Would you buy GTAO DLC?

[DoubleDropUk]

Paid DLC would make large amounts of GTA$ readily available to all (assuming R* up the payouts), making all players rich enough to spend as much as they want. Since I started getting free cars, my play style has changed so much... ammo expenses, contact expenses etc dont matter anymore. Ill buy guns just to give to a low level at the start of a session just because i can. Ill blow up my PV and ring up for another, because 10k insurance is immaterial compared to the hassle of driving far enough away from my pv to order another. I definately dont miss grinding missions with minimal ammo expenses for 18+ hours IRL just to save up for a buzzard (which was my last purchase with legit $$)

Also think about it this way. HEISTS have been designed by R* to be a long winded affair so even the most competent players struggle to earn more than 200k/hour. If i paid £10 for the heists update instead of having the current shark card system, i believe that the heists themselves would have been designed to be a lot quicker to complete e.i an option to 'continue heist' without going back to freeroam (like the current voting screen), and a high end apartment in Sandy Shores to save a 5 min drive at the start of the setups.

Basically what im saying is for the last 4 months, i've been able to play the way i want to, without caring how much i spend... BUT im labelled as a cheat for it. By buying the DLC and scrapping Shark Cards, people can legitimately play GTA how it should be played, without restriction. (unless you cant afford the DLC of course)

Who wouldnt pay £10 for an update containing HYDRA, INSURGENT x2,, VALKYRIE, SAVAGE, TECHNICAL, KURUMA x2 if it meant you could have them in game without investing a sh*t load of time grinding..... truth be told i'd have given £5 for the buzzard instead of spending 18 hours + (roughly £120 at national minimum wage) on it.

[BondageKitty]

I doubt it happens. What will more likely happen is they release single player DLC and vehicles, guns and clothing in that DLC can only be bought and used by people that own the story DLC. That is if they don't make that stuff free for Online.

[Chloroform]

If any of the paid dlc were like the free updates we got? NO, hell no. So far all we got in these updates were sh*t. So if "paid dlc" was filled with the same, I'd pass. Besides the way online is ran, I'm glad updates are free.

[Zanje]

case by case basis, depends on the content of the dlc. but id gladly pay for more activities, map extensions, etc

[JohnDoe7125539271]

The only thing i would buy is a map expansion

 

Like North Yankton or Liberty City

 

Exactly THIS.

 

Wouldn't bother about clothing, cars, or whatever... but map expansions? Hell yes!

[Phyxsius-]

Paid DLC would make large amounts of GTA$ readily available to all (assuming R* up the payouts), making all players rich enough to spend as much as they want. Since I started getting free cars, my play style has changed so much... ammo expenses, contact expenses etc dont matter anymore. Ill buy guns just to give to a low level at the start of a session just because i can. Ill blow up my PV and ring up for another, because 10k insurance is immaterial compared to the hassle of driving far enough away from my pv to order another. I definately dont miss grinding missions with minimal ammo expenses for 18+ hours IRL just to save up for a buzzard (which was my last purchase with legit $$)

 

Also think about it this way. HEISTS have been designed by R* to be a long winded affair so even the most competent players struggle to earn more than 200k/hour. If i paid £10 for the heists update instead of having the current shark card system, i believe that the heists themselves would have been designed to be a lot quicker to complete e.i an option to 'continue heist' without going back to freeroam (like the current voting screen), and a high end apartment in Sandy Shores to save a 5 min drive at the start of the setups.

 

Basically what im saying is for the last 4 months, i've been able to play the way i want to, without caring how much i spend... BUT im labelled as a cheat for it. By buying the DLC and scrapping Shark Cards, people can legitimately play GTA how it should be played, without restriction. (unless you cant afford the DLC of course)

 

Who wouldnt pay £10 for an update containing HYDRA, INSURGENT x2,, VALKYRIE, SAVAGE, TECHNICAL, KURUMA x2 if it meant you could have them in game without investing a sh*t load of time grinding..... truth be told i'd have given £5 for the buzzard instead of spending 18 hours + (roughly £120 at national minimum wage) on it.

