Nintendo DLC Won’t Make Consumers Feel ‘Cheated Or Deceived’

[garyopa]

Nintendo claims their games will still be fully playable without DLC



Nintendo made a statement they will not be like others in pushing MUST-HAVE DLC for their games!

Nintendo confirmed that paid downloadable content will be available for New Super Mario Bros. 2.

According to Nintendo president Satoru Iwata, the publisher plans to create DLC in a way that consumers won’t feel like they’ve been betrayed; Nintendo doesn’t plan to create a game with the intension of keeping things out for paid DLC.

NEWS SOURCE: Super Mario's boss doesn't want to overdo it with Mr video game and won't deceive you with DLC (via) Kotaku

Our thanks to 'Valwin' for this news item!

[billysastard]

i feel betrayed the second i'm asked to pay for something i cant use in a legal manner, like ANY digital content on a games console.

[Captain N1]

I hope you keep your word Nintendo. I for one hate spending money on incomplete and buggy games.
I dont mind DLC many months down the road. as it just adds to the game.
The kind of DLC there at the games lanuch is just fail and a slap in face.

[Battlefield]

Read between the lines.

Nintendo wont this, and thats nice.

They dont say that EA, Activision, UBI, Namco etc.. wont have 1 day DLC.

DLC is ok as long as its months after release.

The only decent priced and huge DLC i can remember this generation is Borderlands and Red Faction 3 DLC.
Both offered big expanded areas on a already big open world map.

GTA 4 had big DLC too, but it was maybe expensive. I say maybe, because i dont know how big this DLC really is. Maybe it was worth the high price tag. I own that DLC, but i never played it.

Today's DLC is usually ****. Its character skins and weapons which dont add anything to the game at very high prices.
Namco is one of the worst, because they add up to 100-200$ worth of DLC for each game, and its mostly skins i think.

[DEDDOA]

I hope Nintendo stick to their guns, but come the release of the next MS and Sony Consoles, I suspect they won't count for much given like now with wii, the Wii-U will be consigned to previous gen ports with all the cash cow DLC being used on the other 2 consoles and PC

DLC is fine in the digital expansion pack way (and by that I mean expands the game not fills in the holes they cut out or stuff the developers weren't bale to add before launch because the publishers wanted it realeased asap to cash in on holiday sales) tho I have noticed that very few games get expansion packs these days, more often than not it is cut up into smaller chunks so they can end up charging more than the game cost in DLC which in my view puts a big negative on what should be a positive.

If the likes of Microsoft and Sony put a ban on day one DLC or selling DLC to complete a game (almost any idiot can tell day one DLC or even post lauch replace the cut out stuff DLC so it wouldn't be hard to police), I think it would do a hell of a lot to fix the DLC image. MS should be the front runners to do this as this whole mess is their creation thanks to limited regualtion letting the likes of EA use it to screw customers, shows it when they throw a hissy fit when Nintendo won't let them have their own way.

It won't happen tho as the likes of MS and Sony make money from the sales of DLC, and even the potential increase in sales from improved image of DLC is no incentive to free cash now. DLC had a chance to be somthing decent, and to a certain extent it did on the Xbox and many old PC games (the Wing Commander Prophecy Expansion and the extra Cars in Pod sprig to mind, and are 2 of the games that made me think DLC could be positive), but the likes of EA chose to screw it from the get go when it went mainstream on the 360 (having to buy unlocks on the likes of NFS:MW and Carbon pretty much summed up how it was goign to be). Now to further justify it we get the "anti-piracy" crap as an excuse for day one DLC and so called "online pass" crap.

I think it would take a complete regulation of the service on the consoles to bring any credibility back to DLC, Exteme Arseholes, Crapcom, Scamco etc may have free reign on the PC but I think they would have a hard time hustifying charging for content that is free on consoles, and no doubt someone would sue their arses off for it if they tried it (still suprises me that they got away with charging for thinks like ME1 DLC and map packs in games that were free ont he PC but paid for DLC on consoles). Won't happen tho and speaking for myself, all they are doing to me is encouraging me to pirate as I will not pay for non expansion pack DLC, tho I will pirate it to get what I paid for int he first place.

