Well it'll be hard to word "Complete" for a game, but for DLC (especially Day 1) means it could of been apart of the game, instead being sold as extra profits.

Ex: Lets say SSB had DLC day 1 with an extra 3 characters. That was already ready to be in the game but now instead of $60 for a game i have to spend $70 for a game if i want the full experience now??? Thats kinda a sneaky way to charge a game more money!

Day 1 DLC is a slap in the face. On-disc DLC is a kick in the balls.

I don't like it, but I've went a whole gen without buying any (I think) so it isn't as big of a deal as some are saying.

Trueness! The only bit of DLC I bought last gen was for one game, LittleBigPlanet, and so far the same is going to happen this gen with Fire Emblem Awakening being the only game I've gotten DLC for. Of course if they make DLC for MK8, then that will most definitely change!

With MK8 i dont feel like they will rip us off. They'll give usthe game and hopefully winter time give us an extra new cup and a retro one. Make a bundle including it for holiday and thats big bucks :)

As long as you can do both, I don't mind.

DLC in general is a good idea whether it's free or paid because it adds support to the game after launch just like mods. Although people exploit it, and there are examples like On-Disc, Day-1 DLC and Season Passes.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the prices of video games remained the same over the years? Weren't people charged $60 for Castlevania and Super Mario Bros2 or 3? In terms of contentand effort put behind games to play well and look great, game developers need to put much more effort, yet they charge the same price.

I'm fine with DLC. You don't have to buy it whether it's day one, on disc or released the next year. It's optional. If you're happy with what they offer in the first place, you can't keep asking for free stuff. If you think what they do offer is not enough, don't buy the game, wait for a price cut or wait for a game of the year edition with all the dlc.

The content they offer in a game keeps getting more and more and breaking even harder and harder. They can't charge more than $60, so they have to find another way and DLC seems to be the way.

Or what is it that you suggest that they do to make the difference? And I'm not just talking about games like Mario or Zelda that are guaranteed to make a profit, but games between AAA and indie titles that sell around 500k and don't make a profit. DLC is a necessary "evil".

But how do you know that those three characters would have been in the game at all if DLC didn't exist? It's possible that they wouldn't have even been made, and if that was the case, would you rather not get those three characters at all or have to pay a bit extra to get them? (Although $10 is too steep for just 3 characters, I certainly wouldn't buy that DLC unless it was at a discount)