DLC Model Discussion

Actually it was more a point about the wait... I guess I wasn't clear enough.

How about this then. If you don't like the price then take your money, save it up and go find something better to do. Because quite frankly this poll demonstrates quite clearly public opinion on the matter. People like this model, and I would quite frankly say its the best yet if they go on to still make expansion packs.

Moderator Action: Please don't tell people to 'go find something better to do'.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Why?

1. You get a steady stream of new content
2. If I get bored of the game for a while I can have a break and come back to find something new and different to try for bugger all money
3. It is cheap enough that over those large intervals of time I'd have probably lost more money about the house than I'd spent on the DLC or wasted more on impulse buying of random crap

Things are worth what people are willing to pay and quite frankly most people are willing to pay around ~$5 for DLC. If you don't like it then just don't buy it. If people stop buying it they'll stop making it and rethink their policy. Fight the power and all that. But don't argue that it's "overpriced" because quite frankly you don't know how much it costs to make a civ and as such you can't put a universal number on it. They're selling them quite successfully at $5 and guess what that means; It costs $5 per civ.

Have a nice day.

jtb1127 said:

That is the developer's fault for their lack of modding tools.

And hopefully for the last time: It is not as simple as "don't like it, don't buy it". The purchases DLC lover make effects everyone else in a rather negative way. There is no reason for Firaxis to do it any other way when the DLC model allows them to make 10x more money. This leaves me, and anyone else who doesn't want the gaming industry to become overpriced and sleazy, with no other options. And that is the way they intend it to be.


What? Just because they have 3-D graphics. Do I have to explain to you how insignificant 3-D graphics are?

Click to expand...

I like them... The hell are you complaining about if you don't care about the graphics. There's a modding subforum, go there and get some free stuff. How does the existence of the DLC affect you if you don't care about the graphics. Just make your own bare bones mod with civs in there without any of the flashing music and graphics. The 3D graphics is probably the hardest thing in making a Civ, what makes it actually cost a bit more money. If it didn't they could pump out hundreds of the buggers for near nothing. Have fun!

DLC is just a form of third degree price discrimination. If the developer released a lot of content as an expansion, they're forced to price it relatively low if they want strong initial sales. But the developer knows that some of those customers are able and willing to pay a lot more for the content. So now that the technology permits, they sell the content in dribs and drabs at a high price, then put it on sale occasionally to reach the more value-conscious.

Claiming that Firaxis is charging more than the product is worth is pretty ridiculous since people are buying it. If it were your business, you'd do exactly the same thing without shame. If I told you that you could make a few thousand extra bucks this year without having to work any harder, you'd probably listen.

Ironically, the losers are the satisfied customers buying the DLC at the high price. If you refuse to buy the DLC or insist on waiting for a discount, you really haven't got a leg to stand on.

Moderator Action: Please don't label any group 'losers'.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

jtb1127 said:

I appreciate how you, yourself exluded the price of something just because you think no one would buy it.

Click to expand...

No, I did not. I mentioned the figure 41.90 multiple times in the post. I said that it includes $10 for the 4 map packs. If I were to exclude that from the total figure, it would have been $31.90.

And I stand by my suggestion that far fewer people would have purchased those map packs than purchased actual new civs/leaders and scenarios. The map packs are, after all, essentially what modders provide for free, and arguably the modders do a better job for that sort of thing.

And it is ridiculous that people keep allowing too many independant variables to get in they way so they can say it is cheaper than it really is.

Click to expand...

41.90 for all DLC up to the Korea and Ancient Wonders DLC. Nice and simple. That's what someone would have paid if they bought everything upfront for full price in the available bundles. That's the maximum. People who waited for one or more of the items to go on sale will have paid less than that maximum of 41.90.

Everything goes on sale, including regular expansion packs. If you are going to say that the DLC is one sale than you should note that the regular game goes on sale along with everything else under the sun.

Click to expand...

Indeed it does. When civ5 DLC goes on sale it's usually because the base game is on sale on Steam as well, and to date, as far as I know the discount on game and DLC has been the same rate at each sale.

On July 21 the sale on Steam was 66% off, which means the game could be had for $17 and the DLC to date (excluding Korea + Ancient Wonders) for about $11.70.

