
If you follow multi-platform websites or other systems on social media, one term will be familiar - loot boxes. After a few years where they've crept into games, plenty of gamers have decided that recent examples take things too far. A recent tipping point seemed to be Middle-earth: Shadow of War, a single player adventure that tried to shoe-horn in immersion-breaking loot boxes. This particular microtransaction-fuelled feature has been common in multiplayer games for a while, yet their presence in the high profile sequel were unwelcome, sloppy and undoubtedly greedy on the part of the publisher.
Pretty much every game is being scrutinised in relation to this topic right now, including shooters where, frankly, they're not new to the genre. Yet if you game exclusively on Nintendo hardware you may not be very familiar with the phenomenon - we have the infamous 'packs' in FIFA 18, similar ideas in NBA 2K18, and not much else. DLC in Switch games, for example, is primarily a 'pay x for an expansion pass' deal; we can debate the merits of individual offerings, but you typically know what you're signing up for.

As highlighted above, the current rebellion against loot boxes and similar microtransactions feels very much like a case of some losing patience, especially with the way games are now tilted to push players towards paying more into their retail games. Balancing is the key issue, and whether it falls towards a 'pay-to-win' model on games that already cost $60. Add to that the way some packs and drops trick players into compulsive borderline gambling, making them dip multiple times for better rewards, and it's easy to see why some are calling for gamers to vote with their wallets and ditch the worst-offending games.
Nintendo, mostly, has stayed quite sweet in this respect, avoiding the bad publicity and vocal critics online that other publishers are dealing with. Yet it feels like the company is struggling to resist, as accountants and investors no doubt whisper in the metaphorical ear of Nintendo to say 'go on, players will pay'.
Those whispers will be happening because, well, gamers do pay. As much as it'll irritate the most staunch anti-loot box brigade at present, companies are using them so much because they evidently work. They'll have analysts proving that this kind of monetisation is effective; heck, EA must make an absolute packet from FIFA each year through Ultimate Team's in-game economy. Yes, a vocal contingent resist these add-ons and even complain about them, but millions evidently buy into it.
Nintendo's no saint when it comes to DLC, albeit its questionable moves have been relatively light compared to exploits elsewhere in the market. This writer still thinks pricing was a tad over-aggressive for extra characters, outfits and stages in Super Smash Bros. for Wii U / 3DS, especially compared to the Mario Kart 8 DLC's fantastic value around the same time. Then we've seen the 'gacha' approach in Fire Emblem Heroes on mobile, with the defence that it is a free-to-play game, where such tactics are common and - from a business perspective - necessary. Let's also not entirely forget amiibo as 'physical DLC' in some cases, such as a difficulty setting in Metroid: Samus Returns locked behind a specific figure.

Nintendo, over the past few years, has also sought to push the boundaries of monetisation in other ways. We've seen commercial tie-ins with major brands, with some Japan-only promotions in Animal Crossing: New Leaf and the infamous Mercedes vehicles in Mario Kart 8; these are free to players, with companies paying the money for advertising. These arguably do little harm as they're optional, but they can impact the 'purity' - such as it is - of some gaming brands. Even in The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild we had the slightly bizarre 'Nintendo Switch' red t-shirt, albeit that's self-promotion. It's a game that's seemingly vulnerable in terms of immersion breaking, with last week's Xenoblade Chronicles 2 tie-in being a simple promotion for an upcoming game. These sorts of moves won't be popular with everyone, and they're gradually becoming more common.
So far Nintendo is trying to increase its marketing and monetisation of DLC through relatively harmless ways. It's clearly important revenue, with Xenoblade Chronicles 2 offering one of the pricier expansion passes, albeit one with more updates than other Nintendo equivalents.
All of that said, a hat should be tipped to Nintendo's efforts to continually make games better for free. Splatoon 2 and ARMS continue to add new weapons, characters and stages respectively at no cost to players, maintaining interest months after release. It's a lovely bonus when we get free content like this, or even generously priced DLC.
Nintendo is - we'd argue - on the right side of having a nice balance in DLC and broader add-on content to date. There have been some flirtations with marketing tie-ins that can be tacky, but so far the company has generally offered fair value with DLC and assorted extras. It'll be interesting to see whether it can resist the temptation to monetise more retail games in the future - the uproar would be significant if some of the microtransactions from a game like Pokemon GO crept into the main series, for example. Or if a future entry of Splatoon throws in loot boxes for new outfits and guns. Those would be moments when criticism would certainly be fair game.
As it stands Nintendo still has a solid reputation in terms of its approaches to DLC and add-on content; let's hope it stays that way.
Comments 162
DLC is welcome if it is not content cut from the main game. So far Nintendo delivered really good DLC, with reasonable prices.
Agreed. Here's hoping for the best-
Please Nintendo, ignore what everyone has been saying for years and on this matter, DONT get with the times.
No lootboxes, microtransactions, pre-order missions, horse armor. PLZ and thank you.
The one thing where I actively HOPE Nintendo is behind industry trends for.
I'm old enough to remember the era of 'Expansion Packs'. They've become rare, but Red Dead Nightmare and Dragon Age: Awakening are two great examples from the last generation. If Nintendo sticks to those things and stays away from pay to win, pre-order lockouts, and horse armor I will be happy.
@BLP_Software 100% behind that statement. As the article states, there's been a few times where I believe they messed up, such as Smash Wii U/3DS and I'd also add FE Awakening and Fates to this list, as well as Hyrule Warriors, but one can argue this is a KOEI Tecmo game using Nintendo characters. Overall though some season passes have been great value, such as MK8 (already mentioned) and the free content in other games is fantastic. I understand the need for monetisation further than a single one-off purchase, but what the likes of Activision and EA have been doing is inexcusable. The other problem with Nintendo is that even with games that are frontloaded with DLC, you rarely ever see Complete/GOTY editions, which would be great for Smash after it's already been out for three years. The only actual recent example I can think of is including New Super Luigi U in the disc versions of NSMBU Selects.
Fire Emblem Echoes
I'm pretty happy with the dlc position on switch at the moment. I'd happily pay more for some more Wario Kart tracks.
I think Nintendo have changed already and some people don't even realise it. They'll develop so much for the €60 base price and then people have to pay for the rest.
Xenoblade Chronicles 2 is the latest example. Base game for €60 and a €30 Expansion Pass for the next year's worth of developed content. They as good as confirmed that it's a shorter game and a smaller world than that which is in XCX.
There's a lot of greed. Will that Expansion Pass have 50% extra content? I can say with almost certainty that it won't. They do these packs to make more money for less effort. The digital price of XC2 is what I paid for the physical Collector's Edition of XCX. So that's already more money for less content before you even factor what I mentioned previously.
The MK8 DLC is a shining example of DLC done well and done fair. But that was their first attempt, certainly on a home console so it was important to create a good first impression. Since then it's gone slowly downhill in my estimation. The Smash Bros. DLC, I can't remember offhand, I worked it out before, but it costs several multiples of the game to buy it all, compared to the base game. There's no 1 DLC Pack that contains it all. It's easily over €100 and it's only a fraction of added content. Oh ya, and that's just for one platform, it's more if you want it for both 3DS and Wii U.
There are others. Metroid: Samus Returns locking content that used to be free in the past, now locked behind amiibo. BOTW too, has stuff that should have been included for free and would have been before, now part of the DLC pack. Costumes locked behind amiibo, some amiibo which are impossible to buy and/or are really expensive, with no alternative method of buying them. The Hero's Mode, Traveller's Medallion, Hero's Path and other little things took little effort and should have been free. Whatever about Hero's Mode but definitely the other 2.
