One of the standout games of the upcoming Nintendo Switch lineup is that of Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle, a game which has no right to be as good as it’s shaping up to be. The tactical RPG is getting lots of positive press and all the footage of it released thus far indicates that the gameplay will be up to the high standard set by Nintendo. The game launches next week, and just ahead of release, Ubisoft has now announced a tempting Season Pass.
The Season Pass will cost you twenty bucks yet—much like The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild—it looks like it’s packing in quite a bit of content for the price. At launch, it’ll give you access to eight exclusive steampunk weapons, in the fall it’ll give you access to a slew of new solo and co-op maps, and in 2018, it’ll add on some new story content.
What do you think? Will you be picking up the Season Pass? Do you think it sounds justified? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Comments 132
Ohhhh no. You never announce DLC before a game comes out. It makes people cry about content being held back and used as an excuse to charge people extra.
Would have been better to just announce it later, in my opinion.
That said, depending on how much we get, this could be a good deal. I'm cautiously optimistic. Nintendo has been pretty decent about dlc lately.
Hmm I'm thinking that maybe it's time to go to bed.
Oh right. This is a Ubisoft game
@RyanSilberman Nintendo has done dlc on games not tied to ubisoft. This is just like the legend of Zelda too, so I'm wondering if Nintendo put them up to this.
And of course none of DAT includes the pre-order bonus =w=
@Kalmaro Yes, but Nintendo typically does things differently, DLC included. This looks like standard fare.
@RyanSilberman But... They did do things differently. We have been getting way more than most get dlc wise. I still don't hear many complaining about the LOZ dlc, and Mario kart 8 dlc was pretty fair. DLC itself is old hat but I feel Nintendo has set itself apart by giving us a quality game and then dlc as icing on the cake, without you feeling cheated.
This is becoming the norm so get over it.
Bad move. Give me Mega Man as a playable character, and maybe you'll earn some points with this.
No big deal. Like with Zelda, I'll wait to see what the story content looks like before I pony up, though. $20 is enough money to buy a couple of really decent games on the eshop.
@JTMnM lol Mega Man?
Well games are a bit under-priced at this point due to inflation; however, if game prices increase and then they do this, I'll be mad then.
Hey everyone, I'm new to this website. I'm a big Nintendo and Sony fan. It great to be apart of this community.
............OR..............and I'm just spitballing here........release a complete game with lots of content from the get-go.
No complaints from me. If I enjoy the game as much as I think I'm going to then the more content the better. I won't be buying it though until the new story content arrives as I'm not bothered about co-op or exclusive weapons. That's $20 I could spend on another game in the meantime.
Gonna get the game.
Probably gonna enjoy it a lot from the looks of it.
Then gonna buy the DLC
Forget about the game when other stuff comes.
Get notification next year about new expansion.
Be all WOO!!! FREE STUFF!!
Play again.
Be happy that you dug up the game because you hadn't in ages.
Im cool with that.
@invictus4000 you wouldn't last one day at Ubi or EA with an attitude like that, mister.
Only people who do not understand that content like this is created or at the very least finished after the main game is done would cry about this. There's a reason why none of this content is sold and available at launch but rather even into 2018. I see no issue.
@Slasher Welcome!
I might just cancel my pre-order... I don't support uncompleted games, or greedy publishers. Or I'll wait and get it at a discount or used.
@nab1 That is very naive, do you really think DLC and Season Passes aren't planned at the start of such a big project?
It's a BS business practice that I generally don't support. Nintendo is also slowly sliding down this slippery hill, Zelda BotW doesn't look much better than the other offenders.
As long as people keep buying it companies will keep doing it and probably try to get away with even more, I guess I'm in the minority as I rarely buy DLC (exceptions are there of course, maybe 2 or 3 since DLC started to be a thing).
It's identical in structure to the Zelda season pass.
I'll gladly pay for more content.
More content is always nice. If I like the game I'll pick it up. I still need the last two FE season passes and the BOTW season pass...need more free time.