Menzies said:

How about this then. If you don't like the price then take your money, save it up and go find something better to do. Because quite frankly this poll demonstrates quite clearly public opinion on the matter. People like this model, and I would quite frankly say its the best yet if they go on to still make expansion packs.

Click to expand...

This poll doesn't demonstrate anything. If you go back to the Southern United States in the year 1850, I'm sure a poll would demonstrate how the majority of people think slavery is a good thing. Bottom line: popular opinion is meaningless.

Menzies said:

1. You get a steady stream of new content

Click to expand...

The game should not rely upon a steady stream of content to keep fans interested. I have been playing civ iv "steadily" (like a stream) since BTS came out in 2007 and have found no need for more content.

Menzies said:

2. If I get bored of the game for a while I can have a break and come back to find something new and different to try for bugger all money

Click to expand...

If you do get bored than you should turn to the modding community to amplify your interests.

Menzies said:

3. It is cheap enough that over those large intervals of time I'd have probably lost more money about the house than I'd spent on the DLC or wasted more on impulse buying of random crap

Click to expand...

Yes, and you probably spend more money on gas too. What is your point?

Menzies said:

Things are worth what people are willing to pay and quite frankly most people are willing to pay around ~$5 for DLC.

Click to expand...

That is why I am on these forums right now arguing. I'm trying to make them realize the error in their ways.

Menzies said:

If you don't like it then just don't buy it. If people stop buying it they'll stop making it and rethink their policy. Fight the power and all that.

Click to expand...

Which is exactly what I am doing.

Menzies said:

But don't argue that it's "overpriced" because quite frankly you don't know how much it costs to make a civ and as such you can't put a universal number on it.

Click to expand...

I think I can put a universal number on it. Check out how much the original civ v cost. $50. It also had 18 civs and a lot of other stuff. Had the game came with just the 18 civs than each one should cost about $2.77. But there is a lot more to the game besides civs. So all I can do is put the universal price of a civ at less than $2.00.

Menzies said:

They're selling them quite successfully at $5 and guess what that means; It costs $5 per civ.

Click to expand...

Tobacco products were once selling quite successfully at one time too.

The poll shows reality.

Sorry if I am "ruining" the gaming industry by purchasing DLC. I can afford $7.49 every few months to expand my game. I needed a fast lunch last Friday and spent almost $5 on a tiny double cheeseburger and french fries (no drink either!).

If you don't like the price, wait for a sale. All the DLC has been on sale along with Civ V. Your brick and mortar stores rarely dropped the price of boxed software. Heck, I bet many places still have Civ 4 gold for $40+ (I've seen it in more than one place).

jtb1127 said:

That is the developer's fault for their lack of modding tools.

And hopefully for the last time: It is not as simple as "don't like it, don't buy it". The purchases DLC lover make effects everyone else in a rather negative way. There is no reason for Firaxis to do it any other way when the DLC model allows them to make 10x more money. This leaves me, and anyone else who doesn't want the gaming industry to become overpriced and sleazy, with no other options. And that is the way they intend it to be.


What? Just because they have 3-D graphics. Do I have to explain to you how insignificant 3-D graphics are?

Click to expand...

As a game developer myself I feel I have to kind of weigh in on this. Your argument seems to be that DLC is costing more than an expansion from a previous game would have. Fine. That's your opinion and I accept your point. To be fair, some expansions have been pretty poor and barely offered new content and some have been great.

But people keep going on about all this "should be provided" or "the developer should have done this" or "the game should be 100% balanced and working out of the box". So lets see... everyone wants:

1) The engine to work on tons of systems (DX9, DX11, Mac) flawlessly
2) support huge maps that don't lag on even the oldest systems
3) look beautiful
4) have tons of options to lower the detail for older computers
5) support all the newest features of your latest GPUs
6) fully 3D graphics
7) dynamic lighting with detailed textures, normal maps, shadows, reflections
8) 3D leader videos
9) completely balanced and bug free out of the box
10) historically accurate
11) completely moddable
12) provide easy to use custom tools for the programming-unsavvy end user

I could go on but that's enough for now. You want all this but nobody wants to wait longer, pay more, or have to patch the game ever. Yet no one considers that development times have drastically increased, feature requirements have drastically increased, platform variety has increased, piracy has increased, the PC and strategy gaming markets has shrunk, and large betas that eliminate bugs and help balance the game more often than not just result in massive piracy.

