Why I'm against purely weapon DLC, what DLC usually adds are the base, the model, and the mechanics for the mods to work with like the Minutemen gun requires you to charge several times with the spinning animation and things like that. Many mods that add creatures and weapons are all using the base models in the game.

I personally don't see the problem with adding a weapon DLC. If you don't like it, don't buy it. It's that simple.

Really not understanding the backlash here. I have yet to see a bad weapons dlc, that and they rarely if ever take away from the creation of new bigger DLC. Adding weapons doesn't take much effort hell the amount of weapon mods on the nexus proves that.

That and they are already showing that they will be doing minor mods like the second DLC they have comming out.

Also to the idiot who thinks it will delay the creation kit, uh stuff like that would more then likely be a higher priority, The only thing that could delay the creation kit is them finding some heavy ass bugs with it that need to be fixed, that and they seem to want to release it with the hardcoe update.

yep you are not that smart.

First of all each weapon in the list above with acception of the p90 is a unique function, the chinese AR has a secondary feature, the pump shotgun is a pump weapon, the grenade launcher will that speaks for its self. (Seriously grenade launchers are a really cool tactical weapon)

Also you do realize that is is highly likely that the two "filler" DLC's are something they are making to tide people over, here is the thing about filler DLC they take little to no effort to make and allow a team to tide over a fan base as they work on the bigger and better things.

EDIT: think my lack of understanding for the backlash is cause by the fact I have worked with a few game devs (endi games rock) and I know how little the work load is on making weapons.

Of course if we don't like those microtransactiony DLC's we don't have to purchase them.

The point is we don't want to be nickle and dimed for things that used to be added for free in patches and only expansion packs are worth purchasing.

If you have disposable income to spend like crazy then fine, but don't impose this on people who don't.

While I do have lots of money to spend I refuse to spend money on DLC's that adds one new weapon for $1 dollar (USD) or whatever. It makes the video game developers or video game development companies look greedy.

Bethesda Game Studios already got called out for the Horse Armor DLC's for The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion.

Stuff like this should be added for free in patches to reward the loyal paying customers.

Every DLC that i can remember for the Fallout games (and I really just mean 3 and NV here) has included new weapons.

yes but most of thoughs DLC's the weapons are limited to their area, you may be able to get ammos in the main area but never the guns. That is really bad to me, what is the point of adding weapons if you will only ever see them either A in the players hands or B in a DLC that you will likely play once and done or play purely to get one weapon in it then leave.

It doesn't matter we or some of us don't want Bethesda Game Studios to bring back the Horse Armor DLC's.

And again, all of that is pointless filler.

The amount of backlash the very idea of a weapons dlc has gotten should tell you that most of us hate the idea. We want actual content, not DLCs that nickle and dime us and certainly not a dlc filled with weapons that most people will only use for about five minutes.

ha, ha, ha, the horse armor [censored] was a cosmetic thing and something many companies to worse then and get praise for (see f2p) a weapon DLC is a completely different ballpark.

I don't care if a weapon DLC is different and I don't play Free to Play (F2P) video games ever. I did play like two of them and stopped playing them after one moth over 10 years ago.

As it stands I'm against being nickle and dimed and I will fight against it.

Items are fillers which should incorporated as part of bigger DLCs, not sold as separate DLC. People want actual content, not pointless filler.

A weapon DLC would be another "horse armor". That's not an opinion, it's a freaking fact.

It's not just weapons fallout 4 needs it's also clothing apparel to, and i'm not talking about actual armor although that would be nice too. There's a severe lack of thin layer clothes like the vault suits or BoS Uniforms i wish this game had far more variety in that

Keep in mind all content not connected to the main story is filler.

That big dlc you want is basicly just a large amount of filler with a slight story.

We want only Far Harbor sized expansion packs to be sold.

Yeah, no. Filler is adding a dlc focused on items like weapons, clothing, ect. An expansion that adds a massive landmass with new quests, characters, story, and more is actual content.

Try again.

You do realize that is near impossible.

The reason large DLC content is rare is teh fact that expansion pack level content is more or less making a whole new game. Making large amounts of stuff like that is well not a good idea, first of all it will lead to budget problems (both time and money wise) as you will eventually hit a point the game is obsolete.

Large DLC is something that should be intersperced with smaller DLC packs, like we have in this first pack.

Keep in mind from a dev stand point.

you have 2 dlc's which are quick makes they do not require much time, money or any heavy changes just simple things to hold people over, you then have the major one. This is a DLC+expansion set.

With that and the fact this is just the first of many cycles for this. (likes 2 or 3) we can expect atleast one major and 2 more filler dlc's

I hate to tell you this but filler dlc's like this are sort of needed they are the tide over parts.

also @Tlord only insulting you, cause dam you are not taht smart.

EDIT: you want proof of why I say large DLC is a heavy time problem , look at the far harber screenshot on the left side of the dock is a floating roof.

Actually it's been proven for Bethesda Game Studios developed video games that selling Far Harbor size expansion packs is good for their business.

When people read about a new expansion pack that they will release for sale they go and instantly purchase it. While there are some people who do want to purchase the microtransaction type DLC's. More people prefer to purchase the expansion packs.

missing the point of that post, in the modern world do to the work load of a large expansion type DLC, you need to make micro DLC's or filler DLC's for budget reasons or else you might just run out of money for development half way through the DLC and have to cut 90% of it.

Nailed it.

People want actual content, not fillers. Even the smaller DLCs announced for Fallout 4 are not what many people expected and they're gigantic compared to the theoretical weapon DLC.

--

It doesn't matter how many weapons or armor it added, it would still piss people off. What part of we don't want filler dlc do you not understand?

Not likely, piss you off probibly but there are many people who would still buy it cause guess what there are many people that want stuff like that.

Not true at all going by Bethesda Game Studios history with the Horse Armor DLC's.

Which is the only example people seem to have, despite them releasing at least one low content DLC per game. ITs like people are stuck on one bit of the past that is laughable when looking at modern stuff.

I see a lot of people were not happy that Bethesda Game Studios released for sale the Hearthfire DLC for The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim instead of releasing it for free in a patch.

Already done.

If you want to see what the reaction would be just look around. The announcement of the first two dlcs has already caused backlash and what you're proposing would be even less content than those two.

If you need older evidence just look at all the angry reactions to Skyrim's Hearthfire dlc.