@noutBr planned yes, developed and created, not necessarily. In this case, just like with BOTW, doesn't really sound like it. But sure, naive is what I am, not a seasoned developer or anything like that.
Hooo....
Well, I will prepare my money.
@Slasher Great to have you here, friend!
If the content is good, I'll get it. I've got no problem paying a bit more for good extra content.
But now I want to know what's Nintendo Japan going to do with the DLC pass since we won't be getting the game until 2018.
Will the Japanese game include the DLC from the start (with a higher price tag)? or will we get that same DLC but a year later than the rest of the world?
why would this be an outcry.......unless people haven't experienced other consoles for the past 8 years
I'm still on the fence about this game
"ok, its a Ubisoft game"
Just to remind you all. 3 march 2017, 70 € Zelda Breath of the Wild + DAY ONE 20€ season pass, without even know what exactly does.
I did it. You did it. Many of us did it.
Hope someday they will throw in more playable Mario characters. Throw in Rayman too.
I will be buying the game day one, and the £20 they want for the SP is going on sonic mania. End broadcast
Nintendo did the same thing with Zelda. I understand why they are doing this. At least ubi have made it clear what's included in the dlc. Nintendo didn't specify before months after zeldas release. I'll be buying the mario rabbids dlc.
Maybe its a good thing, I hear the game is too short so dlc could be good.
When isnt there internet outcry?
No thanks. I guess I'll just wait on this then.
Announcing a demo would have been better
I'd rather pay $20 now than $50 in dribs and drabs
It seems to be the gaming norm nowadays, so I am used to this happening
Steampunk weapons? STEAMPUNK WEAPONS?!? How are steampunk weapons related to Mario. Ubisoft have just destroyed this gam- oh...that's not what the outcry is over? Erm...oops. (I'll be honest, I was just trying to join in. I actually like Steampunk.) Season Pass? Cheaper than buying a sequel that uses the same assets I guess.
Sold
@Slasher Welcome Slasher.
Run that.
I love season passes, especially the $19.99 variety. Extra content but not too much, ya know?
@CorvoRevo I got BOTW day one and didn't go for DLC and I won't. Paying for some feature on world map?!?! What? No way.
Fu**ing greed. What's wrong with all good free updates?!
And now I won't get this game at all.
Xenoblade 2, Skyrim and Mario Odyssey for me... if they don't announce season passes.
@tamantayoshi and that is called robbery my friend. Core game is short but worry no more.. we got more stages for you... just £20 more for you to enjoy full game.
I'll wait until I get details on what the content actually is and how it reviews. Then if its good I'll get it.
Not getting the game until next year at the earliest anyways.
When the DLC + Season Pass for Mario Odyssey is inevitably announced, there is going to be a ton of salt in this comments section
Captain Toad Treasure Tracker DLC @westman98
@Pigeon You obviously care enough to click the article and post a comment about the game. Think next time
@titotito3399 yeah, maybe you should cancle your pre-order, it doesn't seem like you want the game enough anyways. If you did want the game before, hearing about dlc coming out for that game would have excited you since it would make it possible to own more of the game you want. Instead you call the game with this optional expansion, which is is really just extra conent, a incomplete game.
Granted I've only ever bought the BotW season pass, but I really don't see what the big deal is. Why does everyone act like season passes are a bad thing?
@G0dlike
I meant an Expansion Pass-esque set of DLC, with extra costumes, collectibles, and a new Kingdom or two to explore.
An entire spinoff based off of Mario Odyssey ala Captain Toad 2 would be awesome and would (hopefully) incite little blowback.
Do gamers not know how game development works? Your average major game typically finishes development way before it actually hits store shelves. And considering the release dates for the two big pieces of content, it's natural to assume that the DLC just recently started development AFTER the base game was complete.
Gamers, well specifically Nintendrones and the anti-Nintendo fools need to learn that DLC and Season passes are not automatically bad things, nor is announcing such DLC literally a week before its release enough reason to assume that it's cut content from the full game sold to you later because again, that's not how game development works. Now if this season pass was announced, and all the content was releasing day one, then yes, that would sound very suspicious. But considering we haven't even seen footage of the main meat of this season pass yet, there's little evidence to suggest cut content.
