By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kai_Mao on 14 December 2018
Edit Thread
NightlyPoe said:
Kai_Mao said:

Sorry that you think the current Smash DLC plan is over-expensive and exploitative. I just find it hard to understand it somewhat since its $6 for a character, a stage, and some music tracks. Music tracks individually tend to be like about $0.99 or something like that on iTunes. If there are like 5-10 tracks, that's already close, if not greater than the $6 price tag. Then you got the stage and character being made from scratch. That's still money and resources to being utilized. Of course, you could say the same for the extra content Splatoon and ARMS had, but their initial launches were way different compared to Ultimate. Plus, this is all-new content being developed AFTER the game went gold. There are no echo fighters or returning veterans to be considered for the upcoming Smash Bros. DLC. What makes Joker, the first challenger pack, and his stage and music over-expensive and exploitative?

And as for the Splatoon/ARMS/Mario Tennis Aces model, it all depends. You say Sakurai should adapt, but then others will criticize this particular format. The controversy surrounding the game will likely not bode well, especially when you're talking about an established franchise that has been all about an increasing all-star cast. ARMS and Splatoon were new IPs at the time (and even Splatoon 2 had criticisms when it launched the same way the original did) while Mario Tennis Aces was a sequel to Ultra Smash, which was pretty much a laughing stock for having nothing else but quick play matches and random online matches. Smash Bros. is a critically acclaimed franchise with each iteration is expected to be bigger than the last.

Whether you can change the way it can be marketed or not, having the title "Ultimate" but starting with a 20-man roster with more coming in late summer or fall may not necessarily go the way you wanted. I don't know if Smash Ultimate would have had the incredible first week it has now if it started off with the model you suggested. Who knows, because its Smash, the game would still do well in the Summer, but Nintendo wanted the game to help kickstart the holiday rush or Switch in December while Pokemon carried the load in November.

I'm uninterested in music or even more stages (I've got 103 of them, how many more do I need)?  The only thing that would interest me is more characters.  I got Smash Ultimate for $48.  Offering only 5 more characters for more than 50% of what I paid for the game as a whole is just a rip-off.  If the price of DLC is that high, I want something on the level of Xenoblade 2, Splatoon 2, or Mario + Rabbids.

If they were also offering some more modes or another single player campaign to go along with it, then I'd be fine.  But I don't like locking core game mechanics like additional fighters behind a paywall, particularly one this high.  It feels icky and lowers my goodwill towards a game.

Also, I suggested around 40 characters, which only about 10 fewer than Smash for Wii U.  As releasing new fighters soon afterwards so it would outstrip Wii U quickly.  And, I believe that Nintendo chose December for launch because the game was being expedited and needed every last minute they could give them.  I suspect they would have been very happy to release Let's Go... in September and have Smash release in the weeks ahead of Black Friday.  Reggie even talked about the December release being challenging.

Would everyone have been happy with an August release?  Perhaps not.  However, I don't think the complaints would translate to lower sales as long as the product delivered was still of high quality.  It only really hurts games to do this when the core game itself is poorly made and requires extensive fixing post-release.

Really though, could you imagine the waves of hype if the game came out with Ridley as the lone new character, then a month later we get Simon, then a month after that we finally get King K Rool?  That's marketing in and of itself and keeps the game in the press for months on end as people get hyped about which new character is being released this week.

Shiken said:

That still does not give me all of the content on the cart I payed 60 dollars for.  Your argument is invalid to my point.

Fair enough.  However, you've got to admit that particular fight was lost a long, long time ago I think.  

The pricing of the DLC fighters are similar to that of packs of other fighting games. And again, these fighters and stages are being made from scratch, so you don't expect them to be free.  Would be cool, but that's not the expectation. Sorry that it affects your view of the game, but what do you supposed Nintendo, Sora Ltd., and Bandai Namco to do when they put in time and resources just like Aonuma and his team did with the DLC in BoTW or Takahashi w/Xenoblade 2's DLC? Plus, we're looking at third party characters like Joker. Licensing and rights to the characters, the stages, and music aren't free. I wouldn't expect Cloud to have been free when he came to Smash 4 as a DLC character.

And of course Reggie said its challenging to release Smash Bros. in December. And I'm sure Nintendo pushed Sakurai, Sora Ltd., and Bandai Namco to release the game earlier. Nonetheless, Sakurai wanted the game to be complete and deserving of the title "Ultimate."

And yea I would be excited to see King K. Rool and Ridley slowly being added into the game. But I think Nintendo made a good call and we're seeing that in the sales and hardware push.