Official The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild thread - "open your eyes"

DarkDepths

Your friendly neighbourhood robot overlord
Looking back at the graphical comparisons, I really REALLY hope that they iron out the lighting effects on the Switch version of BotW. As is, I much prefer the moodier lighting on the Wii U (Although I like everything else more on the switch)
I've noticed that there have been a lot of video/image comparisons between the WiiU and Switch versions. Many of them point out the different colour grading.

I highly suspect that the WiiU version is going to end up looking a lot more like the Switch version than a lot of people are suspecting. I think the truth is, we've only seen older WiiU footage, and that the Switch footage we've seen has all been of a newer build that has tweaked several visual parameters.

So yeah... I think I agree with you in terms of preference. But in reality, I think it's going the other way.
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
Sounds like Monolithsoft and Nintendo just had a wrap up party at the end of last week, so development is complete. The last months of development are normally focused on optimization and cleaning up bugs. I am confident that the quality of this game will be fantastic on both Wii U and Switch.
I wonder how much Monolith really did in the game's development. Aonuma-san said:

“On the other hand, for Breath of the Wild, we’ve been assisted by level designers used to large game areas, in order to make topographic arrangements.”
http://zeldauniverse.net/2017/01/31...lith-softs-involvement-in-breath-of-the-wild/

"Assisted," because the Zelda team certainly has its own level designers. But I'd guess it was a lot more than mere arranging topography. You don't jump from making a game as segmented and compact as Skyward Sword to one as gigantic as BotW without more than a few pointers from Monolith, I'd wager.
I think that game is probably being developed at the Tokyo MonolithSoft studio, so it must have been in full-steam development since XCX came out. That's assuming that the team helping with Zelda is the one in Kyoto. It could be the other way around.

They published a neat recruitment page recently. Most of it can't be translated with Google Translate due to the text being part of an image, but you can still get some interesting info in the second to last section.
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ja&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https://www.monolithsoft.co.jp/recruit/special/index.html&edit-text=&act=url
Monolith.jpg

109 employees.

And I'm sure not all of 'em are wonks and graphical engineers. How the hell does Monolith do what they do? Ubisoft uses like 10 studios and (allegedly) 500 people to make a big, open-world game. The only explanation I have is that Monolith are actually witches.
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
I think the bloated team sizes for Ubisoft comes as a result of short development periods. Think of how many years Xenoblade Chronicles X was in development, nearly four years I believe. I also think the team sizes are inflated with lots of names that weren't really working full time on the game. The core team might consist of a hundred members, but then Ubisoft enlist many other teams to create assets. These people may have only worked for a few weeks or months on their part of the project.

I believe this to be the case with Zelda BoTW as well. A reasonable team size as the core team, and the team size doubles when you name all the people who assisted that team. It makes sense to do it this way. There are periods of development where certain task are more or less complete, and these members have free time to assist other projects.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 

Cubits

Well-Known Member
Not sure if it was posted earlier, but since we're talking about how monolithsoft was involved, i thought it was interesting to note the way in which the topography of the world was constructed:

Since a lot of people were playtesting the game, Eiji Aonuma asked for a tool to be created, in order to have a map displayed on a PC. That map was to show the movements of 100 players in real-time, and simultaneously, with a marking point every hour.

It was all pretty amusing for Eiji Aonuma, because it showed the many different ways players were playing the game. Sometimes, lines would converge to a single point, which showed lots of players were going to the same place at a given time. When asked why they went there, players would give answers such as “Because there’s something there”, or “Because I found that thing”.

Very often, it was something he had not thought about, or simply didn’t notice from his point of view (as developer/dirctor). This also allowed the development team to see which places players were not visiting, so that they could make modifications: adding a path, modifying the topography, making a place more attracting, etc...
Many people were/are apprehensive about BOTW being like a land-based version of Wind Waker, with points of interest separated by vast tracts of travelling. I don't blame them since that is how all but the most expensive sandbox games are designed.

A small team can make a game as "big" as No Man's Sky if they don't want to impart guidance over player agency (you could go anywhere, but you chose to do exactly what i wanted you to!), but to hand-craft something the size of BOTW takes phenomenal man-power. And it is just that; the entire map is purposefully constructed, like each deliberate stroke of a van Gogh painting, to lead your eye.

