After a delay, DOOM Eternal finally arrived on the Nintendo Switch at the end of last year as a digital-only release.
Since then, Switch fans have been waiting for the first part of the DLC "The Ancient Gods" to arrive. While an official FAQ previously revealed it would be coming to the Nintendo version at a "later date" since then, there's been no additional information.
In related news, a rating for The Ancient Gods, Part Two was last week rated by the Australian Classification Board. While it might not seem like much considering the first part hasn't even shown up on the Switch, fingers crossed it's a sign that Part One will be arriving on the Switch sooner rather than later.
There's also that 50-minute Nintendo Direct taking place (later today, UK time), so that would be the perfect time to unleash a hellish announcement like a release date for part one on Switch.
Are you eager to jump into The Ancient Gods, Part One on the Switch? Think we'll hear anything in Nintendo's upcoming broadcast? Leave a comment down below.
[source classification.gov.au, via purexbox.com]
I can't wait for the soundtrack on this DLC pack
Andrew Hulshult killed it on Ancient Gods Part One
He was literally a DOOM fan brought on to succeed Mick Gordon and he nailed the sound Gordon captured in DOOM 2016 and Eternal
I am guessing Australia censored the game.
Australia ALWAYS does that with games
Poor Australians, how can they play Doom upside down?
It avoided the Aussie Ban-Hammer. Our f*cking censors are like Mr Macky "Drugs are bad m'kay". Bunch of f*cking c*nts, the lot of them.
It's odd that they would classify DLC UNLESS they are planning on releasing a complete physical edition maybe... please...?
@anoyonmus : No, it wasn't censored. If it was censored, it would have been reported as such. The Board can only classify/ban games, they don't cut anything otherwise.
At least we have an R 18 rating now.
I got sick of importing my games from NZ to get around our stupid "ban everything, think of the kiddies!" attitude.
All DLC gets rated simply because its adding stuff to a game that could change the classification.
They're still rating them like the do films. They need to fix that really badly as some games get wrong ratings simply by existing.
@PLATINUM7 : DLC doesn't get rated unless a physical release is in the works (or the publisher doesn't know any better). If every single piece of DLC, no matter how inconsequential, had to be rated, as you are suggesting, then most publishers would not release DLC in this country if they had to pay the full fee for every piece of content (including costumes and music packs).
I can't think of any Nintendo-published Switch game that has had its DLC classifed except for the Pokémon Sword/Shield expansion pass editions, and they were only classified for their respective physical editions, as they contained new content that wasn't in the previous instalments. The Breath of the Wild DLC? Not classified. Splatoon 2 expansion? Not classified. The Pokkén DLC? I could go on. Because none of those were issued a complete retail release.
Expansions only get classified when there is a physical release, and in some cases, publishers have sneakily bypassed this requirement (such as EA with the more recent The Sims 4 expansions, even in cases where there HAS been a physical release, namely on consoles).
While expansions can theoretically change the classification of a game, the only example I can think of is with the original The Sims, which was rated G8+ (now PG) and all expansions except for Unleashed were rated M, and The Sims 3: Supernatural, which received additional consumer advice of "Supernatural themes" (but otherwise maintained its M classification).
@anoyonmus it's why we now have an R +18 rating mate. There are places with more censorship than what we've got. Atm they still rate video games the same way they do movies which is pretty outdated and many games get wrongly rated because of it. It's better than the US system at least.
Lmao switch hasn’t even gotten the first one. Completely forgot. Nintendo is officially the middle child of gaming
@Meikahidenori : No, they don't. Games are classified under different guidelines. Yes, they use the same classification categories (G, PG, M, MA15+, R18+), and the guidelines are mostly the same, but there are key areas in which they differ (especially in respect to sexual violence and drugs). Films are a lot more "free" than games in that sense.
For example, implied scenes of sexual violence can be rated as little as M for film, but the same scene in a game would be rated R18+ if not banned entirely.
Additional restrictions were imposed upon lower classification categories upon the introduction of the R18+ rating for games, so, a lot of games that would have been given a lower rating before 2013 are now being slapped with R18+ for "References to sexual violence", and in my experiences, the Board interprets (and defines) "sexual violence" extremely loosely.