I would not call you cheater, but I would call you stupid and careless. I`ll explain:

 

Our wonderful EA publisher introduced microtransaction gambling. Long story short it would be the equivalent of: "You are paying 10 euro for a box which gives you a CHANCE of getting any of the cars you listed above. More often than not, you would be stuck with crap that you can get effortlessly anyway". Not a problem in itself, BUT they also made ALL THEIR GAMES grind heavy, to make sure that spending money looks really damn appealing versus the amount of effort you need to spend to get somewhere. This problem is even more prevalent in their latest game, Dragon Age Inquisition, where you can get weapons for online EXCLUSIVELY by gambling - the equivalent for GTA 6 is this: "Ammu-Nation sells boxes that give a CHANCE for a minigun" - which sometimes costs millions and you are not guaranteed to get it, and the 500 pistols you got in the meantime aren`t doing you any good - yes, you couldn`t buy ANY weapon directly in such a system. Of course, GTA 50 will ALSO be a grindy crap, to make the buying of "boxes" really appealing, if they would decide to go that route.

 

You can see the results of microtransactions anyway, by how grindy the missions are right now. And it will only get worse the more microtransaction options you will get, because the scope of the game shifts from "let`s make it fun for the player" to "let`s find new ways to make the player work harder, so he chooses the easy way of buying stuff with real cash". You are literally buying the bullet that will kill you at one point in the future, by supporting microtransactions.

Edited April 14, 2015 by Phyxsius-

[Elric_Francis92]

Just curious as to how many of you guys would buy GTA Online DLCs.

For example, they could release a clothing pack for $2 or $3, or even DLCs we've been getting like the High Life.

Would you guys be willing to pay? I know I would be.

 

Well beach bum was a purchasable dlc on last gen and I bought it but Rockstar tends to give a lot more bang for the buck then that small stuff.

[US Marshal1911]

Yep, in a heartbeat

[saintsrow]

No way would I buy a DLC consisting only of vehicles, clothes, better apartment etc. No way.

 

However, for a new story DLC (with new protag) on the scale of TBOGT, yes. And for map expansions, totally yes.

[DoubleDropUk]

 

Paid DLC would make large amounts of GTA$ readily available to all (assuming R* up the payouts), making all players rich enough to spend as much as they want. Since I started getting free cars, my play style has changed so much... ammo expenses, contact expenses etc dont matter anymore. Ill buy guns just to give to a low level at the start of a session just because i can. Ill blow up my PV and ring up for another, because 10k insurance is immaterial compared to the hassle of driving far enough away from my pv to order another. I definately dont miss grinding missions with minimal ammo expenses for 18+ hours IRL just to save up for a buzzard (which was my last purchase with legit $$)

 

Also think about it this way. HEISTS have been designed by R* to be a long winded affair so even the most competent players struggle to earn more than 200k/hour. If i paid £10 for the heists update instead of having the current shark card system, i believe that the heists themselves would have been designed to be a lot quicker to complete e.i an option to 'continue heist' without going back to freeroam (like the current voting screen), and a high end apartment in Sandy Shores to save a 5 min drive at the start of the setups.

 

Basically what im saying is for the last 4 months, i've been able to play the way i want to, without caring how much i spend... BUT im labelled as a cheat for it. By buying the DLC and scrapping Shark Cards, people can legitimately play GTA how it should be played, without restriction. (unless you cant afford the DLC of course)

 

Who wouldnt pay £10 for an update containing HYDRA, INSURGENT x2,, VALKYRIE, SAVAGE, TECHNICAL, KURUMA x2 if it meant you could have them in game without investing a sh*t load of time grinding..... truth be told i'd have given £5 for the buzzard instead of spending 18 hours + (roughly £120 at national minimum wage) on it.

I would not call you cheater, but I would call you stupid and careless. I`ll explain:

 

Our wonderful EA publisher introduced microtransaction gambling. Long story short it would be the equivalent of: "You are paying 10 euro for a box which gives you a CHANCE of getting any of the cars you listed above. More often than not, you would be stuck with crap that you can get effortlessly anyway". Not a problem in itself, BUT they also made ALL THEIR GAMES grind heavy, to make sure that spending money looks really damn appealing versus the amount of effort you need to spend to get somewhere. This problem is even more prevalent in their latest game, Dragon Age Inquisition, where you can get weapons for online EXCLUSIVELY by gambling - the equivalent for GTA 6 is this: "Ammu-Nation sells boxes that give a CHANCE for a minigun" - which sometimes costs millions and you are not guaranteed to get it, and the 500 pistols you got in the meantime aren`t doing you any good - yes, you couldn`t buy ANY weapon directly in such a system. Of course, GTA 50 will ALSO be a grindy crap, to make the buying of "boxes" really appealing, if they would decide to go that route.

