The gods have smiled upon me...

Good times...

While I expected no voice chat for a while now, it is disappointing as we know there are many ways it could have been implemented in a useful and fair way, especially with friends. It seems Nintendo has taken a step back ever since the swap note troubles and are overly protective, imo. 

What exactly happened with Swap Note?

I just feel like the same thing could be done with Wii U messaging, no?

Perhaps, I am wondering though at the time, if Swap Note would of required you to sign in with a NNID, this very well may not even have happened. Just because the sick individual would have known he could be easily found out... he was anyways but it would have been even easier.

Ah, makes sense. I don't think you had to now that you mention it.

You enter the game at the title screen than it tells you if you want to download the dlc.

^ That was my experience...

Here are threads to follow...

http://www.gamefaqs....71682972?page=1

http://www.gamefaqs....kart-8/70568872

http://ca.ign.com/ar...ome-an-epidemic

"Super Smash Bros. director Masahiro Sakuraibelieves the abuse of downloadable content has become a growing problem within the industry, as more and more companies use it as an opportunity to take advantage of content-hungry gamers.

"These days, the 'DLC scam' has become quite the epidemic, charging customers extra money to complete what was essentially an unfinished product," he explained in his latest Famitsu column, as translated by Source Gaming."

I despise it and I don't see this practice dieing off unless there is some sort of legislation against it.

 Also this is not saying DLC is evil it's the DLC practices most developers do with it.

^This! I love when DLC is done right and Nintendo (first party) generally gets this right (so far). The way it was meant to be used (portrayed) like it was when the concept was first introduced in the gaming industry. The only other example for me that I can remember of doing this really right was Gears of War 3. Released a very full, satisfying polished game and the season pass gave SO much more extra content. There are more examples sure but nothing I can think of off the top of my head. The SFxT 12 characters on disc thing was disgusting and if not for the things I really loved about Capcom like Mega Man, Dead Rising, etc. I would have boycotted them altogether, but I certainly did not buy any DLC for that title.

It really becomes blatant now how this concept is abused. Don't even get me started on "Day One" DLC! (that you have to pay for) Really?! And wait, I have to pay for a MP game mode that generally has shipped with games since the beginning of time? The problem with all this is that consumers are now conditioned to it and it will probably never really change.

Nintendo has done season passes but when they release DLC without them there are usually bundle offers that so far are priced way better than the common price we are used to for a season pass. $12 for Mario Kart and it pretty much doubled the content of the game and what previous MKs had (track-wise). Mario Golf: World Tour had a season pass for $15 which doubled course content of that and previous titles and added a few extra characters but the game even sold for $5 less than normal retail to begin with. Unless anyone has more/other examples, to me Nintendo (first party) are the only folks that are consistent with reasonably priced DLC. 

DLC is not "The Devil" and has been responsible for great things but in my opinion it's been used more wrongly that it has been rightfully by devs/publishers or whoever else is in charge of such content.

Yeah, you have the exact opposite thought process as I do.

 

My position is that there should never ever be legislation for any of it. People should just educate themselves and vote with their money more responsibly. The government should only ever intervene in the market when there's actual harm being done. Not when people are being willing fools.

Sure, you might be responsible enough and I don't disagree but call me cynical, I don't have faith in mass population having a proper sense of reason and voting responsibly with their wallets, at least when it comes to gaming - I consider myself more responsible than most but I'm not immune, there is some content I absolutely crave and would throw money at for that could probably be considered unreasonable amounts. If most people are voting responsibly with there wallets, it doesn't appear to be working (with a triumphant one-off here or there). I don't know that legislation is the right word but it would seem some sort of consumer "protection" seems to be needed.

Which games charge for a multiplayer game mode? Just curious as to what game/s you were referring to there.

 

I can't really comment on games like Mario Golf but from what you said it seems they handled the DLC well. Do you think they are charging too much for an individual SSB character?

There was one recently where I went "WTH?" when I found out there was MP being added after but I can't remember for the life of me now. And I don't necessarily mean paid DLC (though that's certainly worse). What comes to mind is Resident Evil 5's versus mode as paid DLC and in Gears of War: Judgement you had to pay for game modes that was included since the first Gears game (can't remember if it was Warzone or Execution or both). It's obviously nickel-and-diming consumers buy comparison to before practices like this came into effect.

In any game charging anything for content I've had in previously games is too much IMO. I don't even know the price for Mewtwo and Lucas but I know they cost too much if they are more than $0. I still take the stance Nintendo (first party) is more reasonable with DLC than anyone else though.

Nintendo is significantly less slimy that most gaming companies by numerous examples. They're just poorly managing the amiibo situation.

FINALLY arrived in the mail from Japan and I couldn't be happier...

Think there was a listing leaked somewhere of Dr. Mario amiibo being compatible with the game.

