Double Standards In The Gaming Industry. Which Ones Do You Hate/Find Suitable?

[Kagerow]

Johnw1104 said:

KingdomHeartsFan said:

Okay so developers can lock everything behind DLC as long as its not "absolute must buy."  This is the double standard I'm talking about, whenever other publishers like EA or Ubisoft did any kind of day 1 DLC that was ripped from the game ppl lost their shit, now Nintendos allowed to do it.  Locking things like an AI partner behind day 1 $13 DLC is as shitty as it comes.

I think people are far too critical of DLC; it can add a good deal to the game and provides work for otherwise superfluous employees in between major projects. I get just about everything Paradox puts out. Again, though, this isn't a very fair comparison.

This is not some day 1 expansion to the game or a "buy this season pass, but you still won't get access to all the DLC" trick that more than doubles the original cost; in fact, they often do almost nothing at all outside of a select few games like Super Smash Bros. They're fun little figurines that some people like to collect that generally add something trivial to the game, and they can be used across multiple games. They've walked that line between neat, physical toy that adds a small something to multiple games and not making them too important so as to restrict important content about as well as they can.

Seriously, point me to some games that you feel were harmed by the existence of amiibo. I can't think of any.

I'm quite a Nintendo fan, but I do think Splatoon was partially harmed by existence of amiibo.

Other games are fine. Amiibo Ai for Smash turned out to be modified version of existing CPU, and Mario Kart 8 costume feels pretty pointless (Excluding Captain Falcon, that is.)