According to OXM, only two and a half of the reputed twenty-five hours of gameplay in Batman: Arkham City is likely to be Catwoman-orientated. But fear not! Another four episodes for Catwoman are to be released as DLC.
Is it just me, or is this DLC thing really starting to take the fucking piss? I don't mind DLC as a thing that exists, but I'd primarily assume it to be a way of adding new content to a game after it's been released. Planning the DLC before the game has even gone gold just reeks of money-grubbing to me. They could have just released the missions in the actual game and not risked looking like such douchebags right off the bat.
But then, should I expect any different? Games companies are companies; they're there to make a profit, and it seems that DLC is the hot profit right now. As a commenter on PCGamer puts it:
'It's perfectly simple, people. Look at the game, look at the price. Is the game worth the price? If you think so, buy it. If not, don't. All this BS about how they have "cut out content" is insane. It doesn't matter if the DLC was cut out, developed later, developed in parallel, or developed by Activision's CEO's son as a school project. The question is whether what they are including in the game is worth the price they are asking. Period.'
Thank you, Zloth.
But it makes me wonder anyway, why don't they just go the whole way and add on microtransactions too? Hatman: Arkhat City has a nice ring to it.
Credit: OXM and PCGamer.