The same crap happened with BotW DLC and how everyone flipped their poo about how they may not be getting a complete game, then the game comes out and lo and behold it is the complete game they promised. It's a mystery why common sense gets thrown out the window with this kind of stuff.
Forget about this boring DLC protest. This game looks and plays awesome. I can't believe that I'm gonna to buy a Mario game after New Super Mario Brothers.
As long as the main game is good, I don't care. I don't buy DLC for most games anyway.
@westman98 I know what you meant! Just saying, if they release Captain Toad Treasure Tracker 2 as Odyssey DLC, the install base would be huge!
If the game feels complete at launch, with lots of high quality content, then I have no issue with a season pass for those that want a little bit more. It's when you only get half a game at launch and the rest of it is hidden behind a paywall that it becomes a morally questionable practice.
It's a tactical game but is it an rpg? I'm not so sure.
Just because it will have a season pass doesn't mean I'm ever going to buy it. They can make a full game and release it on day 1. Beyond that I couldn't care less. This practice has to be stamped out along with pre-orders.
@MasterWario you might mean due to a severe lack of inflation? Inflation itself would cause game prices to rise along with everything else because that's what inflation means. The value of currency becomes diminished so stuff costs more dollars.
Not really good news. I will still get the base though.
@tamantayoshi where did you hear this?
Excited for the game feel like i need a review but its preordered and i want it regardless worried it might be really short though. DLC is perfectly fine buy it if you want or leave it quite simple really. I like it when a game can get more content way into the future!
@bolt05
I think that he meant that the price of video games have not risen in line with inflation, unlike other consumables?
Probably if I enjoy the game I'll pick it up
To hell with internet outcries, this self-entitled approach is getting tiresome. I don't and won't decide if it's "justified" or not, for me it boils down to whether I will buy it or not. And people constantly worrying about "DLC making games launch incomplete at base price" must be confusing full-priced titles with freemiums.
I agree the extra content announcement before the game is a bit premature. And how can we say if we will buy it until we have played some of the game.
It's down to the reviewer to say in the review of the game, without the dlc, is it value for money.
Think back to this when you inevitably play the new BotW story content this holiday season.
Seriously, this is exactly the same as BotW's approach. If you got or are getting the expansion pass for BotW then you shouldn't have any issues with this.
Yeah this is an outrage. Nintendo would never do thi....oh
@SuperTeeter64 Was a joke. Ensue the lulz.
launching a season pass before anyone has played the game a single second, what a joke
I actually don't mind the season pass idea if it's done well. I see it as a sign of the developer continuing to support the game after release. I know his can be done with free updates but the premise can be done well.
So now we know why the game is supposedly so short. They want us to pay for the rest of the content. Thin edge of the wedge is what I said DLC in general would be, and so it is. Very disappointing news. No need for SCamiibo. They'll get you this way instead.
"8 Exclusive Steampumk Weapons" Nahhh this is def UBI, GOTTA GET THAT WEAPON SKIN DLC-$$$.
It's basically a good thing for gamers. If you like the game you can buy extra content. The developer has extra incentive to make the base game good enough that you want to pay for more, and the gamer gets more than they would have done without the DLC.
Ultimately, if you don't think the game or DLC is good value then don't buy it. You always have a choice.
A silent moment to all Collector's Editions buyers........
@607jf cough majoras mask cough Switch t-shirt cough midnas mask cough
Man, I must have cought a bad Breath of the Wild today.
Really don't understand the complainers.
If you purchased a car new, following which the manufacturer designed and manufactured extra features to tack-on, would you then storm into the showroom and demand you have them for free?... Thought not.
Show some respect - these features are not integral to the gameplay, do not fix anything, and are superfluous. They are being developed outside of the main game. Why shouldn't you pay the developer for their resources?
@Zimon cough only cosmetic cough
@Slasher Welcome and have fun This is a really great community.
On topic, I actually like the dlc thing. It's more money... but if it's good I'm in.