Nintendo rarely gets the mainstream credit they deserve for their absurd attention to detail because it's always weighed against the fact that "it's a cartoony baby game compared to fallout/skyrim/uncharted/...", but when this gigantic game ships it will hopefully make it harder for developers like Bethesda to justify their buggy, rough-edged products to consumers. Skyrim is actually going to be pitching against this!

http://www.perfectly-nintendo.com/z...-placed-on-the-map-physic-engine-shenanigans/

You've already probably seen that article, but i found it to be the most illuminating piece about the development of BOTW.
 

Juegos

All mods go to heaven.
Moderator
I had told myself a couple of weeks ago that I wouldn't play any single player adventure game until Breath of the Wild released, but since Mike's been gushing about the first Xenoblade now that he's stuck with it (and since I got a new receiver with some nifty audio features), I decided I'd boot XCX again and do some more quests.

Now that I'm playing it knowing that the same people are working on BotW, I can't help but get pumped about how amazing the BotW overworld is going to be. There's something this team does that absolutely no other developer can do, and that is create a majestic landscape with a ridiculous sense of scale. There's something deeply absurd about parking your mech at the entrance of Noctilum, spending nearly 30 minutes trekking through its sinewy forests, cliffsides, caves, bridges, climbing massive trees and walking on the canopies, falling back down to the river delta, crossing a poisonous bog, and upon reaching the highest impassable waterfall, doubling back along the river until reaching the sea shoreline; and then doing it all again with your mech in less than 5 minutes, avoiding obstacles and flying over the canopies and over mountains with no difficulties.


So I have to wonder whether Breath of the Wild will have the same attention to detail and incredible scale as XCX did. It's easy to assume that it won't from the footage we have seen of the game so far, but then again that footage has been 99% of the plateau. Judging what the game will be like in its entirety from that area alone would be like assuming that if you've seen Colony 9, you've seen everything that Xenoblade 1 has to offer, which we all know is totally wrong.
 
LMAO wut?
This shit is weird. Probably should have waited for post launch to announce this. Everything in Pack 1sounds like it should be in the base game, imo.
 
Last edited:

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
LMAO wut?
This shit is weird. Probably should have waited for post launch to announce this. Everything in Pack 1sounds like it should be in the base game, imo.
was going to criticize this point, but you had already edited.... so many games do this, it is standard practice now
 
One the one hand I'm not that upset about story DLC. The last story DLC I bought was Infamous First Light and I really enjoyed it. Also 20 bucks for it ain't bad considering that's what Infamous FF was, and then you have something like Fallout 4 where Far Harbour alone is 35 bucks.

Theeeeen you have pack 1. Hard mode, a map feature - FEATURE!. Fuck off Nintendo. Nintendo giving free updates isn't out of the norm. Animal Crossing just had a big update, all the Splatoon maps/weapons, etc. I'm not really complaining at the fact that I have to pay for DLC, and as I said, paying 20 bucks for a story campaign is fine enough so everything else is just the icing on top...but hard mode and a map feature? That's fucking stupid to lock that behind a pay wall.
 

sjmartin79

White Phoenix of the Crown
LMAO wut?
This shit is weird. Probably should have waited for post launch to announce this. Everything in Pack 1sounds like it should be in the base game, imo.
A) Of course I'm buying the expansion.
B) It makes a lot of sense as to when they are doing it. Summer - When Splatoon 2 comes out so anyone picking up a Switch at that point will also have news of new Zelda content, brings Zelda back into the news, so Summer Switch buyers may be more likely to get to Splatoon 2 and Zelda. End of the Year - When Mario Odyssey comes out, and please see earlier reason stated.
C) I have no doubt that Breath of the Wild will be an extremely full and complete games when it launches, this is just icing on the cake. I think they saw how the packs for Hyrule Warriors did, and they wanted to try that with Zelda to extend they playtime of it.
 
One the one hand I'm not that upset about story DLC. The last story DLC I bought was Infamous First Light and I really enjoyed it. Also 20 bucks for it ain't bad considering that's what Infamous FF was, and then you have something like Fallout 4 where Far Harbour alone is 35 bucks.

