Opinion: Even Enthusiast Audiences Appreciate Well-Made DLC
This year marks the 18th anniversary of Bethesda's $2.50 horse armor DLC for Oblivion, a milestone that might make long-time gamers feel particularly nostalgic—or old.
For a younger generation of players, it could be tough to grasp why such a small piece of add-on content holds such significance in the history of video game development. Back when it was released, the horse armor DLC became a symbol of everything wrong with paid downloadable content (DLC). For nearly a decade, the phrase "horse armor!" became a go-to critique for questioning the value of paid content in games.
Although today's gamers, especially the younger ones, have grown more accustomed to various types of paid add-ons, there's still a prevailing notion that hardcore and older players generally dislike paid DLC. While this perception is somewhat exaggerated, it aligns with much of the online chatter surrounding game launches. Mentioning DLC season passes at the time of a game's announcement almost always triggers a chorus of groans across platforms like Discord and Reddit.
The horse armor won, in the end.
Critics frequently argue that publishers deliberately withhold parts of a game to sell later as DLC, suggesting that gamers only get the "complete" experience through a subsequent Game of the Year edition. This notion plays into two common complaints: that publishers are greedy and developers are cutting corners.
Developers often counter this by explaining that while they might conceptualize DLC content before a game's launch, the actual development of these add-ons doesn’t start until after the game is published. Their plans center around future expansions rather than holding back completed sections to release later as paid content.
However, this defense has its weak spots. Although most DLC is developed post-launch, there have been instances where the process felt less sincere, fueling the belief in a corporate plot to exploit players.
I'm not sure any developer other than FromSoftware could get away with this kind of thing; the fact that they do, and to rapturous praise, is worth looking at.
Some high-profile releases have debuted in terrible states—riddled with technical issues and missing key features—while simultaneously promoting expensive DLC plans, eroding trust among the most engaged and critical segments of the gaming community.
Nonetheless, it’s overly simplistic to claim that these vocal gamers uniformly dislike DLC. Case in point: the recently released Elden Ring DLC, Shadow of the Erdtree, has become one of the most discussed and praised add-ons, especially among the ardent fans who supposedly detest paid DLCs.
Conventionally, such an add-on shouldn't be as popular, but it appears tailor-made for hardcore fans of the already challenging Elden Ring. Accessing this new content requires overcoming a tough optional boss, highlighting its appeal to dedicated players.
Few developers could release something like this without backlash, but FromSoftware has managed to do so to great acclaim. The original game, Elden Ring, was already vast and felt complete, making it hard to argue that any content was held back for paid DLC.
The two-year wait for this massive expansion, which feels like a new game in itself, also counters criticism aimed at superficial season passes.
It only takes a couple of cases of the DLC model being abused to convince some consumers that a giant business conspiracy to defraud gamers is unfolding.
Those who remember traditional expansion packs will see similarities to Shadow of the Erdtree, contrasting with modern practices of releasing smaller DLC chunks over time. The positive reception of such well-planned expansions likely stems from their substantial content and quality.
FromSoftware isn’t alone in this approach. Cyberpunk 2077's Phantom Liberty DLC, also highly praised, exemplifies this trend. Major expansions for Final Fantasy XIV, like Shadowbringers and Endwalker, and even the Miles Morales spin-off from Insomniac’s Spider-Man, show that extensive, high-quality expansions still resonate well with gamers.
These examples demonstrate what DLC should aspire to be: significant, transformative additions to beloved games, providing extensive gameplay for a fair price. Given the proven quality of the base games, buying such DLC becomes an easy decision for players.
This kind of DLC, which aims for high standards even if it doesn't always succeed, should be the model for all future expansion plans.
It's crucial to perfect the base game before marketing additional downloadable content (DLC). Attempting to do so when the main game requires significant improvements is akin to offering diners a dessert menu while their main course is undercooked and some dishes are missing.
Additionally, DLC should be substantial enough to entice players back to the game. By the time new content is ready, most gamers have usually moved on to other titles. Thus, the DLC needs to promise a significant and engaging experience that reinvigorates the original game to successfully lure players back.
However, creating large expansions isn't the only way to approach DLC and in-game purchases, nor is it the only method accepted by players. This brings us to Bethesda's horse armor, a notable example as it enters a new phase in its legacy.
Despite the initial criticism and jokes about Bethesda's horse armor – especially given the rich ecosystem of free community mods – many gamers in their thirties and younger view spending $2.50 on a cosmetic item as normal and uncontroversial. In fact, they might even find that price surprisingly low. Ultimately, the horse armor model prevailed.
Attempting to sell DLC when the main game still needs improvements is like offering dessert to customers when their main course is undercooked and some dishes are missing
Today, cosmetic DLC like outfits and weapons that change the game's appearance is a substantial part of many games' revenue strategies and can be quite successful, even in single-player games where dressing up characters might seem less appealing.
While such DLC models still receive some mockery, particularly when overused or when the base game is lacking in this area without purchases, most consumers now see them as akin to luxury items. These are not essential for enjoying the game but offer an option for those willing to spend extra if they find them appealing. Just as a luxury wristwatch doesn't make a basic watch obsolete, cosmetic DLC doesn't diminish the core game experience.
Problems arise when items like character costumes, which were traditionally part of the core progression, are locked behind paywalls. This practice, especially in fighting games, can frustrate players and damage the gaming experience (e.g., the backlash observed with Overwatch 2).
Expansions like Shadow of the Erdtree demonstrate that even skeptical audiences can be won over by well-crafted DLC
But DLC is most successful and accepted at the extremes: large, comprehensive expansions like Shadow of the Erdtree or Phantom Liberty, or smaller cosmetic enhancements. It’s this approach that often finds favor with gamers.
Developers planning post-launch content should carefully consider their target audience and choose a strategy accordingly – either creating significant expansions or offering small, appealing cosmetic items.
DLC often fails and frustrates players when it falls somewhere in between these extremes: content that isn't distinct enough from the main game to justify its cost or effort to revisit a game already set aside.
The success of expansions such as Shadow of the Erdtree offers an important takeaway: DLC indeed resonates with even the most resistant audiences when done right. However, if a game doesn’t merit a large-scale expansion, it's wise to reconsider whether adding minimal content is worthwhile, or if focusing on cosmetic items would be a better investment of resources.
