We've known for a while that Nintendo 3DS (and presumably the Wii U when it launches) are going to have downloadable content. Nintendo reiterated this a couple of weeks ago when announcing Nintendo Network.
This is a pretty big move for Nintendo - there have been very few instances in the past where you could purchase extra content for games on Nintendo consoles.
Other consoles have had DLC for as long as I can remember, and you need only have a wander into your local game store to see the variety of little cards that transform your real-life money into maps, weapons and songs for a variety of games.
As has been announced, Theatrhythm Final Fantasy game will be the first game (in Japan at least) to feature additional downloadable content. This takes the form of extra songs for the game, which will cost 150 Yen apiece (about £1.20 or €1.50). While I think that the pricing of those songs is a little expensive (consider that songs on iTunes generally cost a lot less than that and can be played on a variety of devices), I think that more songs are a good form of downloadable content as they offer an extra challenge for those who've completed and enjoyed the game.
What I do have a problem with, however, are a few of the trends that have been appearing in DLC on other consoles. The first of these is offering very powerful weapons or other types of advantageous items for DLC. This makes the game (especially if there's online multiplayer) grossly unfair on other players who don't want to or can't afford to buy the add-on too. I don't think that DLC should be able to change the level of the playing field for some players just because they've bought an item.
Imagine if a Mario Kart item was released that allowed you to freeze all the other racers for ten seconds during a race, and only one person had bought it. That would give that person a huge advantage over all the others! DLC shouldn't allow for that sort of manipulation of gameplay.
Another issue I have is with limited edition or exclusive add-on content. This normally comes in the form of an exclusive item for certain players if they pre-order the game in a specific store. So, while it may be cheaper to purchase it from Amazon or a different store, in order to be competitive in the game, you have to buy it from a specific store. Plus, if those items are pre-order exclusives, there's no opportunity for people who buy the game later on to get them.
But there is an awful lot to be said for DLC too - by offering customisations, people can style characters (or even whole games!) in a way that they like. It can allow people who have really enjoyed a game to get extra content for it cheaply, and potentially expand the game's lifespan dramatically. Plus, if it's implemented correctly, it can make multiplayer more fun, more diverse and more surprising! But what about the price? Well, I imagine that when Nintendo Network fully launches, it'll allow you to use your eShop credit to buy DLC too, so given that you can buy full games on the eShop for about £5.40, I'd hope that you'd be able to buy DLC for around £1-£3, depending on how big and important the content is. I definitely don't think it should get much more expensive than that - otherwise you could almost buy a full downloadable game for the same price!
But what do you guys think? What games are you hoping to be able to get DLC for? And how much would you pay for it?
I am sad that Nintendo have resorted to this.
This only means that we will pay £40 for a game, only to find that only half of it is there, and have to pay another £20 to buy the rest.
DLC should be free, like on Jam with the Band. Then we would get full, proper games, and the developer would create more for us to download for FREE.
I wouldn't pay £2 for a stupid Final Fantasy song! You can probably find it on the internet for free!
I love how almost everyone has forgotten that your not just paying for a song: there's a level in there too. The thing that really bothers me is the fact that this is being released on launch day; that's cheap and pure greed.
you do know that this is a rhythm action game, right?
'Jumping to Conclusions' doesn't begin to describe this comment. While it is true that some games on other consoles appear to be half-baked, requiring DLC to get the full game, there is nothing to say that any good games on 3DS or Wii U will do this.
I am slightly worried that games which already have free DLC will just make it paid (For instance, Professor Layton and the Mask of Miracle has daily puzzles for download in its first year - that's 365 extra puzzles!) Maybe they'll carry on with the free DLC and also add some amazing paid DLC!
Overall, I'm really pleased Nintendo are using DLC. Not only are they great fun and they expand a game you already love (imagine extra levels for Super Mario Galaxy 2) but they can sometimes change a game's genre (e.g. the Red Dead Redemption DLC, in which you fought zombies). It can really extend a game's life, and it's completely optional.
P.S. I know the other comments above have explained this, but it has to be said again - you'd probably better read ONM's preview of Theatrythm, seeing as you seem to know nothing about what could be a great game!
i just hope no dlc is planned before the games release, as that is allways my major issue with modern gaming. MW3 for instance, had a whole £30 dlc thingy on release day! i'm sorry, but you could implement that into the game with so much ease it isnt even funny, you cash hogs. planned dlc (unless its planned to be free, like valve with their portal 2 dlc) is a crime. why not just put it into the game? its just money making and sickens me. dont apply this to all dlc. the aforementioned undead nightmare for read ded redemption is good, as its basically a new game with new things and not really a dlc at all, more a new way of looking at things.
but i see an advert for bf3, and it says dlc comes first on ps3. and then dlc comes 2 weeks into the gaming experience? it could have been so easily put in at barely any cost, it sickens me that companies like activision are just money grabbers, when companies like valve are prepared to do it for free.
look at it this way. a couple of weeks ago, notch (minecraft creator) told people to pirate his OWN GAME. and activision are charging £30 quid for dlc on day one. now which game has had more praise? the game who's developer wants his game to be basically played by everyone and enjoyed, or the cash cow who releases the same game every year?
