory, EA has even made polls for fans to vote on which expansion pack theme they would like to see released next.

I think that including fans and players to decide on where the game should go is pretty great. Better than releasing a DLC or expansion pack nobody wants! There are various problems associated with DLCs that gaming fans have continued to experience. One of these issues is that DLCs are expensive. As a matter of fact, many people argue that the prices are not fair.

To begin with, this is a game that you have already purchased. Imagine the amount of pressure that parents have to go through in order to continually buy DLCs for their children? Gaming is such a popular thing that gets people glued to their screens for hours. The witty marketing strategies of game developers drive gamers to spend a lot of money as they upgrade their gaming content.

The bottom-line here is that as developers make huge amounts of money, gamers are under pressure to download more content. The entire main plot should be included in the base game. Some DLCs also cost the same as the main game! Technically microtransactions are a type of a DLC. Because of this, Valve added an incentive to get players to hop aboard the Steam train. The smoother interface of Steam — in conjunction with providing exclusive access to Counter strike 1.

Eventually the user-base for steam grew, especially once the release of Half-Life 2 was on its way. This is a crucial instance to take note of, as Steam was the only way to play this open beta, as well as the only way to play Half-Life 2 once it was released — a restriction that was the start of a new practice — nowadays considered common for a high-profile release. Steam allowed users to pre-load the game before it released, and most gamers bought the digital copy over Steam.

For some, it was the first digital purchase of what would become many. The trade-off with this new practice was being able to purchase and obtain the game from the comfort of your own home, but in doing so you forgo not only the physical copy of the game in the form of a CD — but also the case, the boxart, instruction book, and any other items like maps or artwork. Despite the negatives, the release of Half-Life 2 through Steam would be a landmark for digital distribution in video games — a bit of a gamble at the time for Valve, but a gamble that would pay off for the company, as Steam would become the model for digital distribution henceforth and the new way for many PC gamers to purchase titles.

What does this all mean for DLC? This ease into an increasingly digital method of distribution coincided with the rise of high speed internet connections, and Steam became a model for many other game companies afterwards. Content became more streamlined, which on paper is all well and good, but purchases of this sort are tied to your Steam account, not a physical copy that some find more secure. The current trend of DLC coincided with the release of the Xbox and Playstation 3, a parallel to the rise of high speed internet.

Also, the more jaded view of contemporary DLC coincides with this distribution and subscription trend that the video game industry has taken on. It is the first widely covered example of purely cosmetic additional content, and while it was only a few dollars to purchase, for many gamers this has become a growing issue, going against the old idea of additional content being something that builds upon the original experience, or at the very least something that adds substance.

Again, this type of content would of been an exercise in futility back before digital delivery, being offered for free if even released at all, but with the increasing accessibility on both PC and consoles, it became much easier to simply open a menu in-game and pay the few dollars it took to purchase, a sort-of impulse buying that was largely unseen before Steam, Xbox Live and other services of their nature. This increased symmetry between consoles and PC came about due to their use of digital distribution, making it possible for video game companies to get their additional content to more gamers, across more platforms — quicker then ever before.

Like Steam, it offers an online marketplace to download titles offered by EA. These season passes cost as much as the game itself, allowing you access to all the DLC that will be available for that title — in effect paying for content that has not been released yet. Many cynics harp on Electronic Arts because of other things as well, such as while one of their titles is still in development, they already have paid DLC in mind — which some see as undermining their costumers.

In other words, jaded gamers see EA releasing a watered down product at full price, then offering the content that should of originally been included at a separate price shortly afterwards.

Another big title released by EA in was Star Wars Battlefront , a game that features top graphics and nails the style and sound of the Star Wars universe pretty well — yet many have had problems with it since its release.

Some criticized the lack of a single player campaign , while others felt that to fully enjoy the game they needed to dish out the extra This goes against what additional content should strive for, not something that completes the original game, but something that builds upon that initial, satisfying experience. A more egregious example in yet another EA game would be Dragon Age:Origins , where the in-game characters pester you to pay for additional content , content that was already contained within the initial release but was blocked off for paid DLC purposes.

While criticism is thrown at companies that pre-plan DLC for their titles along with the implementation of season passes, the truth is that the video game industry is still a business after all.

DLC makes an astounding amount of money for companies. For EA, it is arguably more profitable than the game itself. This increasingly negative attitude toward DLC and these issues over season passes and on-disc content being locked off for future payments is not a complete picture of the current industry however. What this shows is that the current landscape concerning DLC should not totally be condemned, but like any other service or product, a consumer should be aware of what they are paying for and what to expect from a certain company.

Like any revolution, the digital age has its pros and cons. Anyone with a good internet connection now has the ability to purchase and download a title on release day. Overall, what the history of additional content for video games has shown is that it is not the distribution abilities that is the pivotal aspect to what makes additional content worth it or not, but whether or not the time and care was put into the project.

Because of the high profits being made currently, this practice that the majority of game companies follow concerning downloadable content will continue on without any major changes. Gamers should demand that additional content be something that thoroughly expands on the initial experience of the original title, and perhaps most importantly these additions must show that the makers respect their fanbase.

I think that if companies want to make a profit, it should be by releasing decent games… not shitty products and scam the gamer. Companies who release bad games or games with half the content missing for full retails price and thus cheat the gamer deserve to go belly up. Games should be complete and good when released.

Then of course they can milk us for extra bits, if they want. I agree with you Jinny but sales trends are showing that gamers will still buy games in their current unfinished state for various reasons. Hopefully with the rise of eSports this will happen sooner rather than later. I miss the days when you would boot up a game on your old system and it has everything on the disc.

Stop buying games with micro transactions and day one DLC to make up for the 12 year olds who use the parents credit cards to buy this crap. It definitely feels like a shifting landscape these days. I am 40 years old. I remember myself buying games on a 3. This industry, was not industry i think. It was nerds, passionate ppl, innovative ppl, gamers with imagination. It was like Philosophy is, if you told ppl you want to create PC games, ppl would tell you it does not pay well.

Who artist really cares about money? None, none that is who is honest with himself. Just research history. Where Advertisement started, reach to the point how Advertisement is teached in Universities. How they try to exploit naive consumers. It all adds up for ppl who research a bit i think.

The micro-transaction is a greedy twist, not an evolution in gaming. Similar to what Capitalism became, a weird, non humane, evil twist of itself. I think ppl should be able to separate what is worth buying and what is not. Example, Fallout is a game that does not need advertisement. A gamer will buy this shit because it is worth it. For ppl researching the modern gaming industry, you would know the time and effort these Devs put on Marketing and not the developing of the game really.

Fallout, no need for advertisement. Worthless shit, tons of advertisement and marketing. Micro-transactions do not belong in a healthy gaming community imo. Even South Park went ahead to debunk literally the whole process of consumer exploitation with an episode. I believe western societies should move legally against many of these companies.

When you mix art with business, the results are always the same. Pre-order and DLC have become poisoned terms. DLC is a great way to get more out of your game while pre-orders secure your own copy of the game with a sweet bonus on the side, but publishers have exploited the shit out of these two practices!! My earliest jobs in middle school and high school went to this.

Ive recently gotten irritated at the current generation of gamers who because of a few bad apples in the gaming scene assume that games are going to be shit just because they have dlc. I have friends that literally say they think games coming out this year are bad because of dlc, but then they dont understand half the shit.

Just because a game has dlc does not mean its going to be shit at launch. A lot of game purchasers are young and not able to watch out for themselves properly in a free market, and so they get taken advantage of.