The vast majority of Splatoon 1/2 'DLC' isn't actual DLC, literally everything is already on the cart or in your download, they just remotely unlock it. That's why we know pretty much every single weapon plus it's sub and special before they announce it's coming.
Honestly, I'm perfectly fine with DLC as long as companies don't withhold literally 1/2 of the game like Star Wars Battlefront for example, where you buy the husk of the game for $60, and then you buy the actual meat of it for another $60.
@gortsi IMO Smash wasn't even a mess up for the most part, people tend to forget how much development and licensing cost for one character in a fighting game.
However I'd agree that those Mii Costumes prices are outright ridiculous.
I'm fine with this as long as they are free or cheap kinda like BoTW season pass.
Nintendo would be better avoiding going down this route, it might mean losing out on some extra revenue but it'll do wonders for their reputation as it's only going to become more common from here on.Them adding DLC to their games was inevitable and for the most part I welcome it,my fingers are crossed for Odyssey DLC and I've only just started playing it. Loot boxes or any kind of in-game monetization wouldn't be welcomed though, far from it. Folk might be paying elsewhere but I can't imagine anyone is happy doing so.
Hey don’t knock the inclusion of Mercs in MK8. The 300sl is still my main car(t)!
@Monado_III ARMS is actual new content though. So that's pretty nice.
Splatoon 2 benefits from having most of Splatoon 1's content almost already ready for release and just having to be fine tuned as they're released. I'm pretty sure that wasn't the case back in Splatoon 1 though... (At least for any set that has an actual new main) But I might be wrong.
@Pupito You're completely missing the point and going by your comment, it's you who needs to "grow the eff up"!
I think outside of amiibo, Nintendo has handled DLC very well and keep it coming. The fact that most of Nintendo's Switch games this year are more than just "game completed, that's it" is fantastic. I hope they don't go down the loot box route though.
@Pupito If the practice of chopping up content into itsy-bitsy pieces and selling them for much more than they would be otherwise becomes standardised, then the consumer will pay more and potentially get less.
And any sucker who falls for it would be wildly immature and naive for doing so. If you fall into this category, it would be you who are babies.
Clear, dependable pricing structures are not an evil to be fought against. Having a product clearly equated with its price is not undesirable. Gambling away money in the hope you'll strike lootbox luck or hit the gacha jackpot are not good examples of clear pricing, or (to my mind) good practice.
There is a discussion to be had.
Amiibo in ZBOTW where a DLC for lootboxes. You got 3 by buying a 15 dollar toy. If you wanted 6 a day you paid 30 dollars. The boxes that fell from the sky are loot boxes.
Also doing packed DLC is also nonsense. I got the Story DLC fot ZeroDawn For $15 - that is all I care about. Having all DLC bundled behind a $30 dollar DLC paywall is a money grab By Nintendo. There should be no reason a season pass at 50% of the original game is the only option.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE And I can say with certainty that the base game will have more than enough content to justify the base price. Whether or not the expansion will have enough content to justify its price is a separate question. And choosing the size of XCX as your metric for value is inherently flawed. No Nintendo game, possibly apart from Breath of the Wild, is as large, so by your logic no game should be $60; and I hope you'd agree that that would be an absurd conclusion.
@Pupito You are literally whining on message boards.
Also, the two are not mutually exclusive. One can do either, neither, or both.
That is, I may whine and vote with my wallet. Or stay silent and fritter away my cash like a fool.
Telling me to 'stop whining' on the assumption it will somehow have an effect on what I do with my wallet is absurd.
The whole point of this article, and the following comment section, is to have a discussion about the subject. Turning up in said comment section and telling people not to discuss it (by trivialising any discussion as 'whining') is equally absurd, not to mention childish.
In this case, a babies is you.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE I'm not sure that I agree. I think the size and scope of Xenoblade 2 is much more aligned to what was able to be done to hit a December launch. I also think this applies to Zelda (which didn't go gold until very close to its release date).
Your point about the cost of DLC is a valid one but easy to explain. A game will sell, say, x millions copies. By definition, the DLC will always sell fewer copies. If they wish to make the same return on investment (which all companies do) they will need to charge more per unit of their work for the DLC.
I think a reality that the industry is dodging is that "AAA" games cannot be sold at $60/£50/€60 and make an adequate profit. They need additional revenue streams. Personally I would rather pay twice the upfront cost of the game than have the industry fall into a reliance on loot crates. But that's just me.
@Pupito did u even read the article. I presume not. Nobody is saying DLC isn't a valid way to expand and improve upon a game. What is not right and should not be commonplace are micro transactions for loot boxes on single player campaign's, locking premade content behind a DLC pay wall that's already been developed prior to release of the game or even worse locking half of the games content up behind another $60 paywall as well as payy to win on games that are not free to play. These types of practices should be banned.
DLC is welcome so long as it's not content cut and just released later that you have to pay for.
Now loot boxes - those are the a cancer of the industry. They are tolerable in gacha style mobile games - because those are cancer in themselves, but everywhere else they are cancer. I regret that I have spent some money on them in Overwatch, a game I don't even play anymore.
I’m interested to know, why do people hate MTs?
I know I do, but it’s because the game is never complete and destroys the immersion of a game. Also the cost is roofless.
Definitely hope Nintendo will tackle this topic better and differently from the competition especially since there are tons of ways they can do that.
Afterall I think many gamers, me included, are having an hard time accepting things like the microtransaction craziness cause even if you are willing to understand the reasons behind them and supporting them, more often then not these systems feels more optmized toward taking as many money as possible from the players instead then try to create a fair deal for everyone.
Luckily not all games are "The Evil" and Nintendo proved they can enter new money-making systems in interesting ways, but with people spending a ton of money even on the most obvious traps I can't avoid to worry a bit as companies seems to get more and more confident with what they can get away with ^_^;;;
some years ago, i bought the first Harry Potter book - i then bought the next 6 books - every time I paid - i got another book. This is fair. millions and millions of pounds in profit was made from these books. Is it greed? or is it fair? Was i happy?
Yes, I was happy.
This is the way to provide DLC.
I paid £49 for SPLATOON 2 which I've sunk 600 hours in to - I'm happy! I think that's fair. It's a quality game
In addition - I bought each of the Platoon amigos - Hey! That's fair too! I get a great collectible figure . they look great , don't affect the game competitively - I'm happy.
Hyrule Warriors - DLC - absolutely shed loads of content for an already huge game I spent 400 hours on HW - great value!
Fire Emblem Warriors - fabulous game! same model! I'm happy!
Xenoblade Chronicles 2 - Well, look at it ! It's an enormous very high quality game! I'm happy to pay for the season pass up front - of rme it's like pre-ordering the next book in the series - Nintendo DLC has never disappointed me and never made me feel like I was being duped and I think that's important. I also understand that companies need to make money - if they make money - they can make better quality games.
I was just looking at Hearthstone as a paid business model - IT just doesn't seem fair to me so I won't support that business model - I realise other people might think differently in regard to Hearthstone being f2p or pay2win - but the marketing mode skims so close to the edge as to whether or not people can work out if it's fair - that's deliberate and I can see past that.
Lootcrates are absolutely disgusting and I have stopped playing any games that introduce them now - including my beloved Gears of War - because when I get killed in multiplayer - instead of saying to myself "hey, that was fair" - I feel angry - I don't play games to feel angry. .
Hence nintendo is a shining light in this field - and we should be grateful for that.
Mobile? well, hey ha ha! That's fair game!
@Grumblevolcano aye, I agree.
