Quantcast
Nintendo Has Now Become Part of the DLC Problem - VGChartz
Nintendo Has Now Become Part of the DLC Problem

Nintendo Has Now Become Part of the DLC Problem - Article

by Evan Norris , posted on 15 June 2015 / 9,206 Views

Downloadable content (DLC) has existed on consoles in one form or another since the days of Sega's Dreamcast. But only during the seventh generation, particularly with Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, did DLC become a prominent fixture of the video game landscape. More and more video games shipped with "season passes" that promised additional content in the future or, in some extreme cases, with DLC on the disc and locked behind a paywall. The days of buying a complete game at launch were coming to an end.

http://www.vgchartz.com/articles_media/images/dlc-article-and-ninty-3.jpg

Nintendo, for the most part, avoided the DLC question altogether during the seventh generation. Whether by design or because it was made prohibitively difficult by its online infrastructure, Nintendo eschewed the cynical business practices that defined a large part of the generation: downloadable content, micro-transactions, and online passes, among others. If the company did offer DLC it was usually free. Thus Nintendo stood as a bulwark against overpriced and superfluous downloadable content.

That was then. Now, in 2015, the situation has changed. During the course of the eighth generation, Nintendo has made several questionable DLC moves that have realigned the Japanese gaming giant with its competitors. Those who criticized Sony, Microsoft, EA, Ubisoft, Warner Bros. and Activision for ugly DLC practices - myself included - can no longer defend Nintendo without being hypocritical. Right now, Nintendo is part of the problem.

New Super Luigi U

It hasn't been all bad. New Super Luigi U, a stand-alone expansion pack with altered levels, characters, and mechanics, represents the right way to handle DLC. It's a true expansion - one that operates independently of the original game. The problem is that now, two years later, New Super Luigi U is the exception, and the DLC in games like Fire Emblem: Awakening, Mario Golf: World Tour, Mario Kart 8, and, most recently, Splatoon and Super Smash Bros. is the rule. 

With Fire Emblem: Awakening, Nintendo made its boldest leap into the world of downloadable content. In the game consumers can gain access to a suite of paid DLC episodes (with accompanying characters) upon reaching a certain point in the storyline. A whole host of items, maps, and characters are locked behind a paywall in Awakening.

Fire Emblem DLC

The situation worsened with Mario Golf: World Tour, a game that locked 108 holes and four playable characters behind a paywall. The DLC was divided into three packs, the first of which, tellingly, was available at launch.

Next up was Mario Kart 8, which offered two DLC packs that could be purchased as a season pass or individually. The Mario Kart DLC, even among diehard detractors of DLC in general, got something of a free pass. For only $12, consumers could purchase six new characters, eight new karts, and 16 new stages. That's one fifth of the cost of the base game, which launched with 32 tracks. It was seen widely as DLC done right - rich in content and low in cost. Still, the additional tracks, characters, and stages could have been included on disc, had Nintendo planned more judiciously, or at the very least provided free to consumers who paid $60 expecting a complete package.

http://www.vgchartz.com/articles_media/images/dlc-article-and-ninty-2.png

Far worse than Mario Kart 8 DLC is the downloadable content in Super Smash Bros. for Wii U and 3DS. Nintendo announced today three new characters locked behind a paywall: Ryu of Street Fighter fame for $5.99; Fire Emblem's Roy, for $3.99; and Lucas from Mother 3 for $3.99. Individual costumes are also available, for $0.75 each. If consumers so choose, they can also purchase an extra stage for $1.99.

Ryu DLC

Nintendo's newest IP, Splatoon, is another guilty party when it comes to questionable DLC practices. Nintendo, in a strange business decision, opted to release Splatoon unfinished, with free DLC updates arriving throughout the summer. The fact that the updates are free is welcome; the fact that the game arrived without all its weapons and maps is not. Whether Nintendo rushed the game to store shelves to boost hardware sales or purposely withheld content to keep players invested in the game doesn't matter. Splatoon, at launch, was incomplete. 

Then there's the exclusive Splatoon gear locked behind challenges accessible only through Amiibo, Nintendo's NFC figures. Players who want to access the Amiibo area of Splatoon - yes, it's a permanent fixture of Inkopolis - should be prepared to drop $13-$35 for the privilege.

