What is the ideal timeframe for DLC releases?

[Wavergray]

Lately i've noticed a loud vocal minority of people on the interwebs upset that FF15 will be get more DLC next year. When that dlc is released it will be the 3rd years after FF15 release.

The fact that some are upset is a little surprising to and made me wonder what is the ideal timeframe for DLC releases from the gamer/consumer perspective. IMO the timeframe doesn't really matter, but I always like to hear other peoples thoughts on such matters. So PSNP community what are your thoughts on the ideal timeframe for DLC releases?

 

Note: Something of interest to note is that the 2019 DLC for FF15 was chosen to be made by a in-game survey that was done sometime last year. So all the 2019 DLC is stuff that the FF15 players said they wanted.

Edited August 3, 2018 by soultaker655

[Sergen]

I don't mind DLC inevitably being released within the first year of the game's existence, but I can say it is really annoying if more than 2 years after I've finished the game the DLC does show up with trophies. I never wanted the Doomsday heist for Grand Theft Auto V to have trophies and was surprised that it had them, but I'm kinda glad now considering I was first to 100% it. I think it's weird when games do get DLC for the original version that late, considering a lot of companies instead plan to release the sequel to the game by then rather than DLC. I think you likely lose a lot of the player base of the original game when DLC is released so far after the original release, especially if there was no filler material in-between.

[KingGuy420]

This is kind of a bad place to ask this question since the answers will be skewed more towards a trophy mindset.

 

Someone that loves Minecraft or Warframe or FFXV will gladly come back to it for new content whenever they have a chance.

 

People here, on the other hand, tend to care more about completion percentage than actual content so a game hurting that percentage for years on end is going to annoy them. They want to move onto other plats instead of grinding out single bronzes.

 

So yeah, horrible place to ask that question lol.

Edited August 3, 2018 by KingGuy420

[Undead Wolf]

It depends on what kind of game it is; there is no one size fits all. Of course it's perfectly reasonable for MMO's or multiplayer-centric games that are viewed as a platform to continue releasing DLC and updates years after its initial release, but the same doesn't apply to traditional singleplayer games.

 

For a singleplayer game, releasing DLC within the first year is the ideal timeframe. If a developer is still releasing DLC for a singleplayer game years after it came out, as is the case with FFXV, that just has me wondering why they aren't putting all that time, money, and effort into developing a sequel or something new entirely instead. It's actually a little ridiculous. FFXV is kind of a unique case, though. The game obviously wasn't finished when it came out and Square are trying to recoup all the money they lost during its tortured development by repeatedly selling us DLC. Thankfully most other devs know better than that.

[Sardavanua]

I don't mind dlc being released after 2 months, neither do I mind dlc being released after 3 years.

As long as the dlc doesn't turn out to be cut away content, so the publisher and developers just get an opportunity to get more money out of their game for content that should've been accessible in the first place.

 

It also depends on the game genre, I always enjoyed the The Elder Scrolls and Dragon Age content that was released a few years later. Content like this is well worth the money and gives players an excuse to revisit their games while enjoying new high-quality content.

 

Multiplayer games on the other hand should get new content frequently, so people keep playing it (e.g. map packs for Battlefield).

 

If I already can see what content is going to be released with a season pass while preordering a game (looking at you Shadow of War), I often ask myself why should I buy the game for 70$ and the additional content for an extra 25$ or even more. Content like that should be in the fckin base game. I just end up buying the whole package for 15$ two years later anyways.

[B1rvine]

Generally speaking, I wish DLC didn’t exist and was just part of the base game instead. I wouldn’t care if I had to pay a bit more or wait a little longer. Every genre is a bit different though and the type of DLC also matters.  If there must be DLC, a year is adequate.

 

30 minutes ago, Sergen said:

I'm kinda glad now considering I was first to 100% it. I think it's weird when games do get DLC for the original version that late.

 

The opposite for me. I was basically the fastest achiever before the update. Now I don’t even have the game and buying it again is a bit upsetting. All trophies should be released within a year, or the company should least announce their general plans ahead of time.

 

33 minutes ago, KingGuy420 said:

Horrible place to ask that question lol.

 

Your post sums it up pretty well. 

 

23 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

It depends on what kind of game it is; there is no one size fits all.

 

Again, summed up pretty well. The type of DLC matters too. Cosmetic in game items or special gear doesnt bother me, only content related to trophies.