Do We Need DLC?

For every new batch of DLC, there are good points and bad points.  I’ve  been mulling this over for the past few days, after playing a handful of games in a glorious Mountain Dew and Cool Ranch Tacos fueled marathon, and I’ve decided that the best two examples of this whole “good/bad DLC” dichotomy are Just Cause 2 and Dishonored.

Just Cause 2 is the ultimate action game. It was so serious it needed some comic relief. So, the geniuses over at Square Enix gave us the air repulsion gun, gifting us the power to shoot enemies up into the skies in seconds. Then we got Rico’s signature gun. This made no sense, why wouldn’t Rico have his signature gun on him in the full game without DLC?. This shows how developers try and squeeze as much money possible out of gamers if they can.

Dishonored‘s DLC, Dunwall City Trials wasn’t the best example of DLC either, it felt undeveloped and shortened and only three levels were properly playable. The second DLC, Knife Of Dunwall looks like what every DLC should be like, it’s the whole story campaign from a different pair of eyes, it’s going to be worth the money and it’ll have more than one hour of gameplay. (*cough* Batman Arkham City *cough*)  I don’t know about everyone else at UTF but i’ve always felt that DLC shouldn’t be there for most games because they ruin the experience on both sides.

Is DLC a waste of money? Or is it a great way to get more from your games?