Splatoon DLC

I know many video game enthusiasts have become desensitized to all the ugly business tactics deployed by video game companies, but selling a game à la carte is wrong, no matter the company that does it. When you buy a game, you should expect a complete experience. Pieces of the game shouldn't be taken out and sold piecemeal, and consumers shouldn't be made to expect a steady stream of content to be released in the days, weeks, and months after their purchase of a game.

Once upon a time, Nintendo shared this philosophy. Now, with a more stable and secure online infrastructure and emboldened by the financial success of its earlier DLC experiments, Nintendo is drifting further toward other big-name publishers. Who would have guessed in 2010 that five years later Nintendo would be responsible for things like season passes, day one DLC, and unfinished games rushed to market? If things continue this way unabated, it's only a matter of time before Nintendo is, as Rudy Baylor says in The Rainmaker, "just another shark in the dirty water."


More Articles

76 Comments

ihatefatkatz (on 15 June 2015)

While I do think you have valid points, but clearly there are some misrepresentations and heavy spin made to strengthen your argument. The paragraph on Mario Kart 8 had me facepalm. I don't want to be rude, but that's some heavy spin mate.


Nuvendil (on 15 June 2015)

You said it yourself. You should expect a complete experience. What is a complete experience? IMO, if you can remove all PAID DLC and really find no holes, then that's a complete experience. If the DLC stacks on top and doesn't just plug holes, then the "complete experience" argument loses most (if not all) validity.


MatrosRx (on 16 June 2015)

That is what I thought when reading the article. Nintendo games have more content then their previous iteration, and now with the addition of DLC there's even more game to play. I can't think of a Nintendo DLC title that is a lesser game than the previous one in the series. Splatoon is arguably one of those titles, but considering the DLC has been all free, the point is moot.

The article reads like a knee-jerk reaction to the hefty price of the SSB DLC, and reads more like a forumer's rant than a piece of journalism.


  • 0
Machina (on 15 June 2015)

I think it's now clear they didn't do it last gen because it wasn't practicable. Fans thought it was for higher-minded reasons, were wrong, and so now feel a bit let down (whilst at the same time feeling a conflicting need to defend the company, and so come up with some excuses as to why it's actually kind of ok). But hey, if companies need to do these things in order for their games to be profitable then I find it hard to criticise them too much for doing so. I just won't be inclined to buy said games until the inevitable completed ('goty') edition comes out.


Anfebious (on 15 June 2015)

This shows the state of this industry. If videogame developers need to use these practices to attain profitability then something is not right.


  • +3
padib (on 16 June 2015)

I don't think that's true at all. People of all preferences complained about DLC last gen because it allowed companies to release unfinished games at full price.

Sure Nintendo wasn't ready to support DLC last gen, but now they are and nobody is complaining because we still get complete games, just as we are used to expecting from Nintendo pedigree.


  • 0
Cream147 (on 15 June 2015)

You've really gone off the rails by mentioning Mario Kart 8 here. I think a lot of us would say that if that is what the model of DLC looks like, then DLC is something that we are happy with as consumers. The game on launch day had exactly the amount of content you would expect from Mario Kart, and the DLC has served to give us something extra, meaning it has 1.5 time as many tracks as any Mario Kart before it (and the DLC was at what pretty much everyone agreed was a very fair price). Smash on the other hand is a total disaster with its DLC pricing scheme. If I wanted to get all the extra content on that, that would set me back pretty much the same as what the whole game costs. Meanwhile this only adds 4 characters, a couple of stages and a few costumes. Less content than the Mario Kart DLC for more price. This clearly IS Nintendo fleecing the customer. Splatoon is a different case altogether because the content is free. You seem to be ill-informed of the situation with Splatoon - all the content released thus far was actually already on the disc. It's not that Nintendo released an unfinished game - Nintendo just decided to hold back certain content to give people a reason to come back over the coming weeks. You can agree or disagree with that decision as you please, but at least be aware that that is what has happened - all this content was certainly finished already. If you come from a standpoint that DLC is always bad, then this article makes sense. However, in my opinion that's a heavily flawed premise. I don't mind spending a tenner extra on revitalising my Mario Kart experience. Rather than give your article a sensationalistic title, focus on the real problem here - that the Smash DLC is indeed disgraceful, and focus on that, rather than weakening your point by pretending that every piece of DLC Nintendo have released is somehow bad.


