EVERYONE ELSE BTFO
>“And one thing Nintendo has determined as a company policy, what we are not going to do is create a full game and then say, ‘let’s hold this back for DLC.’ That’s not our plan. We’re definitely not doing that. It’s an extreme example, but I think there are examples of games where you get that initial purchase — the very core part of the game — and everything else around it is all DLC. However, if you do that I believe customers will have no motivation to go out and buy the retail package to begin with.”
Huh. I thought this was one of the old articles from back before Nintendo actually started pulling this shit.
I guess now they've gone from turning their backs on their old principles to outright lying.
To be fair, Lunatic is one of those difficult levels that's not...necessarily meant to be played, at least not by anyone sane.
And If I recall, they put out that first DLC map for free when it launched, so you can always use that to grind up on
They never claimed to not do DLC. Just that they wouldn't hold stuff back from the game to release as DLC. Only game that I could agree they sort of did that is Mario Golf. Even then they released the game for a cheaper price to make up for it.
This MK8 dlc is far from a rip-off. 12€/$ for 6 characters, 8 vehicles and 16 new tracks is a pretty damn good deal. The dlc is also coming out on November of this year and May 2015.
>Compare base game before DLC to previous games
>Base game provides just as much content as previous games, if not more
>DLC gets announced
>Everyone goes apeshit
I just...I just don't get it. DLC isn't inherently bad. Why do people hate it so much?
They never said they were against DLC though. More that they were against cutting out content. As far as I know, all the DLC Nintendo publishes for its games is just bonus content. Fire Emblem Awakening had DLC, but you didn't have to buy DLC to get the "real ending" or some bullshit like that, just for extra content to expand what was already a complete experience.
Nintendo's policy on DLC is already pretty obvious...
>Base game provides just as much content as previous games, if not more
Except, that never happens.
DLC is closely affiliated with the ship-unfinished-and-overhyped-game-and-patch-later phenomenon . People aren't necessarily pissed at DLC, but the disingenuous mentalities that are attached to DLC's contemporary–patches.
DLC as it should be, in the form of expansion packs and post-game content isn't bad in and of itself. The problem is fuckers like EA and Activision have poisoned the idea with day one nothings and cutting out content to release it later. As such, that's what most think all DLC is now, and rally against the idea. Season passes didn't help much either.
no, DLC as a concept is quite nice.
as in, after finishing a game, the company makes more content for it that you can buy, essentially a expansion pack.
What IS bad DLC is shit like day 1 DLC, where they make you pay full retail for only the core of the game and then have the balls to sell you DLC from day one.
>DLC is closely affiliated with the ship-unfinished-and-overhyped-game-and-patch-later
How was Mario Kart 8 unfinished? Nintendo's games are some of the most bug-free and well tested in the industry.
>Surely you mean DRM?
DRM is an inherent part of all forms of DLC, and enforces the anti-consumer agreements that become valid and relevant due to being positioned before the sale rather than after.
Not that you care about those things, of course.
>This MK8 dlc is far from a rip-off. 12€/$ for 6 characters, 8 vehicles and 16 new tracks is a pretty damn good deal.
You're goddam right it is. On top of 32 tracks already? holy shit.
They almost did do this with MG:WT, however they did drop the purchase price.
The Hyrule Warriors costumes thing proves this to be bullshit, unless it turns out you can unlock this content in the game itself as per usual.
They're still treading on thin ice.
And just because they say it's their "policy" not to, doesn't mean they aren't lying through their teeth. I personally want proof, but I'm not yet going to go full retard and shitpost or sign a petition to demand that proof, because their pricing is reasonable.
Nintendo's DLC is too generous to the consumer, they need to get on Ubisoft's level.
>How was Mario Kart 8 unfinished?
Not the guy your replying to, but I'll bite.
Although the released (and releasing) DLC don't affect it, the battle mode that was in the game was almost like they didn't even try.