But yeah hey... If I spend $50 for a game I can play for a year or more with devs that are actively attempting to improve it, I've been ripped off

So I understand the complaints and all but... you are missing the entire other side of the argument. Saying things like 3D is insignficant really demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the changing gaming development environments.

Menzies said:

I like them... The hell are you complaining about if you don't care about the graphics. There's a modding subforum, go there and get some free stuff. How does the existence of the DLC affect you if you don't care about the graphics. Just make your own bare bones mod with civs in there without any of the flashing music and graphics. The 3D graphics is probably the hardest thing in making a Civ, what makes it actually cost a bit more money. If it didn't they could pump out hundreds of the buggers for near nothing. Have fun!

Click to expand...

I said that the graphics are not the most important thing as I have found that many DLC purchasers enjoy... too much. I would be using more mods if they developers were not trying to restrict the modding capacities for the soul purpose to sell me DLC. And I thought you said good day.

PieceOfMind said:

No, I did not. I mentioned the figure 41.90 multiple times in the post. I said that it includes $10 for the 4 map packs. If I were to exclude that from the total figure, it would have been $31.90.

Click to expand...

He might have included the separate prices of many of the two part DLCs. Either way:

$41.90
Cha-Ching!

PieceOfMind said:

And I stand by my suggestion that far fewer people would have purchased those map packs than purchased actual new civs/leaders and scenarios. The map packs are, after all, essentially what modders provide for free, and arguably the modders do a better job for that sort of thing.41.90 for all DLC up to the Korea and Ancient Wonders DLC. Nice and simple. That's what someone would have paid if they bought everything upfront for full price in the available bundles. That's the maximum. People who waited for one or more of the items to go on sale will have paid less than that maximum of 41.90.Indeed it does. When civ5 DLC goes on sale it's usually because the base game is on sale on Steam as well, and to date, as far as I know the discount on game and DLC has been the same rate at each sale.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're getting at when you say not everyone buys the maps. Could it be that the developers are greedy nonetheless because they are trying to get every last penny they can off stuff that is already free?

PieceOfMind said:

On July 21 the sale on Steam was 66% off, which means the game could be had for $17 and the DLC to date (excluding Korea + Ancient Wonders) for about $11.70.

Click to expand...

Ok, BTS on sale for 66% = $19.8

(or shall I exclude the parts of BTS that I think no one uses so I can make the price cheaper?)
DLC is still not even comparable.

ArcaneSeraph said:

As a game developer myself I feel I have to kind of weigh in on this. Your argument seems to be that DLC is costing more than an expansion from a previous game would have. Fine. That's your opinion and I accept your point. To be fair, some expansions have been pretty poor and barely offered new content and some have been great.

But people keep going on about all this "should be provided" or "the developer should have done this" or "the game should be 100% balanced and working out of the box". So lets see... everyone wants:

1) The engine to work on tons of systems (DX9, DX11, Mac) flawlessly
2) support huge maps that don't lag on even the oldest systems
3) look beautiful
4) have tons of options to lower the detail for older computers
5) support all the newest features of your latest GPUs
6) fully 3D graphics
7) dynamic lighting with detailed textures, normal maps, shadows, reflections
8) 3D leader videos
9) completely balanced and bug free out of the box
10) historically accurate
11) completely moddable
12) provide easy to use custom tools for the programming-unsavvy end user

I could go on but that's enough for now. You want all this but nobody wants to wait longer, pay more, or have to patch the game ever. Yet no one considers that development times have drastically increased, feature requirements have drastically increased, platform variety has increased, piracy has increased, the PC and strategy gaming markets has shrunk, and large betas that eliminate bugs and help balance the game more often than not just result in massive piracy.

But yeah hey... If I spend $50 for a game I can play for a year or more with devs that are actively attempting to improve it, I've been ripped off

So I understand the complaints and all but... you are missing the entire other side of the argument. Saying things like 3D is insignficant really demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the changing gaming development environments.

Click to expand...

I can easily just swish this all to the side by saying "they should have waited another year before they released the game. I wasn't the ones who impatiently demanded an early release.