That sounds fine to me. I'll play the base game and wait the DLC out until they reveal all of it.
YEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!
MOOOOOREEE GAAAAMMMEEE IS GOOOOOOOOOD!
According to the article this game doesn't deserve to be good. Alright.
On topic, nice to see people suddenly DONT want the game. Make your minds up people. There is endless flip flopping.
Oh well, I'll hold back my buy until story DLC is released and reviewed.
If that's my position with BotW, you imagine what I'd do to any other game.
I'm really not a fan of DLC. At all.
Anyways not really a fan of turn based combat, or the rabbids.
I will need to see some very good review to jump on board on this one :3
nb4 the game is delayed for 6 months so they can put the game on other systems.
I was on the fence about getting this game. This just tipped me towards not buying it.
Why is everyone acting like this DLC means they're shipping an incomplete game?
Did Zelda ship unfinished, too, since it has a story DLC coming in the holidays?
I'll get the game (maybe not day one due to finances), and I'll enjoy it a lot. How many X-COM esque games do you have on Nintendo systems? Plus, it looks great.
Then, as many will do, I'll wait to see what's they offer in the new maps and story DLC before buying it next year.
@Emperor-Palpsy Its because the complainers see this as undeniable proof that the game is unfinished, and that the game was purposely made short in order to sell a season pass for extra cash.
The only thing that irritates me is it isn't included with the collectors edition. If I'm buying the ultimate version of something it should include everything.
As cliche as it sounds, I feel as though the weapons were indeed held back for this. The maps, imo, are a bit iffy with their releasing in the fall, but that's a general release date, so it's not bad as of now. I just hope the story content is good.
I have seen no proof that the game is incomplete. Ubisoft is a company made to make a profit, but I don't think this is enough reason to come to that conclusion. Maybe when reviews come, or hackers show that the DLC is on the kart which would be a shame. I still plan on getting this game day one provided reviews don't bomb. I'm happy the game is getting DLC. If I like the game then I can get more content, and if I don't care enough then I don't have to get the DLC.
I'm pretty sure they finished the core game months or probably a year ago. We also need to consider the time allotted for testing, bug fixes, a few finishing touches, submission to Nintendo for approval, and production of the cartridges. The weapons could have probably been free, but development of new stages and stories isn't that easy. They need to redo the whole development process, it would just take less time since they won't be starting from scratch. The new content are just "nice to have" features and probably won't degrade the quality of the game if they're not included. I think what most people are really angry about is because the DLC is paid. I don't see anybody complaining that Splatoon 2 and ARMS are incomplete games because they have DLC's. If DLC's for Mario+Rabbids are free, for sure people would be happy that the developers are supporting the game. Still, the timing of the announcement is important. Ubisoft probably could've waited a few more months/weeks after release before announcing a Season Pass.
I'm a little worried that if I pay for these steampunk weapons, will they make the game too easy? I don't want to plow through the game using over powered weapons
The only bad thing about these announcements are the inevitable and unreasonable responses from the public. This game looks great. From all the previews I've read, it IS great! So the DLC - like most DLC I will add - is aimed at those that loved the game and want MORE. It beats waiting years for a full sequel, right?
Bottom line, If you don't like it then don't buy it. There is obviously a market for DLC or it wouldn't be happening.
@Spoony_Tech "This is becoming the norm so get over it."
I'm looking at it more as, this is becoming the norm so plan accordingly.
I almost didn't buy FFXV b/c of the season pass, and ever since then I really wish I hadn't. Only I had to b/c our Christmas gifts consisted of a PS4 to the play the game, the movie + webisodes blu-ray to give the movie a story, and the hardcover guide to help w/ the tougher bits. So I had to. But if we already had the PS4 and other gifts lined up I wish I would have waited. Game was out 10 months ago, they only just now added a "bestiary". We are all about the bestiaries in my house.
