Rules on DLC availability/unavailability

What are people's thoughts on DLC, specifically with regards to when a company makes DLC unavailable? Do you think it should be kept on the site or not?

I say it should be removed. Example. If that DLC became unavailable for other players, it would be unfair that I could get records and no one else could.

What do others think?

It should be kept.

Many Xbox 360 DLC will not be available in 30 years... but the competition is still possible with those who downloaded them.

When DLC becomes unavailable, I think the points from that DLC should not be counted toward the game's leaderboards. I agree with thelegendarypsr that it would be an unfair advantage for those who have the DLC and new players would not be able to get it.

But I don't mind keeping the charts for those who have spend time playing them, so they can keep their medals and pointsRecord, just ignore the DLC points/medals from the game leaderboard.
But if majority wants those DLC completely removed from vgr, I'm fine with that too.

Keep it on the site, but have it separate from the main game. It's not fair on the players who spent time and effort getting scores on the DLC if it's just deleted.

I agree with what Smoka said.

Smoka, you make some good points there

Availability issue is not existing only for DLC. Some physical oldies games can be hard to find and get too. Not to be able to get a DLC is as unfair as not to be able to get a physical game. Nothing is permanent. My point is this is not a new issue.

Sure DLC have a shorter lifetime (once an editor delete one from official market places, it is almost impossible to get it), but this issue remains very similar to physical game availability.

Moreover, now this availability issue doesn't concern just "complementary DLC" (that add something to an existing physical game) any more. It is the same for more and more entire games and someday, it is possible that we could just buy non-physical games.

So will we have any more games counted toward the leaderboards at the end ? If we do that, VGR will end to have no interest any more…

My opinion is that in a comparison site, we should group records of the same type in the same category. So I prefer separate versions where there is any difference in records (like DLC). I deeply regret that's not the case in VGR.

Here, VGR decided to add DLC to the original game for better understandings of members.
Now we have more and more games with DLC where the global rankings (MB and PointsGame) are unfair for those who  don't want or can't buy the DLC.
There is no more competition without the DLC in DLC games, that's sad.
But finally, I think it is more due to the (commercial) decision of editors than VGR choice.

For DLC which became unavailable, it is quite the same: you need to buy the game when they decide that it is time to play it (buy it).
So because there was already a consensus on DLC games, I think, sadly, that we should also keep temporary DLC inside the game leaderboards.
And this for eternity, because it will be more and more difficult to delete these records after the fact (people have spend time to add and play them)

I also think that DLC should be kept.

But concerning DLC in the general case (still available or not), I think we should always create two games on VGR :
[name] with all the charts included in the basic version of the game
[name] (DLC) with ONLY the DLC charts*

In that way everybody is happy : people who don't want to buy DLC can be competitive for the game's leaderboard, and people who bought them have the possibility to compete on them too.


* not a new game for each DLC, just a game with all the released DLC

Indeed, it could be a good compromise.

Well, except for the team which would have a H-U-G-E mass of work to do…

I agree with the majority of points put across, but this is what I disagree with:

- The availability of DLC is not the same as the availability of games for all players. Games will always be available, even the insanely rare games. DLC on some games will become permanently unavailable, except for hacking

- Creating two games for 1 game. DLC is part of the game. The game is part of the DLC, therefore the current separation on the site is the only option for that.

The reasons I created the topic:

1. Nico told me to
2. Activision have gotten rid of all Guitar Hero and DJ Hero DLC, so I thought we should discuss it first before (possibly) having to tell Arvain he would lose a lot of records

Asep :

I also think that DLC should be kept.

But concerning DLC in the general case (still available or not), I think we should always create two games on VGR :
[name] with all the charts included in the basic version of the game
[name] (DLC) with ONLY the DLC charts*

In that way everybody is happy : people who don't want to buy DLC can be competitive for the game's leaderboard, and people who bought them have the possibility to compete on them too.


* not a new game for each DLC, just a game with all the released DLC

I think we don't need 2 games for that. We already have "General Leaderboard" and "General Leaderboard without DLC" and we can use them. If DLC becomes unavailable, make the leaderboard without DLC the main one that decides the Master Badge and then other leaderboard DLC only.

I agree with zephyraz about the competition without DLC in DLC games.

thelegendarypsr :

- The availability of DLC is not the same as the availability of games for all players. Games will always be available, even the insanely rare games. DLC on some games will become permanently unavailable, except for hacking

I agree with that, but don't forget the digital only titles. Nintendo is pulling the plug on Wii/DS/DSi online services. Shop still remains, but for how long?

The problem is that the MaserBadge and the pointsGame depend on the "general with DLC" ranking.
It's pretty unfair for people who don't own the DLC (still available or not).

Making the ranking without DLC the main ranking when the DLC are not available anymore can be a solution, but the problem of unfairness is still there before this unavailability.

thinking of retro Games will be "hard to get" because you can't them buy anymore normaly in a physical shop is a joke. First off: we have ebay, its easy to get Cardridges of nearly every Game released (money based) AND you always have the chance buying Games from the eshop (a option im not realy happy, but thats not the point.

Its always possible to get old Games, but a Game that need to be always online like Diablo 3 or Sim City 5, (its now playable offline after a patch but you know what i mean)

What would ppl do if Steam will be shut down any day in the future? Many Games with online binding will be lost for ever.

So theres a difference abou:t impossible to play anymore or just exepensive/hard to find.
Games like the Original Game & Watch are over 30! Years old, still working and are possible to get. Expensive like: not everyone can/want to buy them, should not be a reason to search for other ways to post scores.

For DLCs i can't say much, im not a fan of it, because of the laggy/trusty way to NOT know how long you can use them.
At the end i would pay 50€ for a retail Game before i spend 10€ for a DLC, becauce i still can sell the retail Game again if i want, selling a used DLC? good luck (for me its a difference to say "its my Game and i can play it how long i want" and "its not my Game and i can play it until the Developers shut down the Server)

Why you guys not just ask Arvain what he think about DLCs? like legendary write: he is affected the most with his Guitar Hero DLC records. I think it would be nice if he write in this thread too.