The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild GOTG

Pedz wrote:I think people aren't happy with DLC in general, because they feel like it's usually been held back from the game just to make some extra cash.

It's this for me.

So are people buying the guide for this? I pre ordered the collectors edition before Amazon pulled it. It's now available again to buy but the date of delivery is the 9th of March. Managed to get the collectors edition for £25. I also pre ordered all the BOTW amibo, I have spent about £150 on this game and I plan on buying it twice

Ad7 wrote:

Pedz wrote:I think people aren't happy with DLC in general, because they feel like it's usually been held back from the game just to make some extra cash.

It's this for me.

Its an understandable response, but I don't think its actually true in the nefarious way that people seem to think about it.

At the end of the day, these games cost money to make and the people making them are perfectly entitled to charge whatever they think will get them the most return on their work.

Not that that matters to me. The way I look at it, you just have to ask yourself a simple question. Is what they are offering me worth the price they are charging for it? If it seems like the answer is yes then it doesn't really matter if they thing they are offering is a full game, a piece of DLC for a game or anything basically.

If the answer is yes, buy it. If not then wait for it to come down in price. No need to moan about anything.

Shug5891 wrote:So are people buying the guide for this? I pre ordered the collectors edition before Amazon pulled it. It's now available again to buy but the date of delivery is the 9th of March. Managed to get the collectors edition for £25. I also pre ordered all the BOTW amibo, I have spent about £150 on this game and I plan on buying it twice

I'm glad I'm not the only one, got all the Amiibo on pre-order as well as the Wii U and Switch version. Not ordered a guide, yet

Ad7 wrote:

Pedz wrote:I think people aren't happy with DLC in general, because they feel like it's usually been held back from the game just to make some extra cash.

It's this for me.

This is the main difference between this DLC, and what what we got with Mario Kart. We don't know exactly when those extra tracks were developed, but they were announced after launch and released quite a few months down the line. There was no sense that these were tracks that were ready for launch and held back.

However, posting "it's okay when Nintendo do it" misses the mark for me. This is shitty from Nintendo but it's also a shitty modern business practice that has become common in the industry over the past 4 or 5 years. I don't see gamerforever going into other threads and saying he feels sick, or much outrage when a game launches with DLC, a season pass or imminent add-on content.

Nintendo are just following what other developers have gotten away with and what is now fairly widespread. They're doing it with paid online as well.

Typically of Nintendo and modern gaming trends, they're a few years behind the curve. Indeed, that first batch of DLC has a whiff of horse armour about it. The other two may be high-quality, admittedly, and the first batch isn't being sold separately as far as we know.

But the moral indignation is a bit much, when it's common practice in amongst the big guns. I look at my recent games on my PS4 - Rainbow Six Siege, Elder Scrolls Online, Dark Souls, Destiny, Arkham Knight, Battlefront - and all are games that either had DLC at, or close to, launch, had season passes from the start, had DLC announced before launch or expected before launch or had micro transactions built in.

Do they all make gamerforever feel sick? It might be disappointing to have it in a Zelda game, but this is standard practice now in 2017.

All games are crap and worthless.

How did we end up talking about the last of us in a Zelda thread.

Oh right, fade.

Btw i also sold my xbox 360 because I had 20 games and literally couldn't be arsed to play any of them, the system had a "colour" (other than brown) that was 3rd person cover shooters, fps and driving games and that was pretty much it. Apart from super meat boy. Then I bought Bayonetta 1/2 again on wii u, which (along with remake 1, resi 0 and 4, Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7 and others on GC) was a fantastic example of Nintendo giving a gooseberry fool about alternatives to their games via 3rd parties and exclusives. It's just a shame they always seem to strawberry float off after about 2 years.

Oh and Zombi U was a good game. Blah. I guess Wonderful 101 isn't "mature" enough.

Green Gecko wrote:How did we end up talking about the last of us in a Zelda thread.

Oh right, fade.

Btw i also sold my xbox 360 because I had 20 games and literally couldn't be arsed to play any of them, the system had a "colour" (other than brown) that was 3rd person cover shooters, fps and driving games and that was pretty much it. Apart from super meat boy. Then I bought Bayonetta 1/2 again on wii u, which (along with remake 1, resi 0 and 4, Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7 and others on GC) was a fantastic example of Nintendo giving a gooseberry fool about alternatives to their games via 3rd parties and exclusives. It's just a shame they always seem to strawberry float off after about 2 years.

