By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Lonely_Dolphin on 15 February 2017
Edit Thread
NATO said:
Einsam_Delphin said:

I really don't see how timing can be an issue when it's not relevant to anything. When it's announced doesn't change what the DLC content is, the price of it, how complete the main game is, or any of the things that matter. There's no harm at all in buying a game while DLC is already available for it.

Because it would be nice to think they're making the game the best it can be rather than looking towards how to extract more money from their userbase before they even have one?

Most of the content will not be ready for launch anyway so whats the point of announcing it before launch? other than to make ot obvious that the version theyre shipping isn't complete and you'll need to spend $80 for the standard game to get the full game?

It's shitty, no matter what game does it.

 

I mean you can still think it's made as best as it can be, that's entirely up to you to decide. However there's no use thinking about that, as there's no way to prove whether a game had full effort put into it or not. You can say DLC signifys a lack of effort, but again no evidence that it's a factor. So what matters is that the game is good and complete, which a game can be even if it has DLC. The timing of the DLC announcement has no effect on that.

You're going a bit off tangent here, I'm not saying I do or don't agree with announcing DLC before the game releases. I personally don't care because it's irrelevant to my enjoyment of the game. For Zelda as you said there's day 1 content so they had to. Also this is definitely not another Fire Emblem Fates situation. You do not at all need the DLC to get the full game, it's just bonus extra stuff.