Following in the storied tradition of all the great debates of our times: The Beatles vs. The Rolling Stones, Pepsi vs. Coke, Tastes Great vs. Less Filling - CS is proud to present a new feature called "The Great Debate". Each month a new topic will be presented for discussion via the forums and a Smuggler will be picked to represent each side of the argument. Each participant will be given an opportunity to provide their opening statements to frame their argument and present their opinion. Each participant will also be allowed one rebuttal to their opponents remarks. After that we will poll the public to see who has won that month's GREAT DEBATE!

Downloadable Content - Griffy

Most DLC centers around extra outfits, weapons or bonus levels and are completely done at the consumer's discretion. No one needs to purchase these items and the fact of the matter is that most gamers won't get that much out of these extras beyond what the game itself has to offer. For example, take the Call of Duty Map Packs that were offered (for both COD4:MW and COD:W@W), if the physics of the game itself weren't any good would those map packs have improved the game play?

Along those same lines, what about Gold or Limited editions? Think Battlefield: Bad Company Gold Edition or the Limited Edition Halo versions. These games can cost anywhere from $10 to $30 dollars (and sometimes more) over the cost of the game itself. These limited edition games generally come with trinkets and collectibles to put on your desk or throw in a drawer, but they also usually come with additional game content. Why aren’t people complaining about these limited edition games in the same way they are complaining about DLC? It’s the same principle – we, as consumers, pay more money for additional content. There’s no difference. In fact, most of the time, the additional content that comes with these limited edition games has to be downloaded (generally, with a key that comes with the game).

In closing, let's not forget that this is America! Land of the Free and home of the Super Size value meals. I can go into McDonalds and buy a Double Cheeseburger Value meal for $5.99, but for $1.50 more I can Super Size it and get that extra bang for my buck. Do I really need to add the extra fries and soda to enjoy the meal? No, but damn those McDonald's fires are so good and as a consumer I CHOOSE to pay extra to get more. It's the American way!

Complete Game Release - Xanatos

Games should be completed as they are promised, advertised, and delivered to the shelves for consumers to spend their hard earned or not so hard earned cash on. If not then let us know what exactly it is we are buying. Even pancakes let you know right there on the box that you have to purchase other additional ingredients for the "enjoyable complete finished product". And if not they put a little word to let you know it is complete...what is that word? Oh yea its "Complete".Toys come with "No batteries included or batteries "included" right?

Now this debate is a little jaded because I do support some DLC. It is awesome to know that I can add things to an already made game. Map packs (as long as they didn't make the game with a ridiculously low amount of maps just for the sake of charging for extra maps) or extra change of clothes for your character or a weapon or two to me is awesome and I look forward to those kinds of DLC. And in most cases for that is what is going on. But when game makers put a product on the shelf that does not work as advertised and promised and I have to wait for a Down loadable Patch to make the game just work as promised...well then that is what my argument is about.And it seems this is becoming a more and more popular practice for these companies and designers.

And of course a perfect game to bring up for this debate is Slant Six's Socom Confrontations. A game that is sold in stores as a complete playable game that you should enjoy . I looked at the box and in no way does it say anything about almost done or "DLC required" or the words "not complete", "Lite","Un-socom", "filtered" or any word that let me know that this game would not be the game promised on the box. Now I know we can sit here and nit pick and go about it from the legal angle about what is actually printed on the box . I want to keep it simple and for arguments sake say people buy games expecting to play them as advertised. But spending 60+ bucks on a game and popping it in to find out that it doesn't work as advertised nor does it play as advertised and I would have to wait for a Down loadable patch to make it work (maybe), well isn't very " American" or is it? . That to me is where the problem lies with DLC and how the companies and designers are rushing to get incomplete games out because of the crutch of DLC. Is it suppose to work like credit? An IOU? If the game is incomplete, let me know what I am buying. Isnt that the law? If I have to wait for DLC so the game can perform as advertised then I should have the right as a consumer in knowing exactly what I am getting. Are there not nutrition facts and ingredients in food products we buy to inform us exactly what we are buying?

Choice is good. Choice is American. But I want to know what my real choices are and not be swindled by a gaming company that is not only going to charge me for my uncompleted game but charge me to complete it too. And in those free cases of DLC...well hey the game should still work as advertised when purchased.

Add: I wont even mention in detail the scams going on with Microsoft...those are the best of all, but not for this debate.....

DLC to accessorize a working title...GOOD DLC to make a game work right.........BAD.

Griffy - Rebuttal

Well for me, the DLC adds new life to a worn out game. Specifically with the COD Multiplayer map packs we used as an example before, being able to add new maps to COD4 kept me playing that game long after I had grown tired of it. It freshened up what was becoming a stale game and added that replayability value that is so important with Next Gen games today. Had the developers included those maps in the original release I don't think my attention span would have been as dramatically increased.

In essence, DLC extends the value of the product you've purchased. An additional investment in DLC increases the value of the product for the owner and extends the life of the product resulting in a better consumer experience. It's like adding a deck on to your house. You don't need the deck in the backyard to use the house and enjoy the house, but by investing in the deck you increase the amount of enjoyment you get out of the home. And just think, with a brand new deck on the house you'll have the perfect place to eat all those pancakes you made!

XANATOS REBUTTAL

Exactly thanks for clearing that up. If we are talking about Map packs and such then I am all for that. If the developer and company had those maps already done at release and were just holding them for another chance at making money, than as a consumer I cry foul and think it is part of the decline (except in graphics of course) of these games and that is obvious .But good luck proving that to the masses. Map packs and other DLC to enhance an already complete game for a fee, if you can do it, to me is great. But the sale of content to "complete" a game or make it functional online as advertised is straight criminal. Look at the reactions to the aforementioned game Socom Confrontations, which again is the perfect example of why a game should be complete and functional as advertised. The online only game on its released received a total backlash for not being a totally functional and playable game as advertised. And even though the DLC was offered for free via down loadable patches, the fact that the game was not complete as advertised upon release cause some of the worst video game back lashes in History.*

Looks like the public spoke loud and clear there.

* Who knows but it sure sounded good.