The difference with Nintendo's DLC is that they make post game content based on feedback they get from their users. Like for NSMB2 the levels they created were based on feedback asking for even harder levels, and ones that are remakes of classic levels, and they delivered. Pikmin 3 (which upon release there was absolutely no plans for DLC and they only did so because of demand from their fans), people stated in feedback that they wanted to play as Captain Olimar, DLC then emerges allowing fans to play levels as Captain Olimar.
EA's DLC can be day one and is full of microtransactions to unlock stuff that you already have in the game but can only unlock with hard work. For the cost of new maps from Nintendo DLC, you would only get a couple of guns from EA. So no, they are nowhere as evil. And let's not forget EA's mandatory online stance for games.
Nintendo's biggest problem is that they are too creatively minded and sometimes lack business orientated common sense.
Nintendo tends to only release one game from each of their IPs per generation console. It's very rare for them to do a direct sequel inside a generation unless there is big fan demand for it (Like in Super Mario Galaxy's case). Grouping all the Mario platformers together and saying they are the same thing is pretty lame, because it's pretty obvious that there is multiple series of Mario platformers running. 2D, 3D and the Mario 3D Land/World aka 2.5D series which only came about this gen.
So no, they are not evil, but they ARE a creative business trying to make money off their intellectual properties just doing so in a very tame way compared to Ubisoft, Activision and EA.
PS. My PS3 wants me to pay for desktop backgrounds, icons, and pointless stuff like that. Because Sony offers to sell them to me, aren't they evil too for wanting my money?
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
