14186 posts since 26/03/13
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.
4834 posts since 08/07/08
BotW is 100% full game
The Dlc will make it 110% complete, so no I don't have a problem.
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.
4228 posts since 26/11/10
I don't like the idea of DLC. At the same time, it is necessary for keeping game prices low. I just wish more developers would take the route of Halo 5 where you can unlock things through cash or you can play the game and earn the same rewards as you play. That way you can finance DLC and keep it free.
2687 posts since 26/05/08
The only thing that upsets me about this is that fans are greedy as fuck and don't want to support the developers who gave us a massive world with enough content to go past the asking $60 price. Now they are giving us even more content to justify the size of their game and the work that went into that game.
That being said I am disappointed that it's an all or nothing deal. I really want to buy the story package with the extra dungeon but I don't care about the shirt, harder difficulty, or the extra challenge shrines. That being said everything for $20 is a steal considering the final package being story content and dungeon is often priced at $15-20 in most games anyways. So we're actually getting A LOT of value for $20 in terms of DLC price. This is a very, very good deal and a very low price point. I don't think people are looking at the value of what we are getting, how long this game has been in development, how expensive the game probably is, nor the level of quality this game will most likely be upon launch. Some games are worth far more than the $60 price point. It's simply that simple. There are actually a few companies that do DLC a premium prices not to rip people off, but because their development cost is higher than the MSRP of the game. This also protects the staff working at the company so they aren't let go. While it's quite obvious Nintendo has more than enough money in the bank that this isn't the case, some 3rd part developers are not as fortunate if they want to live up to the quality they are known for.
The way I view DLC in the board view of things. It's an opportunity to TIP the developers for their hard work and potentially fantastic content. It's not a mentality that is often viewed by many gamers, but it's one that I feel that should be shared. You often tip for good service, so why not tip for a fantastic product that thousands of man hours went into to provide you a form of entertainment?
just post em a check.
2756 posts since 04/12/13
It has blemished Nintendos reputation for me, As the company who created the seal of quality they choose now to ruin that, and too think I was gonna buy a switch for this game. Every announcement they make repels me from it. I now want to pay Nintendo to keep the switch away from me.
4980 posts since 12/08/14
Just hoping the base game is worth the asking price. If not, I'll have to hold off for a better deal.
Great graphics are great for a day. Great gameplay is great for a lifetime.
6693 posts since 23/08/12
Its a shame, à game delayed again and again to announce DLC that could have Been in thé game for some and offered for free for others ( like for example Gravity rush offzring thé Big march DLC to compensate the delay )
This is disapointing, even more when it involves à new difficulty that should have Been in the game, thats a shame to force gamers who Want à challenge to Pay, this killed m'y hype à lot
Predictions for end of 2014 HW sales:
PS4: 17m XB1: 10m WiiU: 10m Vita: 10m