I'm not upset, I'm just a little surprised.

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.

The DLC is fine, but the hard difficulty should just be in the game.

I don't mind it at all and it's pretty annoying that people are getting worked up about it. It'd be impossible at this point, but I would love if Nintendo trolled the fuck out of everyone and delayed the game again to finish the DLC and added it to the game so everyone can get their "complete" game.

I don't understand why people would be upset.

1. Its entirely new content which is what DLC should be.
2. Its entirely optional.
3. It doesn't mean there is no existing hero mode built into the game as is. Just that a "new" hard mode will also be launched.

Granted if #3 is wrong and there is no existing hero/hard mode, then that would be something to be upset about as every Zelda game has had a 2nd harder mode when you complete the game. (am I wrong, have some zleda games not come with a harder mode after you beat the game?)

Its also brilliant.

I'm in a family and we'll buy one copy of the game (I'm actually getting two so as not to share, but some may get one). But, if you each want to have the DLC, then you'll each need to buy it as it digital and tied to your account.

This way Nintendo can get additional per person $$ (unless also sharing the Switch console) even when a family is sharing the physical game.

I'm not upset by the announcement at all, it seems pretty straightforward to me. Nintendo appears to be testing the waters for DLC in story-heavy games, as they haven't really done that before. I'll probably buy most, if not all, of the DLC.

BotW is 100% full game
The Dlc will make it 110% complete, so no I don't have a problem.

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.

This. I imagine the dlc for holiday will be like a majora's mask. As big? One can only hope.

But what I mean of Majora's Mask is that can use this same engine/assets/art/world/characters and build a new story. Much easier and cost effective to do that, than biuld a new game from scratch.

So maybe we can get another "full game length" for just $20. Look at Witcher 3. It's first dlc as only like 10 hours something wasn't it? But that wasn't too much shorter than the original game, if you remove all the side quests, points of interests and what have you, and just do main story. Blood and Wine seemed much more massive cause it was a new area that had its own set of side quests and random question marks to do.