I'll agree that the lack of stats and saving up your vehicle was some stupid flaws, but I wouldn't call it incomplete.
Well singleplayer wise it's pretty lacking but that's been stagnated since...god knows when. Why didn't they keep the mission mode from DS? ;_;
You do remember DLC has existed for years in the PC market, correct? We used to call them expansion packs, back when EA took advantage of the idea then with a million half-cocked Sims packages.
This. In the basest sense, DLC should be the opportunity to get more of a game you like.
Unfortunately, in most cases, it's presented as the REST of the game you like.
Agreed, DLC as simply a kind of expansion pack is perfectly fine, it's when the core game is basically incomplete to the point where either the story has no ending without the DLC or where key functions are missing to improve the gameplay quality. I'll say I'm much more pleased with Nintendo's work here than the other companies.
>We used to call them expansion packs
No, "we" didn't. Calling expansion packs "DLC" is a relatively new thing, intended to associate DLC with something different and make it look better by association.
>DRM is an inherent part of all forms of DLC
That's only as true as saying that DRM is an inherent part of all forms of buying physical, because you have to go to the store to buy it. Once you make the purchase on this hypothetical DRM-free DLC, you won't be restricted in any way other than OS and sometimes hardware capability.
If the DLC has no DRM, once you purchase it, you'll be able to install it on as many compatible PCs as you like, and you can have as many backup copies as you can store.
>enforces the anti-consumer agreements that become valid and relevant due to being positioned before the sale rather than after.
You're assuming that the base game has DRM as well. Unless you mean that you need the base game to play the DLC, which is not even a complaint.
Listen, it's not impossible to release a finished game with the only DRM being that you're selling it on an online store. It's also possible to come back to that game later and add content to it, again without any DRM besides the fact that it's being sold in an online store.
>Not that you care about those things, of course.
Of course not, why the fuck would I care about intrusive software on my PC? I'm posting in this reply chain because I really like the way my keyboard feels, actually.
I just realized that the dlc for mario kart 8 is essentially being digitally pre-ordered.
Does... does that actually mean they're making it AFTER RELEASE? IS THIS CONTENT THAT WAS ONLY STARTED LATER?
Because if so, I'm okay with it. Also I finally understand just how the example of using the Link amiibo with Mario Kart is gonna work.
I'm just not sure what the fuck it's gonna do.
Guys, my tinfoil hate might be on a little tight here
But what's to stop Nintendo from removing content, repackaging it as dlc and then
lying about it
>hypothetical DRM-free DLC
Okay, so you even freely admit that your argument is based on something that does not actually exist here in the real world. Thanks for that.
>You're assuming that the base game has DRM as well.
No I'm not.
>why the fuck would I care about intrusive software on my PC
>it's the same idea under a different name
No. I won't agree to that. It's a similar idea under a drastically different method, and it's a method that allows for and encourages more abuse by publishers, even in its most "honest" applications. It drastically changes development cycles, where resources go, what can be released, the frequency, quality, and amount of content that can be released at one time, and so on, all in ways that are better for the publisher than the consumer.
>Most people seem to actually enjoy battle mode on normal tracks
MK8 is the first Mario Kart where they didn't even bother to make Battle maps, its also the first Mario Kart with DLC
Pikmin is another fun example
Pikmin 2 had 30 unique missions
Pikmin 3 had 10 unique missions
And guess what they started selling within 2 months of the game's release
>The Hyrule Warriors costumes thing proves this to be bullshit, unless it turns out you can unlock this content in the game itself as per usual.
Hyrule Warriors is a 3rd party game isn't it? I don't think Nintendo is going to police the studios when they're just publishing.
>Okay, so you even freely admit that your argument is based on something that does not actually exist here in the real world. Thanks for that.
Nah, I just didn't feel like looking up an example. I'd be compelled if you could point me to a video game store that had DRM-free physical releases!
>the rest of your post
Alright, yeah, fuck it, I'm gonna go play video games. You're an unusually unpleasant person to talk to.