I’ve come to realise the negatives of amiibo. They are cool and good ideas, but restricting content to something that I don’t want is t good. Also the amount of them are too many. Sometimes it’s done well like I. mK8 deluxe, but when it restricts things that I’d consider to be part of the game, it sucks a little.
Still better than Microtransactions and loot boxes though. I hope they die.
I love Splatoon 2’s weekly DLC and also greatly enjoyed Smash’s additional characters and MK8’s extra tracks. I really wish they’d port over Smash 4 to Switch soon. I never got Zelda’s DLC because I have the WiiU version and don’t really feel like playing it on that anymore. I’d have to start all over if I got the Switch version. Oh well.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE The vast majority of the complaints of XCX was that the world was too large. Ergo said complaints led to saying there wasn't enough wildlife in the world & it didn't feel as full as it should have. Director intends to correct that by making a slightly smaller in scope world but rich in detail, life and i'm sure quantity of things to do and see. Per his own interview.
I see no problem in making a game with stronger quality and less quantity in mind , there was a lot of unnecessary bloat in XCX, so what's to discredit the game being worth $60? Depending on the story expansion it may well be worth the $30 or at the very least $20 but I intend to support the developers so $30 isn't out of hand for me since the Xeno series is my favorite RPG franchise since the Squaresoft Xenogears days.
I don't buy DLC anymore and I wish that I have never bought it as I helped to encourage what we have now. DLC led to microtransactions to lootboxes and worse will continue to come as long as consumers defend it.
If you think it's going to magically get better, well it isn't and Nintendo is simply behind, not immune.
@Pupito You were previously whining about the very idea of people having a conversation on this topic, telling them they were "babies" (all of them) who should "grow the eff up".
This prompted my whine, to make the point that there are pricing structures gaining popularity which are notoriously luck-based, and thus make it hard for the consumer to accurately judge what they are getting. The issue grows ever more pertinent (and worthy of discussion) as these pricing structures become more prevalent.
Only the most naive commenter would think Nintendo is directly reading their messages. However, the purpose of comment sections is not to 'convince Nintendo' of anything, but to have discussions with other users, share ideas, and hopefully come away with a slightly broader view. Reality doesn't always pan out this way, but often a few fragments of insightful discussion can be gleaned.
Attempting to stifle this discussion by branding anyone who wishes to have it as "babies" who need to "grow the eff up" is neither productive nor particularly mature.
@Crono1973 And yet it won't ever change, because mobilising a large enough force of consumers to push this stuff back, is like trying to lift a house on your own. Not to mention the majority of silent people that will undermine one's every attempt by just buying the stuff.
@Ziggy93 I hate microtransactions because I think there's a chance that they may destroy the gaming industry. An industry that, in my opinion, is as diverse and culturally important as music or film.
There are problems on many fronts. There's no upper bound on what people can spend, rarely a clear indication as what they buying and they are often required to properly experience the game in a 'fair' way. And this is before we get into gambling addiction. The industry has also been unwilling to introduce any kind of self-regulation on this front (especially on maximum spends).
I think it's only a matter of time before either gamers boycott or government regulators step in. Unfortunately, I think the latter is more likely as we can't seem to stop buying loot boxes. At this point, developers will have become too reliant on the revenue and the re-adjustment will be very painful for the industry.
DLC is tricky , as long as its done rite I'm ok with that . In my opinion Bethesda is the best when it comes to extra paid content with the Fallout/ Elder Scrolls series.
@UmniKnight The response to the Xbox One DRM gives me hope that eventually the masses will come around. Everyone complains about lootboxes and microtransactions and sooner or later I hope we will see more than complaints.
@oatmealwarrior92 People have been saying 'DLC is fine if it's done right' since Horse Armor. That has only encouraged what we have today and it won't get better, it will continue getting worse.
@JamesR aye, I see the same thing. MTs seem to be severely killing the quality and experience of gaming. I’m worried, but I actually hope there is another video game crash just to stop it. Nintendo and Indies will be the ones who save the industry.
Another issue is the aim for intense graphics, lack of innovation, which is increasing the developement cost. Making developers sell up, like during the 7th generation of gaming where 80% of AAA developers went out of business due to costs,
@Crono1973 I certainly hope so and I am inclined to be optimistic and agree with you. I agree with another user here stating that Micro transactions and loot boxes are a cancer to the industry.
@Ziggy93 the aim for intense graphics is really a problem...
@Crono1973 May they lead to positive change in the industry. I've boycotted Shadow of War because of those loot-boxes.
@Neferupitou I say that’s where the problem originated. Alongside, people’s unwillingness to pay a fair price to support developers. (Mobile gaming is a perfect example of price difference).
High cost, lower consumer value of games. So they need another revenue model.
@Pupito It it helps, I find Knock Knock jokes hilarious.
That is to say, I'm not particularly mature.
@PtM aye, that is my issue. Star Wars Battlefront 2 for example. It’s looks really good, but yet if I were to get it (although I won’t as they won’t release it on the Switch), id be supporting it. FIFA also.
I hate part, but like the rest..
I really, really hope Nintendo doesn't get in on this whole loot box thing. Loot boxes should only be for merchandise, nothing else. I had no idea that loot boxes actually included things for use in-game, but the idea really doesn't sound appealing to me.
If you ask me, as Nintendo has been doing it as of now, it has been great value almost every single time with all their DLC. Indeed the Smash stuff was a bit overpriced, and I'm personally not a fan of free-to-play games, and especially the difficulty locking behind amiibo is kind of disgusting (and I'm saying this as an amiibo collector), and I personally also think the regular Fire Emblem games overprice their DLC WAAAAAY too much, but overall I've been quite pleased with Nintendo's DLC offerings.
@Crono1973 Vote with your wallet . Your not being forced to pay for anything extra . People get mad and complain about something they don't need to buy . Not sure what exactly is the issue ? 🤔
@oatmealwarrior92 I do vote with my wallet but I also criticize it. Is that ok with you?
It's funny that people are so quick to jump on the companies are greedy, DLC is fine as long as it not cut content opinion. The same profit margins of a $60.00 game today is not the same as last generations.
I am not saying it not ok to be upset. Just take time to look at the bigger picture.
While I doubt Nintendo will straight up adopt loot boxes and microtransactions like the big western 3rd party publishers, I fully expect them to be more aggressive with their DLC/Expansion Passes in future games, starting with DLC for Mario Odyssey
If you want companies to move away from unhealthy exploitation of consumer engagement, then you will have to convince the mass markets to not buy games that support these practices. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen, so it's a "deal with it or leave" situation.
This is why I hate much of the current western AAA gaming industry, but nothing can be done other than to sit back and watch as our pockets are slowly sucked up dry.
@Ziggy93 I live in the UK and I think it's been decades since the yearly Fifa or CoD incarnation didn't take the top selling position on the year-end charts (with GTA interrupting on a few occasions). It's hard to argue that innovation isn't dead already.
Having said this, the success of the Switch has given me a little hope (misplaced, I'm sure)
Petition: Adapt gambling laws to include gambling in video games which targets children. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/201300
@zionich We are looking at the bigger picture, it's ruining gaming.
@oatmealwarrior92 the issue is, is that as individuals we can’t change the industry, and it’s frustrating.
With gaming, our hobby is effected by how others spend their money. So we are at the mercy of others. If it keeps going the way it does, we may have very few games that we like to play as few have no Microtransactions.
@zionich aye that is one of the reasons why we have MTs and DLCs. I made a comment about this further up, about development costs, and the pursuit for graphics.
Nintendo and Indies do fine, because they don’t focus on blades of grass and rather on gameplay and innovation.
The thing about these DLC/Microtransactions becoming norms is that the companies who use them gain a great monetary advantage over the ones who don't.
