Naughty Dog's Greedy DLC Plan & Why Fans Ask For Free Maps

This is the FULL Story as to why fans are upset with Naughty Dog's greedy DLC structuring with the Last of Us. In this blog, I outline why this is more than "just cosmetics", what the actual issue is, and why Naughty Dog has been getting a bad rep amongst the MP fans for how they've chosen to handle their consumer transactions.

Table of Contents:

1) The Initial Article (And the Issue I Have as a Multiplayer Fan)
2) The First Fault: Paid Weapons and Boosters
3) The Excuses People Make (And Why They are Wrong)
4) A Clarification
5) Why Fans are Angry (and Justified for it)
6) Why the Maps Should be Free
7) Paid Maps and the Promise of a Single, United Player Community
8) The Fifth Excuse: "It's Just Business"
9) Conclusion
10) The Purpose of this Blog

1) The Initial Article (And the Issue I Have as a Multiplayer Fan)

Everyone has heard by now about a disgruntled minority who have been criticizing Naughty Dog for releasing new cosmetic micro transaction DLC. And by the larger community, specifically here on N4G, this has been met with a quick defense of Naughty Dog. “It's just cosmetic”, “it supports the company”, “it was never promised to be in the Season Pass”. Gamespot has also run such an article.

All these responses are reasonable. But I feel that the recent outcry of Naughty Dog's DLC hasn't been given the proper spotlight. There IS a backlash, and there IS a justification for it. Naughty Dog IS being very atrocious with their DLC, and it has nothing to do with cosmetics. This blog post will shine light on what matters: Naughty Dog's greedy decision to hurt the loyal fanbase of their Last of Us Multiplayer.

There are four kinds of DLC out for the Remastered version:

1) Cosmetic. 2) Boosters. 3) Weapons. 4) Maps.

For the majority who viewed the article on sites like N4G and Gamespot, there is an incredibly misinformed focus on (1). Yes, cosmetic DLC harms no one, and is a good way to support the developers. However, in that same article run on N4G, there was mention of boosters, weapons, and maps, and the N4G community has chosen to completely ignore that, or brush it under the table.

2) The First Fault: Paid Weapons and Boosters

A few facts:

-Naughty Dog released the Last of Us on PS3 and sold 3 separate map packs. Additionally, they sold some boosters (think “perks” from Call of Duty) and weapons.

Most people were fine with this. Like usual, a multiplayer game is supported with DLC, which is usually paid for individually or through season passes. This hurts the community greatly as communities are split, but more often than not, people who support the game tend to buy the DLC.

-Then The Last of Us Remastered happens. What is promised is a unified player pool: all DLCs are together and this improves matchmaking (as you don't have to wait long in a smaller player pool), and there is less lag (since more players= more people close to you).

But the Remastered edition chose to hide the boosters and weapons of the PS3 version behind a paywall. On day one, there are paid advantages that some players have that others don't. This is a disgusting thing to do, and is incredibly cheap on Naughty Dog's part. There is an outcry when Capcom hides on-disc DLC, and Naughty Dog's case is worse: they are recharging for old content that they already introduced on PS3. Now, the justification here is that PS3 buyers have access to these items for free on PS4. However, new fans are screwed: they are stuck having to purchase this content.

3) The Excuses People Make (And Why They are Wrong)

Excuse #1:
“Those boosters and weapons are weak anyway. There is no disadvantage”. This is simply not true. Anyone who has played knows otherwise.

The silenced rifle is a pretty great power weapon. It's like the assault rifle (which is free for everyone) except that it's silent, so you wont show up on radar. This is a massive disadvantage for those who do not purchase the content. The Enforcer is also pretty powerful. So much so that it is a common and popular weapon of many DLC holders. There is even a booster that overrides another booster: "Covert Ops 3" hides users from getting marked and is available to everyone, but a new booster that you must buy called "Damage Marker" overrides this.

Excuse #2:
“Everyone has access to DLC through Preset loadouts. Use those if you don't want to pay”

There are preset loadouts which give you access to use all the new DLC, but you cannot make your own. On the plus side, ND removed the Level 3 versions of some of these new boosters and combined them into the level 2 versions, which are accessible in the preset loadouts. Basically, the preset loadouts give you access to the paywall content at its best form. 

Still, it's a dumb thing to do, because it is not cosmetic, meaning you screw the player balance from day one, regardless of how insignificant you may think it is. For example, the assault rifle is a pretty good power weapon to use, but the silenced auto rifle for the most part does the same job with the added benefit of remaining off the radar. This is a good advantage to have, but you seemingly must pay for it.

Further, the Specter (silenced power weapon) costs the same in-game points as the Assault Rifle. Even further, those who pay can customize their own loadout to earn points faster, or maximize their efficiency with the Specter loadout. Those who do not pay must rely on the one preset loadout.

Excuse #3:
“COD and Battlefield charge players for guns!”

COD has so many weapons that the DLC weapons don't become a significant advantage over the other. With the LoU DLC, there is at least one weapon that is a silenced power weapon, which there is no equivalent to in the base game. There is another power weapon that acts as a grenade launcher. There is no equivalent to a grenade launcher in the base game

The uniqueness of Last of Us means that every gun matters. When the DLC hides useful guns behind a paywall, this becomes a problem.

Excuse #4:
"It's not Pay 2 Win, so it's not a big deal"

It is not pay 2 win the same way other Pay 2 Win games are. However, surely, some rounds will be won by the fact that some have the freedom to customize their own loadout to have the playstyle they want, while others don't. There is enough in the new content that outclasses the default content, and by definition, this is a paid advantage.