Skullwaker (on 15 June 2015)

I completely disagree that Mario Kart 8 is an example of DLC done wrong. The game was complete to begin with. The content was completed far after the launch of the game, and priced reasonably. I'm not sure what else they could've done other than delay the game, which I don't believe was necessary. As for Splatoon, it's free. And the amiibo gear is totally cosmetic, as the abilities tied to them can be found in the gear that's already in the game. The missions are just playing the story missions with a different weapon. I do, however, agree that Fire Emblem: Awakening and Mario Golf: World Tour did DLC wrong. I'm not sure how to take Smash just yet.


vkaraujo (on 15 June 2015)

I would say Smash is just OK. Not bad, but not amazing either.

I mostly agree with you. That said, i do believe Mario Gold was cheaper ($30) to compensate for the day 1 DLC, so it the end it was the normal cost of a 3DS game. I say it was OKish too.


  • +1
Ryng (on 15 June 2015)

Mario Kart 8 DLC are fine imo.


FarleyMcFirefly (on 15 June 2015)

Mario Kart 8, New Super Luigi U, and Hyrule Warriors are all examples of DLC done RIGHT! The prices of the Mii costumes in Smash are too expensive but for the new characters I feel like it is a fair price. I just hope it doesn't get worse. I wouldn't have a problem with Amiibo if they didn't have insane shortages.


Kallumsmarties (on 15 June 2015)

I agree with Fire Emblem and Mario Golf, but Mario Kart 8 I completely disagree with. It wasn't like it was cut content from disc and then made you pay for it. That was all made after the game launch and the on disc content on Mario Kart 8 is as much as any other recent Mario Kart game so when you buy Mario Kart 8, your getting a complete experience with DLC being extra. Same goes to Super Smash Bros really because you can easily enjoy the game without the DLC, I just think pricing is a bit money grabbing. 80% of what you mentioned are complete experiences in my opinion. I will agree that some things Nintendo's done DLC wise aren't good, but a large majority of the games they made DLC for is DLC done right. You don't like it then don't support it.


fluky-nintendy (on 15 June 2015)

They didn't do it during last gen because their hardware didn't allow. But they didn't waste any time from the moment the WiiU came out. I don't think it's something wrong to do, but the fans always support Nintendo for this while downplaying the other producers, which is wrong and an obnoxious attitude to have.


tripenfall (on 15 June 2015)

While it's certainly something to keep an eye on I have no gripes with some DLC coming out for a game months later that add to the already polished experience and make me want to play again. Mario Kart 8 and SSB are examples of this. What I don't like is day one DLC for things that should either be up to the player to earn or should have been included. Mortal Kombat X I'm looking at you! Letting people pay to do fatalities.... shame on you!!!


naruball (on 15 June 2015)

Amen! Of course you're gonna get attacked by hardcore fans, but that doesn't change the impossible-to-miss double standards. Hardcore fans will always find excuses for their favourite companies and will embrace policies they condemned when other companies enforced them. Certain people cried foul even when games like The Witcher 3 with insane content announced DLC. "Dlc is anti-consumer, thank God for Ninty caring for us gamers". "Releasing incomplete games is unacceptable". "Scores should reflect the game day one, not with the eventual updates". All these things changed as soon as Ninty released games that suffer from such things. At least, there are a few exceptions of people who had a problem with these practices and still do. Props to them for staying true to themselves and having real principles. As for me, I almost never buy DLC, no matter how much I like the game. I only do it to support small teams, or good games with low sales that may not get a sequel. For all the rest, I'd rather save my money and buy another game on sale.


Nuvendil (on 15 June 2015)

I defend any company's DLC when it is of some substance and the base game is already of satisfactory or above substance. Bethesda, Insomniac, Nintendo. Their games are of sufficient substance before the DLC is sold so there is no harm in skipping the DLC. And in most instances, the DLC content to price ratio is satisfactory or better. The only questionable one in my eyes is Smash's characters. While it is in line with other fighting games, it's still feels steep to someone who doesn't play fighting games all the time. A simple bundle pack for $10 or so would solve all that though.


  • +2
padib (on 16 June 2015)

Amen? DLC is not inherently evil. It's evil when it enables companies to release unfinished games. That's not the case for Nintendo.

Hardcore fans will attack when it's obvious people haven't put a drop of thought into their hate against Nintendo.


