From a purely consumer perspective , i always enjoyed post release content like addons and dlcs. More often then not it turned out be the best parts of the game. I also like it when a developer uses post game content to experient with new directions like a harder or more story dense expansion knowing that the audience will be mostly fans of the base game.
This was really evident to me on a DLC like Far Harbor or Nuka World. Being able to add in really wacky aesthetics or horror themes, but still have them fit into the overall plot in a serious way makes Fallout 4 such an interesting game.
I’m still living in 2009 with 2024 games. I am that guy playing single player games and no live services and I just replay the ones I love. Right now DAV and Metaphor, before that replaying all DA games, and a couple indies
One interesting thing to note about the competition with Live Services: last year, the Game Award that is 'normally' intended for Live Services (Best Ongoing Game) went to a large expansion pack for a single-player RPG (Cyberpunk 2077's Phantom Liberty). These really big, super high quality expansions like Blood & Wine, Phantom Liberty and Shadow of the Erdtree can practically generate the hype levels of a whole new game release in the way that 5 little DLCs just can't.
I like the chunky DLC’s myself. I don’t do live service games, and for me to play a dlc, like you said, it needs to be relevant enough for me to put down what I’m doing. I really like hearing your insights.
If we go back to "smaller number, larger experience" type of DLC, I'm fine with that. A concern I have is that it's a further continuation of the issues plaguing the (western) AAA industry - that games are taking longer and longer to make and release, due to the cost of graphical fidelity, the need to throw everything at every game because studios can't take a single flop etc. One of the things that was nice about DLC is you had that period of a year or so where a studio would be giving you new experiences before they needed to go dark again to focus on full development for their next title. Veilguard is a huge game, admittedly, but we might not hear anything from BioWare for another 4-5+ years until next Mass Effect is ready.
I think another indication of a change may depend on the value of using dlc to test out new mechanics for future iterations of the game or other games under the developer’s umbrella.
I remember Skyrim (13 years ago) having just three DLCs, two expansion-sized (comparable in size and content to Morrowind's two boxed expansions) and a smaller house building DLC. It was the exception at that time compared to BioWare's releases and Fable 3. Though The Witcher 2 didn't have any paid DLC at all as it was bundled into free content updates to lure players in after a rocky launch. CDPR were more anti-DLC at the time too. Do you think this practice over time lead to slower initial adoption as players learned they could just wait for a "complete" version? Sometimes I wonder if this is what lead to such a strong focus on pre-order bonuses including post-release DLCs.
I definitely feel like as DLC have gotten larger in scope over time, the terms 'DLC' and 'Expansion Packs' have started to blend together into one. Maybe an exception to this is the Sims franchise that seems to adhere to it's pack nomenclature fairly strictly. I'd be very curious to see how the attachment rate for a simulation game like the sims compares to an RPG. But yeah it's pretty clear that the DLC model has diminishing returns as scope (and player expectations of scope) increases. I am very eager to see what the future of non live service games holds. It is still pretty refreshing to see the AAA space move away from the "everything needs to be live service/live service adjacent" space which seemed to be so prevalent in the mid 2010s. I'm a little disappointed we're not going to have more story content for DA:V. Guess I'm just going to have to replay it to scratch that itch. :) Thanks for posting, as always.
I wanted a Citadel love letter like dlc in veilguard where learn what happened to our dragon age keep choices I need to know wtf happened to Hawke in the fade, or how ppl are accepting Divine Vivienne, where the hell is Zevran, did Shale become a dwarf, etc
@@MarkDarrah A funeral followed by a celebration for Varric feels like a great excuse to bring back many characters from past games, he's got ties to DA2 and Inquisition both
Hi, This is unrelated to the video, but I hope I will get an answer from you. I just finished watching your video about Dragon Age, and man, the level of details and things that I didn't notice on my first playthrough is wild. I always hoped for a remaster for the game, even if I still think it looks and plays nice. Then John Epler, creative director for Dragon Age: The Veilguard, came out to say that it won't be easy "because hardly anyone left at BioWare knows how the studio's old engine works." What strikes me is that some say both Origin and DA II work on the same engine, "Eclipse," while others say DA II runs on a new engine called Lycium built on Eclipse, and I've never heard of Lycium before, but I did read somewhere about the new version of "Origin" engine called "Lyrium" and I didn't hear you talke about the engine, did DA II also used the same engine? Thanks for the videos, and sorry to be out of subject.
@@MarkDarrah Thank you so much for taking time to answer. Please keep up with the videos and content. I just came across your channel trying to find an answer, and I already spent two hours learning more about Dragon Age and game development. Best!
After watching this video, I realized that the number of DLCs for games has been very low lately, and the change in the environment due to the increase in labor costs is a big reason. In fact, I used to be negative about DLC, but the experience of DA Inquisition, where the Trespasser DLC perfectly resolved the feelings that were not satisfied with the ending of the main game alone, made me a positive person about the DLC system, so I feel sorry for the current environment with less DLC. I'm currently playing Veilguard, and I feel like there's a lot of untapped story material in the epic climax of the game (For example, main characters in previous games, Meredith in Absolution animation, characters from Comics), and the story of the heroes in the Blight-afflicted South has a lot of imaginative elements that leave me wanting more, so I was disappointed to hear that there will be no DLC. Also, in a world where DLC is taken for granted, when the news of Veilguard's lack of DLC came out, there was a lot of ridicule in the gaming community that Veilguard was a flop, so DLC would have been very unprofitable and therefore not made. In Korea, the Dragon Age series is a somewhat obscure game because it didn't have an official Korean version until Inquisition, and each game didn't have a fan-made translation mod until a long time after its release (Inquisition's fan-made translation mod was released in 2021), so I'm saddened to see that instead of increasing interest in the Dragon Age series, many reactions to the news of no DLC have labeled it as a failure. I still enjoy playing Veilguard. As a fan, I'm curious about Veilguard's past development and want to get a nice souvenir, so I bought the official art book online and have it in my collection. I'm sad to see the Joplin art, but I'm also happy to see the finished ending of Dragon Age. You did a great job. (My English might be weird because I wrote with the help of a translator.)
My favorite expansions to this day are tied between throne of bhaal, trespasser, blood and wine, and the shivering isles. These were all amazing expansion packs. I want to see more. I have heard phantom liberty for cyberpunk is great.
Always preferred big expansion packs, as someone who got into PC gaming in 2006/2007 as DLCs were starting to become standard I've also noticed a trend of some big singleplayer games continuing to improve upon the base game with free yet significant content updates post-launch, the most notable examples being No Man's Sky and Cyberpunk, and most recently BG3 added quite a bit of content (expanded endings, additional dialogues, etc) via free updates. ME3's free Ending DLC comes to mind as well. I wonder if Cyberpunk's recent expansion would have been a feasible product if CDPR hadn't first rehabilitated the base game's reputation with so many major gameplay updates post-launch.
I enjoy meaty expansion packs as they’re usually a good excuse to replay something. Cyberpunk is a great example with Phantom Liberty, and I always found DA: Inquisition’s story DLC to be great too. But I also really appreciate games that feel like a complete package on their own, like The Veilguard. Games like Starfield felt like it left things out arbitrarily just so they could monetise it later, for example Shattered Space feels like content that should’ve been in the main game.
I think this might be another benefit of expansions over DLC. Because they are so much after the main game (typically) they need to stand on their own as opposed to slotting in somewhere.
Having watched a Let’s play for Veil Guard. I feel a lot of plot points were very rushed. Old god/arch demons in particular…Evanuris…I don’t know about an expansion of pack…any chance of a re-do? The art book for Veil guard looks significantly more interesting than what we got.
@@Allaiya. We got different things out of it then. I keep re-thinking the game and as I do, peeling back the layers, the game is more and more disappointing.
@@Allaiya.I completed the entire game. Things are rushed. Lore bombshells are dropped in one or two sentences and thats it. No chance ot react, discuss, or think on any of it.
My sense is that 1-2 hour story DLCs probably cost more to develop than their price point is worth. They still come with brand new levels, occasionally some new gameplay mechanic, cosmetics, voice acting, etc. It shouldn't generally cost exponentially more on the dev/design team to take that story DLC and give it more game hours, especially since they get to charge 3x the price. I believe it is more resource effective to have 1 expansion with a new game world than 3 story DLCs each with bite-sized game worlds, since those 3 bite-sized worlds still have to be unique from one another. This means stretching your creativity and dev time, vs simply expanding on something you're already working on.
From a self professional curiosity reason can i ask you on a scale of 1-10 how much of an impact do you see/think/believe that your consultancy work had for Bioware/Veilguard after seeing the end product?
What's your opinion on Veilguard in general? Would you say the new developers at Bioware ruining your legacy? I really miss Dragon Age Origins and Masseffect 2 era Bioware.
@MarkDarrah I think many would be interested in a video about your insighta regading the latest Bioware releases. Thanks for the reply, and thanks for the awesome stories!
I do love a good story DLC, I think 1-2 is enough though. One thing I really miss from bit more olden times gaming is the the modding tools given to players, like they had with Dragon Age Origins. That tool is/was 10/10! It gives such longevity for a game and fans an outlet to show their love. I used to make my headmorphs in the toolset and import them into the game to create a custom playercharacter. Inquisition, most likely rather accidentally, also did a service for fandom for having one skin texture that was only shared by 1 npc, the elf woman who is there when you wake up after the prologue. I just started with Veilguard and I gotta say what they did with hair is spectacular! No spoilers xD I'm only couple hours in!
honestly, as long as the new content is substantial, and something they developed after launch instead of cutting away and selling as day-1 dlc, I like dlc just fine.
Fascinating topic and I think you're onto something there. It's definitely the case that bigger DLC gets more attention. Doing that like an expansion pack or new episode is really a great way to get that going. I guess we'll see if the bigger studios pick up on this and if smaller studios can take this going forward.
In the case of Baldur's Gate 3 their success has established themselves in the gaming community and they no longer need to lose a portion of their revenue to that license but rather move on to creating their own IP like they said. Like what CD Projekt Red did with The Witcher to Cyberpunk 2077. As for everyone else I got to remembering what you said about developers being sick of working on the same thing and since games are taking longer to make they surely would be extra sick if they had to work on a DLC. Dreadwolf/Veilguard took 10 years so they must be super sick by now.
Ooh I hope so! I'm finding myself REALLY enjoying my time with Veilguard at the moment, despite the things about its gameplay I don't like, the boss battles especially are highlights for me! They're really really fun! Haven't finished it yet, but just did the last of the Crossroads and learned all you learn from that area and it's got me looking at events of the previous games in a whole new light and that's a fun thing, makes me want to replay the older games again lol. So yeah! A more writing and boss fights DLC expansion would be great please! :D (Though I haven't finished the main game yet lol) I know this vid was talking expansions in a more general gaming sense, but just felt like gushing over my enjoyment of Veilguard a bit too lol. As for that more general sense, I'd love for big expansions to come back into style for all. I've not played Cyberpunk but I think they did one themselves recentlyish right? I adored Awakening, Dark Arisen, and Kane's Wrath, back in the xbox 360 days of expansions, would be awesome if that trend came back!
@@MarkDarrah Aw that's a shame, I really think the bosses have been something special in this game (so far) so even just a reskin boss dungeon expansion like Dark Arisen I think would be great. Either way though, just wanted to say thanks for helping with the creation of a cool game I'm enjoying!
I was wondering why games were doing dlc to begin with. I sometimes look through the trophy completion rate for dlc of a game I’m playing and it seems extremely low for most single player games. I always thought it couldn’t be very profitable. But I figured if everyone was doing it then it must be. I think you’re right with how the price of making games has gone up has affected the willingness to make them. Since it seems the rate at which people get dlc has pretty much stayed the same based on what I’ve seen. I personally enjoy dlc for single player games because that’s pretty much all I play any more. Kinda sad to see how games are taking so long to be made while also not having as much dlc. I get why it is happening but still makes me sad.
@ I’m curious, what makes it so much cheaper to make? Is it because the infrastructure is already there? Like assets and animation that you can reuse to save time and money?