Theeeeen you have pack 1. Hard mode, a map feature - FEATURE!. Fuck off Nintendo. Nintendo giving free updates isn't out of the norm. Animal Crossing just had a big update, all the Splatoon maps/weapons, etc. I'm not really complaining at the fact that I have to pay for DLC, and as I said, paying 20 bucks for a story campaign is fine enough so everything else is just the icing on top...but hard mode and a map feature? That's fucking stupid to lock that behind a pay wall.
Precisely this.
I have no problems paying 20 bucks for some treasure chests, a new story and a new dungeon, that sounds about the norm for 20 bucks. But locking features behind that all is scummy af. It looks like they are padding the pack when they really dont have to.

And this is on top of whatever stuff the amiibos are hiding
 

sjmartin79

White Phoenix of the Crown
Also, wondering, it could just be semantics, but it does say "New Hard Mode".
Now is that:
1) A new "Hard" mode for the game, or...
2 A "New Hard Mode" in addition to some Master Quest type mode you get after beating the game
???
 

Juegos

All mods go to heaven.
Moderator
Also, wondering, it could just be semantics, but it does say "New Hard Mode".
Now is that:
1) A new "Hard" mode for the game, or...
2 A "New Hard Mode" in addition to some Master Quest type mode you get after beating the game
???
When I read it I imagined a "Survival Mode" like Fallout games have. Even then, this feature is usually included for free in games. The only other time I remember a hard mode being locked behind paid DLC was with Metro: Last Light. That's my only concern with this DLC, so like you, I hope it means that it's an additional mode that is separate from an already existing Hero Mode or something.
 
Precisely this.
I have no problems paying 20 bucks for some treasure chests, a new story and a new dungeon, that sounds about the norm for 20 bucks. But locking features behind that all is scummy af. It looks like they are padding the pack when they really dont have to.

And this is on top of whatever stuff the amiibos are hiding

Shiiiiit I forgot about the.....how many Zelda amiibos are there at this point?


March is Opposite Month. Sony is giving away Gravity Rush 2's story DLC for free as an apology for the delay. Zelda on Wii U gets DLC of a Switch tunic reminding you of the better version.
 
Also, wondering, it could just be semantics, but it does say "New Hard Mode".
Now is that:
1) A new "Hard" mode for the game, or...
2 A "New Hard Mode" in addition to some Master Quest type mode you get after beating the game
???
If the latter is the case, fine. I will still not be entirely happy about that but I can see some reason there.
It just falls short of what Nintendo has done before. CoV has mentioned some, but this directly correlates with the MK8 DLC. They gave us a new, faster, harder speed in that game, 200cc, for free. Considering how far off the first pack is, maybe it is more expansive than it sounds. I like SJ's reasoning that they are strategically placed to give the game fresh bursts during some peak sales seasons.
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
Nothing to get to angry about, the base game is a complete game without this content. This is the modern era, and this is how developers make money while retaining the $60 retail price for games. There were multiple N64 games I bought for $70 back in the late 90s, games are a lot more costly to make these days. It's the less attractive side of the gaming business these days, but I feel Nintendo is the most fair with their DLC practices for sure.

Zelda is going to be great, DLC or no DLC.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 

Koenig

The Architect
Nothing to get to angry about, the base game is a complete game without this content. This is the modern era, and this is how developers make money while retaining the $60 retail price for games. There were multiple N64 games I bought for $70 back in the late 90s, games are a lot more costly to make these days. It's the less attractive side of the gaming business these days, but I feel Nintendo is the most fair with their DLC practices for sure.

Zelda is going to be great, DLC or no DLC.

Sent from my SM-G360V using genital warts
It's not that I don't want to buy DLC, but rather that half of the features touted in the DLC have traditionally been standard features in the series and should not be carved out for DLC under any circumstances. It is that kind of practice that sours my mood towards most DLC, as rather than making me feel excited for it, it instead feels like the DLC is holding beloved features hostage which in turn sours my whole mood towards DLC as a whole. By comparison, I would say that Mario Kart's 8 DLC was far more enticing.
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
It's not that I don't want to buy DLC, but rather that half of the features touted in the DLC have traditionally been standard features in the series and should not be carved out for DLC under any circumstances. It is that kind of practice that sours my mood towards most DLC, as rather than making me feel excited for it, it instead feels like the DLC is holding beloved features hostage which in turn sours my whole mood towards DLC as a whole. By comparison, I would say that Mario Kart's 8 DLC was far more enticing.
Well, try this on for size: Imagine if the DLC was included in the full game from the start, but as a consequence, the game would've been delayed until the Holiday, and thus the Switch would've had no real good launch title?