Kerosene31 said:

The poll shows reality.

Click to expand...

Say what ever you want. You don't need to give me any reasons.

Kerosene31 said:

Sorry if I am "ruining" the gaming industry by purchasing DLC. I can afford $7.49 every few months to expand my game. I needed a fast lunch last Friday and spent almost $5 on a tiny double cheeseburger and french fries (no drink either!).

Click to expand...

Yaay! The classic "for the price of lunch" argument. Just what the developers want you to think so they can continue to charge you too much for the DLC.

Kerosene31 said:

If you don't like the price, wait for a sale. All the DLC has been on sale along with Civ V. Your brick and mortar stores rarely dropped the price of boxed software. Heck, I bet many places still have Civ 4 gold for $40+ (I've seen it in more than one place).

Click to expand...

I'm really starting to think that you guys aren't reading my posts.
I have given my argument to the "get it one sale" quite a few times.

Sonereal said:

Err, no, the accepted price is clearly whatever people will pay for it.

Click to expand...

All it shows is that people think DLC is acceptable when it really isn't. It will take a lot of education to sway the minds of the DLC purchasers and that is what I am trying to do.

Sonereal said:

Did you not take High School Economics?

Click to expand...

Yes, did you?

Sonereal said:

In any case, tastes change. Just because something was doesn't mean something will be forever. For now, the accepted price of DLC is what people will pay for it. In the same vein, the accepted price of tobacco is again, the amount people will pay for it. Also, way to bring up slavery because you know how relevant that is to this discussion. I can tell I'm debating with the Debate Team leader of the local high school right here. *rolls eyes*

Click to expand...

I am simply stating that popular opinion may be useless. My slavery argument is irrefutable evidence of this truth. And you do not like it so you insult me and mock me as if you were the more intelligent. I can easily say "I can tell I'm talking to the local [insert negligible position here]" but that won't make anything I say more true.

Moderator Action: No need to reply in kind.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

DLC vs. Expansion:

Everything you get with DLC:

Civilizations:
-Babylon
-Spain
-Inca
-Polynesia:
-Korea
-Denmark

Maps:
-Mediterranean Map
-Asia Map
-Americas Map
-Explorers Maps

Wonders:
-Mausoleum of Halicarnassus
-Statue of Zeus
-Temple of Artemis

Scenarios:
-Korea
-New World
-Polynesia

Total: 16

Everything you get with BtS (Expansion Model)

New Civs
-Babylon
-Byzantine
-Dutch
-Ethiopia
-Holy Rome
-Khmer
-Maya
-Native American
-Portugal
-and Sumeria
Please Note: Each of these Civs comes with a unique units and building!

New Leaders
-Abe Lincoln
-Boudica
-Pericles
-Suleiman
-Darius I

New Buildings
-Customs House
-Industrial Park
-Intelligence Agency
-Levee
-Public Transportation
-Security Bureau

New Units
-Airship
-Anti-Tank
-Attack Submarine
-Cuirassier
-Guided Missile
-Missile Cruiser
-Mobile Artillery
-Mobile SAM
-Paratrooper
-Privateer
-Ship of the Line
-Stealth Destroyer
-Tactical Nuke

New Wonders
-Apostolic Palace
-Cristo Redentor
-Mausoleum of Maussollos
-Shwedagon Paya
-Statue of Zeus

National Wonders
-Moai Statues
-National Park

Changed Wonders
-Sistine Chapel
-Stonehenge

Techs
-Advanced Flight
-Aesthetics
-Laser
-Military Science
-Stealth
-Superconductors

Tech Tree Modifications

Corporations
-Aluminum Inc,
-Cereal Meals
-Civilized Jewelers
-Creative Constructions
-Mining Inc.
-Sid's Sushi Co.
-Standard Ethanol Co.

Espionage

New Victory Conditions

Colonies

Scenarios
-Afterworld
-Broken Star
-Charlemagne
-Crossroads of the World
-Defense
-Fall from Heaven - Age of Ice
-Final Frontier
-Gods of Old
-Next War
-Rhye's and Fall of Civilization
-Road to War

---

Based on the DLC model, BtS would be valued some where around US$222.26!
Or, if you get it on sale, BtS would valued at over $100.

jtb1127 said:

$41.90
Cha-Ching!