@ Thanks for the reply’s. I just recently started getting into watching game dev stuff because I find it interesting. Do you have any recommendations for either other people on TH-cam or some of your videos that may be interesting?
I understand why financially it doesnt make sense but I do miss the smaller random dlc like playing as the dark spawn. I agree it does seem like the only post release content going forward is the expansion pack but I don't think its really like a resurgence of the 90s/2000s because as you mentioned even successful games like BG3 and Veilguard aren't guaranteed to produce them and while companies like Bethesda might have put out 2/3 previously even 1 seems a major risk now
I prefer DLCs/Expansion packs without it we wouldn't have the Trespasser DLC in Dragon Age Inquisition or other previous DLCs I loved from DA 2 and DAO. I think if there is added DLC and the ability to add mods you make a lot of players very happy. BG3 just got way more interesting with mod capabilities.
Great phrasing with the $1.30 ROI! Been on DAV groups trying to explain something like this when I could pull myself outta Thedas haha. I've been wondering why more games don't expand within the established engines for a while. Thought it could be an answer to the Live service model push, since it worked with a lot of the preexisting assets and pipeline. For instance, Andromeda set up a single cluster with a few planets and a terraform system. Their maps were massive, but a few seemed to suggest plots elsewhere on the planets or on others in the cluster. I don't have your experience, but do you think this is a viable Expansion Pack path? Do tech issues and Gfx upgrades make this less likely?
I think you're on to something. Story DLC has had this problem where if it's very relevant to the game's universe it's criticized for being "required" or "should have been in the base game" because we think of DLC as optional content. Notably Trespasser for Inquisition and From Ashes for Mass Effect 3 received this criticism. But if you make story DLC that's not very relevant to the universe it's not as interesting to the players. Expansion packs were generally marketed more like a new chapter of the game, so there was an expectation that an expansion pack would include story that is essential to the game's universe.
I feel like a good story dlc or expansion pack feels like a love letter to the fans. The studio shipped their game, they made their money, fans are already happy and then they can focus on additional content within a finished framework and really focus on a dense story ark. But there are still a lot of ways to fuck this up via price/scope/unsatisfying/disappointing. I really like them but I also see how they don't seem to be interesting for a publisher when a new fifa/EA FC player pack generates more money
I wish there were more expansion dlcs, games just take WAY too long to make and its annoying to wait another 5-8 years with little to nothing in between for the next game from our favorite devs. Like Cyberpunk was supposed to have more expansion DLCs but they ended up axing them and pouring the resources back into the witcher 4 and cyberpunk orion, its been 4 years since cyberpunk and we still dont have any of those games in sight, last time i checked neither of those games are in full production which is kinda sad. Same thing with Veilguard i doubt there will be any big update with ME 5 any time soon or even the next 2 years for that matter. I think Idsoftware handled this the best with Doom eternal constantly having updates by constantly adding master levels, a brand new horde mode, constant new skin updates that you get by completing challenges and 2 expansion dlcs which ended up shaping it into my favorite FPS game of all time.
That's not always a good thing.. Andromeda was in desperate need of more story dlc especially about the "quarian arc" side of things and maybe more story growth to the Ryder twins...that probably would've made the game better the same as tresspaser made inquisition better and made the Inquisitor better gave them more depth. In this instance the dlc was the nutella on a pancake. It made the food better For Veilguard though.. i am kinda happy that they are moving on to Mass Effect and the tweets about the mature tones give me some hope... So far I am about 20 hours in Veilguard and i find the story good but the writing, dialogue, companions and the tone a bit lacking.. but I am still have fun with the lore&combat and visuals and that carries the game so far.. But I don't think i would want more of this game at the end
I would love to work back on expansions, they had good balance of being big enough to have enough time for some impressive stuff but also not being too big to invite feature creep and the inevitable "we have a map twice as big as the previous game and 16 times the detail".
I definitely miss the days of full-on expansion packs. While some story DLCs are absolutely some the best parts of the games they belong to (Lair of the Shadow Broker, Trespasser, etc), even then they may top out at only 2-3 hours of actual additional content. Expansion Packs on the other hand, especially those on the scale of Shadow of the Erdtree, feel like mini games in their own right and more than justify waiting an entire year or even two for them to arrive. Completely get why Veilguard isn't getting anything, I'm sad about it but I appreciate being told upfront, and if it helps ME5's development go more smoothly then that's at least something.
I do think there is a cool expansion for DAI where you combine Trespasser, Descent, and Jaws of Hakkon. Not that exact content but each brings a different thing, while combined they are something complete.
Expectations are even higher now with Phantom Liberty (Cyberpunk) and Shadow of the Erdtree (Elden Ring). Just look at the comparisons people were making when Shattered Space (Starfield) came out and it wasn't nearly as grand.
offtopic, but related: do u think we will ever get remaster of origins? i heared that epler told in an interview from rolling stones only 20 people left at bioware know the old engine, so signs are pretty sad, except u would do a complete remake in frostbyte...
A remaster becomes harder and harder as the knowledge is lost... The easiest (though not easy) way to do a remaster would probably be to find a remaster house that would take the codebase and learn it. A remake could be done but that would be nearly as expensive as a whole new title
I would suspect that another contributing factor is that mobile games and popular gacha games (like Hoyoverse stuff) made core Console/PC audience much more sensitized and weary of small and cosmetic DLCs. In addition to rising costs, people likely buy less of them because of negative emotional connotations.
I don't mind DLC when it's story DLC that feels like it adds to the game as opposed to being something that shoudl've been there from the start. I'm definitely more willing to pay for an expansion pack than I am a for a DLC because the expectation there is a lot more content than I otherwise would get. Depending on how much story DLC the game has, I might end up spending more on that for less content overall than if the company just released an expansion pack.
Another thing that came to mind is without any DLC or content updates, a single player game could lose momentum and fade away. For example BG3 (though not entirely single player to be fair) released patches and free content updates that I think might have helped keeping the base game relevant pushing sales further. Also CDPR with Cyberpunk kind of did the same (but we have Phantom Liberty as a DLC there also). Though I have to say both of these games released in a very poor state technically so these updates were a necessity. Basically I think, that if you don't just count revenue from DLC directly, but also how that DLC translates into your base game's sales or how it possibly reignites interest in your earlier titles or your whole IP might also be kind of a factor to some extent? Just guesswork
I like the great 'meaty' ones....it's gives the feeling " i get something for my money", a reason to play the game again, another point of view (per ex. Trespasser), ....i would per ex. skins not really see as dlc( even it is)....but i not play live Service games.
I think the Witcher 3 definitely mixed it up - lots of free 'dlc', mainly cosmetic stuff, and then 2 large expansion packs (blood and wine could easily have been the witcher 4 and I don't think people would've complained). I love that but understand the implications. Following the apparent 'no dlc for Veilguard', which is fine (and I've not completed Veilguard yet, but am really enjoying it), I hope there will be an expansion pack (I'm hoping it would revolve around Morrigan and the HoF and what they've been up to) :) Haha a dream, love these games!
I usually buy story dlc for games I really like, so I forgot how few people buy it. I think part of what turned me off to games and dlc, is stuff like what Ubisoft did...having $3000 worth of reskins in a game and it made me not want to buy their games at all.
I think the release pacing of full games has also increased greatly compared to the PS3 era when DLC first started popping up. I did a quick count and I bought 23 non-indie RPGs this year alone. With indie titles, it's in the 30s. For the PS3, I may have had that many RPGs total across the life of the system? Just less games to play in total whereas now between western studios, eastern european studios, and asian studios there is probably an RPG I would enjoy at any given time. In particular, China/Korea have quite a few indie-level RPGs that are getting translations now and that wasn't a thing at all in the PS3 era. On the other hand, even with games that are still releasing DLC I rarely buy it now compared to in the past. I enjoyed playing Rogue Trader as one example of a game that did release DLC, but probably will not buy any of it until all of it has been released and the patch cycle is nearly over. Haven't gotten back around to Elden Ring either even though the expansion sounds like it's all killer no filler compared to the main game. Might pick up the Persona 3 DLC next year on a deep sale. Only have dates for stuff in the first 3 months or so of next year, but that's already on track to fit 7 RPGs I'd want to buy. About half are remakes or remasters, which I think get the better ROI nowadays compared to doing DLC as well. A lot more in-house remakes/remasters too, which speaks to various studios seeing them as a safer way to develop skills that can transfer to other new releases later. Or refine on the skills they developed and workflows they put in place with the latest new release. Those might be what have actually replaced DLC for a lot of studios.
If it’s worth the price, then yes, but a lot has changed since 2015. Years ago, indie titles or live service games weren’t nearly as popular-not at the level of Fortnite, that’s for sure. Now, things have shifted. Instead of paying $15 for a DLC, people might put that money toward a Destiny skin or a quality indie game. They may enjoy single-player games, but they don’t necessarily love them enough to buy when they could just get a skin and chat with friends instead. Plus, making a single-player game now is incredibly expensive. That’s why it’s funny when fans ask for more cinematics or choices in games. Like, yeah, sure-they’re really going to blow the game’s budget just to satisfy every preference.
Well the same thing has been happening to JRPGs too. Tales of Arise, Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth, Metaphor and even the Persona games has been getting expansions and less DLCs.
I think Cyberpunk is another case like this, Phantom Liberty definitely felt like an expansion (though maybe this is just how CDPR does things, since Witcher 3 was similar, just with 2 expansions).
There definitely is an opportunity cost considering a lot big RPG studios have multiple projects going on but looking across the industry I think CDPR abd FROMSoft have done expansion-sized DLC with Phantom Liberty and Shadowbof the Erdtree but I do think your right that there is less of a trickle of smaller DLC.
I love the idea of an expension pack sized DLC, like Cyberpunk: Phantom Liberty, ot witcher 3: blood and stone. I think Ubisoft also does this pretty well in modern AC games, and Far cry games. also sony's horizon games. I liked the idea of adding sizable content with some more game mechanic and story. In this regard I think bathesda is going backward, pushing for more smaller story content and paid mods with inflated prices. like paying 7 dollars for one bounty mission with broken reward. Even their most recent "expansion" was a bit light on main story content, and lacked any meaningful story or gameplay impact. On the other hand I think Trespasser from Dragon age inquisition is some of the best expansion sized DLC available, it expanded the lore, introduced a new sympathetic villain, the best soundtrack in the series. Tespasser is so good It definitely a most own for the story of inquisition to feel complete, but off course that can be dangerous having an essential part of the story locked behind a DLC.
Cyberpunk 2077 does fit your model. I wonder if the idea revolves around cultivating IP rather than simple developing short term revenue paths. I think revenue paths is a short term fools errand in an over saturated entertainment market, though people in the business office might disagree.
I think Miles Morales type games will become more normal. I think a lot of us miss Mass Effect type trilogies and Ezio Trilogies and you can only do that by recycling content. Games like Dragon Age rely on story more then gameplay so if they take Veilguard's gameplay and repeat that with slight tuning to make it tighter, few new trees and a whole lot of new story within the next 2-3 years, that'd be the best thing possible. I think it's necessary. It's not healthy for franchises to be forced to prove itself to a new audience every single time a new entry releases. It's risky for business and annoying for fans. I do think years of subpar DLC has diluted the name of expansion. Insomniac titled their Spider-Man DLC expansions and that's what modern audiences think of when they hear expansion. They think of expansions as small pieces of content. They don't remember 2000's expansions anymore so I'd imagine these half-sequels like Miles Morales will be called something new. Avoid the title of expansion and just straight up call it a new game or a come up with a sexy marketing term for it to make it exciting. A new game is gonna get far more attention then an expansion in the press.
I suppose it depends on the nature of the DLC. I kind of like the model of an expansion, an large scale story DLC that expands on what I like about the root game. Phantom Liberty comes to mind, and all three Inquisition expansion DLCs (which I each liked in one way or another). I can see it being risky from an ROI perspective though, and its doesn't always land. It might get me shouted off the internet, but I'm not sure Awakening totally worked for me. Part of that is just that DA:O feels like such a closed loop of a story and part of that is that its difficult to flesh out a brand new set of characters in a more compact experience. The more I think about it, the more I respect Larian's decision to move on from BG. I realize its a complicated situation, but I think they have a sense that BG is one of those once in a generation experiences, and it would be very difficult to follow that without falling short of someone's expectations, even though almost certainly makes more financial sense to follow with a sequel.