I think DLC should be free; since you have already paid for the game the extras should be free
I think some DLC could cost £5.40, the same as full titles on the eShop. On XBL both DLC and Arcade Games often cost the same, ranging from 400-1200 Microsoft Points. (£3.50-£10)
Agree
I have one idea for dlc:
Similar to Skylanders and Activision, Ninty could release action figures of Mario and crew that have QR or a code underneath which you scan or put into say, SM3DL.
This could unlock various themed worlds/levels/quests using and playing as that character instead of Mario/Luigi...
For example:
Toad-levels based on Toad Town
Starlow/Broque Monsiear-levels from Mario and Luigi: Boswers Inside Story
Wario-money/wealth themed levels
Yoshi-Yoshi Island levels/SM 64 ds power ups
Donkey Kong-County Return levels
etc
...
What do you think?
Agreed. Nintendo more then likely will NOT become cash cows with DLC, but other companies may. It's all about using it in the right way: to add extra SINGLE (stressing that, due to the point made in the article about the exclusive items for players who bought the game from a different store) player content.
And, in my opinion, Call of Duty needs to die. Seriously, it's ruined FPS, by literately not changing since 3. Why can't they go back to the Doom way of doing FPS?
My only request (at the moment) is for character/map packs for the next Smash Bros ideally coinciding with the latest releases. So for example when Pikmin 3 comes out we could get new stages based on areas from that game which obviously couldn't be on the disc as they are based on a game that wasn't out at the time. (Yes I realise this is a poor example as Pikmin 3 will be out first but it's just an example).
I'm very picky and bitter and cynical with paid DLC. It has to be worth the money and made to feel like they didn't take it out of the game and made it paid DLC because the chief executive said so. Hopefully it won't.
I wouldn't pay anything for DLC. I don't care about DLCs unless Nintendo make them free. If they do give them away for nothing,I hope there's DLCs for:
Mario Kart 7
Super Mario 3D Land
But I definately can't see other companies giving DLCs away for free. If there's any good cheap DLCs that I might consider,I hope there's some for:
Sonic generations
Mario and Sonic at the london 2012 olympic games
Lego Harry Potter years 5-7(It'd be cool if there was a DLC that featured Villain levels,similar to LEGO Batman)
Lego Pirates of the Caribbean(see Lego HP)
MK7 and SM3DL can't get DLC as it would need to be built in to the game... Which it very well is not.
And same for all of those.
But I see your point with cheap DLC. Most DLC is built into the game and "unlocked" so there would be no point.
But I'd happily pay for the cheap stuff. If, for the love of God, they made Eshop cards available in more places and included PayPal payments.
I reckon SM3DL and MK7 still could have DLC. Nintendo could patch the software via system update, much like they fixed that game ending bug in skyward sword via patching the game. I think they did that at least. Regardless, I'm sure they COULD do it if they wanted.
The worst thing that could happen is if Nintendo brought out Mario Kart DLC (I mean a game called that, not DLC itself), with virtually no tracks, characters or other content, then made DLC available - but still made the game full price. I'd probably still end up buying it though
I can't imagine Nintendo releasing a game with content missing and releasing "extra" content as DLC either. I think most likely they will release a Mario game and then a month or so down the line release a new world/stages and I would be happy to pay £4 or £5 for this.
I would personally like to see, if possible, DLC for older games. Just imagine downloading Zelda The Wind Waker and Nintendo giving you the option to download the original Gamecube version or an enhanced version which Eiji and his team have worked on to add the couple of dungeons that they had to scrap originally and remove the triforce hunt.
I am looking forward to seeing what DLC is released for the Wii U and how Nintendo implement it into their existing franchises.
Does "Shut up and take my money!" answer the question?
I think it should depend on what it is and how the game is effected.
Small things like songs or character skins could use play coins (think of the option for buying a gun pack in Resident Evil 3D the mercenaries(or whatever the name is))
Big things like new worlds, levels, game changing playable characters etc, would cost money.
man, i really wish they'd stop releasing those brown and grey fps' and go back to releasing good games like this:
http://xboxlivemedia.ign.com/xboxlive/image/article/109/1093385/doom-ii-20100526092950341_640w_1274992213.jpg
look at dat colour mang
all you people saying 'DLC should alwayz be three!!!!' need to get your head out of your ass. you've paid for the main unit, not the extra stuff the developers have made to keep you entertained. they could just leave the game, but no, they make an attempt to keep you coming back to the game, pumping time, money, and resources into developing this extra content. that's something completely worth paying for. obviously stuff like release-week DLC is simple greed, but releasing good quality content several months after release is something to be praised, not demonised.
Most exclusive DLC offers are aesthetic or unlock things earlier than you normally would get.
I would never buy those sort of things anyway. Expansion style DLC like found in GTA4 and Red Dead Redemption are by far the only way to go.
I dont mind what the price is as Nintendo will most likely make it fair, but if Layton's weekly puzzles start costing money then all hope will be lost