If a game is pulling in over $100+ per customer on average. A $60 game and it's sequel is going find it hard to compete with the increased budget/marketing of the the DLC/Microtransaction filled game and sequel. I think the more accepted these things become the more inevitable it becomes that Nintendo will start to implement them.
I sincerely do hope lootboxes get a blowback whether it's by consumers or government intervention. Pseudo-gambling microtransactions are not something I want to see Nintendo put in their regular games.
Let there be loot-boxes, but I won`t spend a single Euro on it !!!
It's too late. Nintendo has already embraced many of the industry's worst trends in some form or another (microtransactions in their mobile games, pay-to-win Pokémon Shuffle, no longer offering worthwhile content with amiibo etc.), and they are all the poorer for it. Allowing publishers to release games without the actual game being playable from the cartridge is one of their worst practices yet. I don't want to to know what kind of ..... they will be "embracing" or permitting going forward, but I can no longer view Nintendo as the "lesser of evils" in the industry, as much as I love a lot of their output.
I guess we could look at it like this: Some people are willingly subsidizing gaming for the rest of us the way smokers subsidize taxes for those who don't smoke. So thanks...I guess?
Short answer (for a change ): yes indeed, they must.
@SanderEvers So much wrong in your statements. I'll deal with a couple of them. You say Nintendo aren't greedy. Would you stop please? Nintendo are as greedy as any other company out there. They're also probably the stingiest as well. They don't know how to have a good sale. They keep their prices on games high for years even when they aren't selling. They charge ludicrous prices for their accessories. €90 Switch dock says "Hi!"
Another point, you say we know how much the DLC is going to be. That's true for the most part but not always. However, you don't always know what you're getting. MK8, they charged a price and I like many others paid for it day 1 but I'd know idea what I was getting. The same goes for many other games, BOTW, €20, again I bought it, no idea at the time what I was getting. Still have no idea what the main DLC is and it's a month away from release. XC2 has a €30 Expansion Pack, people are talking about buying it but they've not a notion what it's going to contain.
The expansion pass is ok on BotW but the hard mode should have been a free unlockable on the get go, like in A Link Between Worlds, Wind Waker HD, and Twilight Princess HD.
@AlanJones84 Arguably, yes. In fact, I would say definitely yes. I fully agree.
But if the game is designed such that it would be unbalanced without the purchase of loot boxes, then the problem escalates.
If a game played sans-lootboxes is excessively tedious or unfairly punishing, then the question becomes not just about whether to purchase lootboxes, but whether purchas the game itself. And then you're in really murky territory.
So yeah, lootboxes can potentially have a negative effect on game on even if the player chooses to ignore them entirely. It depends how centrally the game is designed around them.
Even in the best case scenario, the mixing of real money with luck based rewards rubs me up the wrong way. I'd rather not see gambling with actual cash become a standardised game mechanic.
I would counter argue and say Nintendo has some of the most expensive DLC paywalled behind Amiibo and that practice is horrid.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE why the hell would you buy a DLC/expansion pass without knowing what you're getting? Also, Nintendo doesn't owe anyone a price drop. If a game still sells at a price that they originally set, it's juat rational to continue selling it at that price.
I think the way Nintendo has handled season passes has been good. They don't start working on them till the game is done, so it's not cut content, it's additional content.
One thing that is funny is that people judge a season pass before the content is released, which is really odd since there's no way to know whether it will be worth it or not. It's just a way to know that there is even more coming so if you want more, you can buy more. You can also wait until it actually releases before buying it so again... I don't really understand the rush to judge it.
Also, price has very little to do with length of content. Price is determined by how much time, money and man hours went into making something.
But most importantly... less than three weeks to Xenoblade!
@cowntsikin I said for games that weren't selling they still keep the prices high. And it's not just games. Hardware too. They wouldn't reduce the price of the Wii U. It only ever got one €50 reduction.
I bought the DLC without knowing because I wanted to support the game and I put faith in Nintendo. For BOTW, I wanted them to do the Wii U versions DLC justice.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE yeah, I bought the BotW DLC and hope it delivers. I finished the “story” and was pretty underwhelmed with the ending. Hopefully the Champions Ballads adds something substantial.
@Mr_Zurkon Like new enemies? because damn man, after 70 hours of killing recolored versions of the same monters..argh.
@Neferupitou yeah, that was just one of many issues I had with the game. Enemy variety was sorely lacking for sure.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE Pretty sure they said XC2 will have a smaller world like the original as it fits the game better, but will still be around the same length as the original, which was very long as well. XC2 will have more cutscenes than XCX and they will be better animated (As we have seen so far), so it makes sense that the game's world may be a little smaller.
Being a family of gamers with four 3DSes and four Switches, my biggest problem with DLC is the fact that it can't be shared the same way a game card can. So while we may be able to get away with buying a $60 Breath of the Wild once, that isn't the case with the Season Pass since it's tied to the profile, not the cartridge. Instead of getting used to/learning to accept DLC, the more time that passes with DLC being part of the video game market, the less I like it. So I hate myself every time I buy any of it, such as the recent Season Pass for Fire Emblem Warriors.
Nintendo, at worst, has offered DLC with questionable value for price. Fire Emblem Echoes DLC and Smash.
However, I'm totally fine with that. It's a "buy it if you want it, skip it if you don't" proposition. It's all extra content and it's all completely up to each consumer whether they buy it or not.
My issue, is with microtransactions. And I don't even mind them if they're not in the single player campaign (FIFA 18, for example- they can do whatever they want in FUT, but the single player was clean and free). It's when they put microtransactions in the single player content that I draw the line. That, and multiplayer focused games that don't even offer offline content when they should.
We need to SUPPORT games like DOOM and Wolfenstein 2. Solid, GotY quality single player games without a single micro transaction or money sucking MP mode. You wanna keep microtransactions at bay? Go buy DOOM and speak with your wallet. But right now, Assassin's Creed Origins is vastly outselling Wolfenstein 2, despite Wolfenstein 2 being completely clean of microtransactions or loot boxes. You wanna take a stand? Support single player games without this nonsense. DOOM and Wolfenstein 2 are a good start.
edit
And btw, as much as I don't like it and stopped playing because of it, FE Heroes gets immunity as a mobile game. That's simply how mobile monetization works. It would be a different story if it were a console game.
If it's to unlock core gaming features like a difficulty mode or levels, then it's wrong. Otherwise no real problems here. The consumer ultimately decides.
Many major releases on the ps store are absurd, the main culprit, to my eye, being E.A. They seem to release three different versions of some of their sports titles, in particular, with ludicrous names. The most expensive of which costs around £85.
@Masurao : It was hardly a commercial failure. It just proved to be less lucrative than the microtransaction model that has (sadly) become the norm. Ideally, Nintendo should have stuck to their guns, had some semblance of integrity, and continued to produce complete mobile games at a set price. Instead of trying to help steer the industry forward in this way in the long term, they buckled after just one release, and reduced themselves to executing the same scummy practices as their contemporaries, because, as you've stated, "consumers are stupid", and post-Iwata Nintendo is more keen on short term profit from fickle, disloyal consumers as opposed to fostering goodwill and trust from those more likely to stick it out and support them in the long term.
If this is the future of gaming, then there is no place in it for me.
The DLC is a gray area. It all depends on what you are getting. I loved getting the MK8 expansion pack. I do not mind the Amibos either. The DLC was great with the Fire Emblems for 3DS. It helped you gain experience and gold. I admit to paying $15 for clothing on a Tales game for the Vita. Looking back, I was a fool. I do feel like that was a waste of money. Stuff like that should have a quest mission to get clothes or already be in the game. I think Nintendo has it in a balanced spot for the most part.