  • -2
naruball (on 17 June 2015)

@padib
Some selective reading right there. Yes, if you're gonna criticize The Witcher 3, you have no reason to defend any Ninty game with DLC. How exactly could all the people criticizing DLC for years know how much content could be found in those games that offered DLC? Yet, that didn't stop them from bashing companies even though the content was there. They also praised NInty to death for not having DLC and now that they do the same thing, it's somehow ok. And like I said, how can you argue that Splatoon deserves a higher score because of all the free DLC it will get, while claiming that games like Killer Instinct deserve a low score for lack of content? You and everyone else can deny it all you want, but that won't change the facts.


  • +2
padib (on 17 June 2015)

You will always have unreasonable people on all sides naruball. But the majority of people who complained about DLC last gen complained because 3rd parties were using it as a pretext to release unfinished games. I will give you 1 example, though it's not technically DLC but in a separate SKU. Street Fighter IV.

I love that game to death, but let's agree what they did was unacceptable from a consumer perspective.

I'm not selectively reading you. Read yourself again, you generalized that he would be attacked by hardcore fans because you see a double-standard, but the reality is that Nintendo approached DLC decently, except for Splatoon, and Nintendo fans (Spemanig for example) complained about it!


  • -2
naruball (on 17 June 2015)

Is it really the reality or is that simply your opinion? I think it's the latter. You can call it a generalization or anything else you want, I won't stop you. But whether you like it or not, DLC was being constantly condemned by Ninty gamers. There were countless threads about DLC and the comments in them were about DLC in general, not specific games lacking content. Also, like I said, it's impossible to determine objectively, if a game is lacking content. So if one's company makes a game with little content, one can tell oneself that the content is enough and that it justifies the price. On the other hand, that person can argue that x game (not made by their favourite company) lacks content even though they've never played it.
As for your example of Spemanig and some others, I already said, "At least, there are a few exceptions of people who had a problem with these practices and still do. Props to them for staying true to themselves and having real principles.".


  • +2
padib (on 17 June 2015)

It's the reality. Nintendo's been doing DLC since pokemon. You download a pokemon off a friend's gameboy. Then there was the transfer pack.

The problem wasn't downloadable content, the problem was anti-consumerist tendencies. I gave you a perfectly good example: SFIV. You just ignored it.

I'd recommend you take off those tinted spectacles you're wearing that paint Nintendo fans as hypocrites and start thinking logically.


  • -1
SanAndreasX (on 15 June 2015)

Nintendo is doing better than most with DLC, and their games, by and large, don't feel like retail betas without it, unlike other companies. The DLC era still sucks, though.


sundin13 (on 15 June 2015)

DLC is not inherently evil, and this article is full of misrepresentations and assertions to make it seems so...


dontfaultthestars (on 15 June 2015)

Nintendo's games are complete. And prices aside, their DLC is extra optional content, it wasn't cut from the game. This article is just a bunch of poorly though bias against nintendo.


nuckles87 (on 15 June 2015)

I thought the problems of on-disc DLC were that games were either being shipped incomplete or with on-disc DLC? The vast majority of the content here doesn't even do that. Splatoon included. The game will be complete, without anyone having to pay a dime, in August. From that point on it'll be a non-issue. So if the game being "rushed out" bothers you, simply wait until August as the "real" release date. I know that's what I do if I cared so strongly about that. This article seems to just be railing against the concept of DLC in general.


Faxanadu (on 15 June 2015)

Really surprised about the arguments regarding MK8 and the false portraying of Splatoon "DLC".


97alexk (on 15 June 2015)

i hope nintendo just calms a bit down from the DLC, i really really dislike the Mii fighter costume DLC, and pay for little thing, mario kart 8 did it right, and splatoon aslong as its not paid DLC


BraLoD (on 15 June 2015)

Kudos for having guts to write it in this heavily Nintendo oriented site. Nintendo also said they wouldn't sell games for $60 and are doing it as well this gen. it'sclear that they were simply a gen behind in tech last gen and couldn't join the others. Now they reached that gen and can do it, and of course they would. Hope people would be more open about it, the Amiibo approach is worse than anything last gen IMO and people still praise it. Well, it's how things are since 2005, won't be going back, Ninty just came late to the party because of their limitating hardware approach after the gamecube failure.


BraLoD (on 15 June 2015)

Hahaha I knew I would see quick dislikes. Classy ;-)


  • +3
Nuvendil (on 15 June 2015)

Don't even try to pretend the karma spam doesn't go both ways. The only comments under the karma dislike threshold are those against the article's statements.


