| Medisti said: Someone explain to me how exactly this benefits people who (a) want to purchase the Animal Crossing DLC separately or (b) people who don't even own AC. Because it sure feels like I'm either missing something or this is one of the worst business decisions I've seen a company make since Battlefront 2's whole loot box fiasco. |
As was said earlier, it feels like the Animal Crossing DLC might have been a last-minute throw-in for some damage control. Because despite how popular AC is, there are still a lot more Switch owners who don't own the game than who do.
Wouldn't it make more sense to do something like, having DLC from several different games to choose from? Like, you could choose between AC, one (or heck, be a real champ and do both, Nintendo) of the fighter passes from Smash, or all of the Breath of the Wild DLC? Between those three very popular games, you'd be covering much more of your base.
And every year, allow the subscriber to get another free DLC package for renewing the subscription from not only those games (and other games like Xenoblade 2), but for games released during that annual period as well. I mean, we all know that Hyrule Warriors is going to get a season pass, and there's no reason to think Botw2 won't follow the format of its predecessor.
Feels like that would soften the blow and justify the price hike somewhat.