@River3636 The DLC was great with the Fire Emblems for 3DS. It helped you gain experience and gold.
You couldn't really grind without the DLC, could you?
@Crono1973 I did grind that is how I gained the EXP and the gold in it. Could that mission be in the game? Sure, but in the end. I did not purchase all of the DLC I chose which to purchase.
In my personal opinion, I think that the only time loot boxes are okay is if it is only for cosmetics and not for weapons, abilities, characters, etc. (i.e., Overwatch). If it is for pay-to-win then I'm against it.
A person complaining about other people's views makes me question who's the real toddler.
@Pupito
"You’re babies. All of you. Why is this still a talking point?
If you don’t want it, don’t buy it. It’s that simple."
Generally, I hate the DLC scene. I grew up in an age where you bought a game as it was and that's what you played whether it be then, or now, 20 years later.
Even as a massive Zelda fan, I've skipped on all the BotW DLC since it's all just worthless garbage outfits that look ridiculous anyway. We will see what the 'new story content' brings though I'm already hesitant for that too.
I’m okay with new content for a fee, but anything else and I’m out.
@Pupito Agreed. It also depends on what the content is. If it is a cool character hat but priced as much as a level then no. However if it is a nice level or characters that don't add much to the story but extends the game then yes. Honestly I think Injustice 2 is doing a good job. They go the distance by making their dlc characters have specific dialogues and ending. Impressive. Now if it can only come to the Switch.
Everyone seems to have the same answer 'Some DLC is fine'. Well, keep up the status quo then.
@jomo32 You're paying more for an added story they most likely haven't yet even finished writing to add on to the story they've already made for the game. If they had cut the story from the main game to sell as DLC it wouldn't be releasing autumn 2018, it'd be releasing in Spring at the latest. So either we don't get Xenoblade for another year or we get it this year with some DLC in the future. The price of buying games had stayed the same while expenses to making a AAA game have gone through the roof and companies needed to find a way to compensate for that and free DLC doesn't help the bottom line nearly as much as paid DLC does, the cost may be a bit steep and while it does somewhat annoy me as a consumer I get why companies do it.
I do t mind DLC if it’s worth the money. But, I won’t stand for micro transactions, loot boxes and pay to win for a game I e already paid 60 bucks for... and I won’t be purchasing any game like Battlefront 2 etc.
Sadly Amiibo are handled in the worst possible way. Limited supply with locked dlc essentially only available to those who get them day one or pay a premium online or on craigslist. Wish they could mass produce them to destroy the resellers market i can't even get the Princess Zelda Smash Bros Amiibo Walmart exclusive to USA it looks like. They do good dlc but the Amiibos need to be handled way better than they currently are.
They have embraced two of the worst videogame-related business practices to date: Season Pass and retailer exclusivity. Only loot crates are left for them to enter the hall of fame of anti-customer companies.
My mom always said, "Life is like a 'loot crate', you never know what you're gonna get".
-Forrest Gump
I thought the smash bros. dlc was too expensive. The Mii costumes also should have been free.
As long as DLC is optional and Nintendo doesn't pull a Capcom by splicing vital content out of their games, it's fine.
The thing to consider is that these days making HD games is crazy expensive. And game companies have had to find "creative" ways to make each game profitable without being too obvious about it (some companies manage that better than others).
It's not a cheap hobby, videogames. We always have the option to go back to playing chess or pinochle.
@GC-161 And game companies have had to find "creative" ways to make each game profitable without being too obvious about it
Why can't they be obvious about it? Is it because consumers have made it clear that they are unwilling to pay more than $60 for video games? Why is the response to that by developers to create hidden costs instead of reigning in development costs?
I personally have no problem with any of Nintendo's DLC. All of the DLC that I've bought I consider to be a fair deal, even the Smash DLC (to be fair I didn't own Smash on the 3DS) And I can purchase the DLC if I want to, and I can skip it if I don't want to. I still haven't bought BOTW's DLC as I don't know what the Ballad of the Champions adds, and I probably won't buy M+RKB's DLC unless it adds more than story like characters (but they would have to playable from the start for me to care)
i dont mind season passes for nintendo at least its not loot crates that ea and now sega as well.
Nintendo by and large have handled dlc quite well, I don't mind expansion passes if I get more content built for the gane over time and games like Mario Kart 8 benefited hugely from this.
There is one bad example though and that's Zelda, some of the things behind the season pass clearly should be included with the game especially when it was tracking your movement in the first place and the travel medallion for example. Worse than this are the costumes which are locked behind a ridiculous number of Amiibo and that situation is about to get worse. Weirdly Mario Odyssey adopted a similar approach but also let's you unlock them all in game, Zelda does not. If you want all the costumes just spend a small fortune on Amiibo that may or may not be available to buy or hope you have a friend with them because not even buying the expansion pass brings you closer to them. Sorry what was that? You want to ride Epona, you know Link's own horse, well buy an Amiibo.
Don't think that I'm hating on Amiibo because when they are used correctly I think they are Great, I bought the Mario wedding set because they look great and I know the content is already accessible and I would buy a Doom guy Amiibo in a heartbeat, they just need to avoid the Zelda model.
I have no idea how much big budget video games really cost to make these days, but I'm sure it gets more and more expensive as time goes by. Gamers demand far more for their $60/GBP/Yen or whatever you pay in, and new games are always compared to their predecessors in terms of gameplay and graphical fidelity etc. So games always need to improve, look better etc, yet the the prices of games has remained almost static for years.
It's easy to slam EA for their 'dubious' pay to win loot boxes, but they'll get ripped apart no matter what they do to increase their profit. If they charge more for the base game and forego dlc and lootboxes then people will rage. If they have a season pass then people will rage. If they have no season pass, promise new free dlc and have paid loot boxes then people will rage. People will love them if they have no season pass, free DLC and no loot boxes; but then how are they actually supposed to make any money?
They are a business and they have a right to ask for your money as much as you have a right to say 'no thanks'.
Some people need to realise that at the end of the day, it is EVERY developer's/publishers goal to make as much money for their game as they possibly can. If you don't agree with how they go about that, then limit your spending on that product accordingly and reap the consequences.
I have bought BF2, and won't be buying a single loot crate. I know thats gonna put me at a significant disadvantage in MP, but that just the reality I have to accept for paying my 8000yen in this day and age. It sucks, and I don't like it, but I like playing big budget AAA games, so I don't see what other choice I have. I'm not gonna pass on buying a star wars game just because .... and the only opinion that matters to me on whether thats right, wrong or stupid is my own. I'll be perfectly happy with my 8000yen investment, until something better comes along.
So far I have been fine with how Nintendo have gone about it with the exception of some amiibo locked content. I believe amiibos should be a shortcut to unlocking content, not the only way. I have the Samus Returns amiibos because I love Metroid and wanted figures. But there are people who didn't want figures. Nintendo need to offer alternative methods of unlocking.
As for the whole Expansion Pass business, so far we only have one partially released and one on its way. I do like how its treated more like a proper Expansion Pack rather than small pieces ripe for nickel and diming. Of course there is the lack of details regarding the story based content, which so far doesn't feel "removed" from the main game but rather an addition that provides even more detail. The fact its coming out much later suggests it was developed after the main game and possibly conceived as something extra. If games kept on being delayed to add every new feature and idea they'd be delayed indefinitely.
Personally, I hold off Season Pass purchases until the content I want is released (story content) and based on reviews is worth the cost. I personally don't support the idea of myself buying anything purely to support a series or company; I'll buy it because I want it.
