Comments 403

Re: Talking Point: Nintendo Must Take Careful Steps Into Paid DLC and Free-to-Play

Kevlar44

@unrandomsam

I'm not sure i understand how you claim Nintendo has offered poor value in regards to DLC? They don't have GOTY editions because they rarely have DLC and when they do it hasn't typically been on their biggest games. However what they do have is the player choice games for 20$ for the Wii. Still Nintendo doesn't have to offer there games at a discount once they become old i think they rightfully feel that the consistent quality of their games allows them to retain their value. That's fair for them to decide. If the game was once fairly valued at one price then why must that change for them to offer value?

Re: Talking Point: Nintendo Must Take Careful Steps Into Paid DLC and Free-to-Play

Kevlar44

I think it's hilarious how people are worried about "current trends" in relation to removing content to make DLC when Nintendo is a company that ignores "current trends", sometimes to the point that it's annoying. Nintendo makes plenty of mistakes but they are rarely of the unethical or anti-value variety. Let's not prosecute Nintendo for the crimes of other companies.

Re: Talking Point: Nintendo Must Take Careful Steps Into Paid DLC and Free-to-Play

Kevlar44

@DLC Haters

I made an account just so i can complain about the attitude on here towards this DLC. What's with the generalizations and need to paint all DLC with the same brush. Just because some DLC is bad doesn't mean all DLC is, i ask Nintendo for DLC in my club nintendo surveys when it comes to games i think it would work well for (i.e. Mario Kart Wii, Mario 3D World).

In regards to this particular game it's clear that the DLC is not necessary for a full game experience with the roster, game modes, and courses being as abundant as ever. The game is already priced very cheaply considering what there is to play through in regards to previous installments and other retail releases. Essentially what i see it as is you can buy a mini sequel for 15 dollars, as 105 courses is a substantial addition and 4 extra characters adds about as much diversity as many sequels would to the roster. Whats wrong with that?

Also there is no way of knowing if this content was available at the time when the game was finalized, or in other words "left off the cart", i'm sure the process of getting a game to retail is fairly extensive and there would be an ample amount of time to add additional courses using an already complete engine. Day one seems like a missed opportunity and a pretty naive way of going about adding content but claims of wrongdoing are being greatly exaggerated.

An idealistic standpoint that doesn't critically evaluate each situation on it's own individual merits is a foolish position to take as such idealism does not allow an individual to give credence to the differences in execution. The devils in the details so to speak, and there's some pretty big details being left out by people when evaluating this situation. The option to play Mario Golf for 30 dollars is a great one, the option to add a mini sequel for half the price is an amazing one. People should be applauding the option to get the same game content for cheaper with the option to get a far bigger game for just a little bit more. I can't believe you people can complain about this, i'd be stoked if this exact same scenario played out for Mario Kart.