Oh so you get to decide what is required to enjoy a game or not? Then I decide that the Last of Us DLC is purely peripheral and not required to enjoy the game. Same with CoD and Battlefield and all games that use DLC. Is this how it works?

What does that even mean?

The story was self contained, with those sections being bonus chapters at best. That is all I said there. They existed outside of the core story, and honestly, it would make no sense if those chapters were put into the main story.

The Last of Us on the other hand introduces uneven footing into competitive multiplayer.

If you want my opinion on CoD DLC I'll give it to you. I don't know a ton about the DLC in CoD, but I think its mostly map packs and a zombies mode which seems fine with me. I don't play a ton of CoD, but I don't see any problem releasing map packs. Seems like previous games had zombies mode built in, but those were Treyarch so it doesn't really seem like it would make sense to compare the two.

Not sure why you are trying to jump down my throat about DLC in other games, when I never said I had a problem with DLC in most other games. I did say earlier that DLC should be evaluated on a case by case basis and except in specific scenarios I don't really have a problem with it.

What are your thoughts on Smash's character DLCs? If it was possible that you get matched up against someone who bought the characters and you haven't are you going to conside it bad DLC? Or do you already consider it bad DLC?

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm attacking you. I just geniunely want to see what are some nintendo fans' thoughts on DLC and whether or not this is a case of bias. Because last gen almost everyone was against maps and character DLCs without even considering the value that the games presented. And btw even if it is bias I'm not implying that this is exclusive to Nintendo fans. There were Sony fans for example who swore they'd never pay for online and that it was a ripoff and now have no problem with it.

In fighting games, having an extra character doesn't really change the dynamics of a match (unless that character is broken but that is another story). This is because the matchup is focused on how you can tailor your play to this opponent and how you can react to this opponent. This means that in almost every situation, a mirror match is no the way to go, so to counter a Mewtwo character, Mewtwo will not help you. While Mewtwo is an additional skillset that can be learned, learning that skillset doesn't really give you advantages over learning other skillsets. Assuming consistent balancing, having Mewtwo will not make you better able to deal with Mewtwo or other challenges.

However, in shooter games, and TLOU specifically, the matchups are much different. First of all, a match holds much more factors than just you and your opponent. There is a team to worry about, so you have to worry about all possibilities at all times. While in Smash you know your opponent and see your opponent at all times, in TLOU you need to plan for the possibility of a long ranged, short ranged or mid ranged weapon everywhere. DLC changes the second to second characteristics of the game by introducing more variables to your opponents and taking away possibilities for your. There are also changes that occur within the match through purchasables, which gives your opponent more options to react to changing conditions. Having DLC does make you better able to deal with other challenges. This information does primarily come from the comments of others about the game which states that the DLC does alter the meta of the game in a large way at middling skill levels.

Basically, I see a pretty big distinction between the two because of the fundamentals of how the game works. While TLOU isn't a horrible use of DLC, I still don't think that they should charge for something like this, while the line in fighting games is much different. When we start seeing "Street Fighter 4", "Super Street Fighter 4", "Super Street Fighter 4: Arcade", "Ultra Street Fighter 4" is when the line has been crossed, asking far too much of users.

Reading the response of defending Nintendo regarding DLC practices is really hilarious. It's just as Angry Joe said. He was right.

When he's the one buying the game, yes.

Now I'm curious, what did Angry Joe say?

Angry Joe said, "Nintendo supporters will say its good when its done by Nintendo. But its opposite when others do it." Kinda funny when his video is reflected in the thread.

Really? Cmon we dont even have any info at all. No price, no release information, nada. There are bad dlc and good ones. Thiswe dont know at all.

FE:A= Overpriced 

MK8= Extremely well

NSLU= Extremely well

SSBU/3DS= Ok Priced (look at other fighters)

See? XCX..... Cant comment at all

Glad we could be your guinea  pigs.