Did You Buy The Wrong Pokémon Sword And Shield DLC? Don't Worry, Nintendo Will Sort It Out

Well, that’s unusually helpful. Guess they worry it could be a widespread issue.

On the Target website, when you go to get the pass it's listed as:

"Pokemon Sword or Pokemon Shield: Expansion Pass - Nintendo Switch (Digital)"

And all the way up until final checkout there's nowhere to choose which one you want. It just says they'll email you a code. So I have no idea how you get the right one that you actually want.

@TDCinFL Its chosen in the eshop. GameStop did the same thing and i gifted a friend a copy for their birthday. They send you a "one size fits all" code and after redeeming in the eshop, you choose the game to use it for.

I really don’t understand why it’s different.

This is ridiculous and unacceptable given expansion packs have been a thing for years now.

Honestly an odder approach to expansions than Dragon Marked for Death. Def should have been one expansion, either copy type of thing.

That said, I’ve got both games, both dlcs. Was gonna be hard for me to choose the wrong one. Lol

I think this bears repeating:

I have Pokemon Shield. When I load up the eshop, the Pokemon Sword expansion pass appears on the 'discover' page.

It would be quite generous I think to not consider this deliberate.

"Did you find it difficult to purchase the correct Expansion Pass?"
Why yes thanks for asking.
Wooo Nintendolife edited my comment? What is this, kotaku?

I buy two expansion for the Splatoon 2.
I brought my copy of the game in Europe and got the USA Octo expansion.
Not work.
For Mario and Rabbids, my copy is European too. But there’s no “region locked”, so the Donkey Kong expansion working just fine.

@Franklin It doesn't show the opposite expansion pass according to the version of the game you have. I have Pokemon Sword and it also shows the Pokemon Sword expansion pass for me on the Discover page. The Pokemon Sword expansion pass is just the default one advertised on the Discover page.

I still don't understand how this is a thing that more than maybe a couple people did. Do people just not read?

They absolutely should have either made it just one purchase that automatically works with whatever version you have, or let you buy the other one so you can pick up the other version's exclusives while you're doing the new stuff, like buying Black and then White 2 or Moon and then Ultra Sun.

I wonder why they do not implement some kind of check? Like "you don't have this software on your switch, are you sure you want to proceed?". I mean, it's useless to buy a DLC if you don't own the game in general. And for this case, it's also strange that they have two versions instead of putting all the content in one version...

@SPL64 exactly! The DLCs are also region free, but they have a Game-Version lock. So they are not version free...
Mario and Rabbids is a fine example of a game that uses one version globally! I bought it in Germany and the DLC in Japan, works fine!
Xenoblade Chronicles 2 on the other doesn't. German version, japanese DLC, but they won't talk to each other...

I didn’t because I know how to friggin read.

you gotta be blind to mess this up

@Bl4ckb100d you can use a different word to describe stupidity

@Dakka-Dakka

That's so odd, why wouldn't they have both next to each other? That omission in itself is potentially misleading.

I guess they were counting on people to not be idiots. I mean come on, there is a huge picture of a sword or shield in the background plus it’s clearly written sword or shield in huge writing.

On top of everything else, Nintendo made it very clear about each version. The eShop page for each version tells you which version of the game the pass is for, and the order confirmation screen (the one prior to completing a purchase) explicitly says that this passs compatible with that version (e.g. Shield Pass works with Shield, if you want the DLC for Sword this pass won't work). Majority of the complaints that complained ot was "confusing" or "unclear" really have just revealed they spent less than the 30 seconds it would've taken to read the basic description before locking in their purchase.

In fairness it should be one expansion covers both versions Pokemon game version arent that different and shouldn't have to buy it twice if you have both

I assume this is aimed at parents with no clue rather than a discerning customer.

Well if people would learn how to read you would be buying the right pass for the right game lol.im mean sure buy pokemon sword and buy pokemon shield expansion pass lol

What is it with Nintendo only dealing with their problems in America? Just like with the Joycon drift defect. Are the other regions not good customers?

Maybe people can stop defending multi billion dollar corporations and Nintendo (and Sony) can get with the times and come up with a fair refund policy. This is why I still prefer and end up buying more games on PC. Steam, GoG and even the "bad guys" EA all have fair refund policies.