Awakening massively benefited from coming out so close to the main game (due to the delay for consoles) If it had come out 9 months later I don't expect it would have seen the attach rate it did. Instead a lot of people were buying it while still playing DAO
@@MarkDarrah That brings up another good question, do you think inflating development times inhibit the ROI to the point where it makes it untenable, just because the game will no longer be in the public consciousness? I would think it’s pretty difficult to get a large expansion out for a AAA scale game within the peak play window. Phantom Liberty and Shattered Space seem to indicate that, given they both came out pretty long after the games’ initial release. That gamble worked for Cyberpunk as part of their whole redemption story, but it didn’t seem to work for Starfield (although that’s a game where the narrative around it sometimes makes it difficult to get an objective sense of its successes and failures).
@@Joshuaraymalan If you are out a year later, you need to be big ENOUGH to break through. Phantom Liberty felt bigger than Shattered Space (regardless of reality)
I do think that small DLCs have just borne out as not making sense in economics of scale. Bethsoft seems to have switched largely to things that are at least mini-expansions, CD Projekt seems to have shifted to them between the Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk's semi-expansions. It seems from an outsider's perspective like small pieces of content still have a lot of inherent cost in production that doesn't scale down to their size. I do think RPGs in particular work worse with small bites of content, the core loop of an RPG bears out over a long period so a good small piece of DLC is harder to make work, not that BioWare didn't do good work with DA and ME's content. I've noticed that even Japanese companies have been doing this, Final Fantasy 7 Remake only had one mini expansion, Rebirth had none, Final Fantasy 16 had two mini expansions that aren't quite "expansion pack" sized, but are bigger than the old DLCs we used to see in the late 00s. I can't help but feel like DLC has ended up making the most sense at live service endless cosmetics and larger pieces that are in a space almost in between old DLCs and old expansion packs. BTW loving Dragon Age the Veilguard, I wish I could tell the team what a great job I think they did but i hope a positive sentiment is reaching them.
Small non story stuff can be made really cheaply but attaches pretty poorly. Small story stuff does have a high $/hour cost for sure and still attaches worse then an expansion
I bought all the dlc for fallout 4 far harbor was better than the main story. If game company's are deliberately holding back content so they can make more money selling as a dlc then that's not good but if the dlc is a genuine after thought because they have come up with an idea later after the game has been released and I really want more out of the game also I think it can be good. Although I won't waste my money or time if it's just 1 hour of extra game or weapons pack or clothing.
as far as i heard there is a DLC planned for dragonsdogma2. i personally like the idea of expansions/DLCs as long as it feels like new content and makes the experience richer in several departments of the game. a bit off-topic: regarding dragon age the veilguard i have to say: it was a nice experiment but now i hope guys at bioware make a REAL dragon age successor. veilguard did like 2/3 things better than the older games but like 5/7 worse. its a fun action game and spin-off but its no real rpg and no serious successor (especially of origins, where i still hope we get either a remaster and not a remake of) veilguard basically put away most of the things i enjoyed of the dragon age games especially origins. maybe the combat is more boring in origins but it has a better progression than veilguard and it has more things it does "right" for a mature "dark-fantasy" game. its really heartbreaking fans of origins had to wait 15 years for this and i really hope its just a spin-off and ppl at bioware find back to their routes... otherwise selling the IP would be unfortunate but maybe the best options (especially if you look how BG3 basically did what DAO fans hope for since over a decade... / end of rant, sorry, but i had to write this cause it really bothered me and i think an intellectual guy like you and some guys in the comments, might understand what i mean and where i'm coming from) anyway thumbs up for the video but thumbs down for veilguard. (i assume you weren much involved in the development but i respect your work what you did for the series so just that you know)
Do you think marketing plays a role? like you aren't going to do a marketing push for a small DLC but you might for a expansion pack 'size' of thing? I think we have seen 'relaunches' from things like TV shows; and the Expansion might be another way to try and capitalize on that. I'm also wondering if build process and support costs factor in. Like if you have a game that has 25 possible DLC configurations; QA is going to be more expensive as they have to test for all those configurations. Also how expensive is it to maintain the builds and make sure they aren't breaking (even if its just the automated stuff)? Further more I'm wondering if DLC is getting remade into cosmetics and microtransactions in in-game stores. First of all, selling currencies 'gems' has like the best return on investment, and cosmetics are often just something you can get through the store. I know it might sound strange to try and do that with a single player game but well that hasn't stopped Ubisoft from trying. And even if it is only in a publishers online catalog... its probably better to focus talent to microtransactions instead of small DLCs. anyway; I'm probably just thinking too much.
You are right that there is no marketing for small DLC and a BIT for an expansion. And this affect sales for sure The combinatory disaster that is 25 pieces of DLC hit QA hard but it doesn't seem to actually be considered in planning
As a comparison, nowadays studios like Paradox&Creative Assembly have been pumping out DLCs like there's no tomorrow. For example, CA could just make a new minor faction DLC for one of its total war titles by adding a few new models/tweaking some existing mechanics. As a player, I would happily sink at least 10-15 hours for a new campaign. But to a RPG game, I probably won't start a new playthrough solely for a single story based DLC. I guess the lesson is perhaps there are new ways for RPG developers to generate revenue(as long as they are fair to players ofc)
I wish the age of DLCs is at an end and we get back the expansions of the past. Throne of Bhaal, Broodwar, Mask of the Betrayer, Lord of Destruction, those were some epic expansions that you cannot talk about the base game and not bring them up. They were that important. Still I don't think expansions have really gone away. Many of them have appeared as DLCs but were actually expansions. I mean I wouldn't call the DLCs of Dragon Age Origins and DAII expansions, they clearly are not (Awakening excluded). However the DLC of Inquisition could be considered expansions. They were large, they offered new areas, new items, new stories and of course Tresspasser adds to the ending of Inquisition like many expansions of the past have done. That said, if we start getting expansions the size and quality of Shadow of the Erdtree going forward, I think that's the best that could happen. As for games like BG3 and DAV, on one hand it's a shame they are not getting a proper expansion. Both games seem to be a great base platform (I'm very early on DAV but I'm liking it so far) for an old style expansion like the ones I mentioned above, that could be something special. On the other hand, in this day and age it is nice to get a full game on release and not have to wait 2 years just to finish your BG3 or DAV experience. One of the great benefits of single player games, in my opinion, is that they do not last forever. You can be done with them and play something else.
Lovung the new game there's a couple of things I think are pretty mid but the combat is the best it has ever been for sure. I guess the reboot makes sense I just wish we could have been apart of it or got something more than we have so far. It will be interesting to see what they do with mass effect I wonder if they will pick a canon ending or if the reapers weren't really defeated and destroyed everything we did accomplish.
There's been an expected amount of DLC for Starfield (smaller Creations and Shattered Spaces with more to come). I don't see anything about Bethesda modernizing for better or worse. lol
Another big piece of evidence in this might be Spider-Man 2. It looks like they had one or more DLCs planned, but they ultimately decided against it. Part of that was obviously the leak, but they also clearly judged that it wasn't worth it economically.
I always wanted the old way of expansion packs. Now a day I would not call them that anymore. For me an expansion pack is a hard copy of an expansion, for a game I have a hard copy of. But on the other side, the line between DLC and microtransaction are a bit blurred. If I could wish anything I want. I would first get rid of all this pre-order stuff. Imo is it harming the players that lost trust in your studio. Harming them is not the way to get the trust back. Then I want a complete game. One that feels really finished. This will take the most work, but it will pay of Imo. Because after that game, I would love a new expansion of the map, and a new story every year. Make it half price of the base game, as all the elements are already there. And do this every year, until the new game comes out. I know you need real good story writers for this. But look at Genshin Impact. If it works for a free to play game, how could it fail for a RPG?
@@MarkDarrah I really would love that! Even if it's not as a physical copy. The whole thing about digital copies is also about trust. And the last years were really bad. I am fine with a digital copy, if I am protected by law. As it stands now, I can pay full price for a product, and they can take it away from me, with the line that it was just a License to play the game, as long they wanted to give it to me. That's not the way to build trust. I believe to many people have felt betrayed the last years.
Honesty I'm fine with no DLCs what I do want is quality of life updates tho 😅 like how Hogwart Legacy or Baldur Gate 3. Even Halo Infinite finally did The Great Journey contents.
I guess I was spoiled. I expect DLC from single players games. But if it doesn't happen I guess it's cool as long as the game is complete. Dragon age, Mass effect, For Honor, God of war, etc
I think its a good idea to release a game that doesnt have initial plans of expansion or DLC. My reason is, its all a gamble on how well it's actually going to be precieved right out the door. You dont want to push for things that won't sell obviously. I think it's a good idea to release, wait, talk, then maybe start making the plans for more and if not, have a backup idea for the initial release to have wiggle room if wanted or let it be a possible complete end
This is largely apropos of nothing but I went back to the initial big announcement trailer this year and I think in hindsight, after playing the game I think the team was absolutely on the money with the tone and presentation that we got in the final product, and that the hate it got was absolutely undeserved. (I was always broadly positive on it, but as far as announcement trailers go this is probably the most accurate initial trailer BioWare has ever made) Bravo to all you guys for knocking it out of the park
@There is an alleged leak that they're working on a sizable piece of content (dlc, expansion, remaster, who knows). Nothing official has been stated though and nothing is currently out. The only dlc it has is cosmetics and such + a "dark arts arena" which basically amounts to a testing room for spells and maybe some freeform combat.
DLC are not bad .. but the gaming community as a whole is kind of fed up with it. in fact i believe the dlc stuff is increasing but also the quality is increasing. taking a look at the strategy genre entire business model is based on dlc eg paradox. and also gamers are actually asking for dlc .. take black myth woo Kong for example. and in many games they have shifted from dlc format to season pass format. also there are games that are doing good with cosmetic dlc if they built up enough good will eg anno series and dying light series. even in rpgs there are dlcs happening everywhere .. larien is an exception but take kingdome come deliverance for example and pathfinder series has 2 season passes with 6 dlc (one like masseffect 3 citadel and its praised). pillers of eternity has a lot of dlcs. i think even space marine 2 is also getting a single player dlc. the market for smaller companies has open much more with a lot of gamers not trusting the AAA industry and sometimes out right boycotting it and they are trying to use it.
@MarkDarrah True. Most in my circles don't call them expansions anymore. Everyone has gotten used to small dlc's so we gave up on thinking of them as expansion packs. Even Phantom Liberty. 'MTX' is a veiled curse.
Just finished Veilguard last night and absolutely loved it. Probably my new favourite DA game (even if the final battle did hurt my wrist a little using mouse and keyboard) It would be nice if Veilguard got a large story DLC or Expansion Pack, but then I'm also not really sure whether I'd go for one over the other - if nothing else expansion packs give stories a little bit more time to settle. Sometimes story DLC can feel like by the time you're really getting invested in the new story they're telling you're already at the finale
@MarkDarrah That's fair, I am struggling to think of any part of the story that feels like something is obviously missing (or requiring an immediate exploration with those characters rather than a potential sequel)
One of Andromeda's main criticism beyond the Bugs and glitches side of talks was the writing and tone of the game was not quite what Mass Effect should be.. it lacked the mature aspect.. It wasn't very "serious"...Now this begs the question why apply that to Dragon Age too? Not only that but why did Veilguard double downed on that style of writing and why the Disney art style for the characters. Did the criticism fall on deaf ears? Or is feedback and criticism not that important for Bioware.. Who made the combat, enviroments and i gotta praise the sound effects and music are at a modern day AAA standard. Very class. But the writing? I found better writing in indie games.