  • -1
Jranation (on 15 June 2015)

You can always go to a Micrsoft/Sony or other forums, if you dislike this "Nintendo Oriented site", and bitch about getting dislikes - LOL @ THAT! =D


  • 0
Anfebious (on 15 June 2015)

The Amiibo, the DLC, everything is bad. The idea of Nintendo falling to such practices is bad. The idea of other videogame developers doing it is bad. Profitability should come from videogame sales, when you fall into these pits then it's a sign... The industry is not as healthy as it used to be.


  • 0
Cloudman (on 15 June 2015)

I don`t really agree with the MK8 point either. It is a good deal consider how much you get for the total combined price, and I don`t think it was content that could have been included in the game. It could have been delayed, but that would push it back to another 6 months to a year, which wouldn`t really have been good for the Wii U... I do think Fire Emblem Awakening`s dlc went a little too far, but of the characters you have to buy through dlc, the game provides you with dozens of other characters in the game for free, as for extra characters and maps released for free as well later after release. And Splatoon`s is an odd case. It does hold back content for some reason, but they don`t charge you for any of it, so it`s not completely bad. And the amiibo, it`s not something essential you need, unless you really want the costumes, and try try missions with a different weapon. I will agree that Ninten is starting to become questionable with their dlc lately.


Platina (on 16 June 2015)

I'll just talk about Fire Emblem 13, since it wasn't really mentioned by anyone else. I found the DLC completely fine. True, there are characters, skills and classes that are only unlocked via DLC, but these are completely extra. Even without any DLC, I would be able to beat the game just as easily. There isn't any locked weapons; you can get all legacy weapons normally and the only items that are DLC locked are the items used to reclass your character into a Bride of a Dread Fighter. The DLC just makes it easier to get more of them. The DLC characters also completely optional. You can already get a lot of Spot Pass characters which were free, and with reclassing and releveling, you can get any character to max stats. So basically the only difference with having these DLC characters is Skill arrangements and the Avatar picture. I found no use of the DLC characters (the Spot Pass ones too) because I can just use my huge party of characters. Same thing with the extra stages, these are completely optional as the original game already have tons of maps and chapters you can play through, and with the Risen, you can replay all of those stages, as many times as you like. So not having enough maps really isn't the case in Fire Emblem 13. All that said, the DLC is veryyy expensive, so it may not be worth it but I got some myself because I like having these extras. But keep in mind that if the DLC is completely useless (having no extra maps, classes, characters or skills) there would be no incentive to buy the DLC in the first place. So I feel that they balanced it very nicely. The DLC is not mandatory in anyway, nor by not having it remove from the gameplay, but it is still good enough for people to consider to buy it.


super6646 (on 15 June 2015)

I can handle DLC if it doesn't go out of hand (like with CD Projekt red, 29.99 for 50 HOURS of extra content). My real problem is MICRO-TRANSACTIONS!!!! Those are a cancer to the industry, and will destroy it. Its bad enough these greedy higher ups needs to milk the gamer to dead, now its become sickening. Console gaming is turning into FTP gaming, only we're paying 60$ (70 or even 80 at the high end in Canada) for games!!!!


Torillian (on 15 June 2015)

Your definition for bad DLC seems to be that its exclusion leaves the main game unfinished, but then your definition for a main game being unfinished is if there is paid DLC. I think you're casting too wide of a net for what are bad DLC practices. Things that are unlocked on the disc I can agree that likely should or at least could have been included with the main game, but if developers use their time after making a finished game to make extra content for that game and sell it I have no issues. Each person can decide for themselves if that DLC is something worth their money, but the mere existence of DLC does not mean that the main game is missing something.


padib (on 16 June 2015)

Very well said.


  • 0
Qwark (on 15 June 2015)

Some DLC (MK8, NSLU, Pikmin 3) is good and some is questionable (SSB and Splatoon)


Zekkyou (on 15 June 2015)

*44 comments* What have you done, Evan?


Clyde32 (on 15 June 2015)

Just got VGChartz tons of clicks.


  • 0
super6646 (on 15 June 2015)

*50 comments now.


  • 0
Clyde32 (on 15 June 2015)

Your problem with most of this is that you assume all of this DLC was ready on launch day. Mario Kart and Smash Bros had the complete package already. This content was made after launch.