>I don't think Nintendo is going to police the studios when they're just publishing.
Why exactly wouldn't they? Why wouldn't Nintendo say "Hey, this isn't an acceptable thing for you to be doing with the IP we're offering you" and let them know that there is a quality standard that they must live up to?
>I'd be compelled if you could point me to a video game store that had DRM-free physical releases!
I could, but I'm sure you're one of those retards who thinks that everything is DRM.
>You're an unusually unpleasant person to talk to.
Well, the feeling is mutual. It's so unpleasant dealing with DLC apologists.
If you honestly believe that MK8 was a rushed product, you're delusional. The game is polished as fuck, there are 32 tracks, a shitload of unique vehicle options, and replayability out the ass. Battle mode has never been the draw of Mario Kart, so they probably decided not to waste resources and manpower designing levels that only a few people will play.
People looked through the game files on the MK8 disk when it first released, the only thing that is part of the DLC which is on the disk is the icons for the cups, everything else is new content which they started working on after MK8 released.
But, so far, if anything they've only been supportive of the studios. Wonderful 101 was originally going to be another Nintendo crossover game, for instance, and they actually questioned Bayonetta's wearing an undershirt in the Link costume because it didn't seem like it fit her provocative style very well.
>Why exactly wouldn't they?
because they're japanese beta pussies
And if you're buying a musou game at this point, you expect to jet jew'd. That's the whole point of the series, low-effort games that use fanservice to mask how repetitive and shallow they are
Then how come Pikmin was better than both of them faggot?
Have you even fucking played it?
In what way is Mario Kart 8 rushed? You may like Battle Mode, the loud minority may like Battle Mode, but they clearly didn't see enough interest to bother with it. Besides, if they were cut because they rushed the game, they would likely have been the first DLC package, since they would already have work done on them.
Just because it isn't there, it doesn't mean it was cut for DLC, it doesn't mean it was rushed.
Stop being so pessimistic. It is no way to live.
>They probably planed to make DLC to support the game for years to come.
This makes sense to me. Mario Kart is a one-per-system title, so DLC gives Nintendo an opportunity to release new content at their leisure without having to commit to a whole new game.
I wasn't exactly happy to see the battle maps go, but I don't see their exclusion as a sign of the developers rushing the game. If there's enough outcry, they'll probably show back up in MK9, but as I said, battle mode has never been that big a deal, people buy the game to go fast and race.
strong statements from nintendo, but they will break eventurally
>Remember when people bitched that Nintendo needed to "get with the times?" Those same people are now bitching that they're doing DLC.
Look at the number of people in this thread who are all for it.
THOSE are the people who wanted Nintendo to get with the times. They're now just a little bit more satisfied.
because hey, HD development is hard and expensive on companies that don't have that much experience. If there was a Pikmin 4 and a Mario Kart 9 on Wii U, they'd have more content because they can repurpose assets, code, development tools, and already have enough experience to focus less on developing an entire game and more on desiging content for it.
But of course, it's not like people here know how game development actually works.
I'm holding out for some Kirby DLC, it would get my one friend to stop hating Mario Kart. He hates how "unfair" and "bullshit and "RNG" the games are. He's also a huge Kirby fan and si constantly assblasted whenever Sakurai reveals more KI:U stuff for SSB4.
No, it's actually not an opinion. By law and in practice, it grants more options and rights to the publisher and fewer to the consumer.
It's not an opinion. You don't get to decide whether or not you agree.
>not an opinion
Some people prefer digital distribution to physical copies, meaning that the digital option is better for that particular consumer.
>It's not an opinion. You don't get to decide whether or not you agree.
You should really pull your head out of your ass and realize that your opinion, and yes, that's exactly what your autistic little tirade was, isn't any more valid than anyone else's.
I don't think the amiibos will do that much, not at the beginning anyway. Nintendo will probably spend a year or so testing the water with the first line before they commit to something like unlocking characters.