It should have been free, and that's the bottom line. If they wanted to nickel and dime us, they could have charged for more class loadout slots and a variety of taunts and cosmetics. But once it affects gameplay even in the slightest, it affects everyone.

4) A Clarification

No one has a problem with cosmetics. But in combination with paid weapons, paid boosters, and paid new maps, it becomes really apparent that Naughty Dog is nickeling and diming a loyal fanbase.

People who ignore this and say "it's just cosmetics" are only looking at one side of the issue. Day one paid boosters and weapons is nonsense. It is old content being charged for again. It doesn't matter if it's not part of the season pass. This is a Remastering of a year old game, and for them to charge again for old DLC is really dirty.

I know that if Activision announced tomorrow that the next Call of Duty game hid some perks behind a paywall, on day one, there would be a universal disgust for such a practice. This is no different. The only difference is that Last of Us MP is nowhere near as popular, and therefore, won't get the same attention.

5) Why Fans are Angry (and Justified for it)

Let's suppose you can ignore day one paid boosters and weapon. The ultimate pushback from fans comes from Naughty Dog promising new DLC in the form of 2 (yes, just 2) new maps. These maps are not free. But they absolutely should be.

This is the straw that broke the camel's back. This is what the community is truly in an uproar about. If you think it's just a vocal minority complaining about cosmetics, you are misinformed.
Map packs hurt the whole community and goes against the advertised "united player pool" Naughty Dog advertised for the Remastering.

Matchmaking is already bad enough as it is. Naughty Dog continues to struggle to fix the matchmaking, that in most cases, does not match you with any players. And it's going to get worse with a community split. There is an irony in that Naughty Dog is working to fix how long matchmaking takes, only to break apart the community again by bringing out new map DLC.

All this for 2 maps.

6) Why the Maps Should be Free

This section is taken from the PS Forums, where a petition is growing to make maps free. I've copied and pasted a perfect summary of what happens when you charge for a map pack, in a Remastering that promised a unified player pool:

"Fragmentation of the TLOU community; this means there are more (unnecessary) sub-playlists which divides the community.

Longer matchmaking times: Lol this one is already bad enough, I won't even bother here.

More lag: Since the player pool is divided, that means the probability of you finding players from your region decreases and so creating a very laggy MP experience.

Less map variety: So far, it seems that there are going to be 2 maps in the next DLC drop. To create a playlist consisiting of just 2 maps is just awful. It will get very repititive really quickly and later down the lifecycle of TLOU, there won't be many players in that pool.

Party dominating: We all know how so many laggy parties ruin the experience of the paid DLC maps in TLOU PS3. New players are very unlikely to buy the new paid maps, which means lots of parties in matchmaking. Playing solo in that case is a lost case."

(Credit to PSN User: Shadow-Man_4). See comments for citation*

Fans do not want to pay for new maps, when the initial sell of the multiplayer was a unified player pool, where matchmaking was faster, with less lag, and more players to play against.

7) Paid Maps and the Promise of a Single, United Player Community

Naughty Dog got away with charging for boosters and guns (selling old content in a Remastering just feels like an awful thing to do, regardless of whether or not it was included in the Season Pass). There should be no paid advantages on day one of a purchase, but sadly there is. I understand that Naughty Dog didn't technically advertise it to be free, so, there's little room to complain. While this is still an upsetting choice, most people can't argue with the fact that Naughty Dog never advertised otherwise.

Paid maps on the other hand are something else. They hurt everybody, they hurt matchmaking, they hurt what the game was advertised to be: a complete player pool. Clearly, it's a case of pushing your luck, as people are fed up with what will happen to the community.

Even IF people are willing to pay for the maps, they are still hurt by poor matchmaking, lag, and a split community. This benefits no one, and all of this is for 2 maps. It's not worth the destruction.

This is why fans are petitioning for the maps to be free. While most ignore the boosters and weapon DLC, and while more yet are okay with cosmetic DLC, fans are adamant that, for the sake of the community, paid maps should be free.

8) The Fifth Excuse: It's Just Business

"It's just business. Naughty Dog needs support. Maps are not free to make!"

This excuse fails to acknowledge the situation here and is just used to lazily excuse the problem with map DLC for this game. It is a vague and entirely meaningless phrase. Business is done multiple ways, and there are many reasonable points made by the fans as to why this is a bad path for ND to take. There are lots of businesses that profit by treating their fans with respect. This is not what's happening here.

There are more sensible ways for a AAA studio backed by an entity like Sony to make money, and they don't involve hurting the community that supports them like this.

9) Conclusion:

Fans are upset. It is not a simple case of “it's just cosmetics”. The cosmetics are priced at a really high price, but this alone is not an issue. It is the combination of paid perks, paid weapons, and paid maps that Naughty Dog's whole approach just becomes shameless.

While I can pass on cosmetics, I can't stand by and see people misrepresent the DLC situation by ignoring the rest of The Last of Us's transactions.

10) The Purpose of this Blog:

A Remastering isn't meant to gouge even more out of the players in a way that continues to fracture the game. It is meant to be a final culmination of the game at its best and most ultimate state. Naughty Dog has not done this with the multiplayer. While most can ignore the cosmetic DLC, it seems really strange to me that anyone would defend what Naughty Dog has done with the rest of the game. While it seems to be a technical truth that Naughty Dog never promised free booster/weapon DLC, it seems to be in poor taste to charge for on-disc, old content.

Still, I am sure that there are those who will defend Naughty Dog. I had always assumed gamers stood united against harmful DLC, and I assume also that most who saw the article of Last of Us's DLC were misinformed. This blog was meant to clarify why the hardcore fans are upset, and to address those who simply think that the DLC is harmless, or that the vocal minority are complaining simply about cosmetics.

-Alpha