You can't argue that you had to buy a new handheld just to get that new content in LADX because it's the same exact thing as TPHD, a rerelease/"remake" (I guess adding proper colors to a game hardly qualifies as remaking it), you have to buy a new system/a Wii U if you want to get the added content as well, but now they expect you to own the amiibo on top of the console.
In 1998, to promote the launch of the Game Boy Color, Nintendo re-released Link's Awakening as The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening DX. It features fully colorized graphics and is backward compatible with the original Game Boy. Link's Awakening DX contains a new optional dungeon, with unique enemies and puzzles based on color (due to this the dungeon cannot be accessed on the earlier non-color Game Boy models).
If you wanted to play that extra dungeon you DID have to upgrade to a GBC.
At least you have the possibility to share or resell the toy.
But I agree with you, no currently available amiibo functionality is worth the cost of the amiibo itself. I buy some amiibo figures because they look cool, but I rarely use them in games. Captain Toad was the only one where it felt fun to use the amiibo.
have you heard of Super Smash Bros.
P.S. they're figurines, the worth is in the figurine, the NFC technology is a bonus
@iKhan: so ALL couch co-op games are evil because the content is locked behind a $50 second controller and all online multiplayer games are evil because that content is locked behind a second $300 console + second $50 controller + second human being and all videogames are evil because they require you to spend money in order to access the content. Is basically what you can say with your logic.
Did you even read what I said. I explicitly said controllers for multiplayer WEREN'T bad because the existence of the second controller enables local multiplayer. The existence of videogames enables them to be played. When you pay for them, you are purchasing some intrinsic value. The existence of Amiibo does NOT enable extra content, that could be done with or without them. When you pay for Amiibo, you are purchasing some value that was withheld by a company.
If they're actually calling it a 'dungeon,' and it's not a mistake, then the dungeon will be way worse than the original TP ones.
If they're actually calling it a 'dungeon,' and it's not a mistake, and the dungeon is actually really good, then WHAT THE HELL!?! They'd be crazy to not spend their apparently very-taxed dev time on Zelda U!
It's funny when you consider this is already one of the games with the most dungeons... And the previous hd remake, on the opposite side of that spectrum, actually got content cut... To some extent.
It could easily be something along the lines of the Hidden Village. Or a small dungeon that somehow carries over to Zelda U. I actually want it to be something fairly significant, especially if your actions in one game transfer to the other.
Some playlists: Top All Time Songs, Top Last Year
An opinion is only respectable if it can be defended. Respect people, not opinions
@iKhan: but that's just convenient stretching to suit your agenda against this product dude. Again, I can say that videogames as a whole are evil because the entire content of the game is withheld by the company until you give them the dough. I see it as providing value for money for my £13 NFC figure, you see it as evil, evil, evil withholding of content. Neither is right, but neither is wrong either. You can't prove that this dungeon would've been in the game without the amiibo, obviously, so your stance fails at its most basic premise.
@TheLastLugia: I don't care about the amiibo, at least give us the option to purchase the DLC digitally, even if it's the same price as the amiibo (€15); that would still be a rip-off, but at least then everyone has access to the extra content. The idea of an entire dungeon or cave locked behind a physical toy is just ridiculous.
@Octane: It still think that this dungeon is either small and uninteresting or there will be an option to get it without the amiibo. We just have to wait for the official informations.
@Chandlero: I'd hope so. But my argument can be applied to any upcoming game that involves amiibo. It was a novel idea when Smash launched, but it's starting to get really annoying as more and more content is locked behind figurines for no good reason.
@Octane: However, I don't know one simple example where really important content was locked. The mushroom in Super Mario Maker is funny, but really not needed for the game. I have the impression Nintendo does a good work in balancing both aspects. Amiibo owner get a few things besides the figurine and Non-Amiibo owner don't miss them. Mostly these things are so small that nobody would buy them as DLC and therefore I don't see it as "locked" content.
@Chandlero: Mario Party and Animal Crossing come to mind. Especially Mario Party has already proven that it doesn't need amiibo to function properly. amiibo Festival has amiibo in its name, but there's no reason why that game couldn't function without amiibo. Splatoon also had quite a lot of challenge stages locked behind amiibo.
@Octane: 'locked behind figures for no good reason'
Except for the very good reasons of selling figures, providing value for money for said figures and basically doing the basis of any good company/business smelling what sells and doing it. You provide a good point about having the option to purchase the dungeon separately, but then that just would muddy the waters further IMO as the where could you draw the line as to which amiibo features are sold in this way. The Mario Maker Costumes? Co-op in Shovel Knight? How about we go all in and give people the ability to replenish their arrows and rupees with the brilliance of microtransactions? We all have the right to complain about things like this, but when we're at a point where Square-Enix can't/won't sell complete games, Konami sells insurance in MGSV and Uncharted 4 has 'Naughty Dog points' and Halo 5... Whatever dumb microtransactions it has I think this isn't so bad.
I'm personally fine with them hiding it behind an Amiibo paywall, though it could set a bad precedent.
I'm against that sort of thing in general because you get the sense that they deliberately took that chunk out of what would otherwise have been the main game's development budget.
In this case though, that's obviously not true. The game was a finished product long ago and this is purely an addition.
On the other hand though, they are asking full retail price for something that's a very minor upgrade to the thing that you can already play on the Wii U. So I dunno.
On the other hand though, they are asking full retail price for something that's a very minor upgrade to the thing that you can already play on the Wii U. So I dunno.
With waggle controls.
Currently Playing: Resident Evil Village: Gold Edition
@TheLastLugia: I don't buy the "Nintendo is the lesser evil of them all" argument. Just because some games have even worse DLC/microtransaction practises, doesn't mean it's okay for Nintendo to do this. There's plenty of developers that deliver a full game at launch and that should be something every company should strive for.
I don't care for the small stuff, like the power-ups in Kirby, or the costumes in Mario Kart. I even think that the amiibo in Smash was a novel use. However, Challenge Mode in Splatoon and content and/or modes along those likes, could be easily offered as DLC. I'm not going to spend more because Nintendo decided to attach the DLC to a plastic figure that I don't care for and that only takes up space.
Forums
Topic: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD - OT
Posts 721 to 740 of 1,760
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.