[DEDDOA]

Also, what the hell is with the digital format being as expensive as physical media, I expect at least a 25% mark down if I am not paying for the production, packaging, media, distribution and retailer cut that is part of a retail physical copy, why should I still be paying for that when it's pretty much 99% pure profit for them (server costs etc proabaly cost an insignificant percentage when mass sales of mutliple software products is taken in to consideration as they all use the same servers).

Mists of Pandaria is a shining example, why the hell is it £29.99 for a digital version of a game that you will likely get for less at retail (I'm betting most online retailers will sell it for easily £2-5 less) and whats more both versions are only paying for the activation code, but one has all the extra retail costs and the other has no extra costs as the likes of the server costs have been paid for by monthly subs and the other stuff they sell. Mind you £29.99 for an expansion pack on the PC,thats full game price and best part of 30% mark up on what you would expect to pay. I know they are just using it to exploit the people who can't wait to play the exapansion (then get bored of it a week or 2 later as they had to see all the content asap, knowing full well the next mini expansion patch will be at least 4 months away), but it makes me wonder why these Publishers actually can't understand why digital media hasn't replace physical media yet, when anyone can see that charging more or equal to something that is technically less is no incentive.

I guess when you have people who don't live in the real short of cash world making the policies then you can't be suprised when the policies fail so much.

[Diztructor]

how is any DLC cheated or deceived, i dont get how people still think that dlc is content stripped from the main game, when all DLC is, is optional skins, online multiplayer maps and side missions.

what can nintendo do other than this, offer new suites, or levels which erm inst this the same, people say its stripped content that should have been added to the game, so why is it any different if nintendo offer this as dlc.

[mattias800]

how is any DLC cheated or deceived, i dont get how people still think that dlc is content stripped from the main game, when all DLC is, is optional skins, online multiplayer maps and side missions.

what can nintendo do other than this, offer new suites, or levels which erm inst this the same, people say its stripped content that should have been added to the game, so why is it any different if nintendo offer this as dlc.

For once I agree with this guy.
DLC isn't a ripoff. One particular DLC might be, but not the concept.
This allows companies to create more content that you wouldn't get if they couldn't charge you for it. Since, you know, it costs money to create the DLC:s.

[Diztructor]

For once I agree with this guy.
DLC isn't a ripoff. One particular DLC might be, but not the concept.
This allows companies to create more content that you wouldn't get if they couldn't charge you for it. Since, you know, it costs money to create the DLC:s.

people forget for example, Resident Evil 5, was in its own a full game, yet it offered 2 DLC packs, side missions which I never purchased (but only played because i DL'd RE5 Gold Eddition) and I didnt sit there thinking that they were stripped out of the game.

I cant say I've ever bought a game that hasnt offered a full campaign mode, ive played games that have felt a little short (but theres allways games like this) and has nothing to do with it having DLC content.

not long ago people kicked off over capcom including the DLC content on the disc, which baffled me, as they didnt see the benefits for this, because the game itself remains the same regardless if the content wasnt on the disc, but the advantage of it already been on the disc is that you dont have to download it.

and if your ISP is like mine that give you a monthly download limit, this idea benefits me, i get to keep my monthly usage for other things "legit backups pmsl" (which charges £2 + VAT per GB exceeded, also usage is rounded up to its nearest 5GB).

[DEDDOA]

For once I agree with this guy.
DLC isn't a ripoff. One particular DLC might be, but not the concept.
This allows companies to create more content that you wouldn't get if they couldn't charge you for it. Since, you know, it costs money to create the DLC:s.

Maybe you both need to look a tiny bit harder as it's easy to see when DLC is a rip off, a few prime examples, day one DLC, on disk DLC (where you pay to unlock content that was part of the game that has been locked away) and DLC packs that are less than what you would get if it was a disk based expansion but cost as much an expansion disk (if you have never played games on anything but a console you probably won't realise that and that is what the publishers rely on). Noone is denying that real DLC is worth while if like I said it is cheaper than what you would pay for a disk based expansion and not cut up into smaller chunks to get more money out of it and most certainly not when it's free on the PC (tho they have gimped the ability to epand a good many PC games like FPS with player maps to justify charging PC gamers for what they can usually get for free as well).