Bomberman

Candy Kong

Dixie Kong

Pauline

Bayonetta

Simon Belmont

Banjo-Kazooie

Knuckles

I kinda want to cast a ballot for Tetris. I mean if Duck Hunt is in it it seems like the sky's the limit.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- It was human players vs. each other. I can't see how paying to add a MP mode to any game is ok. I bought a game for $60 (or whatever). It's fine if you worked on it after without it planned for the original game, but you nor I should have to pay again for it. I can't say for sure but with such practices now it doesn't seem likely, it was probably predetermined. My point is we're now conditioned to believe it "isn't so bad" to pay more for something that should be shipped with the game or is locked on the disc no matter how nominal the fee is and that's the problem. It's been abused terribly.

- GoW Judgement did not sell for less.

- Again, I don't think it's reasonable to pay anything for extra content we had before at no extra cost.  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoting Sorceror...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorceror

- That's like complaining about no versus mode in a Mario game or Borderlands or something.. It's far from the main appeal of the game (the singleplayer/co-op story mode is). I haven't yet played RE6, but versus mode in Resident Evil? Does anyone even play that? That sounds like a completely optional mode that would only appeal to a very small amount of people. I don't recall RE having a versus mode before RE5 anyway so I'm not sure why it would be expected as free content.

 

Why is it that you feel a versus mode should have shipped with the main game or been free when it was never was a part of the series before this? I honestly don't see why we would be entitled to an optional game mode like that.

 

You say that we're conditioned to think that it's not so bad to pay more but you then go on to say that it's something "that should be shipped with the game". We're not the ones to say what should ship with the game and a versus mode in a game that is primarily about the story mode is far from something that should have shipped with the game. I'm not sure how much extra content you feel you're entitled to for free.

 

- I haven't played GoW: J so I can't really say if the amount of content in the main game is enough to say that selling the rest of this as DLC is fair. That being said, it did seem like a smaller game in the series with Gears 1-3 being larger releases so I wouldn't be surprised if Judgement had a smaller budget than previous titles in the series which I would say makes charging for this DLC more understandable.

 

It should be looked at on a case by case basis. If GoW:J has enough content then this DLC isn't such a big deal, sometimes it's a fine line though. 

 

- So you want the exact same Mewtwo from Melee?

I never complained RE5 didn't have a versus mode. I complained that a MP mode was added for a cost outside of the selling price for the game. And yes I and other people played it. Sure, it was very much optional for an extra cost but you seem to be missing the point. The problem I have is that the mentality for this now is ok compared to the times when I paid for the price of a game and didn't pay extra for parts of it later. I paid full price for Sonic the Hedgehog 2 and got a versus mode "that sounds like a completely optional mode that would only appeal to a very small amount of people". It doesn't matter, no one was nickel and dimed for it back then. I didn't expect RE5 Versus Mode as "free content". I paid already.

"Why is it that you feel a versus mode should have shipped with the main game or been free when it was never was a part of the series before this? I honestly don't see why we would be entitled to an optional game mode like that."

I... I can't...

...

...

Is it really THAT bad amongst gamers now?? That from the get go we don't feel all playable modes are not entitled to us after paying full price for a game? That anything new should always be just optional for an extra cost?

You know what extra content I feel I'm entitled to? How about the ending for a game? 

^ If you can't see from that example how awful these practices have mostly turned to then there is nothing more I can say. You would be at a whole 'nother level.

GoW:J had just as big a budget as any of the previous games. It was made partially by a different developer and just wasn't as good. Again, small budget or not, NOTHING makes it ok to charge extra for something that was blatantly not shipped completed with the game to be charged for later. Most of it was already on disc. I agree it is a case by case basis as with Mewtwo I'm kind of ok with, just kind of. I realize he wasn't in the last game and he was reworked since he was last seen so I'm 50/50 on it.

Bottom line is no one is the authority on what is right and wrong in DLC practices but I can't see how one can be completely blind to what is very obvious and blatant cash grabs. It's just super clear to see when you look back.

Just gave me Super Mario series Mario a look over after opening it today and well, does the emblem on his hat look off to you?

Some games have multiplayer and some don't. I'm sure we can agree on that. While Sonic 2 had a multiplayer mode, a game like Vectorman was only singleplayer. No one was 'nickel and dimed' for it back then because they really couldn't have been, if development is over and the game is released then that is all you got.

And that's exactly my point. They can now, and a lot of times we are because developers can now. That's all I've been saying.

You have indeed said many times devs/publishers do decide the content and a lot of times it's blatant content cut for extra money. There's absolutely no denying that (No, not is all cases). You're not blind because you don't feel that you're entitled to more than you pay for. You're blind if you can't acknowledge due to DLC/patches and what devs/publishers can do now that sometimes you get what's obviously an unfinished game.

There is no denying a lot of times there is a fine line. I haven't disagreed on most points. All I'm saying is there are times when the abuse is cut and dry.

Think it's worth anything? Like those disfigured amiibo that sell online for crazy moolah?

Never played the original, so it would be enough incentive for me to buy such a remake to try for the first time and in HD.

Someone gets it.

Paper Mario 64 & Paper Mario TYD > Mario RPG

Thems fighting words! (Though to be fair, again I haven't played TYD).

I think most of the Mario's have that same offset of the M logo on the hat.

DOES YOURS?!

yep, Luigi's letter is more centered.

Oh.

YES!!!