Hiku (on 15 June 2015)

The final MK8 point I don't agree with. I don't see why that should have been free. it seemed like DLC done right, indeed. As for the rest, I mostly. (Don't know anything about the Mario Golf DLC though.) The Fire Emblem DLC, even though it was mainly just unnecessary things, still had me concerned when I heard about their plans to split up Fire Emblem IF into three games. I don't mind their DLC practices with Awakening. I even bought a couple. But due to the high prices they set for them, and because they seemingly made a lot of money from them, it had me worried that maybe they will try something less than noble with Fire Emblem IF. Still remains to be seen how that turns out. As for Smash, I'm used to seeing new fighting game characters cost around $5 each. The price for the Mii costumes seemed steep though, but thankfully that's just unnecessary things, and they can be bought separately rather than in a bundle.


Jranation (on 15 June 2015)

You know for these dlcs, companies can always lower the price ( if its not selling well ) but they cant increase it.


Azuren (on 15 June 2015)

They're doing Smash DLC right by simply doing Smash DLC. Sure, the only new character so far is Ryu, but for fuck sake, the new character is fucking RYU.


gigaSheik (on 15 June 2015)

If you don't like it, don't buy it. The videogame market is too expensive nowadays and companies have to make money.


StuOhQ (on 15 June 2015)

The pricing on the "Sm4sh" DLC is saddening. If they even went so far as offering each complete wave at a reduced (~66%) price for bundling everything, I would gladly do so. Instead, they've nickel-and-dimed us with a myriad of individual items - each one over-priced and no savings if we want all of the content. I hate to say it, but I prefer the DLC on most third-party AAA FPS games (with a one time $40 pass, to this). "Super Luigi U" and the "MK8" DLC were positive experiences. The "Sm4sh" DLC is a bit-time turn off.


Nem (on 15 June 2015)

Alot of overeacting here. The characters from smash are still cheaper than other fighters. The rest of the content is individually cheaper than their competitors. This overeaction just came because all of it was made available at once. I do agree that overall it sounds overpriced, but compare it to the recently released kombat pack from Mortal Kombat X. You get 1 character less and lots more costumes and stages (wich MK doesnt even offer) and you still pay almost 10 euros less. Nintendo isnt quite as bad as the other publishers yet, though i admit, they are getting nearer.


WhiteEaglePL (on 15 June 2015)

STILL CHEAPER than what most would do for these things, especially MK8. Even Smash's fighters are cheaper than dlc characters in fighting games. DLC won't go away now.


Vor (on 15 June 2015)

At least the game is complete even before the DLC has crossed their mind.


WhiteSky (on 15 June 2015)

Is that a journalistic article or only somebody opinion? I cant take this article/opinion serious.


BasiltheBatLord (on 15 June 2015)

dumb article, people really need to get over the concept of "paywalls" as they put them. Nintendo is doing a great job with DLC, they're continuing to support the base game with continual updates and new content. It's not like they're launching a game and on day one they have 12 different DLC available or something. DLC is not evil, it's an absolutely valid way of both supporting a game over the long-term as well as making money, it's just the way DLC is handled that can be seen as rotten, and Nintendo has so far done a wonderful job with it.


hansrob00 (on 15 June 2015)

Mario Kart came with a large amount of tracks with that original $60, they even added a 200cc mode for free and I believe all the DLC generally came after the game was released. I will say with the exception of the missing arena mode, it felt as though there was a lot of content. Super smash bros comes with 50 fighters for you $60, in contrast to Mortal Kombat 10 which only comes with 20. I also have never heard them of nerfing games to encourage people of making those "optional" purchases like other games do. GTA V online uses a freemium model for their online. Elder Scrolls online encourages you to buy that "optional" horse. There are even rumors of MK 10 nerfing the crypt, making it harder to unlock to encourage you to make that "optional" 19.99 purchase. I agree with other comments. What is a complete game? How much content does a $60 purchase warrant. And the answer is I'm not sure, I can only tell when examples of this come up. Evolve felt incomplete game and it was more about selling a DLC platform. Destiny felt like incomplete game with chunks of the entire story taken out. Super Smash Bros felt not necessarily complete, but there was an abundance of content so you can't complain. The same goes for Mario Kart 8, lots of replayability, lots of content.