I am glad Veilguard is not having an expansion, as a Dragon Age fan, the game disappointed me greatly. I finished it at 80+ hrs. This is not Dragon Age. This game left me with a feeling of sadness and guilt. Gameplay: It is fun at the beginning, the problem is that the game is quite long, and the battles and enemies aren't varied, that´s why it feels so repetitive. I played a mage, it was fun. But by the end of the game I was very tired and bored of the combat. Skill system: Worst in the series, also having only 3 abilities plus one ultimate felt so restrictive and boring. Puzzles: Monotonous and again, (VERY) repetitive, a terrible lack of creativity. Characters: They are very underwhelming, the devs marketed them as the best thing ever in the franchise, and they aren't (I still prefer ALL the characters fro Origins and DA2). Only Davrin and Bellara are decent, Lucanis is wasted potential, the rest are boring. Taash, the worst character ever created in DA, I forgive you, Sera. The dynamic with them at the end was "interesting", but failed to deliver. Why? Because I didn´t care about them, and thus, I didn´t care about their fate. Main Story: It has a couple of good moments, especially the Weisshaupt, Fire and Ice, and the Ending missions (but I couldn´t enjoy the ending for a reason I will disclose later). Sidequests: I didn't like them much, especially the companions' quests, they felt very disconnected from the main quest and they were the ones that specifically made me feel this game wasn't Dragon Age at all. I expected more of Harding´s quest. Music: Worst soundtrack in the series, and again, one of the reasons that made me feel it wasn't a Dragon Age game. Veilguard feel so out of place. Item management: Going into the menus is terrible, and the loot mechanic it´s annoying. Having to depend on RNG in order to get the equipment fit for your build, bad execution (and you need to find the same piece of equipment 3-4 times to actually make it worth your time, just terrible). Writing: Bad, just bad. As Skill Up said in his review: "HR is in the room in every conversation", this line 100% describes the writing of the game. Tone: Everything is so positive and safe, so soft, it doesn't feel like a Dragon Age game in any way, and because of this; nations like Tevinter and Antiva were a total disappointment, they were totally sanitized. They didn't deliver what was promised since Origins and DA2. Emmerich's missions had the potential to be something dark, and it ended as a parody of a kiddy Halloween. The dancing hand, and Hezenkos' personality made me laugh so much, and not in a good way. There is no real player agency in the game, Rook is easily the most boring and restrictive protagonist so far. I forgive you now, Inquisitor...or not, as the Inquisitor was very disappointing and boring in Veilguard too. The game suffers A LOT from not being able to import our past decisions despite the excuses the devs offered in order to gaslight us. Wasted opportunities of cameos and references, I even found instances where the devs stomped on my decisions. Mentioning characters from Inquisition that I didn´t even recruit or I have kicked out , like Cole and Sera. And the twist with Varric was really, REALLY bad. And the post credit scene is just BS, and ruins a lot of the complexity of characters like Loghain and Flemmeth. The only time the game reminded me it was a Dragon Age game was during Solas' scenes and when Morrigan tells you her "secret", no more. Also, I felt they disrespected my decisions and actions in the past games by what they did in Ferelden (especially there), Kirkwall and Orlais... technically everything is destroyed, and no mention of my Warden and Hawke. It was already bad enough that they ignored the Warden's quest to cure the calling (this one being the main reason I wanted DA4 so much to happen, to continue this story), and to make it worse the devs went out of their way to undo everything the Warden and Hawke accomplished in the past games, even the Inquisitor. Despite the endgame missions were somewhat...interesting, I didn´t enjoy them, instead of immersing myself in those events (and caring about my Veilguard companions), the only concern in my mind was...What happened to the people of Ferelden? What happened to MY Hero of Ferelden (my favorite protagonist)? What happened to her Warden lover Alistair? What happened to Vigil´s Keep and to Nathaniel and Oghren? Who among the writers thought that wiping out Ferelden off screen was a good idea? As a Dragon Age fan since Origins I felt insulted by this. At this point is very safe to assume that the team that made Veilguard has a deep hatred for DA Origins. Is it out of envy because the game is so beloved by the fanbase? And just as I thought, the 10 year gap affected the game, the devs didn't know if they wanted to target the old fanbase or a new audience, and IMO they failed at both. Worst Dragon Age in the franchise (if we can even call this game Dragon Age). This game feels like a new IP wearing the Dragon Age skin in order to trick the fans into buying it. I am very disappointed or worse, especially after 10 Years, the result and wait weren't worth it. First and last time I finish this game (there is no replay value anyway). In my book, Veilguard is not canon to the Dragon Age franchise. Despite the negativity I decided to try Veilguard myself and give it a chance. And what did I get? I was even left with a sense of guilt for having contributed to the sales of this...abomination.
Ohh, and by the way, Rook's actions are meaningless, because of him the Elven gods were set free, and everything was destroyed anyway. His actions have no value at all. This automatically invalidated Rook's entire journey. Most meaningless protagonist ever.
Rooks actions aren’t meaningless. He stopped Solas from going through with his plan to destroy the veil and took out the last Elven gods & arch demons. Anyway, I respect your opinion but I’ve also been a fan & played since DAO/Mass Effect and enjoyed DAV for what it is, more than I anticipated. The music is also growing on me. I agree they should have world states but I just headcanon what happens anyway.
Say it louder, my friend! Let them know we won't forgive that they destroyed one of our favorite franchises like that! However, I am sorry if I sound harsh, friend. But why did you even buy the game in the first place? You are also at fault here. Since the first trailer it was obvious this "Dragon Age" wannabe was going to be a total mess.
First of all i want to thank you Mark and BioWare for amazing game(VailGuard)i m at the beginning of ACT 1 and i love it.Second i always buy DLCs and Expansions for games what i like or love for the story but i buy cosmetics too(but not Japanese DLC cosmetics because they cost like fuill game LOL)im sad that VailGuard will not get story DLC but i hope we will get DA5 sometime in future
I'm not a fan of dlcs. I dont want to return to a game that I played a year ago to pick it up again. Still haven't touched Iki Island, Burning Shores etc. I also just generally don't approve of paying for things that should be a basic feature of the game (like how all the cool weapons in AC valhalla cost money). I vote with my wallet
yes, we can spend minutes intellectualizing: profit margins, cost-benefit analysis, live-service market competition, etc. but doing that while neglecting to emphasize one of the most obvious reasons for why games never see DLC, like absolute sales of the base product, begins to feel a lot like creating a narrative for why DAV won't be seeing any. if there wasn't enough market demand for the base game then attachment rates for prospective DLC themselves are irrelevant
@@MarkDarrah in the vid for BG3 you say, "the team had their own reasons for doing this" and you go on to detail what you think they were. since you're on the topic how many copies did DAV sell?
I agree that expansions are the better way to go. This is what Inquisition should have done instead of making comics and novels. Let us play those stories, not just read about them. Plus, BioWare would have been utilizing all the production costs and time they used to re-purpose Frostbite into an RPG engine, and it would have been a rolling snowball of assets going into the next major title. As for Veilguard, I think BioWare and EA knew it wouldn't sell well, so there was no reason to bother with any DLC or expansions. Just like how EA didn't bother with DRM because they knew even pirates wouldn't want it.
@@MarkDarrah I didn't write that they were in competition for resources. I wrote that expansions would have made use of the investment of turning Frostbite from FPS to RPG by maximizing the amount of content made in that engine. Also, a playable expansion is superior to a comic or novel since players would actually get to interact with those stories, and making games out of them would allow the developer to create new game assets that could then be used in the next title. For example, if the comics had been part of an Inquisition expansion, we'd have had Vaea, Francesca, new Fenris, Marius, and Tessa as possible characters in Veilguard since the models could be carried over. Same with the Tevinter assets like buildings and objects. They could have all been reused to make Minrathous more detailed in Veilguard.
idk, AAA RPGs seem kind of dead nowadays, with really generic, middle-of-the-road writing. Mostly, they just seem to be turning into glorified dating sims. We'll never see any of the more adventurous stuff that we got out of AAAs in the early '00s. Indie gaming seems to be the only place where interesting things are being done, but most of those studios aren't doing DLC.
That is sad. Sometimes Story Dlc's feel like true sequels that we don't get much of anymore. But i am very excited for Mass Effect. I liked the writers of Dragon Age as persons in podcasts and interviews... but I hope Mary DeMarle will be the most involved in the writing for Mass Effect.. i found myself wanting to go back to Baldur's Gate 3 while playing Veilguard and i currently am playing BG.. i felt the same while playing Andromeda.. that game made me leave it mid playtrough and replay the Trilogy..
From a purely consumer perspective , i always enjoyed post release content like addons and dlcs. More often then not it turned out be the best parts of the game. I also like it when a developer uses post game content to experient with new directions like a harder or more story dense expansion knowing that the audience will be mostly fans of the base game.
The team is operating at their highest skill level on DLC
As long as it doesn’t feel like cut content I totally agree
This was really evident to me on a DLC like Far Harbor or Nuka World. Being able to add in really wacky aesthetics or horror themes, but still have them fit into the overall plot in a serious way makes Fallout 4 such an interesting game.
I don’t mind whatever they decide but Mark I don’t think I can wait another ten years between stories!!! 😅
Hopefully not
I really wanna know if they're going to continue the plot points they set up at the end of Veilguard or if they're going to ignore it due to backlash.
I’m still living in 2009 with 2024 games. I am that guy playing single player games and no live services and I just replay the ones I love. Right now DAV and Metaphor, before that replaying all DA games, and a couple indies
Probably the best way
I love DLCs and was bummed Veilguard isn't getting any, though I do understand why, but DLCs have really fun potential and I always want more
I get that
Same DA has always had some great expansions throughout the releases.
Me too. I loved all DA DLCs.
I would definitely buy all DLC for DAV. But im ok with Bioware making ME instead.
I enjoy Expansion packs! Bring 'em back!
I prefer the model
As long as they don’t feel like cut content I totally agree
Expansion Back even
One interesting thing to note about the competition with Live Services: last year, the Game Award that is 'normally' intended for Live Services (Best Ongoing Game) went to a large expansion pack for a single-player RPG (Cyberpunk 2077's Phantom Liberty). These really big, super high quality expansions like Blood & Wine, Phantom Liberty and Shadow of the Erdtree can practically generate the hype levels of a whole new game release in the way that 5 little DLCs just can't.
100% true
I like the chunky DLC’s myself. I don’t do live service games, and for me to play a dlc, like you said, it needs to be relevant enough for me to put down what I’m doing. I really like hearing your insights.
I'm glad you found the video helpful
I don't really enjoy live service games. I prefer single player anyway so good rpgs with single player is always of interest.
If we go back to "smaller number, larger experience" type of DLC, I'm fine with that. A concern I have is that it's a further continuation of the issues plaguing the (western) AAA industry - that games are taking longer and longer to make and release, due to the cost of graphical fidelity, the need to throw everything at every game because studios can't take a single flop etc.
One of the things that was nice about DLC is you had that period of a year or so where a studio would be giving you new experiences before they needed to go dark again to focus on full development for their next title. Veilguard is a huge game, admittedly, but we might not hear anything from BioWare for another 4-5+ years until next Mass Effect is ready.
Yes it certainly is useful to have something for a team to work on between big games
I think another indication of a change may depend on the value of using dlc to test out new mechanics for future iterations of the game or other games under the developer’s umbrella.
hmmm. interesting thought
Mr. Darrah, It's always enjoyable to hear your perspective on the game industry and development! Thanks you!
Glad you enjoy the videos!
I remember Skyrim (13 years ago) having just three DLCs, two expansion-sized (comparable in size and content to Morrowind's two boxed expansions) and a smaller house building DLC. It was the exception at that time compared to BioWare's releases and Fable 3. Though The Witcher 2 didn't have any paid DLC at all as it was bundled into free content updates to lure players in after a rocky launch. CDPR were more anti-DLC at the time too.
Do you think this practice over time lead to slower initial adoption as players learned they could just wait for a "complete" version? Sometimes I wonder if this is what lead to such a strong focus on pre-order bonuses including post-release DLCs.
It might be. Definitely "GotY" and "definitive" editions were all the rage for a bit.
Yeah it might have
I am surprised that Veilguard did not tie in any of the Netflix show. Isn’t that a waste of good marketing?