DLC in theory is fine but largely in prcatice it is a rip off and a int he case of day one DLC (like the ME3 day one DLC which is clearly an intergral part of the game that has been cut out so they have somthing to sell rigth away) or on disk content which couldn't have been made afterwards unless they have invented away to burn stuff on disk fromt he future now ( like SF x Tekken which as all the extra content on disk and Capcom tried to deny it at every turn so proving that they knew they were trying to screw their customers or else they would have tried to be more convincing), is a con. If people are stupid enough to think it's fine or like that guy justify it for the publishers, then they really need to have their heads seen to as they are only screwing themselves.

[mattias800]

It's quite simple economics in my opinion.
For $60 the game developer can create n content-units.
For $70 they can create n+m content-units.

They choose to create a little bit more, and charge for it. If they could not charge for it, they wouldn't create it.
In other words, those on-disc DLC wouldn't be on that disc if they couldn't charge extra.

So, you don't loose anything, you only gain the ability to buy more content. If you want to.

That it is released on day one doesn't mean that it didn't cost extra to develop.

Everyone wants as much content for free as possible. Developers want as much money from as little content as possible. This is the trade-off. You get to decide yourselves.

[Battlefield]

It's quite simple economics in my opinion.
For $60 the game developer can create n content-units.
For $70 they can create n+m content-units.

They choose to create a little bit more, and charge for it. If they could not charge for it, they wouldn't create it.
In other words, those on-disc DLC wouldn't be on that disc if they couldn't charge extra.

So, you don't loose anything, you only gain the ability to buy more content. If you want to.

That it is released on day one doesn't mean that it didn't cost extra to develop.

Everyone wants as much content for free as possible. Developers want as much money from as little content as possible. This is the trade-off. You get to decide yourselves.

I agree.

There is 2 major problems why its like this, and why people dont like it.

1.) Games costs much more than ever to make, and prices is cheaper now than the NES/SNES days. The market is bigger now, but so is the competition.

2.) People have been used to get COMPLETE games on day 1 for decades. People have a problem with day 1 DLC.
I dont like it myself, but its the only way to get more money for the game when people refuse to pay more than the retail price which havent increased for ages.

[billysastard]

here is a complete list of DLC that i "own"

3ds ambassador games
3ds gifted games (excitebike 3d and 4 swords)
360 gta 4 episodes from liberty city (disc)
360 red dead redemption undead nightmare (disc)
360 fallout 3 5 expansion packs (disc)
360 xbox live arcade compilation disc (disc)
360 assassins creed 2 3 additional levels (disc)
360 oblivion both expansion packs (disc)
360 dead island extra mission (disc)
360 battlefield bad company extra weapons (disc)
360 forza 3 extra tracks and cars (disc)
360 mass effect 3 proper ending (dlc)
360 quake 2 (disc)
360 halo 3 complete map collection (disc)
360 aegis wing (dlc) was free but now unavailable in eu region so i cant have it on my slim as its no longer downloadable
ps3 heavy rain taxidermist mission (disc)
wii Goldeneye classic conflict mode (dlc) (for some reason my CE had 2 code sheets)
xbox halo 2 map packs (disc)
xbox classic doom and doom 2 and ultimate doom 2 (disc)
xbox fable additional regions and storylines (disc)
xbox jade empire additional character (disc)

i guess that makes it pretty clear where i stand on what dlc is worth buying.

[mattias800]

I agree.

There is 2 major problems why its like this, and why people dont like it.

1.) Games costs much more than ever to make, and prices is cheaper now than the NES/SNES days. The market is bigger now, but so is the competition.

2.) People have been used to get COMPLETE games on day 1 for decades. People have a problem with day 1 DLC.
I dont like it myself, but its the only way to get more money for the game when people refuse to pay more than the retail price which havent increased for ages.

I actually think "complete games on day 1" might not be the norm in a few years, and the term "DLC" might fade away.