 

You can see the results of microtransactions anyway, by how grindy the missions are right now. And it will only get worse the more microtransaction options you will get, because the scope of the game shifts from "let`s make it fun for the player" to "let`s find new ways to make the player work harder, so he chooses the easy way of buying stuff with real cash". You are literally buying the bullet that will kill you at one point in the future, by supporting microtransactions.

 

Im confused, i don't support microtransactions at all.

 

I think its crazy that in GTA I should be concerned about my expenses in game. Money glitches wouldnt matter if we paid a few pounds/ dollars so that the item(s) included in the DLC became 'in stock' in the relevant shop/ website. (which we could then buy with our billions we earned from gambling in the casino, or PvP pink slip racing etc which basically doesn't exist because skilled players will earn too much $/h). So by making money free, and content paid, this would give R* more time to build good quality content, with less restrictive gameplay.

[Phyxsius-]

Im confused, i don't support microtransactions at all.

 

I think its crazy that in GTA I should be concerned about my expenses in game. Money glitches wouldnt matter if we paid a few pounds/ dollars so that the item(s) included in the DLC became 'in stock' in the relevant shop/ website. (which we could then buy with our billions we earned from gambling in the casino, or PvP pink slip racing etc which basically doesn't exist because skilled players will earn too much $/h). So by making money free, and content paid, this would give R* more time to build good quality content, with less restrictive gameplay.

I get it now.

 

It was discussed previously that GTA 4 was just a "Battle Royale" and this game wanted to be more than a full lobby duking it out at the airport. It succeeded up to a point, and part of it being spending for consumables - this way you can`t RPG / C4 / Minigun spam all day long. At some point you`ll run outta cash, so you`ll need to earn some.

 

However, at this point I am at 120 euro spent on one game - one PS3 and one PC. This is considerably more than what you pay on serious AA titles, which give very good online gaming. I FULLY expect Rockstar to deliver on what I already paid and not try and slap me in the face by asking for more, like that darn gipsy at the street corner.

[EMAGDN1M]

they said cash cards exist so that they DONT have paid DLC.

[Chloroform]

Yes. I have a job.

Or you're just foolish with money. Also implying people without jobs don't spend money. I think someone is to full of themself.

they said cash cards exist so that they DONT have paid DLC.

You believe that story? The money Rockstar makes vs the amount of content we got so far doesn't add up. Besides most of the content we got in these "free updates" were in the coding. That tells us a different story. This gave Rockstar a reason to charge real cash for fake. Edited April 14, 2015 by Chloroform

[Not A Nice Person]

Unless the clothes are really good, NO rofl.

If it was a map expansion then take my money tbh.

[DoubleDropUk]

Granted. I cant share the same view as I paid £13 last summer for a 2nd hand ps3 copy.

 

Think about it though, with a working casino, large $ betting on impromptu races AND 1v1 DMs, bigger bounties, and god knows what else they could add for us to do.. theres gonna be a whole lot less time to spam rockets all day because we will get new stuff, instead of hotfixes and patches every other week. Im sure most of this would have all been included already if it wasnt for the cash card system.

[Scaife13]

No I wouldn't. I worked it out a few weeks ago, I've spent £60 on the special edition for the Xbox 360, £40 on the Xbox One, and roughly £300~ in cash cards. So no, Rockstar has had enough money from me already.

[DoubleDropUk]

No I wouldn't. I worked it out a few weeks ago, I've spent £60 on the special edition for the Xbox 360, £40 on the Xbox One, and roughly £300~ in cash cards. So no, Rockstar has had enough money from me already.

 

If you bought the DLC INSTEAD of Shark Cards, do you think you would still have spent £300 in the last 18 months?