My son played Zelda many extra hours to complete his. Before giving up and buying all the photos, but whatever. I only started playing after the first set of DLC came out - I would have screamed at myself if I had tried to play Zelda w/o the green line on the map, it was oh so helpful for filling in the blank spots to figure out where the extra shrines are - up to 111 on my own. That green line REALLY should have been a free update for everyone, it's already in the game tracking 200 hours of play. Oh and I beat the beginner trails last night, sword up to 40, ready to go face Ganon now after playing for 158 hours. And I'll go back for the Ballad of Champions.
And I'm glad I've waited this long on Witcher 3. Not only did they add 2 story DLC segments but they also improved the menus and other items. And the DLC for Horizon Zero Dawn releases this fall, and that's when I'll play the game. And of course for me the best thing about waiting on H:ZD - they just added easy mode, and that's how I roll.
http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2017/08/horizon_zero_dawn_update_lowers_the_difficulty_for_casual_fans
So yeah, almost every non-indie game these days has DLC and season passes - heck even Shovel Knight is all about the ongoing support. So from now on I'll buy games "when their done". Or at least when they seem like their done, I'm not going to wait 5 years for the 4k port of every PS4 game on PS5, remastered games don't count.
So yeah, this can wait until 2018 for us. When it's done.
Yeah any little interest I had in getting this is completely blown away now. That's actually a good thing.
it's a ubisoft game. did people really expect something else?
@TheMisterManGuy That is absolutely not how game development works. When I was at 2K, the DLC wasn't worked on by QA until a month after the game was released and the first couple patches were completed. Same with Bioshock, X-COM, etc.
Anyways, I love how people are complaining they're getting an incomplete game now when none of them know the scope of the base game. "I'm cancelling my pre-order!" Yells the person who was so upset there was going to be a Mario+Rabbids game when the rumors were around before it was officially announced. Don't be so reactionary, it's unbecoming.
"A new unexpected story content" -This is why proofreading is important.
@SuperTeeter64 Arm Cannons dude. Arm cannons.
@titotito3399 Let me explain something really basic to you: you do not need the DLC. It is not a necessity, in order for it to be a complete game.
I don't understand why everyone falls into this logical fallacy of "-if it has day-one DLC, it's not a complete game!" It's literally add-on content, added after the game went gold. Look. The whole idea of day-one DLC being content cut from the game's development to be resold is bogus. All the people who claim it's true in all cases have zero proof of it being the case, and try to get around the burden of proof by either trying to turn the burden of proof on those who call out their BS, or browbeat people who don't agree with them till the end of time.
Breath of the Wild had a Season Pass everyone raged about that and...everyone went quiet after that.
This could happen to this one.
@Yorumi I'm sorry, no.
The whole idea of them selling us an incomplete game just because it has Day One DLC is fallacious, and for that matter, completely unable to be proven unless unless you datamine the disc or the game data to look for evidence of such.
The whole idea that Day One DLC is cut content that is sold back is based on a presumption that cannot be proven without having the game in hand, and even then, most people don't have the tools or knowledge to even find out that information.
My overall point being you're basically pulling charges out of thin air with nothing but tissue paper to try to solidify them and it's all based on BS. At the end of the day even if you compare games to others, even if bare bones, you still got the complete game, you got what was promised, and the DLC, you get it after the fact.
It's all conjecture based in nothing concrete. All people have is finger-pointing at other companies and their past actions, and act as if that holds true for every single game. Here's a hint: it doesn't.
@Yorumi To be fair anything said about the possible outcome of this is an assumption or guess. There is nothing concrete so you can atleast concede that point to @MegaVel91. In my opinion from what's listed, the DLC doesn't look all to big at all. I don't see that much of a reason to doubt the content of the game at this point in time.
@Darthroseman The specifics of when DLC exactly begins development probably varies between publisher. But I do know that a game typically is finished development well before it's actually released.
@Yorumi Fair enough
@DarkVortex Except Spoony_tech's listed age is older than you
I still think Blizzard handles DLC best. Release the best complete game you can. If it's a hit, then make an expansion that adds in new characters and levels for a reasonable fee. If that's a hit then do it again.
The worst part about these prerelease season passes is you know in a year they'll release a complete edition for half the cost of the original.