Smear-Gel (on 15 June 2015)

You're making your argument bad by going back to DLC universally accepted as great (Mario Golf, Mario Kart) and calling them bad. Who is going to agree with this?


Asriel (on 15 June 2015)

Disagree on Awakening, Golf and Kart had as much content as those franchises would normally have without you needing to buy extra content. Plus, Awakening at least had fairly substantial free DLC (7 missions, several characters). The Smash content is expensive for cross-platform buyers, but extra content made after the fact costs more money to make. Smash is a case of DLC priced poorly, agreed. The rest of the argument--particularly about Kart--is quite weak. It's not as if Nintendo launched with 16 tracks and then asked for money day one to unlock the remaining 16.


Mystro-Sama (on 17 June 2015)

I have never seen so many comments on a VGC news article before. LOOOL


Zugdar (on 16 June 2015)

MK8 was the template of what DLC should be. Great price, expanded the game and the first title was very complete (minus a good battle mode) Its the Smash pricing that I'm upset with. If I got each character at the DLC rate I'd be paying well over $200 for both games at release and that does not include maps which is crap. I'm a huge fan but can't seem to find a good enough excuse to get the DLC yet.


ReimTime (on 15 June 2015)

I'm just commenting because I feel left out


Darc Requiem (on 15 June 2015)

Outside of the criticism of Awakening, which I feel is justified your article seems to be a big reach. It seems like you made up your mind before hand tried to make the situation fit your point of view.


Darc Requiem (on 15 June 2015)

Outside of the criticism of Awakening, which I feel is justified your article seems to be a big reach. It seems like you made up your mind before hand tried to make the situation fit your point of view.


Anfebious (on 15 June 2015)

Nice article! Now we can put Nintendo, EA and Ubisoft in the same stinky bag. Or all developers for that matter, everyone does it these days. Goes to show the stinky state of this industry.


onionberry (on 15 June 2015)

very one sided article just to make a point. Also not an article, an opinion.


Torillian (on 15 June 2015)

Since when does the term article not include opinion pieces? Isn't that like having an issue with someone calling a square a rectangle?


  • 0
DivinePaladin (on 15 June 2015)

Let's be fair with Mario Golf. The game launched at a lower price specifically because of the DLC. You still got slightly fewer stages than was par for the series for half the cost. The DLC ended up doubling the hole count for the game and ended up at $60 total. I would've preferred another 18 hole course instead of one of the 9 hole ones in the base game though


kopstudent89 (on 15 June 2015)

I'm fine with the MK DLC, the Smash Bros ones are just ridiculously expensive. It seems unacceptable to me that the value you get in MK DLC's are waaay higher than another game by the same publisher.


DivinePaladin (on 15 June 2015)

Let's be fair with Mario Golf. The game launched at a lower price specifically because of the DLC. You still got slightly fewer stages than was par for the series for half the cost. The DLC ended up doubling the hole count for the game and ended up at $60 total. I would've preferred another 18 hole course instead of one of the 9 hole ones in the base game though


Hiku (on 15 June 2015)

The final MK8 point I don't agree with. I don't see why that should have been free. It seemed like DLC done right, indeed. As for the rest, I mostly agree. (Don't know anything about the Mario Golf DLC though.) The Fire Emblem DLC, even though it was mainly just unnecessary things, still had me concerned when I heard about their plans to split up Fire Emblem IF into three games. I don't mind their DLC practices with Awakening. I even bought a couple. But due to the high prices they set for them, and because they seemingly made a lot of money from them, it had me worried that maybe they will try something less than noble with Fire Emblem IF. Still remains to be seen how that turns out. As for Smash, I'm used to seeing new fighting game characters cost around $5 each. The price for the Mii costumes seemed steep though, but thankfully that's just unnecessary things, and they can be bought separately rather than in a bundle.


spemanig (on 15 June 2015)

Just so we're clear, I was saying this months ago. Definitely don't agree that the MK8 or Mario Golf DLC was bad, though.


SWORDF1SH (on 15 June 2015)

Article against Nintendo = record number of replies lol :p The article makes some great points although it's still far worse on Xbox and PlayStation. Dead or Alive is a prime example of DLC done wrong. But if us gamers buy it, they will keep doing it. No point moaning about it when our community supports it with their wallets.


