Survey: What exactly upsets you about DLC for BOTW

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Survey: What exactly upsets you about DLC for BOTW

Stance on BOTW DLC

Fine execept for the harder difficulty 99 18.97%
Zelda should not have DLC 56 10.73%
Zelda having DLC is fine ... 67 12.84%
Hate the idea of DLC in general 70 13.41%
Gonna wait and see if its worth it 55 10.54%
Planning on getting it along side BOTW 86 16.48%
Indifferent/do not care 68 13.03%
Will wait a big for a com... 21 4.02%

will it really have DLC?

How the heck.... Nintendo are makeing their consoles only ship with 32 GB disk space.
They need to ship a finished and polished game from the start since their going with cartridiges.

Around the Network

I'm not "upset", and getting upset about it kind of pointless.

However as I've said elsewhere, the only DLC that should exist, IMO, is actual "Expansion" content that is developed AFTER the game is finished and shipped. If that's technically what this is, IE this is stuff they couldn't fit in the main game, then fine. That's great, and I'll probably get it if it seems worth it. But IF it's shit that could have easily just been on the disc/card already? No, that's BS. Not just from Nintendo, but from ANY company.

I have a hard time answering that so simply. Depends how developers do it would be my answer.

DLC should not withhold some important feature of a game behind a paywall. Anything intended to make the game a complete package should not be DLC. DLC should mainly be stupid extras like a pink outfit or a racecar version of Epona. Nothing I care about, but someone somewhere will pay 2 dollars for.

DLC should maybe add alternative experiences to a boss fight maybe. Like take an existing boss, change his pattern, and charge 5$ for the privelage to play it.

DLC should include more levels of something that players want more of. So if I really enjoyed the desert dungeon, maybe they can make a "desert levels 2.0"

So basically, DLC should either be cheap costumes or a mini-expansion pack.

I personally don´t care. It doesn´t seem something that will prevent you to fully appreciate or experience the game

animegaming said:

What exactly upsets you about DLC for BOTW

Its existence.

Around the Network

-lack of informations, "additional map feature", what is that? New Hard mode, is that THE hard mode or another hard mode?
-Should have been introduced after the game was released
-I think only the Pack 2 should be a paid DLC, all the other stuffs are just little bonuses that should be free. So to me, it comes down to the question : Is the pack 2 worth 20 bucks? We'll see when we have more infos

I don't see a problem with them charging for post launch content, even with the announcement pre-launch, the game sounds feature complete (difficulty settings haven't typically been a feature of Zelda games) and no doubt you're going to get a full experience.

Hard mode is the only thing that would concern me, unless they are having to significantly alter the game post launch I don't really see why that should be behind a pay wall.

Also not selling items/content individually is not a great practice, especially as you don't know fully what you're going to be getting.

Don't ruin the moment

Currently Playing: Rocket League (PC/PS4), Dead Cells (PC)

LordyPlays on YouTube

animegaming said:
m_csquare said:

I'm just gon repost your own thread title:

What exactly upsets you about DLC for....

Easy Street Fighter V should of come outthis year with all season 1 characters and premium stages on the disc and actually be content complete. If you launch barebones at full 60 dollars and have the fucking balls to sale 2 season passes then you dersved to fail just like Street Fighter V did sales wise. 

The fact they actually keep releasing paid DLC when they still don't have an arcade mode shows how awful that game's business model truly is.

Heh... we've been talking abt the concept of dlc, yet here you go back and forth talking abt how a game couldv and shouldv been. Just pls tell me one reason why paid dlc is better than free dlc that you can get by playing the game.

OdinHades said:
Airaku said:

Some games are worth far more than the $60 price point. It's simply that simple. 

Imo it's the exact opposite. There's a shit ton of games that isn't worth 60 $, yet the publishers ALWAYS ask for that price, just because gamers are stupid enough to pay it. I don't think there is any game that is worth more than 60 bucks. Especially not Zelda that will sell huge quantities anyway, they will get their money back just because of the amount of copies being sold. For the same reason GTA 5 is also not worth more than 60 $. The content in this game is friggin' insane, yet when selling more than 70 million units, you don't need a high price tag to get your money back and loads and loads of cash on top. Plus, in that game, DLC is free.

While I am very certain Zelda is worth 60 $, I won't pay any more than that for the complete package. I once spent 130 € on a single game, which was Battlefield 4 with the Premium shit. It wasn't worth its money. I had a shitload of fun with it, but it still wasn't worth 130 €. I'm never gonna make that mistake again. I could have waited and get the complete package for 20 € just a year later. ´That's what I'm doing these days with every game that comes with DLC. Zelda is no exception.


Are you aware of how expensive games are to make and how some very high quality video game companies went under because they couldn't afford to continue to make games under their current operations due to how expensive their AAA content was? There are plenty of games that are worth more than $60 due to their quality and cost to make. Things that cost more to make don't all fit the same price range. Otherwise all houses, cars, and furniture should be price the same. It's simply a mentality that exists in the gaming industry, and for good reasons for the consumer as well. I do agree that there are some games that shouldn't cost $60. For example No Man's Sky should have been $40. There's some games that I'd gladly pay $80-$100 for. Stuff like Mass Effect and Metal Gear Solid definitely fit that for me in terms of quality and content.

What games do you feel are not worth $60 and more importantly why do you feel that to be the case. For example do you believe that developers/employees should suffer if the game costs are too high? Should they reduce their content and quality over all to make up for these alternatives? Should lay offs be applicable. More importantly should be people be paid for the job they do? Many games have insane crunch time with employee's working over time with no pay and let go after the game is done because there isn't enough money to keep them on. If this ever happened in education or other industries there would be strikes like crazy. Now should developers becoming unionized? I'd prefer not but there are very real issues in the game developer community. DLC is a way to compensate for this and some developers actually prepare day one DLC as a way to ensure that the pre-production team does not have to be let go. They can continue to work, get paid, and work on great games. This kind of content does not go into production until AFTER the production teams take over and the Pre-Production and concept guys are DONE with the game. Which I would roughly estimate is about 20-30% in the development process in many cases.


That being said I agree that many games do not justify it's DLC. For myself I often only buy it when I want to get it. So I get what I want, very rarely I do I get ahead of time. With Resident EVII I did because I'm a huge fan of that series and the Deluxe edition is a steal. I believe it only cost me an extra $10 if I recall correctly. It was well worth it. Definitely wait until developers outline everything you get in the season pass before you buy it. I feel that Ubisoft's season passes are very bad and most of the stuff is skippable. If you get all the essential stuff it's almost half the price of the Seasons pass in many cases. At least as far as Assassin's Creed goes that seems to be the case so I end up paying significantly less for the single player DLC as I don't care for the cosmetic items and bonus weapons.

JRPGfan said:
will it really have DLC?

How the heck.... Nintendo are makeing their consoles only ship with 32 GB disk space.
They need to ship a finished and polished game from the start since their going with cartridiges.

The Wii U also shipped with 32 GB of disk space and that also had games with DLC. What's your point exactly? Unlike the PS Vita, the Nintendo Switch supports cheap SD cards for extra memory. 

And who says Breath of the Wild isn't a finished and polished game? This new story campaign only releases during the Holiday, that's more than enough time to develop a new dungeon. 

"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" - Thoukydides