Article content continued

DLC has proven a great way for game makers to capitalize on finished work. Rather than building a new game from scratch, they can simply add to what they’ve already created, using existing play mechanics and in some cases many of the same assets. It costs less to make, and has a built-in audience of existing fans.

Players stand to gain, too. Unlike buying a game they haven’t yet played, there’s little risk in DLC; they’re just getting more of something they know they already enjoy. Patient consumers are even better off. In many cases publishers release so-called “ultimate” editions of slightly older games that bundle together the base game and all DLC at a discounted price – usually substantially less than what the original game cost when it was brand new and lacked any add-ons.

But, as The Wall Street Journal suggests, the flip side of this coin is that it could eventually impact the development and release of new games. In fact, it might even be happening already.

There’s some evidence to suggest that people who keep playing the same game, content to spend $20 or $30 here or there to grow its scope and features, may be less inclined to purchase more new games. And not just those made by competing companies, but potentially sequels to their favourite games. Last year’s Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare, for example, saw a dip in sales compared to other editions of Activision’s popular war franchise, and it could be because series fans were content to keep playing the previous instalment, Call of Duty: Black Ops III.

There’s no right or wrong in any of this, of course. Gamers will vote with their wallets and the majority will get what they want: more new games or more DLC. But the next time you find your thumb hovering over a button to purchase the next add-on for your current favourite game, you may want to consider whether that purchase will keep you from buying a new one – and whether or not you care if it does.