[Chloroform]

 

 

No I wouldn't. I worked it out a few weeks ago, I've spent £60 on the special edition for the Xbox 360, £40 on the Xbox One, and roughly £300~ in cash cards. So no, Rockstar has had enough money from me already.

If you bought the DLC INSTEAD of Shark Cards, do you think you would still have spent £300 in the last 18 months?

Only a fool would have paid for every update we got so far.

[Scaife13]

 

No I wouldn't. I worked it out a few weeks ago, I've spent £60 on the special edition for the Xbox 360, £40 on the Xbox One, and roughly £300~ in cash cards. So no, Rockstar has had enough money from me already.

 

If you bought the DLC INSTEAD of Shark Cards, do you think you would still have spent £300 in the last 18 months?

 

I'm guessing R* would charge atleast £30 per DLC. I'm too lazy to work it out, but it sounds like I would have spent more.

[Loki_The_Coyote]

if they made single player DLC to the equivalent of TBGT and LATD from 4, with new vehicles and weapons that would carry into online, I'd pay... no more than $15-20 tho..

especially if it included a much needed map expansion.

[Chamber53DV]

Just curious as to how many of you guys would buy GTA Online DLCs.

For example, they could release a clothing pack for $2 or $3, or even DLCs we've been getting like the High Life.

Would you guys be willing to pay? I know I would be.

No, I wouldnt. I stand by the same reasons I gave when this question was mentioned in another thread.

[H8GodMode]

Depends what it is. If it were an expansion like TBoGT or TL&TD then yeah. For a couple cars, guns and some clothes updates we've had so far, no.

This. I would pay for a new expansion into the game. Most likely if they added San Fierro island connected to the original SA, and added a new storyline with new characters for story mode, I would pay.

I would not pay for cars/clothes/more missions or heists or anything like that especially if it don't include a map expansion...IMO they owe us San Fierro and Las Vegas (forget the gta name of it). Also things like lorises w hydraulics and things they seemed to left out of the game. Hopefully they were left out for a reason (ie they are coming in real DLC)

Edited April 14, 2015 by H8GodMode

[DunkMujunk]

I would not buy GTAO DLC at this point. I most likely would have bought it if R* went with DLC from square 1.

 

Personally i'm pretty much done with DLC in any game. I think its disgusting the direction games have gone now that so many consoles are connected to the internet. I'm not saying I would never buy DLC again, but it is going to take something special.

 

I say go back to subscriptions. If the game is fun and deep, and the developer maintains it and at least pretends to listen to the community sometimes, I would have no problem throwing 5, 10, 15 dollars per month at a game. I would be lying if I said I knew why companies have moved away from the sub base method of making money, but for me it seems to be the best way.

 

I refuse to pay for-

Map packs

Cosmetic items

In game money

Weapons

Anything that remotely resembles Destiny DLC

Fatality Tokens (apparently the new Mortal Kombat game allows you to execute a fatality by pressing only 2 buttons.......I think its $5 for 30 tokens)

etc etc

[CarimboHanky]

i'd pay for some dlc stuff like clothes or gun packs.

 

also the content better be free, paying for a pack with real money only to pay 30-50k in game for the items is not cool

[Ido]

Yes. For a reasonable amount.

[jgnum01]

definitely would as long as it doesn't separate the community

 

[fiebru787]

Yep r* can take my money if they release a pack like other games do.

For example:

Drift pack = three cars(s13,liftback sprinter trueno,s14)some t shirt and things like that.

 

Or a house only avalible to buy whith real cash. R* can make money doing this but idk why they dont.

Edited April 14, 2015 by fiebru787

[statistic]

No.

 

I'm still wearing the same clothes I bought in December 2013, and my car situation is doing fine. More maps would be cool, but not sure how that could work as a paid DLC for online, it would have to separate everyone up in different servers which wouldn't be a good thing. Single player map expansion DLC maybe. But even then, probably not. I have not touched single player since starting online.

[Troye]

If the clothes were well modeled and done properly, yes. Same goes with car packs.

[LBCWorldWide]

You damn right. Money ain't no thang, but a chicken wang...

 

... wait...that ain't right.

 

LBC