Again, it's cold hard fact that digital offers more to the publisher and less to the consumer. You can't argue it.
And yes, my opinion IS worth more than yours because I'm not retarded. Maybe when you pull your head out of your ass and realize that you're a consumer, not the publisher, you can start batting for the proper team.
..they already showed that amiibo will work on MK8, Toad Adventures and Smash.
also this is no ilogic given link looks like the Amiibo model,
and also can be like in smash, the amiibo link will remember your racing and chose the best track on a race in a course you have played before (kinda like the personal coaching in Smash), so its no only unlock, but superior
>digital games are often sold at far lower prices than their physical counterparts
>digital offers quicker distribution than physical
>digital, if offered on services like GoG, is DRM free
Oh man digital is so biased against the consumer, good thing you have sources to back up your retarded claims to prove me wrong and not make yourself look like a dumbass.
This is a case where Nintendo's typical slow adaption to the market actually benefits them.
>we can look like the good guys by not doing the things the bad guys have been doing for years
cue the cocksucking
it's like the ps4 and xbone drm fiasco
There's a pretty big difference in unlocking a racing ghost and unlocking a character. I'm not disagreeing that it's a good idea, I'm just not sure that Nintendo would offer something that would take away from one of their first real attempts at DLC.
>“And one thing Nintendo has determined as a company policy, what we are not going to do is create a full game and then say, ‘let’s hold this back for DLC.’
But they already did that with Awakening. And Mario Golf 3DS.
Sonic All Stars Racing had a superior roster (naturally) and a superior campaign mode by virtue of actually having a campaign mode, but MK8 pretty much shat all over it in every other area.
>“And one thing Nintendo has determined as a company policy, what we are not going to do is create a full game and then say, ‘let’s hold this back for DLC.’ That’s not our plan. We’re definitely not doing that.
Explain the Mario Golf DLC then.
There is no way to know if a game is complete when you purchase it and if a company has or hasn't kept something out of the game to be used as DLC later.
Unless the DLC is a good sized one it's not worth it.
It is a rip off, it's just that we've become so accustomed to even bigger rip offs that it seems good by comparison.
This is stuff that should have been in the base game. It should have been a free update as way of an apology to people that bought into the hype.
Who the fuck does Nintendo think they are?
DLC is worse than stealing 40 cakes.
That's four tens, and that's just terrible.
>This is stuff that should have been in the base game
32 tracks is a lot of content, and is the status quo (actually a bit more) for a Mario Kart game. There was no incomplete data aside from the unfinished icons. The game was a finished, holistic product.
>It should have been a free update
Expecting a developer to give you that much content for free says a lot more about you than it does about Nintendo.
Well most of the Nintendo games with DLC already have a shitton of content. Mario Golf: World Tour had more than the previous games did when it came to courses and DLC added more, Mario Kart 8 had the same 4 new cups/4 old cups that previous games did and they announced DLC for it.
>Nintendo games have so much content they can cut them from the game, resell it and still have made a product with more content on disc than most companies
>How do you know that exactly?
Because Nintendo is business?
and they would rather the game sell for $72 instead of $60?
It would be irresponsible of Nintendo not to plan this out.
Why the 6 month gap between release and DLC then? If Nintendo had content waiting in the wings, they could have released it months ago. It makes a lot more sense that Nintendo is developing new content instead of holding back old stuff from the base game.
>The first pack was available immediately at game launch
>Part of the DLC came out on the first day. The rest was developed and released on a schedule.
So you admit that Nintendo intentionally held back content to be sold separately as paid DLC?
Well I would assume it's because Nintendo requires playtesting and bug hunting and general designing so they can be satisfied with the product before they release it. I'd rather them take their time than rush it out. Rushed products don't generally scream quality.
I really don't think that's one of Nintendo's big dark dastardly plans. Like, at all.