Let's not forget these are games for children so they really should have made these expansion passes less easy to mix up, I actually think if they refuse to help people who buy the wrong version they might be opening themselves up to another class action lawsuit. They're already in hot water about refund policies in the EU so I can see this turning sour.

@Eel Lack of common sense, and plain stupidity is a wide spread issue amongst the Human race, unfortunately.

@idrawrobots I fail to see how its difficult to pick the right version when it asks you at least 3 separate times to make sure you are choosing the right one.

@DarkTron Which is their fault! And i don't think those people deserve refunds, the error was made solely by the purchaser, and should not be Nintendo's problem! It's hard to believe this is even an issue. -_-

@ReaperExTenebris All those PM can accessed by those what have them on bank or by trading with those who have the DLC, its no different a 3rd game haven't exclusive PM. Its funny you say it costs more when i bet you got the 3rd game in the past on top of the first version.

I seriously don't understand how DLC is an issue when the same people complaining were fine with a 3rd game what added yes then what these two Expansions will give you. Pokemon Yellow's big feature was Pikachu being your starter and that all 3 original starters can be got, that was it yet everyone who got both Red and Blue happily snapped it up without a care in the world despite it being pretty much the same game as Red and Blue.

@Varoennauraa Americans feel they are the most privileged of the bunch, ya know, cuz 'Murica. Games probably sell the most in USA too, not sure of exact numbers but im sure im not too off. Gotta keep the consumers "happy" and coming back for more.

@WallyWest I think there's a ton of more factors in play here 9ther than just people willing to buy a third complete game versus DLC. One being cost. And maybe it's an unfair point considering we are talking about two different consoles in the Switch versus 3DS. And maybe it's splitting hairs here. But you are talking about $80 for two 3DS games versus $90 for a game and it's DLC that seemingly moves it closer to almost one of those 3DS games in terms of content

And that leads me to my next point. Content and intent. I don't really know what The Pokémon Company and Game Freak's intent is or was with Sword and Shield. But I can see the optics of this being the issue here. Sword and Shield were lacking in a lot of content (Pokémon themselves included) compared to past titles. And I completely acknowledge that it is set up in a way in that you don't need to purchase the DLC to transfer over older Pokémon. But again, the optics of selling an incomplete game and then springing DLC on consumers is there, whether that was their intent or not and they haven't really done alot to quell those arguments.

Edit: As for the topic at hand on this particular issue of buying the wrong DLC, I think both making this less convoluted than it might be and being bit more consumer friendly versus the customer really reading the fine print are both valid suggestions and should both be the case.

@Roibeard64 Yes it should, but Nintendos greed knows no bounds. They get a pass from the fanboys though, because well.....Nintendo

@Mhayes111387 gamefreak and the pokemon company in particular need a bit of cop on.

I assume it parents that only touch the switch to make purchases from the store from a kid who says I want the new Pokémon thing. As a 35 year old pokemon fan I understand that most “normal” adults probably stop listening as soon as the word Pokémon comes up.
And I can see said parents getting very upset when a Huge company would quibble over a $30 exchange.

To also answer the question, no I didn't find it difficult to purchase the DLC. I personally felt Nintendo made it clear during it's initial presentation that each version of the game had it's own DLC and to make sure you choose that one

I didn't find it hard at all. I purchased it through Amazon with a gift card I got from work. They made it very clear in the product description on Amazon and in the subsequent email that was sent to me with the code after I purchased it.

Would it have been too much to ask them to make the DLC just work with both versions?

This really should have been a DLC "bundle". one price, one payment, and you get access to both DLCs.

It feels very scummy to have two versions of this DLC

Again, how is this an issue?? It literally takes seconds to make sure you're getting the right version.... This actually takes less effort than looking up the system requirements for a PC game.

Can't be hard to have a warning in place like: "the selected DLC is not compatible with your game" based on the savefile, game installed or inserted.

I feel like 99% of the problems are probably from parents who don't know which versions they bought their kids. Which is a thing.

@ReaperExTenebris IIR DLC is the only way to catch them but you can bring from old games or trade with person who has in SW/SH plus rare event like with the Gen 1 starters a few months ago.