Oh and Zombi U was a good game. Blah. I guess Wonderful 101 isn't "mature" enough.

I think you'll find it was actually Rax's giant post.

I only mentioned the last of us as an example of evolution/change over the years.

He's the one who said it was really similar to uncharted. Of course I'm going to dispute that, it's factually wrong

Also, why take a shot at me for mentioning LOU and then continue to go off topic and talk about other games? A bit hypocritical no?

Also, half the games you listed also came out on PS2. Bayonetta came out on PS3 and 360, but those platforms also had alternatives like GOW, Ninja Gaiden and DmC.

Yeah but I mean blahblah Nintendo games are similar and have no variety which is a pretty wild tangent from a thread about one specific game and its dlc.

Zelda > DLC >Nintendo make kid friendly games that lack variety. OK.

Has gooseberry fool all to do with zelda which is why I think Rax did a speech because it's tiresome whenever Nintendo does something like in this case DLC, which isn't a new thing at all.

People buy all this season pass and pre order gooseberry fool and then Nintendo offers dlc for a zelda game (after doing it for a few years, or arguably 30 years ago). Maybe Nintendo should include a chastity belt for adults' wallets so they're not forced into buying dlc on Nintendo formats? Then they really would be kid friendly.

Edit: don't give a crap about that boring tit for tat stuff, I just mentioned a few games that were originally Nintendo exclusives as an example of addressing variety like any other platform holder. For example, Microsoft purchasing Rare.

I was talking about Bayonetta 2 which is an incredible game.

This stuff bores me in any thread, sorry, my opinion. Really looking forward to this game.

The problem isn't that Nintendo's output lacks variation - as I said, the do actually have quite a lot of range and produce as much different stuff as we can realistically expect from one developer (I don't expect Nintendo to do an 18 rated GTA clone anymore than I expect Rockstar to make a game like Pikmin).

The problem is that their last few consoles haven't attracted mass third party support, so the gaps they have in their output (in terms of style, genre and even the temporal gaps I release schedules) don't get filled by other developers. The problem isn't that Nintendo don't make mature games (let's not get into an argument about "mature" either, as many many games are not mature but "adult"), it's that developers whose forte is those types of games, either stay away or give half-arsed support. Nintendo deserve a lot of flak there for business decisions and the like, but not because of the output and direction of their games.

My only qualm with their output is that they have made games in the past that enlarge their scope greatly, and these IPs - F-Zero, Metroid, Wave Race, 1080, Excitebike - have been left on the shelf for the last decade or so.

Being slightly more on topic, Xenoblade X was a strawberry floating epic game and had a few dark themes like suicide and murder so hopefully some of that finds its way into this game with Monolith also having worked on it. I think Monolith have mostly worked on story and NPC stuff as there was so much of that in Xenoblade. As well as environments etc.

Only 17 days!

This game has more DLC than Horizon Zero Dawn. One of the reasons I used to love Nintendo is because they still made games like they used to be. No Day 1 patches, no stupid DLC that made you feel like waiting for a GOTY edition. So now they're still making the same games they were making 10 years ago, with the same stories and gameplay (which is fine) but now I get to buy a dungeon in Zelda? Yay? Like what exactly are they offering that other companies aren't?

You say other companies sell DLC, yes they do, but they usually do side story DLC only (Bioshock, DmC, LOU, GTA) They don't sell dungeons and challenges. And most people hate it when they do and also hate it when the content is clearly done before launch.
Some have no single player DLC at all (Doom, Titanfall, Yakuza 0, Mirror's edge Catalyst, Until Dawn)

Plus it goes against their own stance: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011- ... n-paid-dlc

You're not just buying a new dungeon.

You're buying a difficulty level and a feature for the map.

Lagamorph wrote:You're not just buying a new dungeon.

You're buying a difficulty level and a feature for the map.

We don't actually know enough about what the DLC entails, especially the content towards towards the end of the year. I would advise waiting for more details.

Do "other companies" "usually" sell side-story DLC? Or have you just picked examples to suit your argument?