Not at all. According to Nintendo they began development on the DLC after they finished the game and sent it off to be mass produced and sent to stores. Hence why none of the Day 1 DLC was on the cartridge and it had to be downloaded, since it wasn't made until after they'd finished development.
>No, they didn't hold back content because the game was $10 less
Price has nothing to do with it, they intentionally cut out content that should have been part of the main game to sell it as paid DLC the day it came out.
>According to Nintendo they began development on the DLC after they finished the game and sent it off to be mass produced and sent to stores.
Yet it still managed to be day one?
>5 years ago
"we do not believe in dlc"
>2 years ago
"we will only use dlc to enhance the gaming experience"
"we will not be outright evil with dlc"
>According to Nintendo they began development on the DLC after they finished the game and sent it off to be mass produced and sent to stores.
So what you're saying is that they released the game before they'd finished developing all of the content that they wanted to include with it.
The easiest way to tell is sheer timing. It's pretty clear when content has been developed alongside a game to be sold as an add-on and when content has been developed after the release of a product and is sold as an expansion because it's not really enough to stand on its own as a game.
I suppose we could hypothesize a publisher so deep into it that they create content and then withhold it for 16 months to give the illusion that it's been developed after the game itself, but that never happens. It's always day 1 - month 1 stuff.
>According to EA they began development on the DLC after they finished the game and sent it off to be mass produced and sent to stores.
Well, it's not exactly hard to do a map pack consisting of remakes of existing golf courses you made in the past when you have the engine all ready to go to let you do whatever you want with it.
Creating maps isn't hard, creating an engine and bughunting it is.
>but that never happens. It's always day 1 - month 1 stuff.
like Mario Golf
shit, we know for a fact that the FEA dlc was finished before the game came out because it was all released in Japan.
EA and Nintendo are not comparable except in the basest terms that they both make video games, and as of the last couple years I would argue against the idea that EA makes video games even then.
I think people don't want to admit something they do not think is true. I do not think Nintendo is lying. In spite of there being day 1 DLC, to me it does not seem like the first map pack would have been impossible to create in the timeline they had between when the game was sent to stores and when it released.
I guess nothing, but I was expecting to be able to do all the shit I do in Hard, like all the chapters, level up all the characters, etc. cuz I like filling out the team and doing all the breeding
you basically have to use the same characters over and over in Lunatic, once you get to like chapter 5 or 6 that's it, no one else can be leveled because all the enemies will rape them even when they are paired up
They did, and I did. In fact I spent 20+ hours grinding up on that map because I'm obsessive about making sure all the characters are leveled
I guess I just went in with the wrong mentality
Bad directing and execution. Had some great things (music was incredible, the art style was super clean and colorful, it actually used the paper theme more than previous games), but awful things (the worst is the super lackluster writing, terrible combat).
But Sticker Star has nothing to do with the topic at hand so I don't know why did you decide to bring it up.
>Fact of the matter is, Nintendo intentionally held back content from the main game so it could be sold as paid DLC, regardless of the price.
you are getting it cheaper you autistic cunt,
The trouble is the existence of these practices anywhere in the industry. At least both packs represent a significant increase in content, instead of weapon packs or single map packs.
Ehh...I liked Samba Di Amigo and Eggman, but there were so many fucking shit characters.
Cool game though. I'd probably rank MK8 just a tiny bit higher than All Star Transformed because it feels more polished and it's got my boy Wario.
That Shinobi track in All stars transformed still rocks my cock off.
>Dat everytime you do a lap the season changes.
Source is you take an objective look at what DLC is and offers publishers.
Compared to a retail game purchase, publishers get:
Control over the user, what he's allowed to do with the content, both legally (license agreement is now valid, relevant, and binding) and in practice (resale and transfer are simply impossible)
Ability to release an extremely small amount of content with no production costs.
Ability to price content so that it appears deceptively cheap while in reality being far more expensive than content in a real release.