I think there is a toss away line in there somewhere…
But you aren’t wrong
I definitely feel like as DLC have gotten larger in scope over time, the terms 'DLC' and 'Expansion Packs' have started to blend together into one. Maybe an exception to this is the Sims franchise that seems to adhere to it's pack nomenclature fairly strictly. I'd be very curious to see how the attachment rate for a simulation game like the sims compares to an RPG. But yeah it's pretty clear that the DLC model has diminishing returns as scope (and player expectations of scope) increases. I am very eager to see what the future of non live service games holds. It is still pretty refreshing to see the AAA space move away from the "everything needs to be live service/live service adjacent" space which seemed to be so prevalent in the mid 2010s.
I'm a little disappointed we're not going to have more story content for DA:V. Guess I'm just going to have to replay it to scratch that itch. :)
Thanks for posting, as always.
the business model for the Sims is bananas. I don't know what individual attaches are but overall the average person is buying SEVERAL
I wanted a Citadel love letter like dlc in veilguard where learn what happened to our dragon age keep choices
I need to know wtf happened to Hawke in the fade, or how ppl are accepting Divine Vivienne, where the hell is Zevran, did Shale become a dwarf, etc
You know, that actually might be the most likely thing (if they make anything)
@@MarkDarrah A funeral followed by a celebration for Varric feels like a great excuse to bring back many characters from past games, he's got ties to DA2 and Inquisition both
Hi,
This is unrelated to the video, but I hope I will get an answer from you.
I just finished watching your video about Dragon Age, and man, the level of details and things that I didn't notice on my first playthrough is wild. I always hoped for a remaster for the game, even if I still think it looks and plays nice. Then John Epler, creative director for Dragon Age: The Veilguard, came out to say that it won't be easy "because hardly anyone left at BioWare knows how the studio's old engine works."
What strikes me is that some say both Origin and DA II work on the same engine, "Eclipse," while others say DA II runs on a new engine called Lycium built on Eclipse, and I've never heard of Lycium before, but I did read somewhere about the new version of "Origin" engine called "Lyrium" and I didn't hear you talke about the engine, did DA II also used the same engine?
Thanks for the videos, and sorry to be out of subject.
DAO and DA2 are basically the same code.
Not 100% but mostly
@@MarkDarrah Thank you so much for taking time to answer. Please keep up with the videos and content. I just came across your channel trying to find an answer, and I already spent two hours learning more about Dragon Age and game development. Best!
After watching this video, I realized that the number of DLCs for games has been very low lately, and the change in the environment due to the increase in labor costs is a big reason. In fact, I used to be negative about DLC, but the experience of DA Inquisition, where the Trespasser DLC perfectly resolved the feelings that were not satisfied with the ending of the main game alone, made me a positive person about the DLC system, so I feel sorry for the current environment with less DLC.
I'm currently playing Veilguard, and I feel like there's a lot of untapped story material in the epic climax of the game (For example, main characters in previous games, Meredith in Absolution animation, characters from Comics), and the story of the heroes in the Blight-afflicted South has a lot of imaginative elements that leave me wanting more, so I was disappointed to hear that there will be no DLC.
Also, in a world where DLC is taken for granted, when the news of Veilguard's lack of DLC came out, there was a lot of ridicule in the gaming community that Veilguard was a flop, so DLC would have been very unprofitable and therefore not made. In Korea, the Dragon Age series is a somewhat obscure game because it didn't have an official Korean version until Inquisition, and each game didn't have a fan-made translation mod until a long time after its release (Inquisition's fan-made translation mod was released in 2021), so I'm saddened to see that instead of increasing interest in the Dragon Age series, many reactions to the news of no DLC have labeled it as a failure.
I still enjoy playing Veilguard. As a fan, I'm curious about Veilguard's past development and want to get a nice souvenir, so I bought the official art book online and have it in my collection. I'm sad to see the Joplin art, but I'm also happy to see the finished ending of Dragon Age. You did a great job.
(My English might be weird because I wrote with the help of a translator.)
DLC in a live service world needs to pull a player back
My favorite expansions to this day are tied between throne of bhaal, trespasser, blood and wine, and the shivering isles. These were all amazing expansion packs. I want to see more. I have heard phantom liberty for cyberpunk is great.
Yeah I haven’t played Phantom Liberty but I’ve heard good things
If the model means we get 1 or 2 dlc for Veilguard, then yes please. Haven't beaten it yet, but I already know, more dragon age is an instant yes
That would be what it would mean if they made an expansion. But they haven't announced anything
Always preferred big expansion packs, as someone who got into PC gaming in 2006/2007 as DLCs were starting to become standard
I've also noticed a trend of some big singleplayer games continuing to improve upon the base game with free yet significant content updates post-launch, the most notable examples being No Man's Sky and Cyberpunk, and most recently BG3 added quite a bit of content (expanded endings, additional dialogues, etc) via free updates. ME3's free Ending DLC comes to mind as well. I wonder if Cyberpunk's recent expansion would have been a feasible product if CDPR hadn't first rehabilitated the base game's reputation with so many major gameplay updates post-launch.
There is something to be said for a "refresh" that keeps attention on you and potentially justifies holding a price point
I enjoy meaty expansion packs as they’re usually a good excuse to replay something. Cyberpunk is a great example with Phantom Liberty, and I always found DA: Inquisition’s story DLC to be great too.
But I also really appreciate games that feel like a complete package on their own, like The Veilguard. Games like Starfield felt like it left things out arbitrarily just so they could monetise it later, for example Shattered Space feels like content that should’ve been in the main game.
I think this might be another benefit of expansions over DLC.
Because they are so much after the main game (typically) they need to stand on their own as opposed to slotting in somewhere.
Having watched a Let’s play for Veil Guard. I feel a lot of plot points were very rushed. Old god/arch demons in particular…Evanuris…I don’t know about an expansion of pack…any chance of a re-do? The art book for Veil guard looks significantly more interesting than what we got.
Hard to tell from a let's play
@@MarkDarrah We're likely to disagree on this.
I played it & didn’t feel that way. The lore is spread out depending on when you do the quests.
@@Allaiya. We got different things out of it then. I keep re-thinking the game and as I do, peeling back the layers, the game is more and more disappointing.
@@Allaiya.I completed the entire game. Things are rushed. Lore bombshells are dropped in one or two sentences and thats it. No chance ot react, discuss, or think on any of it.
My sense is that 1-2 hour story DLCs probably cost more to develop than their price point is worth. They still come with brand new levels, occasionally some new gameplay mechanic, cosmetics, voice acting, etc. It shouldn't generally cost exponentially more on the dev/design team to take that story DLC and give it more game hours, especially since they get to charge 3x the price. I believe it is more resource effective to have 1 expansion with a new game world than 3 story DLCs each with bite-sized game worlds, since those 3 bite-sized worlds still have to be unique from one another. This means stretching your creativity and dev time, vs simply expanding on something you're already working on.
That' the issue. Small story DLC is definitely the mot expensive to make $/hour
From a self professional curiosity reason can i ask you on a scale of 1-10 how much of an impact do you see/think/believe that your consultancy work had for Bioware/Veilguard after seeing the end product?
Not a question to be answered in a comment
@@MarkDarrah Maybe in a video?
What's your opinion on Veilguard in general? Would you say the new developers at Bioware ruining your legacy? I really miss Dragon Age Origins and Masseffect 2 era Bioware.
I'm pretty happy where it ended up given the voyage it took
@MarkDarrah I think many would be interested in a video about your insighta regading the latest Bioware releases. Thanks for the reply, and thanks for the awesome stories!
I do love a good story DLC, I think 1-2 is enough though. One thing I really miss from bit more olden times gaming is the the modding tools given to players, like they had with Dragon Age Origins. That tool is/was 10/10! It gives such longevity for a game and fans an outlet to show their love. I used to make my headmorphs in the toolset and import them into the game to create a custom playercharacter.
Inquisition, most likely rather accidentally, also did a service for fandom for having one skin texture that was only shared by 1 npc, the elf woman who is there when you wake up after the prologue.
I just started with Veilguard and I gotta say what they did with hair is spectacular! No spoilers xD I'm only couple hours in!
We may see modding come back...
honestly, as long as the new content is substantial, and something they developed after launch instead of cutting away and selling as day-1 dlc, I like dlc just fine.
Fair enough
I think we passed the DLC age and arrived at the remaster/definitive edition age.
That may be
Fascinating topic and I think you're onto something there. It's definitely the case that bigger DLC gets more attention. Doing that like an expansion pack or new episode is really a great way to get that going. I guess we'll see if the bigger studios pick up on this and if smaller studios can take this going forward.
Yeah we will see I guess
I would love to see some dlc or expansion packs. I was sad andromeda didn’t get any.
Loving DAV btw.
There was some political STUFF going on with Montreal after MEA shipped that I will touch on eventually.
In the case of Baldur's Gate 3 their success has established themselves in the gaming community and they no longer need to lose a portion of their revenue to that license but rather move on to creating their own IP like they said. Like what CD Projekt Red did with The Witcher to Cyberpunk 2077. As for everyone else I got to remembering what you said about developers being sick of working on the same thing and since games are taking longer to make they surely would be extra sick if they had to work on a DLC. Dreadwolf/Veilguard took 10 years so they must be super sick by now.
There is something to that for sure
I adore DLC. If i love a narrative or world or characters, then i always want more.
Edit: more story DLC. Never interested in "stuff"
Maybe you can get it packaged into larger groups
Ooh I hope so! I'm finding myself REALLY enjoying my time with Veilguard at the moment, despite the things about its gameplay I don't like, the boss battles especially are highlights for me! They're really really fun! Haven't finished it yet, but just did the last of the Crossroads and learned all you learn from that area and it's got me looking at events of the previous games in a whole new light and that's a fun thing, makes me want to replay the older games again lol. So yeah! A more writing and boss fights DLC expansion would be great please! :D
(Though I haven't finished the main game yet lol)
I know this vid was talking expansions in a more general gaming sense, but just felt like gushing over my enjoyment of Veilguard a bit too lol. As for that more general sense, I'd love for big expansions to come back into style for all. I've not played Cyberpunk but I think they did one themselves recentlyish right? I adored Awakening, Dark Arisen, and Kane's Wrath, back in the xbox 360 days of expansions, would be awesome if that trend came back!
No plans for Veilguard announced AFAIK
@@MarkDarrah Aw that's a shame, I really think the bosses have been something special in this game (so far) so even just a reskin boss dungeon expansion like Dark Arisen I think would be great.
Either way though, just wanted to say thanks for helping with the creation of a cool game I'm enjoying!
I was wondering why games were doing dlc to begin with. I sometimes look through the trophy completion rate for dlc of a game I’m playing and it seems extremely low for most single player games. I always thought it couldn’t be very profitable. But I figured if everyone was doing it then it must be. I think you’re right with how the price of making games has gone up has affected the willingness to make them. Since it seems the rate at which people get dlc has pretty much stayed the same based on what I’ve seen. I personally enjoy dlc for single player games because that’s pretty much all I play any more. Kinda sad to see how games are taking so long to be made while also not having as much dlc. I get why it is happening but still makes me sad.
DLC is way cheaper than the main game so even with the poor attach rate, it was considered worth it
@ I’m curious, what makes it so much cheaper to make? Is it because the infrastructure is already there? Like assets and animation that you can reuse to save time and money?
@@robertking7465 yes. Plus the tools are mature(ish) and the team is all trained up
@ Thanks for the reply’s. I just recently started getting into watching game dev stuff because I find it interesting. Do you have any recommendations for either other people on TH-cam or some of your videos that may be interesting?
@@robertking7465 Game Maker' Toolkit is good if you don't to want to get TOO in the weeds.
I understand why financially it doesnt make sense but I do miss the smaller random dlc like playing as the dark spawn.
I agree it does seem like the only post release content going forward is the expansion pack but I don't think its really like a resurgence of the 90s/2000s because as you mentioned even successful games like BG3 and Veilguard aren't guaranteed to produce them and while companies like Bethesda might have put out 2/3 previously even 1 seems a major risk now
Dark Spawn Chronicles is an interesting case study. Made pretty cheaply but it also had the worst attach of the DAO DLC
I prefer DLCs/Expansion packs without it we wouldn't have the Trespasser DLC in Dragon Age Inquisition or other previous DLCs I loved from DA 2 and DAO.