I would say there is a wide variety of different types of DLC, so to say that other companies mostly sell optional side content is disingenuous to me.

Besides, do you know what form this DLC dungeon will take? It's possibly going to be a side story too (hopefully not an Assassin's Creed 2/Human Revolution-style missing chunk of me-game story, though I forgot most other companies just do side stories). Or I hope it isn't the proper ending or epilogue to the main game, like in Fallout 3, but again most companies do side stories.

There are a myriad of ways to approach DLC. Some companies do just sell "dungeons" and challenges (and what is an extra dungeon and challenges if not a side story DLC)?

Yes, you can pick a dozen or so games and say that they don't have DLC and try and paint an industry-wide picture like you have done. I could pick a different 12 and argue about micro transactions, or season passes, or gated-off content. It is too varied a concept now to just say "other companies usually do X" to support your argument, or to name a random five games as having no single player DLC . Good for those five games. Well done them. Though you could even argue that perhaps some Doom fans or Until Dawn fans, would like a tenner's chunk of DLC if it added or expanded on the original game, or even just gave them more decent content to play.

And the stance you mention in the link was from 2011.

Since then we've seen Nintendo embrace DLC, so this isn't really the start of any change. Mario Kart 8 and Hyrule Warrior's DLC was met with pretty decent acclaim. They may have been "doing something that other developers do" by offering DLC, but it was all reasonably priced, of a good quality and added to the game. I don't think that's a reason to now dislike Nintendo, just because it was something they previously avoided. DLC definitely has a place in the industry and can be beneficial to consumers. The MK tracks for example, probably wouldn't have surfaced if it weren't for DLC, or would have just been kept for a sequel.

I think we need to reserve judgement on that second piece of DLC especially, before jumping to conclusions. It could be some of that lovely side story stuff you like. It could match the quality of Nintendo's offerings in other games.

Of course, it could be a dungeon cut from the main plot leaving a Wind Waker-esque scar on the game map. It could be a story epilogue which forces people to pay £20 to see the plot reach a satisfactory conclusion. We also don't know when development started on the DLC. It could have been as the main game was finished and all sorted, seeing as we won't get that second piece for awhile, they are possibly still working on it now and will be doing so after launch.

Saying that, the first bit of DLC - the hard mode stuff - is blatantly gated off content that we would be getting at launch. It is more galling as it isn't even a new addition, as the past few Zelda games have had a Hard Mode on disc.

I'd be fine with second lot of DLC, the dungeon and challenges, for £8-10. It's the first two parts that are akin to the shitty DLC/pre-order/season pass practices that others do.

I'd like to hear more about this hard mode. Does it change the game up enough that it would warrant paying money? Is it something more akin to Master Quest or is it just a Hero mode?

I'm not gonna get mad if it has had work put into it. If it's just a Hero mode where everything does more damage, that would be a bit shite.

I have a feeling that the survival elements will be coming to the forefront with it. Much like Fallout.

I hate DLC because I usually buy it when it for games I like when it's on sale and never actually play it.

Nintendo are offering more Zelda for people that want more Zelda? What a shower of banana splits they are. Im absolutely sickened how they have come out and said they are going to continue to support this game post launch and are going to put a bundle of content on sale that I can preorder, arseholes. How dare they package this up and force me to pay for things I dont want, the dickheads. The rage inside me is so violent I cant even comprehend why they would offer people this when no other company has ever done anything like this, I hope they all die.

No wait, the other thing, its DLC, everyone does it, buy it if you like whats in it, leave it on the digital shelf if you dont. Getting bent out of shape because you dont like the bulletpoints in the press release is a bit daft.

Rax wrote:Nintendo are offering more Zelda for people that want more Zelda? What a shower of banana splits they are. Im absolutely sickened how they have come out and said they are going to continue to support this game post launch and are going to put a bundle of content on sale that I can preorder, arseholes. How dare they package this up and force me to pay for things I dont want, the dickheads. The rage inside me is so violent I cant even comprehend why they would offer people this when no other company has ever done anything like this, I hope they all die.

No wait, the other thing, its DLC, everyone does it, buy it if you like whats in it, leave it on the digital shelf if you dont. Getting bent out of shape because you dont like the bulletpoints in the press release is a bit daft.

We have a winner.