@Pupito That attitude is pretty shortsighted. If you want to play great ganmes. We are seing a very definate move towards all games being held ransom behind a paywall. With free to play games making more money than BOTW there is serious pressure to move to that business model. Which, in my view, makes worse games.
@jomo32 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop
sorting by cost with inflation or development cost gives you dozens of games from the past decade with only one or two exceptions (FF VII, Pokemon R/B), and note, other Nintendo games besides gen 1 aren't on the list (likely due to lack of definite numbers) and I guarantee botw and at least a couple other games would be on there if we had definitive numbers for them. Games are also taking longer to develop and are requiring more people to develop them (Rare was making several quality games a year for the N64 with around 85 employees, when was the last game by Retro who also has ~70+ employees, 2014? Even Platinum games with ~200 employees isn't making games as fast as Rare was).
And I'll admit they haven't said anything about the story, but if it was cut, why wouldn't they release relatively shorty after the release (Spring-ish) when they can be sure most people who bought it around launch have beaten it, but they still have the game fresh enough in their minds that they wouldn't mind going back for more, a release of the story content in the later part of next year doesn't seem as ideal in terms of getting as much people to buy the pass seeing as how that is going to be the main meat of the expansion as many of the more casual players will may potentially have forgotten and lost interest in the game or the more hardcore players gotten burnt-out and bored with it. But it makes a lot more sense if the content isn't even developed yet.
I don't like that Nintendo DLC effectively makes their cart purchases sort of half invalid. I cannot get the full Zelda BOTW game on a cart. I need a eShop account, and thus I can never sell it on (ain't gonna happen anyways) or lend it out to a friend or relative (more likely) without them ALSO having to purchase DLC.
Nintendo don't do GOTYs, unfortunately. Mario Golf World Tour also left me with a sour taste since a lot of the courses are locked behind DLC, leaving the base game feeling somewhat short and me short changed.
@sillygostly would you prefer that those games have not come to the platform instead? Because was that kind of attitude that knock down Nintendo since the mid 90's...
@BLP_Software
It's a bit ironic that we would like the a traditional Nintendo on this subject but with regards to everything else we want them to catch up with the others.
But agree with you 100%, and maybe go further to say to go back to when no dlc never existed.
I think Nintendo are missing a trick.
They do have a history of charging premiums for content Vs other publishers (Mario run?) And could do with just pushing that cost down slightly. The €30 xenoblade dlc is in line with other similar games I think, though it does put me off playing until it's "finished".
Where I want Nintendo to do more is games it makes sense. We're unlikely to get Mario kart 9 on switch so let's have regular dlc tracks for it - every 6 months 2-4 cups, doesn't even have to be new, could be retro tracks. I'd buy every time. They could do something similar for smash Bros but I do think that has a life span on dlc.
With regards to amiibo - personally I think the content needs to be exclusive otherwise I won't buy it. Though I'd be interested to see what would happen if they opened up that content as dlc as well, what would sell better...
@Pupito well said, shovel Knight says no. If they pull this, at least make it cosmetic, free to start or dirt cheap. Smash Bros had way too much to pay for, with content double the price of the main game now. These days I can buy a whole game for their price of 1 character, especially when games go on sale. I feel dlc done wrong is a luxury good; to brag like iPhones.
The video game industry needs to be careful, having micro transactions in full priced games is a complete ripoff and travesty to console and PC gaming.
Greed from these companies are going to kill our favorite pass time. Us gamers need to fight back against this micro transactions madness and not perches full priced games that nickel and dime us dry.
Jim Sterling has made some very good videos on his YouTube channel lately concerning DLC and lootboxes. He's supposed to release a new video today on the topic and I'm really looking forward to it. If you haven't seen any of his stuff, I highly recommend it.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWCw2Sd7RlYJ2yuNVHDWNOA
@Crono1973
"Is it because consumers have made it clear that they are unwilling to pay more than $60 for video games? Why is the response to that by developers to create hidden costs instead of reigning in development costs?"
Because the other options are 1) prices go up to $100 per game (they haven't risen in line with inflation for 20 years), or 2) games don't get made if they aren't profitable.
Saying 'cut Dev costs' reminds me of governments who will reduce public services costs by 'streamlining' or 'cutting red tape'. It's too easy and it often turns out these people have worthwhile roles.
No option is great really.
@electrolite77 It totally agree.
Xenoblade 2 costs 60 EUR/$. That is less than I paid for Secret of Mana more than 20 years ago. And that doesn't even include inflation!
So therefore I can buy Xenoblade 2 for 60 EUR and play it. If I like it or want to play more after the end, I can purchase another part of the game. That is very fair. And I still have the option to choose not wasting more money on the game.
By the way: I don't see the logic behind buying the season pass upfront. Why are you buying an expansion pack before you need to? It is not like that it will be out of stock, will be getting more expensive or will vanish suddenly. Can someone explain me this?
Nintendo have already taken the worst industry DLC norms and made it one step worse. It's called amiibo.
@Shane76: Yes, we do:
SNES: 49.10 million
A link to the past: 4,6 million
WiiU + Switch: around 20 million
BotW: around 5 million
I don't see that huge difference here. Nintendo wants to sell 115 million units of Switch. That is just factor 2.
However, the developer costs of BotW are wayyyy bigger than that of AlttP.
As someone who doesn’t generally play other consoles: what’s a loot box? The article acknowledges that people like me may not know, says it’s bad, then completely fails to explain it...
Basically, if it extends the game in some way, then I'm happy to pay for it... if not, then I don't see the point.
Cosmetic DLC (costumes, etc.) are the worst for this, but I don't mind it if they're bundled in with another bit of DLC which does extend the game.
Amiibo as DLC I think really depends on their unique uses, as their generic uses just aren't worth it... some have unique uses that are worth it, while others do not... however, you do also have the added value of them as figures/collectibles, which could make up the difference, depending on your preferences.
@gaga64 A loot box is a random collection of ingame items. You can get loot boxes by either ingame methods (e.g. playing matches, buying with ingame currency) or by spending real money though generally those who spend lots of real money on loot boxes have an advantage over those who spend no real money.
@Masurao: To be fair: Japan had more deflations than inflations over the last 20 years. However, your example still works.
@Shane76
I don't think the userbase has increased exponentially with the costs. Making e.g. FFXV costs a large multiple more than it did to make FFVI but the userbase isn't that much bigger.
I remember when DLC was first becoming a thing. Of course, many of the more sanctimonious Nintendo fans, desperate to take the moral high-ground at all times for some reason, boasted about how great Nintendo was for not doing DLC and how Nintendo will never do DLC because they're so much better than that, etc. Of course, then Nintendo jumped on the DLC bandwagon and they had to desperately scramble around for a new moral high-ground, which was "Nintendo does DLC right!" Then Nintendo, having just jumped on the toys-to-life bandwagon ("Everyone always copies Nintendo!/Nintendo goes their own way!" etc) added amiibo DLC on top of regular DLC and I think they finally just gave up after that.
Face it. This is what Nintendo has become. They're willing to use the same tactics as EA and Take-Two for micro transactions now. Not even under an expanded definition- even the most narrow definition would apply here.
This is not how to do DLC. This sort of content should follow CD Projekt RED's example with The Witcher 3: If it's not a full blown expansion (not just a few dungeons or extraneous story bits, but practically a whole new game), phase it in for free as a reward for those who have purchased the game and registered it on their account.