I think if there is added DLC and the ability to add mods you make a lot of players very happy. BG3 just got way more interesting with mod capabilities.
Games can live a long time on a strong mod community
@MarkDarrah Yes absolutely I love how much it enhances our gameplay!
Great phrasing with the $1.30 ROI! Been on DAV groups trying to explain something like this when I could pull myself outta Thedas haha. I've been wondering why more games don't expand within the established engines for a while. Thought it could be an answer to the Live service model push, since it worked with a lot of the preexisting assets and pipeline. For instance, Andromeda set up a single cluster with a few planets and a terraform system. Their maps were massive, but a few seemed to suggest plots elsewhere on the planets or on others in the cluster. I don't have your experience, but do you think this is a viable Expansion Pack path? Do tech issues and Gfx upgrades make this less likely?
I think single player games should run in little bursts.
2-3 full games done 14 month apart then a break to update
@MarkDarrah gives ya time to settle on feedback and solidify ideas?
I think you're on to something. Story DLC has had this problem where if it's very relevant to the game's universe it's criticized for being "required" or "should have been in the base game" because we think of DLC as optional content. Notably Trespasser for Inquisition and From Ashes for Mass Effect 3 received this criticism. But if you make story DLC that's not very relevant to the universe it's not as interesting to the players. Expansion packs were generally marketed more like a new chapter of the game, so there was an expectation that an expansion pack would include story that is essential to the game's universe.
I think that's right.
An expansion can be "must play" a lot more then a DLC.
I feel like a good story dlc or expansion pack feels like a love letter to the fans. The studio shipped their game, they made their money, fans are already happy and then they can focus on additional content within a finished framework and really focus on a dense story ark. But there are still a lot of ways to fuck this up via price/scope/unsatisfying/disappointing. I really like them but I also see how they don't seem to be interesting for a publisher when a new fifa/EA FC player pack generates more money
Its small spend for small return.
I think they are worth it but it can be a hard sell in a bigger org
I wish there were more expansion dlcs, games just take WAY too long to make and its annoying to wait another 5-8 years with little to nothing in between for the next game from our favorite devs. Like Cyberpunk was supposed to have more expansion DLCs but they ended up axing them and pouring the resources back into the witcher 4 and cyberpunk orion, its been 4 years since cyberpunk and we still dont have any of those games in sight, last time i checked neither of those games are in full production which is kinda sad.
Same thing with Veilguard i doubt there will be any big update with ME 5 any time soon or even the next 2 years for that matter.
I think Idsoftware handled this the best with Doom eternal constantly having updates by constantly adding master levels, a brand new horde mode, constant new skin updates that you get by completing challenges and 2 expansion dlcs which ended up shaping it into my favorite FPS game of all time.
With a fear / antipathy towards "asset reuse" maybe expansions bridge the gap...
That's not always a good thing.. Andromeda was in desperate need of more story dlc especially about the "quarian arc" side of things and maybe more story growth to the Ryder twins...that probably would've made the game better the same as tresspaser made inquisition better and made the Inquisitor better gave them more depth. In this instance the dlc was the nutella on a pancake. It made the food better
For Veilguard though.. i am kinda happy that they are moving on to Mass Effect and the tweets about the mature tones give me some hope... So far I am about 20 hours in Veilguard and i find the story good but the writing, dialogue, companions and the tone a bit lacking.. but I am still have fun with the lore&combat and visuals and that carries the game so far.. But I don't think i would want more of this game at the end
MEA had DLC planned that never happened. That' a worst case
@@MarkDarrah See also Spider-Man 2
I would love to work back on expansions, they had good balance of being big enough to have enough time for some impressive stuff but also not being too big to invite feature creep and the inevitable "we have a map twice as big as the previous game and 16 times the detail".
Totally my feeling too
I definitely miss the days of full-on expansion packs. While some story DLCs are absolutely some the best parts of the games they belong to (Lair of the Shadow Broker, Trespasser, etc), even then they may top out at only 2-3 hours of actual additional content. Expansion Packs on the other hand, especially those on the scale of Shadow of the Erdtree, feel like mini games in their own right and more than justify waiting an entire year or even two for them to arrive.
Completely get why Veilguard isn't getting anything, I'm sad about it but I appreciate being told upfront, and if it helps ME5's development go more smoothly then that's at least something.
I do think there is a cool expansion for DAI where you combine Trespasser, Descent, and Jaws of Hakkon.
Not that exact content but each brings a different thing, while combined they are something complete.
Expectations are even higher now with Phantom Liberty (Cyberpunk) and Shadow of the Erdtree (Elden Ring). Just look at the comparisons people were making when Shattered Space (Starfield) came out and it wasn't nearly as grand.
Yeah those 2 may have et the standard for a while
offtopic, but related: do u think we will ever get remaster of origins? i heared that epler told in an interview from rolling stones only 20 people left at bioware know the old engine, so signs are pretty sad, except u would do a complete remake in frostbyte...
A remaster becomes harder and harder as the knowledge is lost...
The easiest (though not easy) way to do a remaster would probably be to find a remaster house that would take the codebase and learn it.
A remake could be done but that would be nearly as expensive as a whole new title
I would suspect that another contributing factor is that mobile games and popular gacha games (like Hoyoverse stuff) made core Console/PC audience much more sensitized and weary of small and cosmetic DLCs. In addition to rising costs, people likely buy less of them because of negative emotional connotations.
Maybe. I have no data either way
I don't mind DLC when it's story DLC that feels like it adds to the game as opposed to being something that shoudl've been there from the start. I'm definitely more willing to pay for an expansion pack than I am a for a DLC because the expectation there is a lot more content than I otherwise would get. Depending on how much story DLC the game has, I might end up spending more on that for less content overall than if the company just released an expansion pack.
An expansion pack can be big enough to be a whole experience. Harder to do that at DLC size
Another thing that came to mind is without any DLC or content updates, a single player game could lose momentum and fade away. For example BG3 (though not entirely single player to be fair) released patches and free content updates that I think might have helped keeping the base game relevant pushing sales further. Also CDPR with Cyberpunk kind of did the same (but we have Phantom Liberty as a DLC there also). Though I have to say both of these games released in a very poor state technically so these updates were a necessity. Basically I think, that if you don't just count revenue from DLC directly, but also how that DLC translates into your base game's sales or how it possibly reignites interest in your earlier titles or your whole IP might also be kind of a factor to some extent? Just guesswork
In today’s landscape, once a player npc Ed away, it’s hard to get them back
I like the great 'meaty' ones....it's gives the feeling " i get something for my money", a reason to play the game again, another point of view (per ex. Trespasser), ....i would per ex. skins not really see as dlc( even it is)....but i not play live Service games.
Skins in single player are definitely weird
I think the Witcher 3 definitely mixed it up - lots of free 'dlc', mainly cosmetic stuff, and then 2 large expansion packs (blood and wine could easily have been the witcher 4 and I don't think people would've complained). I love that but understand the implications. Following the apparent 'no dlc for Veilguard', which is fine (and I've not completed Veilguard yet, but am really enjoying it), I hope there will be an expansion pack (I'm hoping it would revolve around Morrigan and the HoF and what they've been up to) :) Haha a dream, love these games!
Yeah wither's "DLC" is smaller them what would normally be charged for but the 2 expansions are BIGGER then that
Yay another video from you!!! Love these, they make my day! 😊
Thank you!
I usually buy story dlc for games I really like, so I forgot how few people buy it. I think part of what turned me off to games and dlc, is stuff like what Ubisoft did...having $3000 worth of reskins in a game and it made me not want to buy their games at all.
For sure
All my fav games have DLC, so i'm pro DLC, more story was always the best❤
fair
I like story dlc's and expansion packs. Never cared about cosmetic stuff.
Cosmetics in a single player game are a bit odd
I think the release pacing of full games has also increased greatly compared to the PS3 era when DLC first started popping up. I did a quick count and I bought 23 non-indie RPGs this year alone. With indie titles, it's in the 30s. For the PS3, I may have had that many RPGs total across the life of the system? Just less games to play in total whereas now between western studios, eastern european studios, and asian studios there is probably an RPG I would enjoy at any given time. In particular, China/Korea have quite a few indie-level RPGs that are getting translations now and that wasn't a thing at all in the PS3 era.
On the other hand, even with games that are still releasing DLC I rarely buy it now compared to in the past. I enjoyed playing Rogue Trader as one example of a game that did release DLC, but probably will not buy any of it until all of it has been released and the patch cycle is nearly over. Haven't gotten back around to Elden Ring either even though the expansion sounds like it's all killer no filler compared to the main game. Might pick up the Persona 3 DLC next year on a deep sale.
Only have dates for stuff in the first 3 months or so of next year, but that's already on track to fit 7 RPGs I'd want to buy. About half are remakes or remasters, which I think get the better ROI nowadays compared to doing DLC as well. A lot more in-house remakes/remasters too, which speaks to various studios seeing them as a safer way to develop skills that can transfer to other new releases later. Or refine on the skills they developed and workflows they put in place with the latest new release. Those might be what have actually replaced DLC for a lot of studios.
There are so many indie releases now
If it’s worth the price, then yes, but a lot has changed since 2015. Years ago, indie titles or live service games weren’t nearly as popular-not at the level of Fortnite, that’s for sure. Now, things have shifted. Instead of paying $15 for a DLC, people might put that money toward a Destiny skin or a quality indie game. They may enjoy single-player games, but they don’t necessarily love them enough to buy when they could just get a skin and chat with friends instead.
Plus, making a single-player game now is incredibly expensive. That’s why it’s funny when fans ask for more cinematics or choices in games. Like, yeah, sure-they’re really going to blow the game’s budget just to satisfy every preference.
YUUUUPPPP.
You need to get me to stop playing fortnite to get me to play a DLC.
That 5$ thing is unlikely to DO that. The 40$ thing might.
Do you lore secret about anthem? Was the shaper secret ever fleshed out?
I do not know. There was story work after I was off...
@MarkDarrah thanks!
Well the same thing has been happening to JRPGs too. Tales of Arise, Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth, Metaphor and even the Persona games has been getting expansions and less DLCs.
True
I think Cyberpunk is another case like this, Phantom Liberty definitely felt like an expansion (though maybe this is just how CDPR does things, since Witcher 3 was similar, just with 2 expansions).
yes, for sure
There definitely is an opportunity cost considering a lot big RPG studios have multiple projects going on but looking across the industry I think CDPR abd FROMSoft have done expansion-sized DLC with Phantom Liberty and Shadowbof the Erdtree but I do think your right that there is less of a trickle of smaller DLC.
I think that's what we are seeing.
Some studios are shifting people to new projects earlier. Others are collecting DLC into larger expansions
I love the idea of an expension pack sized DLC, like Cyberpunk: Phantom Liberty, ot witcher 3: blood and stone. I think Ubisoft also does this pretty well in modern AC games, and Far cry games. also sony's horizon games. I liked the idea of adding sizable content with some more game mechanic and story.
In this regard I think bathesda is going backward, pushing for more smaller story content and paid mods with inflated prices. like paying 7 dollars for one bounty mission with broken reward. Even their most recent "expansion" was a bit light on main story content, and lacked any meaningful story or gameplay impact. On the other hand I think Trespasser from Dragon age inquisition is some of the best expansion sized DLC available, it expanded the lore, introduced a new sympathetic villain, the best soundtrack in the series. Tespasser is so good It definitely a most own for the story of inquisition to feel complete, but off course that can be dangerous having an essential part of the story locked behind a DLC.
With a full sized expansion, I think having critical info in there becomes more ok
I love expansions, personally. I love when im able to come back to a game i love and have new experiences.
Maybe they are back?
@MarkDarrah here's to hoping! 🤞
Cyberpunk 2077 does fit your model. I wonder if the idea revolves around cultivating IP rather than simple developing short term revenue paths. I think revenue paths is a short term fools errand in an over saturated entertainment market, though people in the business office might disagree.