Click to expand...

Yep, we pay a premium to get things right away. You can just wait for a DLC sale and get stuff for 40% off (or more).

More options = better for the consumer.

I know I can get the current DLC on sale in a few months, but I want it now, and $7.50 isn't exactly taking food off my table.

jtb1127 said:

This poll doesn't demonstrate anything. If you go back to the Southern United States in the year 1850, I'm sure a poll would demonstrate how the majority of people think slavery is a good thing. Bottom line: popular opinion is meaningless.


The game should not rely upon a steady stream of content to keep fans interested. I have been playing civ iv "steadily" (like a stream) since BTS came out in 2007 and have found no need for more content.

If you do get bored than you should turn to the modding community to amplify your interests.

Yes, and you probably spend more money on gas too. What is your point?


That is why I am on these forums right now arguing. I'm trying to make them realize the error in their ways.


Which is exactly what I am doing.

I think I can put a universal number on it. Check out how much the original civ v cost. $50. It also had 18 civs and a lot of other stuff. Had the game came with just the 18 civs than each one should cost about $2.77. But there is a lot more to the game besides civs. So all I can do is put the universal price of a civ at less than $2.00.


Tobacco products were once selling quite successfully at one time too.

Click to expand...

Nice irrelevant points there. The look over there strategy isn't particularly useful though. Now, I'm going to get some sleep in a moment, so I'll deal with whatever avoidance tactics you come up with some time tomorrow (maybe), but for now I'll say the following:

Firstly, argumentum ad populum is irrelevant in this case as we're talking of business and not universal morality. If the majority of people are willing to pay for something at that price it is worth that price. If you think otherwise I suggest you go study economics.

That's great that you still enjoy playing Civ IV, however it has little to nothing to do with anything here. The fact that you don't need a steady stream of context (official or not) to keep your self interested doesn't change the fact that other may need one...

I don't spend any money on gas, at all. I live within walking distance of the university I work in and as such I don't need to drive. This is just like most of your points irrelevant to the argument.

Now, per civ on the base game does come to $4.44 (where I am Civ V is apparently $80 on steam...), but you have to consider the bundle effect. Let's consider some examples:

On their own:
Korea - $5.99
Korea and Ancient Wonders Bundle - $8.99
Inca and Spain (+stuff) bundle - $8.99

So we can assume that a bundle reduces the overall cost by 25%. Without having any information on a triple, quad etc. bundle we can't really assume much. In that case let's take the 18 civs by the $5.99 price. This gives $108. Without that 25% however its $81. So about the cost of the game. You'd also have to consider an additive bundle effect which would bring the cost per unit down. But hey...

...who cares, nobodies mind is being swayed here. I'm still going to buy DLC and be happy about it. You think differently, I don't really care now I think about it. The company aren't going to change their tone, there's too much money for them. Have fun though. I'd just ask you to spend more time thinking about what goes into each civ, but I know you'll only see what you want to. It really doesn't affect me whatever way I look at it. Have a nice day!

Moderator Action: Bits of this are needlessly personal. Infraction for this and one other post.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Kerosene31 said:

...better for the consumer.

Click to expand...

Empirically, DLC is not better for the consumer. It allows for less options and less content for greater prices.

It is a rip-off.

Surely, you have something better tucked away somewhere than what is best for the consumer when it comes to DLC.

If you, or Firaxis for that matter, really cared about what is best for the consumer, there would be no hesitation to forgo the absurdity of DLC and skip straight to an expansion.

Moderator Action: Statements like, 'if you...really cared about what is best for the consumer,' are trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Derrick CB said:

DLC vs. Expansion:

Everything you get with DLC:

Civilizations:
-Babylon
-Spain
-Inca
-Polynesia:
-Korea
-Denmark

Maps:
-Mediterranean Map
-Asia Map
-Americas Map
-Explorers Maps

Wonders:
-Mausoleum of Halicarnassus
-Statue of Zeus
-Temple of Artemis

Scenarios:
-Korea
-New World
-Polynesia

Total: 16

Everything you get with BtS (Expansion Model)

New Civs
-Babylon
-Byzantine
-Dutch
-Ethiopia
-Holy Rome
-Khmer
-Maya
-Native American
-Portugal
-and Sumeria
Please Note: Each of these Civs comes with a unique units and building!