The sad thing about this is that there is a superior alternative in the works. Recent developments in BotW emulation on Cemu allow one to mod Link's model into different costumes or characters- including an upcoming fully fledged Zelda model mod. (Yes, that's right, play through the whole game as Zelda instead of Link.) Even completely different characters like Goku have been demonstrated, it's crazy. BotW modding really does make the game like Zelda Scrolls. Granted, the emulation of BotW is difficult to set up, requires fairly new components, and is still rife with errors, especially with various GPU's (the price to pay for this sort of thing).
Yet, the fact that such things can be had for no monetary charge makes paying for these official DLC variants look like a slap in the face by comparison. Seriously, go look up the BotW Cemu mod developments going on right now and compare them to this.
DLC is bad. Expansion packs are good.
I'm also very apprehensive of the "expansion passes" they've been pushing for BotW and will be pushing for Xenoblade 2. I'm not going to pay up front for future updates that aren't even properly defined.
Personally I'm against DLC. Maybe it's a little purist of me, but I see a game as a work of art and should be released as a complete work of art and then not be tampered with. I see a Zelda game as a whole, not just as a random collection of bits that can be added to whenever. I also think games have more than enough content (and it's not even about the amount anyway), they don't need to just become more and more bloated.
I have bought some DLC, not really because I wanted to, but because of FOMO and my completionist tendencies.
I agree with those who've pointed out the Amiibo issue. Nintendo may not have followed all industry trends but they invented their own distasteful practice. Nothing of any consequence should be locked behind potentially scarce toys unless it can be unlocked either in-game or via separate purchase of the content digitally.
Stuff like the Mario sports game on 3DS with 90 cards sold in blind packs leaves a nasty taste as well.
i dont like DLCs, I hate loot boxes and I absolutely abhore ....however, amongst us there is a lot of absolutely stupid kids who regularly buy it like as if they were braindead, so we wont be seeing the fall of DLCs anytime soon :/
and i also hate Amiibo....actually that is content hidden behind additional payment
@Agramonte I agree 100% if they want to add DLC for skins or outfits that's fine.... I personally only bought story DLC, and not much then. The Xenoblade DLC is outrageous! I would purchase story driven DLC, but the rest of the stuff I don't care about. Therefore I will not purchase any of it unless they separate the story DLC.
@Crono1973 There was an article about it, actually. I'll see if I can find it.
But it made the case that in most cases, charging $60 just doesn't cut it anymore. Each game dev is paid a certain amount of money (which increases each year). And as a team & over a normal development cycle (3-5 years) it adds up. That's not even counting the millions spent on advertising.
That is why a company like Square Enix said once that some of their games, despite selling 4-6 million, weren't profitable. Because they were just breaking even or not even that.
DLC is suppose to be a way for them to actually make games profitable. And again, some companies will differ in how profitable they want to be (some, like EA or Ubisoft, will take it to an extreme).
@Grumblevolcano ok. So kinda like how BotW uses amiibo?
@jmap It is at least an actual toy. I'd be very happy if they sold BOTW Expansion pass as Amiibi
@phamster From a sustainability point of view it would be far preferable to sell DLC to those that want it, and toys to those that want them, instead of frittering away resources on manufacturing and distributing bits of plastic that people buy to flip a bit from 0 to 1 in a game they’ve already purchased.
The expansion pass requires the downloading of additional content that was created after the release of the original game. As far as I know all amiibo unlocks just unlock stuff that’s already in the game files, aka “the worst norms of DLC” that EA got so much flack for in the late 00s.
@electrolite77 Cut dev costs means 'don't worry about perfect graphics' and yes, it's doable.
@Yorumi Actually the article mentioned that gamers are demanding MORE AND MORE that their HD/4K games look both beautiful and run at least at 60fps. Which guess what? Requires devs & tech that are expensive to come by. They don't work for pennies anymore.
So they're not claiming "poverty" no more than Hollywood productions moving to Canada or a cheaper alternative to filming in Los Angeles, are. It's just a way to keep making EXPENSIVE (looking) movies and still make a profit from them. Which keeps getting harder to do since most movies these days need a ton of FX's to get butts on seats at a movie theater.
With Nintendo phasing out the DS line, devs that cannot afford to move to mid-tier HD gaming will lose a cheaper alternative and will probably focus on making mobile games.
So unless you're ok with paying more than $60 per game, you're going to see more DLC and microtransactions.
@GC-161 That's a problem developers created themselves. They sell graphics and resolutions so of course gamers have come to expect it and gamers have purchased hardware to take advantage of 4K. It can be reversed though as most people do not have 4K hardware. I read something the other day about developers being excited about making mid-tier games for the Switch. That's what needs to happen, this graphics/resolution race is not sustainable and we will see more anti-consumer behavior as it goes until eventually it all comes crashing down. There is a reason they haven't just raised the standard price of games, consumers won't pay it.
Sorry, but to me, Nintendo have been getting as bad as the others since Kimishima took over; just in different ways:
>Having to buy an amiibo to unlock a new difficulty setting is possibly the worst piece of DLC scumbaggery I've ever seen.
>They let Tecmo and Intelligent Systems run riot with day-one DLC that should be in the main games.
>Sony and Microsoft at least offer cross-buy on games that are on 2 systems. Nintendo do no such thing.
>Nintendo slowly drip-feeding content they held out at launch in Splatoon and Arms is hardly them "continually making games better for free".
>Zelda BotW's "Hero's Path DLC is something that the game was already keeping track of (it works retroactively), you just have to pay make it visible.
>Badge Arcade constantly bugs you after every single turn to pay money, you have to tell them "no" every time.
So no, I don't believe that Nintendo is better than the others. They're all as bad as each other.
@Crono1973
But there's a segment of the market that wants the best graphics possible. Not only in the Console market but the PC gaming market.
@RainbowGazelle
Kimishima is just following the path Iwata set....
@Ziggy93 Having them legislate video games is a slippery slope that can have a lot of unintended consequences.
@Crono1973 It's not even that I disagree that it is ruining gaming but gamers allowed and forced it to happen. I have stated in another thread we want bigger better games. Well, production cost are up, people like to get raises and make more money. I am sure shipping and storage have gone up. Something to balance this was inevitable.
@Crono1973 I have thought the exact same thing! Also found much evidence to back it up. E.g Tomb raider being a failure despite selling 4~ million.
The switch is more powerful than the ps3 and Xbox 360, which was a point where developing was already unsustainable with the costs. But yet I feel the graphical power was still good enough back then. I read an article saying how it was probably a good thing the Switch can’t cope with big games for the exact reason that it will stop the pursuit of graphical intensity.
@zionich maybe you are right about it when regulating gaming just because some don’t like it, however I do think there is a potentially serious problem with children and promoting the essence of gambling.
@Yorumi About loot boxes, the UK government is currently investigating how closely they should be associated with gambling laws. If loot boxes are integrated into regulation by gambling laws, then games with them will become prohibited from sale. It will become illegal to knowingly sell those games to minors. (Loot boxes really should be classified as gambling, it's not the same process psychologically as buying card packs, as the companies using loot boxes claim.) So let's hope Nintendo doesn't make a Pokémon title with loot boxes. They already went the cruddy Candy Crush route with Pokémon Shuffle.
I'd rather have something unique in my Amiibo than stuff that can be unlocked in the game. As long as that stuff seems to fall outside either the scope of the game story (Wolf Link, Costumes from other games) or the Amiibo feel like they are paying for extra dev costs for some new gamemode. I wish they had straight up full DLC on them and that the digital DLC option would still exist. So for me, the Mario Wedding Amiibo were basically worthless and a bit of a rip off, where the Zelda ones are more of "indulgences" that also make for really great looking figures.
@Crono1973 Nintendo is always going to be a viable option since they traditionally lag behind Sony and MS in terms of having the latest high tech platforms.