@bolt05 No, I mean inflation. Games are, as far as the people I've talked to and I am aware, underpriced. They can easily be raised to $70, however, I believe companies don't because they choose to charge for dlc instead.
or
Games should be priced higher due to inflation, but for some reason they aren't.
@manu0 Just Dance never had a season pass.
@MegaVel91 Yeah, sure. You also don't need the green line telling you where you've been in Zelda BotW. That's not a necessity. You can fit the whole map in your head easily.
@Yorumi It has nothing to do with being upset that consumers exercise their rights, and not taking whatever a company dishes out. Nor am I even implying it's the consumers job to buy the games. You're being ridiculous. Not only that, I am not "flying off the rails" with "how dare you"s. Calling a game incomplete without the DLC is one thing, and in some ways true. Saying a company is selling you an incomplete game is disingenuous and wrong. Cause DLC isn't even necessary to complete the base game in most cases.
What irks me is people making a presumption based on flimsy evidence with basically nothing substantial to back it up.
Pointing fingers to past practices only substantiates that something has happened before, not that something is currently true. Without substantial evidence that the Day One DLC is content cut from the game, any such claims are bogus and nothing but conjecture.
-and what it seems like to me is some people can't fathom the idea that a base game without the DLC is still a complete game. Unless you're that certain game where they tried to sell you the game's ending. That is crap.
I myself plan to get this game at a later date, probably after all the DLC is already out, so I can see whether or not it's worth the purchase.
@victimOfNirvana The fact it is not needed to complete the game in and of itself means it's not a necessity.
@MegaVel91 Many games have been completed blindfolded. Does that mean image output could be sold as DLC and that would be fair? Just because you can finish a game doesn't mean it's optimal. In fact, it's PAINFUL to play Zelda BotW without knowing where you've been. You are being way too strict in your definition of a complete game.
@victimOfNirvana Maybe I am, but I find it ridiculous when people scream they're not going to buy a game because of Day-One DLC they can't even confirm is content cut from the game to be resold to them.
That's my peeve here. They're making this claim with no evidence to back it up beyond a company's past practices. They know they have nothing substantial so all they can really do is point fingers and hope it sticks. Ubisoft has been known for shady crap, but come on.... Can people really do no better than flimsy finger pointing?
My problem with BOTW dlc is that it costs $20 (33% the cost of the full game), therefore I should expect atleast 33% more content. MK8 did it, so it isn't impossible.
The same applies to M+R kb
@MegaVel91 We are not the ones who have to prove anything. It's our money on the line. There are plenty of games to buy and plenty of games to play that we already bought. It's the publisher's job to convince us that their game is worth our money, not ours. If they want to give us reasons to distrust them, then don't be surprised when we decide we won't be the ones to do the leap of faith.
@TheMisterManGuy If games finished development "well before release" Day One patches wouldn't exist. Of the 20+ games I worked on from various developers, none of them were not being worked on up until and through their release dates.
@Darthroseman Day One patches are usually when there's a bug or glitch that was noticed at the last minnute I would think (unless there are other things too). Yes, with things like DLC and continuous game updates, developers do continue to work on games up to and even well after their release. But the core game is usually completed before the game hits stores.
Waiting for reviews before I pick up
Not into steampunk but I'm into this game!
@MasterWario your second statement makes sense. But I disagree. I think the market is flooded with games and they are priced to sell accordingly. Supply and demand. There have never been more games on the market than has the last 10 yrs with the rise of Indies and govt. Grants and Kickstarter like funding to boost them.
So many AAA games get a price drop after 1 month when they fail to sell to the extent that indie game shops can lose money by selling AAA games. There's a great article over on polygon about this. Couple of months old now.
@TheMisterManGuy The answer to your original question is no. Most gamers are not informed consumers and thus don't care about how the product is made/production costs/dev timetable; only that they get as much of the product as possible for as cheap as possible. Value add propositions don't really fly with them.
Of course as with anything a value add proposition can be an exploit but the issue is way too many gamers assume this off the bat.
I see a lot of people complaining about length. Not quite sure where this info is coming from?