Ability to cut content from a game and release it for an additional fee, or to push a game out the door early and do the same.
Ability to devote resources to DLC development for more money with less work, rather than devoting those same resources elsewhere to full game development.
God, this is getting long, fuck it.
I honestly played Battle Mode for the first time in my life on MK8. It's just. Like, yeah it's a thing. But why is it a thing?
Yes, but that would be Koei's doing. They are the ones with publishing rights in Japan and they seem to have full control over DLC and skins. Probably something in their contract about it.
It's not really additional content, it's content that should have already been there from the beginning.
We've had 32 courses for the last few games, but in this new generation it's time to step it up.
48 should have been what the game shipped with.
They removed the maps because they were running out of time in development and the game had to come out by summer.
And everyone gave them shit about it. But no one ever mentions that they're doing free content patches as well. They're doing a bug patch that adds a the NES sword and shield to Link, a Challenge mode and a BGM menu.
So why is Nintendo's MK8 DLC bad again?
No one complained that there wasn't enough content. Its biggest controversy was whether you thought the koopalings were "wasted slots" or not.
Now, months to a year after release, we'll get a fuckton more content for cheap.
Are people really against Nintendo's DLC platform, or is it just the same 2 people who consider the Mercadies DLC to be some major breach of ethics?
It felt like they put way more thought into the tracks, especially the ones with dynamic elements
I also liked that the trick system actually had a risk-reward system, instead of being spammable like in MK
Also dat soundtrack
>that would be Koei's doing
If Nintendo didn't want it as part of their reputation, they wouldn't have allowed themselves to associate with it or allowed it to happen.
They didn't stop it, so they're complicit in it.
whoosh shinga dalla shank ka dank badoosh
you understood me know?
Okay, that's nice. They're allowing another developer to use their IP to make a game, and not giving a shit about the quality of product being churned out. They're responsible, even if you don't like it. They're willingly associating directly with that kind of thing.
DLC is bad because it only introduces 2 unique characters, Link and Isabelle who aren't even supposed to be in the game.
What you're getting are reskins of Peach, Mario, Bowser and Mii.
The courses are going to be half assed ports of older courses, as is the case with half of the courses in the game already.
And what else? Palette swaps of Yoshi and Shy? New vehicle parts to rub in that we aren't getting a proper F-Zero game?
That would have just ended up in one of two things.
1. Half assed remakes of old maps, and I have to say the full remakes of the retro tracks in 8 is fantastic.
2. The game being delayed significantly. There is evidence it was forced out to a completed state earlier than everyone might have wanted. We wouldn't see MK8 until 2015, holiday 2014 if they rushed it, if they went with full remakes and extra maps.
3. The game would have been buggy with (even poorer) balance.
I'm fine with how the game released. I did not expect new maps or even DLC. They're offering me what I feel is a good value for what I expect to be more good maps. I'm fine with it. Sorry if you're not.
Yes, but you should still lay the blame on Koei first and foremost. Nintendo let Koei make a Dynasty Warriors with a Zelda skin. I'm wondering if they even paid for development of it.
I can't tell if they're just desperate or experimentative at this point. The best I can say on the matter is at least Capcom wasn't in charge of the DLC.
I have to say, even if they did let them do DLC Nintendo seems to have held them to a stricter standard than most DW games are held to, and especially the spinoffs. It's the best looking DW game yet which... isn't saying much at all. But it's clear they do have some quality control on, or Koei stopped slamming Sake at work. Take your pick.
MK8 was finished and polished yes, it's just that the roster feels half done. I would just have rather waited another year for MK8 with the dlc as a release than to buy the game, and then the dlc as I've had to do.
Hopefully this is the only dlc we're getting and that on the release of the second pack a complete edition of MK8 will be put out.
The roster feels very done to me, but then again I don't hate the Koopalings. They're all very unique little characters. I'm wondering why Nintendo kept them hidden away for so long when they have such distinct and exploitable personalities.