It’s no secret that the cost to produce games is on the rise, and developers have been looking for ways to monetize and recoup costs since before overpriced downloadable horse armor was available in The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Living games have their own share of problems to worry about, but we aren’t talking loot boxes or microtransactions here. How does the developer of a single-player game ensure that they bring a profit in order to invest in better tools and talent for their next game" How do they not make the player feel nickel and dimed for content, allowing additional content to be truly optional in nature"
There’s a debate raging right now about games being “complete” and whether or not they are chopped up and sold for parts when it comes to DLC and additional content. What determines a complete and full game" Is there a benchmark in terms of play time/install size/number of polygons present" If a game gets a sequel, does that make the first game incomplete" If add-on content continues the story, was it clear that the game was cut up to be sold to players in multiple pieces" There are so many questions, but there’s no real set standard or rule book. DLC, expansions, and add-ons are up to each of the developers and publishers to do what they feel is best for their own profits and their players. It’s a balance that players tend to feel should weigh more heavily on their side, but that’s...