You can tell more story in an expansion for sure
I think Miles Morales type games will become more normal. I think a lot of us miss Mass Effect type trilogies and Ezio Trilogies and you can only do that by recycling content. Games like Dragon Age rely on story more then gameplay so if they take Veilguard's gameplay and repeat that with slight tuning to make it tighter, few new trees and a whole lot of new story within the next 2-3 years, that'd be the best thing possible. I think it's necessary. It's not healthy for franchises to be forced to prove itself to a new audience every single time a new entry releases. It's risky for business and annoying for fans.
I do think years of subpar DLC has diluted the name of expansion. Insomniac titled their Spider-Man DLC expansions and that's what modern audiences think of when they hear expansion. They think of expansions as small pieces of content. They don't remember 2000's expansions anymore so I'd imagine these half-sequels like Miles Morales will be called something new. Avoid the title of expansion and just straight up call it a new game or a come up with a sexy marketing term for it to make it exciting. A new game is gonna get far more attention then an expansion in the press.
I'd LOVE to see that TBH
I suppose it depends on the nature of the DLC. I kind of like the model of an expansion, an large scale story DLC that expands on what I like about the root game. Phantom Liberty comes to mind, and all three Inquisition expansion DLCs (which I each liked in one way or another). I can see it being risky from an ROI perspective though, and its doesn't always land. It might get me shouted off the internet, but I'm not sure Awakening totally worked for me. Part of that is just that DA:O feels like such a closed loop of a story and part of that is that its difficult to flesh out a brand new set of characters in a more compact experience. The more I think about it, the more I respect Larian's decision to move on from BG. I realize its a complicated situation, but I think they have a sense that BG is one of those once in a generation experiences, and it would be very difficult to follow that without falling short of someone's expectations, even though almost certainly makes more financial sense to follow with a sequel.
Awakening massively benefited from coming out so close to the main game (due to the delay for consoles)
If it had come out 9 months later I don't expect it would have seen the attach rate it did.
Instead a lot of people were buying it while still playing DAO
@@MarkDarrah That brings up another good question, do you think inflating development times inhibit the ROI to the point where it makes it untenable, just because the game will no longer be in the public consciousness? I would think it’s pretty difficult to get a large expansion out for a AAA scale game within the peak play window. Phantom Liberty and Shattered Space seem to indicate that, given they both came out pretty long after the games’ initial release. That gamble worked for Cyberpunk as part of their whole redemption story, but it didn’t seem to work for Starfield (although that’s a game where the narrative around it sometimes makes it difficult to get an objective sense of its successes and failures).
@@Joshuaraymalan If you are out a year later, you need to be big ENOUGH to break through.
Phantom Liberty felt bigger than Shattered Space (regardless of reality)
I do think that small DLCs have just borne out as not making sense in economics of scale. Bethsoft seems to have switched largely to things that are at least mini-expansions, CD Projekt seems to have shifted to them between the Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk's semi-expansions. It seems from an outsider's perspective like small pieces of content still have a lot of inherent cost in production that doesn't scale down to their size. I do think RPGs in particular work worse with small bites of content, the core loop of an RPG bears out over a long period so a good small piece of DLC is harder to make work, not that BioWare didn't do good work with DA and ME's content. I've noticed that even Japanese companies have been doing this, Final Fantasy 7 Remake only had one mini expansion, Rebirth had none, Final Fantasy 16 had two mini expansions that aren't quite "expansion pack" sized, but are bigger than the old DLCs we used to see in the late 00s. I can't help but feel like DLC has ended up making the most sense at live service endless cosmetics and larger pieces that are in a space almost in between old DLCs and old expansion packs.
BTW loving Dragon Age the Veilguard, I wish I could tell the team what a great job I think they did but i hope a positive sentiment is reaching them.
Small non story stuff can be made really cheaply but attaches pretty poorly.
Small story stuff does have a high $/hour cost for sure and still attaches worse then an expansion
I bought all the dlc for fallout 4 far harbor was better than the main story. If game company's are deliberately holding back content so they can make more money selling as a dlc then that's not good but if the dlc is a genuine after thought because they have come up with an idea later after the game has been released and I really want more out of the game also I think it can be good. Although I won't waste my money or time if it's just 1 hour of extra game or weapons pack or clothing.
The scale of a DLC compared to the acceptable price makes having enough to feel "worth it" tricky. But scale it up to 30$ and you can do a lot more
as far as i heard there is a DLC planned for dragonsdogma2. i personally like the idea of expansions/DLCs as long as it feels like new content and makes the experience richer in several departments of the game. a bit off-topic: regarding dragon age the veilguard i have to say: it was a nice experiment but now i hope guys at bioware make a REAL dragon age successor. veilguard did like 2/3 things better than the older games but like 5/7 worse. its a fun action game and spin-off but its no real rpg and no serious successor (especially of origins, where i still hope we get either a remaster and not a remake of) veilguard basically put away most of the things i enjoyed of the dragon age games especially origins. maybe the combat is more boring in origins but it has a better progression than veilguard and it has more things it does "right" for a mature "dark-fantasy" game. its really heartbreaking fans of origins had to wait 15 years for this and i really hope its just a spin-off and ppl at bioware find back to their routes... otherwise selling the IP would be unfortunate but maybe the best options (especially if you look how BG3 basically did what DAO fans hope for since over a decade... / end of rant, sorry, but i had to write this cause it really bothered me and i think an intellectual guy like you and some guys in the comments, might understand what i mean and where i'm coming from) anyway thumbs up for the video but thumbs down for veilguard. (i assume you weren much involved in the development but i respect your work what you did for the series so just that you know)
I think you are right about the Dragon Dogna 2 DLC
Do you think marketing plays a role? like you aren't going to do a marketing push for a small DLC but you might for a expansion pack 'size' of thing?
I think we have seen 'relaunches' from things like TV shows; and the Expansion might be another way to try and capitalize on that.
I'm also wondering if build process and support costs factor in. Like if you have a game that has 25 possible DLC configurations; QA is going to be more expensive as they have to test for all those configurations. Also how expensive is it to maintain the builds and make sure they aren't breaking (even if its just the automated stuff)?
Further more I'm wondering if DLC is getting remade into cosmetics and microtransactions in in-game stores. First of all, selling currencies 'gems' has like the best return on investment, and cosmetics are often just something you can get through the store. I know it might sound strange to try and do that with a single player game but well that hasn't stopped Ubisoft from trying. And even if it is only in a publishers online catalog... its probably better to focus talent to microtransactions instead of small DLCs.
anyway; I'm probably just thinking too much.
You are right that there is no marketing for small DLC and a BIT for an expansion. And this affect sales for sure
The combinatory disaster that is 25 pieces of DLC hit QA hard but it doesn't seem to actually be considered in planning
As a comparison, nowadays studios like Paradox&Creative Assembly have been pumping out DLCs like there's no tomorrow.
For example, CA could just make a new minor faction DLC for one of its total war titles by adding a few new models/tweaking some existing mechanics. As a player, I would happily sink at least 10-15 hours for a new campaign.
But to a RPG game, I probably won't start a new playthrough solely for a single story based DLC.
I guess the lesson is perhaps there are new ways for RPG developers to generate revenue(as long as they are fair to players ofc)
Yeah definitely this isn’t across all genres
I wish the age of DLCs is at an end and we get back the expansions of the past. Throne of Bhaal, Broodwar, Mask of the Betrayer, Lord of Destruction, those were some epic expansions that you cannot talk about the base game and not bring them up. They were that important.
Still I don't think expansions have really gone away. Many of them have appeared as DLCs but were actually expansions. I mean I wouldn't call the DLCs of Dragon Age Origins and DAII expansions, they clearly are not (Awakening excluded). However the DLC of Inquisition could be considered expansions. They were large, they offered new areas, new items, new stories and of course Tresspasser adds to the ending of Inquisition like many expansions of the past have done.
That said, if we start getting expansions the size and quality of Shadow of the Erdtree going forward, I think that's the best that could happen.
As for games like BG3 and DAV, on one hand it's a shame they are not getting a proper expansion. Both games seem to be a great base platform (I'm very early on DAV but I'm liking it so far) for an old style expansion like the ones I mentioned above, that could be something special. On the other hand, in this day and age it is nice to get a full game on release and not have to wait 2 years just to finish your BG3 or DAV experience. One of the great benefits of single player games, in my opinion, is that they do not last forever. You can be done with them and play something else.
For me the DAI DLC is still too small. Put all 3 together for 35$...
Lovung the new game there's a couple of things I think are pretty mid but the combat is the best it has ever been for sure. I guess the reboot makes sense I just wish we could have been apart of it or got something more than we have so far. It will be interesting to see what they do with mass effect I wonder if they will pick a canon ending or if the reapers weren't really defeated and destroyed everything we did accomplish.
No idea what's up with Mass Effect...
There's been an expected amount of DLC for Starfield (smaller Creations and Shattered Spaces with more to come). I don't see anything about Bethesda modernizing for better or worse. lol
Bethesda was the one studio who seemed to be doing the same stuff as always.
Another big piece of evidence in this might be Spider-Man 2. It looks like they had one or more DLCs planned, but they ultimately decided against it. Part of that was obviously the leak, but they also clearly judged that it wasn't worth it economically.
indeed
I always wanted the old way of expansion packs. Now a day I would not call them that anymore. For me an expansion pack is a hard copy of an expansion, for a game I have a hard copy of. But on the other side, the line between DLC and microtransaction are a bit blurred. If I could wish anything I want. I would first get rid of all this pre-order stuff. Imo is it harming the players that lost trust in your studio. Harming them is not the way to get the trust back. Then I want a complete game. One that feels really finished. This will take the most work, but it will pay of Imo. Because after that game, I would love a new expansion of the map, and a new story every year. Make it half price of the base game, as all the elements are already there. And do this every year, until the new game comes out. I know you need real good story writers for this. But look at Genshin Impact. If it works for a free to play game, how could it fail for a RPG?
I think we may see this (though maybe not physical copies)
@@MarkDarrah I really would love that! Even if it's not as a physical copy. The whole thing about digital copies is also about trust. And the last years were really bad. I am fine with a digital copy, if I am protected by law. As it stands now, I can pay full price for a product, and they can take it away from me, with the line that it was just a License to play the game, as long they wanted to give it to me. That's not the way to build trust. I believe to many people have felt betrayed the last years.
Honesty I'm fine with no DLCs what I do want is quality of life updates tho 😅 like how Hogwart Legacy or Baldur Gate 3. Even Halo Infinite finally did The Great Journey contents.
Those are probably gonna stick around.
or just the team has low confidence for base game.
I don't think that's what we are seeing in any of these cases. Certainly that CAN happen
I guess I was spoiled. I expect DLC from single players games. But if it doesn't happen I guess it's cool as long as the game is complete. Dragon age, Mass effect, For Honor, God of war, etc
Maybe you’ll get few but bigger things
I think its a good idea to release a game that doesnt have initial plans of expansion or DLC. My reason is, its all a gamble on how well it's actually going to be precieved right out the door. You dont want to push for things that won't sell obviously. I think it's a good idea to release, wait, talk, then maybe start making the plans for more and if not, have a backup idea for the initial release to have wiggle room if wanted or let it be a possible complete end
It is useful to have a place for people to go.
But that doesn't have to be DLC
This is largely apropos of nothing but I went back to the initial big announcement trailer this year and I think in hindsight, after playing the game I think the team was absolutely on the money with the tone and presentation that we got in the final product, and that the hate it got was absolutely undeserved. (I was always broadly positive on it, but as far as announcement trailers go this is probably the most accurate initial trailer BioWare has ever made)
Bravo to all you guys for knocking it out of the park
I think it shouldn’t have been the first thing
Just wanted to correct this from the thumbnail:
Hogwarts Legacy has no expansions (yet).
Dragon's Dogma 1 had one expansion.
Doesn't Hogwarts have...
huh. I swear there was something when I looked.
Thanks.
@There is an alleged leak that they're working on a sizable piece of content (dlc, expansion, remaster, who knows). Nothing official has been stated though and nothing is currently out. The only dlc it has is cosmetics and such + a "dark arts arena" which basically amounts to a testing room for spells and maybe some freeform combat.