So its not surprising that indies have embraced it or that Japanese devs are quickly warming up to it.
Meanwhile, big Western devs are cautious with the Switch.
But if you notice, they still want to charge its users full price for even 15 year old games (see Syberia).
Now all this talk about Nintendo being just as bad as EA in terms of DLC is pure unadulterated hyperbolic BS. They're not even close to being the same. I suggest anyone claiming that, to actually buy EA products instead of ASSuming they're completely alike. Because they're not.
And again, most of Ninty's DLC is optional. Unlike EA's.
Anybody who thinks Amiibos and expansion passes are worse than microtransactions and loot crates are delusional.
@Yorumi
But if targeting that segment of the market using current development techniques and monetising tactics is profitable why change? Personally I'd rather see the end of all the microtransactions and loot boxes and the games priced honestly but risking abandoning paying consumers makes no sense whatsoever. Just because the big AAA shooters aren't something that interests me doesn't mean they shouldn't be made for other people.
@Pupito Its not talking about DLC too much and is accepting it. Its taking about micro transactions in single player games where they can affect the base game, developers can add off-the-charts difficulty spikes or locking necessary items/story points behind tons of grinding only to encourage buying a mystery loot box, even though a player has already paid for the full game. This is going to happen more and more.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE they said xc2 is smaller, but they never said it was less content than xcx though. It's not as much of an mmorpg-like grind as xcx was, that's all they meant. This is not the first time I've seen you measure content value by hours played, that calculation is unreliable. By that calculation games like CoD and Battlefield have the most content ever because those l33t weapon skins take hundreds of hours of gameplay to get. I personally don't consider grinding or doing the same exact task over and over as more content.
@GC-161 not all ea games are so bad, titanfall 2 offers free dlc, you only buy some colors that are totally unnecessary. The worst company for micro transactions is Activision. Over watch, cod ww2, destiny. While WB has the most expensive DLC and Ubisoft has DLC that is rarely if ever worth it.
I disagree about the characters and stages in smash bros being overpriced (the costumes however are too expensive). While Nintendo hasn't dipped into loot box territory yet, I bet you top dollar they'll get there eventually. I hate some some things are amiibo locked like the BotW costumes as well as the difficulty modes in Samus Returns.
If I had to place bets as to which Nintendo studio will crack first, I almost guarantee it will be Intelligent Systems. Fire Emblem Awakening and Echoes both have dlc whose total comes out to more than the base game itself. Echoes was worse in a way because they were advertising the $45 season pass before the game even released. In addition there was the scam that was Fate's release. I do not care what anyone else has to say, Fates should have been released as 1 game at $60 at most period. Lastly the fact that IS already has gacha mechanics in Fire Emblem Heroes and it isn't that much of a stretch to see them implementing this crap into the main fire emblem games
@Pupito sorry I just gotta pull you up on something. Your saying you don't think this is a subject worth debate anymore. Actually right now more than ever is a good time for this discussion. You mentiined you mainly play Nintendo 1st party games. Well then until you play games like Overwatch etc where when you are playing getting your arse handed to you and start thinking to yourself now are they better than me or have they spent more money than me? This isn't a good situation and it calls into question the value of buying a game and ignoring the paid for extras, some of us start to think well should I even by the base game at all? Yes we should be 'whining' and you can go back to your corner thanks.
@Ziggy93
thx, signed!
@Ziggy93 As a father, that's just poor parenting from my perspective. The kids have to get the money from somewhere.
@zionich I still see an issue with gambling currently. It’s addictive and doesn’t promote anything good, apart from get rich quick, which devalues work and effort.
The problem bough, is that these games, whether kids are allowed to buy premium point system to use them, most games give you a few for free occasionally to try appeal to gamers. Basically giving kids the first dollar or pound free to put in a slot machine. And I know not all games have that same loot box style gambling, but any Microtransactions that has no limit in costs, (those that have £80 worth of premium points), just don’t sit right with me. It’s almost unethical where you don’t really get anything apart from some slight boost to feed an ‘addiction’.
@Ziggy93 The problem I have with Laws controlling our behaviors, other that that stated in the statement =P, is where do we stop. A lot of things can be addictive. There are soda taxes and laws against having too big of a carbonated beverage. Should we regulate what and how much we eat as well?
Its entertainment. Not a necessity. That makes regulating it an even worse idea.
My biggest things is we as people refuse to allow others to suffer the consequences of our own bad decisions. We are so quick to say I think its bad so lets make it bad for everyone. Or "what about the children". At some point we need to be accountable for ourselves.
This doesn't mean stop offering places to help those that take it to far or not help out you neighbor. Just stop making laws that demand it.
Amiibo are already microtransactions, resist what?
Mario was fine since they were optional and the costumes were part of the progression normally, but they've also just launched more exclusive armor-locking amiibo for Zelda Wii U. I don't care a whole lot about the matter personally, but you lot do, and Zelda U is already no better than multiplatform open world games with microtransactions, worse for single purchase consumers since the other tunics and weapons just aren't in the game at all if you don't buy the 'bo. It's insane to me that you couldn't tame wild wolves and Wolf Link was the only way to get a partner character.
@Haru17 I think Amiibos are a great deal because not only do you get a cool figurine, you can let a friend use them as well.
@zionich aye I agree with yo strongly on that part. You make a very good point.
I still think that too many kids are exposed to things that shouldn’t be the case. Gambling is one of the few things that I feel deserves to be resitricted, just like alcohol or smoking.
I guess the good pat is that either way the politicians will think it through logically and eithically (presumably) and debate any decisions like that outta find the right decision. Theoretically anyway.
@zionich What you think doesn't keep them from being pay to win, microtransactions, and all that stuff that people write angry comments on the internet about.
@Haru17 I have seen some angry comments about Amiibos, especially when Metroid : Samus Returns was coming out. It's not really a pay to win because it's not a recurring transaction. At best it's just a DLC that you get a physical item for that you can let other people benefit from. People just like to complain lol.
@zionich I think it's pay-to-win if you're paying to win. Y'know, like some of the best horses in the game and late game weapons.
People need to stop supporting companies that practice it, period, is the problem. I don't care if Ubi Soft releases a game with Mario in it, 90% of their other products are microtransaction hell. So because they get a gift cameo appearance from a Nintendo character I'm supposed to help their bottom line? Uh, no. All it does is enable them to add the crap to future games like they do EVERYTHING else.
Buy Nintendo products. Buy Indie Games. Stop worrying about third party crap. Ta-da, problem solved.
@Haru17 That's fair.
@CptFalcon If you support the games that don't have it and don't support the ones that do, wouldn't it send the same statement?
I still hate that I can't play BotW on hard/master mode because it's behind a paywall that is called DLC. Unless, it wasn't ready at release then its annoying.
Nintendo has been good with their DLC overall. Nothing too shady about it from them. But the SD Card partnership they have with SanDisk for Switch Micro SD Card is straight up ROBBERY!!!! That's not cool! AT ALL!
@zionich Unfortunately, I don't believe these companies change. They either lose power and allows others to take their place, or continue to monetize to the point we have now.
They'll always have excuses as to why a game did or didn't sell, and their dissonance will always place the blame anywhere except a corporate profiteering decision the CEO and directors made. Nintendo seems to be one of the few left that wants the 'traditional' path to continue, even admitting to prefer it in mobile games, even though Super Mario Run didn't do what they wanted. I'm fine with a future where the third party market implodes from its own greed.
Nintendo does dlc the right way. Only wish there was a little bit more of it. For instance, I would love to see older characters such as Petey piranha and honey queen come back to Mario kart.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...