New Leaders
-Abe Lincoln
-Boudica
-Pericles
-Suleiman
-Darius I

New Buildings
-Customs House
-Industrial Park
-Intelligence Agency
-Levee
-Public Transportation
-Security Bureau

New Units
-Airship
-Anti-Tank
-Attack Submarine
-Cuirassier
-Guided Missile
-Missile Cruiser
-Mobile Artillery
-Mobile SAM
-Paratrooper
-Privateer
-Ship of the Line
-Stealth Destroyer
-Tactical Nuke

New Wonders
-Apostolic Palace
-Cristo Redentor
-Mausoleum of Maussollos
-Shwedagon Paya
-Statue of Zeus

National Wonders
-Moai Statues
-National Park

Changed Wonders
-Sistine Chapel
-Stonehenge

Techs
-Advanced Flight
-Aesthetics
-Laser
-Military Science
-Stealth
-Superconductors

Tech Tree Modifications

Corporations
-Aluminum Inc,
-Cereal Meals
-Civilized Jewelers
-Creative Constructions
-Mining Inc.
-Sid's Sushi Co.
-Standard Ethanol Co.

Espionage

New Victory Conditions

Colonies

Scenarios
-Afterworld
-Broken Star
-Charlemagne
-Crossroads of the World
-Defense
-Fall from Heaven - Age of Ice
-Final Frontier
-Gods of Old
-Next War
-Rhye's and Fall of Civilization
-Road to War

---

Based on the DLC model, BtS would be valued some where around US$222.26!
Or, if you get it on sale, BtS would valued at over $100.

Click to expand...

Hahahahaha!

I think you should wait until June 2012 to make that comparison. It's quite biased to do it so early on. It's like comparing the achievements of a child to a 40 year old businessman as it stands. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good argument.

Also, you assume that DLC precludes expansions. That is yet to be proven, but hey... Whatever makes your argument look better eh?

jtb1127 said:

I can easily just swish this all to the side by saying "they should have waited another year before they released the game. I wasn't the ones who impatiently demanded an early release.

Click to expand...

You can just swish away an entire extra year of dev costs for free? That's a great buisness model there.

jtb1127 said:

He might have included the separate prices of many of the two part DLCs. Either way:

Click to expand...

Yes, that's exactly what he did, and that's why it was misleading.

$41.90

Click to expand...

Yep.

I'm not sure what you're getting at when you say not everyone buys the maps.

Click to expand...

What's there not to get?

If Firaxis had tried to flog a map pack for $50 just before BtS was released, that modders could do similar for free, and only 10 people ever bought it, would that completely change our whole perception of the value of civ4 and its expansions?

My point is that your game is definitely not "incomplete" if you don't buy the map packs. People frustrated about DLC often point to the fact it's more expensive to get "the full game", basically because the price of all the DLCs start to really add up over time. My point is that the DLC civs and scenarios are more deserving of being mentioned as part of the "full game" than a few overpriced map packs are. I'm sure there'd be lots of people, especially civfanatics, who have purchased most or all of the DLC civs but not the map packs.

Ok, BTS on sale for 66% = $19.8

(or shall I exclude the parts of BTS that I think no one uses so I can make the price cheaper?)
DLC is still not even comparable.

Click to expand...

I agree that DLC is not comparable to fully fledged expansions. Both can exist together, or one without the other. It depends on what the publisher and developer have planned.

I think civ5 is very likely to receive an expansion. Granted it might be sold on Steam exclusively and while the line may be blurry between expansions and DLCs I'm sure they'll take care to distinguish it from other DLCs by calling it an "expansion" in all the marketing.

Menzies said:

I think you should wait until June 2012 to make that comparison. It's quite biased to do it so early on. It's like comparing the achievements of a child to a 40 year old businessman as it stands. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good argument.

Click to expand...

For what reason is it biased to compare DLC to expansions? Isn't that the whole point?

Menzies said:

Also, you assume that DLC precludes expansions. That is yet to be proven, but hey... Whatever makes your argument look better eh?

Click to expand...

Who says that DLC does preclude expansions? The purpose here is to say that DLC is a greedy business model.