I like dlc😊
I'm curious if what I am seeing is real...
@MarkDarrah i'm buy all DA and ME dlc's
DLC are not bad .. but the gaming community as a whole is kind of fed up with it. in fact i believe the dlc stuff is increasing but also the quality is increasing. taking a look at the strategy genre entire business model is based on dlc eg paradox. and also gamers are actually asking for dlc .. take black myth woo Kong for example. and in many games they have shifted from dlc format to season pass format. also there are games that are doing good with cosmetic dlc if they built up enough good will eg anno series and dying light series. even in rpgs there are dlcs happening everywhere .. larien is an exception but take kingdome come deliverance for example and pathfinder series has 2 season passes with 6 dlc (one like masseffect 3 citadel and its praised). pillers of eternity has a lot of dlcs. i think even space marine 2 is also getting a single player dlc. the market for smaller companies has open much more with a lot of gamers not trusting the AAA industry and sometimes out right boycotting it and they are trying to use it.
Non AAA DLC is an interesting topic.
I love major DLC's. Tiny mtx packs? Not so much.
The line between big DLC and small expansion is very blurry
@MarkDarrah True. Most in my circles don't call them expansions anymore. Everyone has gotten used to small dlc's so we gave up on thinking of them as expansion packs. Even Phantom Liberty. 'MTX' is a veiled curse.
Just finished Veilguard last night and absolutely loved it. Probably my new favourite DA game (even if the final battle did hurt my wrist a little using mouse and keyboard)
It would be nice if Veilguard got a large story DLC or Expansion Pack, but then I'm also not really sure whether I'd go for one over the other - if nothing else expansion packs give stories a little bit more time to settle. Sometimes story DLC can feel like by the time you're really getting invested in the new story they're telling you're already at the finale
Currently they are saying no plans
@MarkDarrah That's fair, I am struggling to think of any part of the story that feels like something is obviously missing (or requiring an immediate exploration with those characters rather than a potential sequel)
One of Andromeda's main criticism beyond the Bugs and glitches side of talks was the writing and tone of the game was not quite what Mass Effect should be.. it lacked the mature aspect.. It wasn't very "serious"...Now this begs the question why apply that to Dragon Age too? Not only that but why did Veilguard double downed on that style of writing and why the Disney art style for the characters. Did the criticism fall on deaf ears? Or is feedback and criticism not that important for Bioware..
Who made the combat, enviroments and i gotta praise the sound effects and music are at a modern day AAA standard. Very class. But the writing? I found better writing in indie games.
I don't think tone is in the top 10 of MEA criticism
@MarkDarrah if you watch reviews from IGN... no. If you watch reviews from gamers.. yes.
I am glad Veilguard is not having an expansion, as a Dragon Age fan, the game disappointed me greatly. I finished it at 80+ hrs. This is not Dragon Age. This game left me with a feeling of sadness and guilt.
Gameplay: It is fun at the beginning, the problem is that the game is quite long, and the battles and enemies aren't varied, that´s why it feels so repetitive. I played a mage, it was fun. But by the end of the game I was very tired and bored of the combat.
Skill system: Worst in the series, also having only 3 abilities plus one ultimate felt so restrictive and boring.
Puzzles: Monotonous and again, (VERY) repetitive, a terrible lack of creativity.
Characters: They are very underwhelming, the devs marketed them as the best thing ever in the franchise, and they aren't (I still prefer ALL the characters fro Origins and DA2). Only Davrin and Bellara are decent, Lucanis is wasted potential, the rest are boring. Taash, the worst character ever created in DA, I forgive you, Sera. The dynamic with them at the end was "interesting", but failed to deliver. Why? Because I didn´t care about them, and thus, I didn´t care about their fate.
Main Story: It has a couple of good moments, especially the Weisshaupt, Fire and Ice, and the Ending missions (but I couldn´t enjoy the ending for a reason I will disclose later).
Sidequests: I didn't like them much, especially the companions' quests, they felt very disconnected from the main quest and they were the ones that specifically made me feel this game wasn't Dragon Age at all. I expected more of Harding´s quest.
Music: Worst soundtrack in the series, and again, one of the reasons that made me feel it wasn't a Dragon Age game. Veilguard feel so out of place.
Item management: Going into the menus is terrible, and the loot mechanic it´s annoying. Having to depend on RNG in order to get the equipment fit for your build, bad execution (and you need to find the same piece of equipment 3-4 times to actually make it worth your time, just terrible).
Writing: Bad, just bad. As Skill Up said in his review: "HR is in the room in every conversation", this line 100% describes the writing of the game.
Tone: Everything is so positive and safe, so soft, it doesn't feel like a Dragon Age game in any way, and because of this; nations like Tevinter and Antiva were a total disappointment, they were totally sanitized. They didn't deliver what was promised since Origins and DA2.
Emmerich's missions had the potential to be something dark, and it ended as a parody of a kiddy Halloween. The dancing hand, and Hezenkos' personality made me laugh so much, and not in a good way.
There is no real player agency in the game, Rook is easily the most boring and restrictive protagonist so far. I forgive you now, Inquisitor...or not, as the Inquisitor was very disappointing and boring in Veilguard too.
The game suffers A LOT from not being able to import our past decisions despite the excuses the devs offered in order to gaslight us. Wasted opportunities of cameos and references, I even found instances where the devs stomped on my decisions. Mentioning characters from Inquisition that I didn´t even recruit or I have kicked out , like Cole and Sera.
And the twist with Varric was really, REALLY bad. And the post credit scene is just BS, and ruins a lot of the complexity of characters like Loghain and Flemmeth.
The only time the game reminded me it was a Dragon Age game was during Solas' scenes and when Morrigan tells you her "secret", no more.
Also, I felt they disrespected my decisions and actions in the past games by what they did in Ferelden (especially there), Kirkwall and Orlais...
technically everything is destroyed, and no mention of my Warden and Hawke. It was already bad enough that they ignored the Warden's quest to cure the calling (this one being the main reason I wanted DA4 so much to happen, to continue this story), and to make it worse the devs went out of their way to undo everything the Warden and Hawke accomplished in the past games, even the Inquisitor.
Despite the endgame missions were somewhat...interesting, I didn´t enjoy them, instead of immersing myself in those events (and caring about my Veilguard companions), the only concern in my mind was...What happened to the people of Ferelden? What happened to MY Hero of Ferelden (my favorite protagonist)? What happened to her Warden lover Alistair? What happened to Vigil´s Keep and to Nathaniel and Oghren?
Who among the writers thought that wiping out Ferelden off screen was a good idea? As a Dragon Age fan since Origins I felt insulted by this.
At this point is very safe to assume that the team that made Veilguard has a deep hatred for DA Origins. Is it out of envy because the game is so beloved by the fanbase?
And just as I thought, the 10 year gap affected the game, the devs didn't know if they wanted to target the old fanbase or a new audience, and IMO they failed at both.
Worst Dragon Age in the franchise (if we can even call this game Dragon Age). This game feels like a new IP wearing the Dragon Age skin in order to trick the fans into buying it.
I am very disappointed or worse, especially after 10 Years, the result and wait weren't worth it. First and last time I finish this game (there is no replay value anyway). In my book, Veilguard is not canon to the Dragon Age franchise. Despite the negativity I decided to try Veilguard myself and give it a chance. And what did I get? I was even left with a sense of guilt for having contributed to the sales of this...abomination.
Ohh, and by the way, Rook's actions are meaningless, because of him the Elven gods were set free, and everything was destroyed anyway. His actions have no value at all. This automatically invalidated Rook's entire journey.
Most meaningless protagonist ever.
I like where the game landed, but fair enough
Rooks actions aren’t meaningless. He stopped Solas from going through with his plan to destroy the veil and took out the last Elven gods & arch demons.
Anyway, I respect your opinion but I’ve also been a fan & played since DAO/Mass Effect and enjoyed DAV for what it is, more than I anticipated. The music is also growing on me.
I agree they should have world states but I just headcanon what happens anyway.
Say it louder, my friend!
Let them know we won't forgive that they destroyed one of our favorite franchises like that!
However, I am sorry if I sound harsh, friend. But why did you even buy the game in the first place? You are also at fault here.
Since the first trailer it was obvious this "Dragon Age" wannabe was going to be a total mess.
First of all i want to thank you Mark and BioWare for amazing game(VailGuard)i m at the beginning of ACT 1 and i love it.Second i always buy DLCs and Expansions for games what i like or love for the story but i buy cosmetics too(but not Japanese DLC cosmetics because they cost like fuill game LOL)im sad that VailGuard will not get story DLC but i hope we will get DA5 sometime in future
That's what they are saying...
Pokemon yellow lol
Yeah I never thought of that. It basically is an expansion sold as a new product...
I'm not a fan of dlcs. I dont want to return to a game that I played a year ago to pick it up again.
Still haven't touched Iki Island, Burning Shores etc. I also just generally don't approve of paying for things that should be a basic feature of the game (like how all the cool weapons in AC valhalla cost money). I vote with my wallet
You are in the majority. I can't think o any DLC that has an over 50% attach rat.
yes, we can spend minutes intellectualizing: profit margins, cost-benefit analysis, live-service market competition, etc. but doing that while neglecting to emphasize one of the most obvious reasons for why games never see DLC, like absolute sales of the base product, begins to feel a lot like creating a narrative for why DAV won't be seeing any. if there wasn't enough market demand for the base game then attachment rates for prospective DLC themselves are irrelevant
Yes that definitely explains the broader trends...
Oh wait BG3 sold what, 20 million copies?
@@MarkDarrah in the vid for BG3 you say, "the team had their own reasons for doing this" and you go on to detail what you think they were.
since you're on the topic how many copies did DAV sell?
"I consulted on Dragon Age: The Veilguard" - Okay, bye.
Are you new here?
BYE!
I agree that expansions are the better way to go. This is what Inquisition should have done instead of making comics and novels. Let us play those stories, not just read about them. Plus, BioWare would have been utilizing all the production costs and time they used to re-purpose Frostbite into an RPG engine, and it would have been a rolling snowball of assets going into the next major title. As for Veilguard, I think BioWare and EA knew it wouldn't sell well, so there was no reason to bother with any DLC or expansions. Just like how EA didn't bother with DRM because they knew even pirates wouldn't want it.
Comics and expansions aren’t remotely in competition for resources
@@MarkDarrah I didn't write that they were in competition for resources. I wrote that expansions would have made use of the investment of turning Frostbite from FPS to RPG by maximizing the amount of content made in that engine. Also, a playable expansion is superior to a comic or novel since players would actually get to interact with those stories, and making games out of them would allow the developer to create new game assets that could then be used in the next title.
For example, if the comics had been part of an Inquisition expansion, we'd have had Vaea, Francesca, new Fenris, Marius, and Tessa as possible characters in Veilguard since the models could be carried over. Same with the Tevinter assets like buildings and objects. They could have all been reused to make Minrathous more detailed in Veilguard.
idk, AAA RPGs seem kind of dead nowadays, with really generic, middle-of-the-road writing. Mostly, they just seem to be turning into glorified dating sims. We'll never see any of the more adventurous stuff that we got out of AAAs in the early '00s. Indie gaming seems to be the only place where interesting things are being done, but most of those studios aren't doing DLC.
There are tons of strong AAA RPGs out right now.
Indie will always be more experimental.
Ok i watched the video again, for a better understanding. So... Gaming industry, bring expansion packs back please!
yes indeed
That is sad. Sometimes Story Dlc's feel like true sequels that we don't get much of anymore. But i am very excited for Mass Effect. I liked the writers of Dragon Age as persons in podcasts and interviews... but I hope Mary DeMarle will be the most involved in the writing for Mass Effect.. i found myself wanting to go back to Baldur's Gate 3 while playing Veilguard and i currently am playing BG.. i felt the same while playing Andromeda.. that game made me leave it mid playtrough and replay the Trilogy..
Expansion packs can be even more like that.
Bigger budgets, more support
@MarkDarrah oh i get it now dumb me. Forget what i said That is exciting then !🤣