I hope the first DLC continues the story, making it so you don't die and can continue on.

I hope it makes you extra dead and deletes your saved games from your hard drive.

I agree with SimpsonFly and Lucid.

An expansion is the only way to build an interesting subplot within an existing game world. DLCs often attempt to have a storyline, but never have enough depth, and are ultimately only to expand the PC's arsenal. Case in point: Chinese Stealth Suit from Op Anchorage.

fallout 3 dlc's were mediocre, the pitt was the best, small dlc's for a fallout game don't really fit in with the rest of the gameworld, i prefer one or two pretty large shivering isle type expansions, even PL wasn't that big, half of the area was water, it had no towns, no settlements, no roads, no little stores or gas stations here and there, no people doing anything, the enemies were just bullet sponges, hillbillies, ghouls, moelrats and dogs mostly, PL didn't even have one large complex or building to explore or battle in, the CW had the capitol building, chryslus building, national archives, the roosavelt academy, red racer factory, statesman hotel, LOB enterprizes etc. ,lots of underground places to explore some of them fairly complex. so any dlc or expansion has to have at least a few settlements, it made no sense that PL had ferris wheel, bank and boardwalk but no people or towns or settlements, its easier to make swamp and water obviously so thats why i vote for 1 big expansion over 5 small dlc's. one large expansion will fit in with the game very well if its done right, the FO3 dlc's were ok but not all of em really connected with the main story or main map area very well. although the pitt was an exception, it was small but i think the best dlc for game immersion and atmosphere.

I vastly prefer expansions.

Bloodmoon OR Shivering Isles>all and any DLC for Fallout 3 combined, in my opinion.

If the DLC is good, why not both?

So your calling me an idiot?

You're*
:whistling:

What about a full-sized Downloadable expansion!?! :shrug:

That's what we'd get if an expansion was made, it would be on Steam after all :S

:cookie: well guys it looks like the votes are in, we're gettin an expansion :fallout:

DLC's can add some pretty cool stuff. I know one of my favorite DLC's was the Fighter's Stronghold for Oblivion. In that tense DLC > Expansion in the way that it adds something to the actual game world. Expansion > DLC in the sense of adding a big hunk of story, but it usually doesn't really make any impact on the actual game world like in Shivering Isles you have to go through some odd portal to get to and after you're done and leave the place nothing has changed in the actual game world.

Really not much to compare DLC are more for little cool tid-bits and Expansion for another huge gaming experience.

Also I've seen complaints about DLC's just being financially better for the company etc. So?!?! Who cares I would happily pay into Bethesda, etc. so they coud come out with more and more great things.

Neater.

If you have already completed the game 3 (or more) time (NCR/Leagion/None), completing it one more time is not really that appealing. So that leaves using a save game made after exploring all of the regular game, to play a DLC. The same goes for and expansion, picking up where the game left off, it does not add replay value to the rest of the game.
In both cases, our charters most likely are at the level cap already. And that means the only character development you can get are perks or new equipment.

So I would prefer a new separate campaign. Imagine if Beheads had taken all the zones, new graphics, and new game mechanics that wend in to all the DLC’s for FO3 and instead put it all in to The Pit. But rather then have the PC come in from the capital wasteland, you would have started out with a new level 1 charter that had recently become a slave.
It would almost have been like a new game.

I'd prefer a nicely crafted Expansion that has had a lot of work an love put into it over a bunch of DLC packs anytime. :tops:

Look at dragon age, so many DLC's with not much content. The expansion is good though.

It was decent but way over priced.

Why not just do it more like a mix of Oblivion and FO3?3-5 KOTN/Pitt sized DLC and then one big expansion at the end.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-08-16-bethesdas-todd-howard-interview?page=3

(This is of course a Bethesda employees opinion, and if Obsidian is creating the DLC's then I guess this quote doesn't mean much.)

I'd like a dlc.

Point lookout sized dlc`s are good. It gave good solid 10+hour gameplay.

YEAAAAH! Im sure we will get that area 51 with aliens! WOOHOO! :celebration: :foodndrink: Cant wait to get flying in a alien battleship and blast every town in mojave into ashes with its death ray gun! :woot: :intergalactic:

Area 51 is probably going to be a DLC for sure lol

I don't care about little DLCs. All they do is add a few quests and overpowered weapons.

I'd really like them to go with an expansion instead of few few-hour questpacks. The talk about having to wait too long - that Bethesda told as the reason for not doing an expansion - to me, feels like backwards thinking as DLCs don't really put up all that much exitement, and they are over in so short time that one feels the experience really wasn't worth the money.

If all DLC's they create are like Point Lookout (I'd prefer that they be a little bigger though) then I could accept it but no more one way run and gun dungeon crawlers or Broken Steels.

But I'd like an expansion as well.

Agreed. Point Lookout was great and easily the best DLC of the lot. I would prefer they not make more DLC like Mothership Zeta or Operation Anchorage. They were as linear as a Super Mario side scrolling platform game. The Pitt, while having a great atmosphere, also gave me no reason to go back there after completing the quest line. I think if they go with the formula that Point Lookout had then all DLCs they make for New Vegas will be great.