Rogerioandrade (on 15 June 2015)

Mario Golf World Tour and Mario Kart 8 are DLCs that shouldn´t be listed here as problematic. Both games have enough content on their own and those DLCs are expansions that made the experience last longer - a lot longer - specially in the case of MK8 where the new tracks were developed AFTER the release of the game. They´re similar to the case of Super LuigiU- and here it seems that the author of the article is clearly trying to find motives for his assuptions. They only case so far about Nintendo DLC that really is problematic is the Super Smash Bros case: the game itself has enough content for anyone to enjoy, but the extra characters/costumes/stages are too pricey. The Splatoon case is something to be considered, although in any way you´re still buying first a figure.


bunchanumbers (on 15 June 2015)

DLC is a sign of the times. It just is what it is. Fans won't stop paying for it, so there is no motivation for game makers to stop making it. Nintendo was going to get on the train sooner or later. Maybe they wouldn't have done it if Wii U was a success. At this rate we'll end up with a paywall for onlline, DLC, MTs and every other bad thing that gamers today don't like but buy anyway. But if Nintendo is going to do this, they better learn what Season Passes are. It will be the only way to really get people to sign onto the plan.


Never (on 15 June 2015)

No. There isn't any double standard when people praise Nintendo and crit other companies. The companies that get crit do some genuinely bad things to consumers and their isn't any comparison. You partly just seem to be against the idea of dlc full stop. Equating Nintendo to the publishers who do do a bad job with DLC is letting the people who are genuinely taking their audience for a ride off the hook. Nintendo releases unbroken games, always. This is the issue I've have with a number of third parties right now who are more interested in on disc dlc that fixing bugs. Nintendos dlc is optional and only made after the full games release or are trivial amiibo stuff that don't matter unless you're ocd. I've not got a single amiibo and it doesn't matter at all to me nor do I feel it's rubbed in my face. Mario Kart 8 is an example of dlc done perfectly. MK8 had all the content you'd expect from a Mario Kart game. The DLC was made after the games release. On top of that the DLC was far far cheaper than we had any reason to expect for a significant amount of content. Hating on Mario Kart 8s DLC shows you're anti all DLC out of principle. I could understand people being unhappy with splatoon. Their splatoon strategy seems to be to give you a reason to turn it on regularly and provide (Hopefully) long term support. Its incomplete state is an exception and as long as they maintain the free updates I like getting the regular free stuff and, due to it's online competitive nature, it could well end up a far better game than if they took their time to try and to do it all out of the box. If we do continue to get long term support for no extra cost that's something I would attached a great deal of value to, especially considering the online shooter genre.


hansrob00 (on 15 June 2015)

...


ExplodingBlock (on 15 June 2015)

Smash is still Smash without DLC Mario Kart is still Mario Kart without DLC Fire Emblem is still Fire Emblem without DLC Splatoon is still Splatoon without DLC I think Nintendo is doing DLC just fine. Where as other companies make DLC pretty much forced. all of Nintendo's DLC is completely optional and the game is still complete without it


Aielyn (on 15 June 2015)

"Nintendo, in a strange business decision, opted to release Splatoon unfinished, with free DLC updates arriving throughout the summer." - and with that claim, you make the entire article very suspect. Splatoon's "DLC" is just a gradual release of on-disc content when playing online. It wasn't unfinished at all - all of the additional maps so far were finished well before launch, and are simply being added to the cycle of playable maps online later, so that they can keep interest high. The fact that you describe it as "unfinished" proves that you're speaking, not out of knowledge, but out of ignorance. Add the fact that you claim that there's a whole "area" of the game only accessible via Amiibo (the stages are the same as the regular single-player mode, just using different weapons to mix things up), and that having gear "locked behind" the Amiibo (it's a small bonus if you buy the Amiibo, it's not like they're locking away gameplay functionality by having this gear), and you're really showing that you didn't do your research properly... or that you're being disingenuous. Your Smash Bros claims are a little more solid... but you ignore the fact that the extra DLC was undoubtedly made after release of the game, they're added extras on top of a broad cast of on-disc characters and stages, they're also adding free content, and you don't have to buy the DLC to get access to all of the proper gameplay (just extras). In short, this article reads like clickbait, rather than a properly-thought-out article. There might be a kernel of a valid argument within it, but such an argument does not show through all of the misrepresentations.


FunFan (on 15 June 2015)

The only problem with DLC is the customers. Bad deals are custom made for the dumb.