One prieview I read mentioned a section three quarters through the game being about 15-20 hours in, which means the game should be aortic 20-25 hours, which is more than enough for me, as these days I struggle to sink close to what I used to into something. 15-20 hours is the sweet spot for me these days.
I don't see what the issue is. The main extra content isn't due out until next year, so they're hardly holding anything back. They would have stopped working on the main game months ago, so the timing of the announcement makes sense too. They will have started working on this already, and knowing additional solo content is due definitely sounds good to me. Too many games are online multi player focused these days.
My preorder of the special edition should be on its way, which is great. Except I don't have a Switch to play it on yet!
@MasterWario
Inflation is just 1 compoment. The large increase in the market well offsets any inflationary increases since a game is largely fixed cost and cost/game takes into account the sales the game makes. Also as the move into digital distribution has occured the middle man is more often getting squeezed out as well as lower distribution/boxing costs. Also as mentioned above tech has allowed companies to reduce manhours on certain components of development and the high amount of competition at this point means that margins will naturally decrease.
@TheMisterManGuy
Except in the case where Nintendo is going. There two biggest new release games (Splatoon, Arms) are being released in parts with significant parts being released well past actual release. It's like early access beta on Steam.
@MegaVel91
"Pointing fingers to past practices only substantiates that something has happened before, not that something is currently true. Without substantial evidence that the Day One DLC is content cut from the game, any such claims are bogus and nothing but conjecture."
What you are asking for is something that only a few people in Ubisoft would know for sure. The asking for "proof" to back up ones opinion thing is overdone and a poor argument. I mean do you have proof that Ubisoft absolutely crammed everything into a $60 game they could? And they are cramming everything they can into the $20 DLC? Oh, you're just mad because Yorumi never claimed to have proof that you are demanding except past history which you claim is invalid here? I mean I wish we could all be naively optimistic over all things Switch but making yourself judge of opinions is probably not going to endear you to many here.
Perception matters and anytime a company announced DLC on a new IP before seeing if that new IP is actually successful is going to be a bad look. You shouldn't be upset at someone's opinion so much. This is a forum to discuss opinions. Maybe the game will prove to be well worth $60 and the DLC well worth $20 and this whole discussion dissapears much like the Zelda DLC. But until that time there's nothing wrong with being skeptical of the approach.
@cleveland124 They're not the same thing. Early access means playing the game before the core experience is finished, which means the game is much more susceptible to bugs and glitches in this state. With Splatoon and ARMS, the base game and mechanics are already fully complete. What Nintendo is doing is simply building upon and refining them with continuous content updates.
@TheMisterManGuy
Most early access games play well and more about producing additional content rather than changing physics. Sure the physics can be tweaked but arms physics has already been tweaked as well. To me with splatoon and arms had enough content released after launch to indicate that they weren't finished. If you want to argue not finished is different than early access that's fine, but I'd rather have as finished a game as possible at launch.
@cleveland124 Maybe it's just the games you played, but Early Access implies the games is still in pre-alpha at most, and the developers are simply letting people try it early to gauge first impressions.
With ARMS and Splatoon 2, the core fundamentals of the game, including gameplay, content, look, feel, and graphics are all completed. The developers are simply improving upon and adding to them with regular updates. With ARMS, physics changes are expected because it's a fighting game, character re-balancing is mandatory for a modern fighter like this, and the main way to do that is tweaking the physics to make it more fair.
@TheMisterManGuy
Pre-alpha and post alpha by definition are more about how the developer defines it. Arms version 2.0 is live now. Nintendo very well could have called that alpha version 1.0 but they didn't. The last game I bought early access was Dirt Rally. I bought it a couple months before it went gold. I could make a solid argument that it was more complete than splatoon 1 when it was released but if you only seem to be focused on if a game calls itself early access or not.
@cleveland124 @aesc Interesting points, never thought about those. Thanks for the info! I still feel like developers are pushed into dlc because they'd like their game to sell for a higher price, at least to a small degree.
It was to be expected. You can always ignore it, of course.
Tap here to load 132 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...