Well it largely depends. To Western developers? Absolutely. The Switch is not a priority for UK/US-based dev teams. But even then, we're seeing that slowly turn around with games like Doom Eternal and Apex Legends on Switch.
For Japan? Not so much. The Switch has overtaken the PS4 in Japan and we're seeing a lot of Japanese Switch exclusives. Ninjala, Bravely Default II, No More Heroes 3, Shin Megami Tensei V, Disgaea 6 (in the West), Astral Chain, Monster Hunter Rise, the list goes on.
It really depends on where you're looking to get an idea of who cares about the Switch and who doesn't.
My mistake in using all then but major expansions are liable to requiring new classifications, regardless of a physical release. I say liable because changes that wouldn't alter the classification are exempt from reclassification but that sounds like it is up to the risk of the publishers in judging that. The only outright exemptions listed by the ACB are for minor and or technical changes.
Also, just looking this stuff up, even game mods get classifications. There's some Minecraft mods that have been refused classification and I even found a listing on the ACB website for a Breath of the Wild randomiser.
@PLATINUM7 : Those aren't "real" classifications, per se. IARC ratings, which require publishers to fill out a survey on the content of the software (this is only used for download-only releases; whereas traditional peer-reviewed ratings take priority if there is one available), spits out classifications for multiple jurisdictions, and these decisions all get dumped into our classification database in bulk, regardless of their accuracy (tons of innocuous stuff gets "banned" in this way) or whether they are even available in Australian app stores (there's tons of stuff with titles in foreign language characters). The stuff you have just mentioned was likely app store garbage that would have gone through the IARC rating generator and dumped in the database.
I wish there was a way to filter them out as the majority of them are garbage and impede upon the usefulness of the classification database.
Furthermore, games that are issued an initial digital-only release must go through the traditional peer-reviewed classification process if a physical release follows after the fact, and this can result in disparate ratings. For example, Wonder Boy and the Dragon's Trap spat out an M rating for its digital release for "Mature themes", but the peer-reviewed rating for its physical release (which takes legal precedence) is G for "Very mild fantasy violence".
There's even a Picross game that was rated MA15+ which is perhaps one of the most absurd examples. I'd bet that it wouldn't have warranted any higher than PG had the game been human-assessed.
Some publishers release catalogue titles (ports of past physical releases) with the incorrect IARC ratings when a proper rating already exists. For example, DOOM 3 BFG Edition (as well as the original game) is rated MA15+, but IARC spat out an R18+ rating, and Bethesda incorrectly indicated that as the rating in the eShop. Likewise with a few of the Resident Evil games, but these were later corrected.
Even the SNES NSO app received an M via IARC for "Coarse language", and I strongly doubt that there's so much as a single F-bomb in any of those games.
@Mgene15 So much edge you could almost cut yourself on it. I thought you were in absolute PS5 heaven, what are you doing in here child?
First DLC was really bad.
I love the Main Game so much, it is my personal Game of the Year 2020.
But the DLC has a Level Design that does not feel polished and a annoying Enemy Placement (not harder, annoiying!).
They throw them in because they want to make it harder, but it is just soo annoying.
Also they slow your Movement down in so many Ways, the Game is about Movement and they block you.
"Rebalancing" Weapons because you can use them in Ways that they don't want to.
Even taking out the unlimitied Ammunition for Super Weapons out of the Cheats (why even implement Cheats if you can't rage around).
The Spirits are Fun.
Doom Guy for Smash
Really enjoyed part 1 DLC, except for that last boss
I like the dlc picks up where it left off opposed to this slow long build up
I did a test playthrough of Part 1 on easy difficulty just to see what I was getting myself into if I did it on nightmare, and oh man I still haven't had the courage to try. I can only imagine what insanity is gonna be in part 2.
@Meikahidenori oh thats fine.
At least it wasn't banned in Australia unlike China.
China bans like 70% of the video game market
@Giygas_95 yeah Part 1 is brutal, I tremble at the thought of Part 2 lol
I beat it on UV right after my first playthrough of the campaign (also on UV), and it had some of the most stressful gaming experiences I've ever had 😂
The Holt is just crazy.
Pros complained that the Slayer's Gate was too easy, so they added a possessed Marauder at the end 😂
That was definitely the most stressed I've ever been playing a game lol
Going back to the campaign on Nightmare is almost a cakewalk now 😂
Tap here to load 22 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...