Downloadable content, or DLC, as we in the industry refer to it as, is still a pretty new element to video games. As such, publishers and gamers both seem to be feeling each other as to how best go about implementing it. The issues range from price to file size to when it should be released. Nothing gets the Internet cranking like dreaded Day 1 DLC.
But it is a decent question, brought up by today’s news that Fallout: New Vegas, a massive game like few others, will have its first expansion pack drop on December 21st on Xbox Live. The game came out in October, so most people who bought it right away should have beaten it by then.
But back to question at hand: how soon after a game’s release should DLC be rolled out? And how often after that? It depends on both the size of the game and the DLC, but personally, I think 3 months is enough time and then maybe a month or 2 before the next one. What say you?
Source: Joystiq
Actually, it’s interesting you mention “most people who bought it right away should have beaten it by then,” and I think that’s the key point; depending on the average length of the game, the DLC should be launched once most people have gotten a chance to beat the game or come close. You can always announce incoming DLC so people know that there’s a point to keeping the game instead of selling it back immediately, and also, if the content allows for it, the community can have to time to give suggestions or feedback on the launch game and things they want to see in the DLC, if the developer is proactive in listening to and responding to their community’s ideas.
Rule of thumb; keep people interested, but don’t shove stuff in their face, and don’t make it seem like you’re ripping them off by releasing Day 1 DLC that should honestly just be in the launch package.
I think it’s definitely a good point that stuff needs to come out after people have had a chance to finish the game. DLC provides a good reason to go back into it, and often doesn’t get treated very well when pushed into an existing narrative.