Though using HOME to bring in from old games requires the premium plan. Plus specific pokemon has to be in base game or expansion

This is truly Nintendo's fault. Yes stupid decision to let this happen in the first place.

@ReaperExTenebris If you got both S&S then that's your problem, you aren't meant to get both versions the idea of the series is you buy one version and then trade with someone else who has the other version, yeah in the past i expect most of us me included got both games but now that the Internet is a major part of the series you no longer need both at all, if i was to buy Sword i would be chucking away money because it offers me nothing what i don't have already. Again you want both games then that's on you but the idea is you buy either Sword or Shield and the DLC what goes to the version you got. Fun fact if they made a 3rd game at $60 then that's $180 for all 3 games what just so happens to be the price of both S&S and the Expansion Pass for each version combined, again so if there was a 3rd game instead you would be fine then?

There are two separate expansion passes so fools who buy both versions of the game will have to also buy the DLC twice. It's disgusting.

@GrandScribe this is Nintendo....

Who would have thought reading and comprehending, along with multiple prompts to be completely sure you got it right, would be so hard?

It is extremely short this DLC, was very disappointed how little added story there was.

@Richnj There are two versions of the game. Sword & Shield are very similar but technically they are different games. They both have their own icon on the Switch home menu, so it would be impossible to make one dlc pack for both games.

Where it says “we are unable to offer a refund” it should read “unwilling”.

Of course they could offer a refund and their wording makes it seem like it’s impossible.

@sanderev That's not what I mean. You'd have two separate DLCs, but you'd sell them as one item, a bundle, at the price for one DLC.

Everyone would buy the same bundle, and no matter which version you own, you'd get the DLC for that game, and if you are one of the lovely people who bought both games, your DLC would work with both. A bonus for being a loyal customer and supporting the games that way.

I think most who did this would have automatically assumed the DLC worked on both.

Remember, kids play these games and they are probably the majority who made the mistake.

Personally, I think they should have just made the DLC go across both.

We already have to buy two games to get the full experience. Now two DLCs. It sucks.

@Richnj So basically decrease the price of the DLC by 50%. Yeah..

@sanderev For the people who just bought two games for £100. Yeah..

Put it this way. A regular gamer will spend £77 on one game and one DLC. Those who buy both versions have already paid £100 for what is more or less the same content. Those who bought both versions have already supported Nintendo more than those who bought one version and the DLC. Asking for another £54 (the price of a full game) on top of the £100, is too much.

If these were entirely different games, it would make sense to charge for each DLC. But these are versions of the same game. It's not unreasonable to expect a universal DLC pack.

@Richnj If you made the choice to pay for both games you should know what you were getting yourself into.

I did, and from the beginning I knew that any possible DLC would require two purchases as well. However if they did what they did with Sun & Moon or Black & White it would have been "Sword 2 and Shield 2" both being full priced games as well.

@sanderev You knew that you'd have to buy two unannounced DLCs for games that have never had paid DLC before?

The way these games were going to handle DLC was not known. No other game has multiple versions, and as you pointed out with the ultra games, previously, updates were handled through new releases.

Nintendo had the chance here to offer a customer friendly option to handling DLCs for their Pokemon games, and chose not to. This could have been an easy win. Nintendo reward players who buy both versions, and actually encourage players to pay more. As it stands, Nintendo are actually punishing players who bought both versions.

It's the sort of thing that can actually cost a company more money in the long run as customers feel it's not good value.

@koekiemonster I know but still this is bad even by Nintendo standards.

I definitely got the wrong one as I paid €30 for something worth about €5

@ReaperExTenebris Me have a problem? I don't have a problem at all, i've spent £72 on Shield and its Expansion and its much better then £90 i would spend on Shield and a 3rd game. No your problem is you got both games for some reason and are getting p*ssy Nintendo haven't thought of you, i agree the DLC should be one purchase for both games but considering most people only buy one of the games it hardly matters, honestly you should be annoyed that they still release two games when its not needed any more with online being a thing. Maybe next time buy just one of the games instead buying two games what are exactly the same beyond a different gym leader and a handful of PM, if you want both games though then hey buy them but expect to pay more money.