I'm starting to think that BotW, due to its immense size and quantity of features, even had to be trimmed down in order to make the launch date. You might be wondering, "Why would this game, that was supposed to launch in 2015 originally, is still not fully finished then?" To which I answer with,

"Because...Nintendo."
 
I wouldn't want it to get delayed again, but Fried brought up Mario Kart 200 cc mode. That came after launch, and Nintendo didn't force you to buy the DLC or season pass to get it. It was just a free update.

This hard mode and map feature, without really knowing what it is, sounds like "free update" material to me, unless if what Jueg said and it's a survival mode or Second Quest dealio, even so I'm not that happy it's paid DLC. They could have put this out in Summer and still get that mid year revival of interest.

Games since Wolfenstein 3D and all that had expansion packs. I'm all for buying a game, enjoying it, then paying a bit more for more story content or levels. I bring up Infamous First Light again. Starcraft Brood War was the tits. Quake, Doom, etc.

So I'm pretty happy we're getting a story expansion pack. I'm all for DLC if it's good and worth the asking price....but a map FEATURE and what Nintendo is calling "hard mode"? That's shitty. Not just Nintendo, any game company that does it would russel my jimmies. I also find it kinda crappy how "if you don't buy the season pass, you can't get anything". I'm the type of person who wants to find the person whose idea it was to turn unlockable costumes into paid DLC and punch him in the stomach.

Admittedly, 20 bucks ain't bad and I would pay 20 for the story alone if it's good, but just locking this stuff behind that is weird.

I'm impressed the expansion pass isn't an amiibo..then again, there would be a shortage of them.
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
Things that used to be free ain't no more, my friends. That's why I was so salty with paid (non-dedicated server, "listen" server into peer hosting) online. Tbh, I find paid DLC far more defensible. If you're OK with previously-free modes now locked behind a wall in one place, then you gotta be OK with them elsewhere, too.
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
I wouldn't want it to get delayed again, but Fried brought up Mario Kart 200 cc mode. That came after launch, and Nintendo didn't force you to buy the DLC or season pass to get it. It was just a free update.

This hard mode and map feature, without really knowing what it is, sounds like "free update" material to me, unless if what Jueg said and it's a survival mode or Second Quest dealio, even so I'm not that happy it's paid DLC. They could have put this out in Summer and still get that mid year revival of interest.

Games since Wolfenstein 3D and all that had expansion packs. I'm all for buying a game, enjoying it, then paying a bit more for more story content or levels. I bring up Infamous First Light again. Starcraft Brood War was the tits. Quake, Doom, etc.

So I'm pretty happy we're getting a story expansion pack. I'm all for DLC if it's good and worth the asking price....but a map FEATURE and what Nintendo is calling "hard mode"? That's shitty. Not just Nintendo, any game company that does it would russel my jimmies. I also find it kinda crappy how "if you don't buy the season pass, you can't get anything". I'm the type of person who wants to find the person whose idea it was to turn unlockable costumes into paid DLC and punch him in the stomach.

Admittedly, 20 bucks ain't bad and I would pay 20 for the story alone if it's good, but just locking this stuff behind that is weird.

I'm impressed the expansion pass isn't an amiibo..then again, there would be a shortage of them.
Personally, I don't see this stuff as locked content though, and like MK8, is merely additional content the developers are currently adding to the full game now that the OG game has gone gold. Whether or not this is worth everyone's time is one thing, but I can guarantee that in traditional Nintendo fashion, we don't know the full story, and won't until later.

And since the first pack is coming out during the Summer, you can bet we'll hear more about it come E3 this year.
 
Personally, I don't see this stuff as locked content though, and like MK8, is merely additional content the developers are currently adding to the full game now that the OG game has gone gold. Whether or not this is worth everyone's time is one thing, but I can guarantee that in traditional Nintendo fashion, we don't know the full story, and won't until later.

And since the first pack is coming out during the Summer, you can bet we'll hear more about it come E3 this year.
Its bad optics, which is par the course for Nintendo.
Yes, the game has gone gold, but you kind of want to announce this sort of stuff some point after the game's been released. It tempers statements like "this should have been in the game already". Zelda can kind of slide by this with most fans because we all expect this to be a fully featured, large, game, but for those that arent 100% sold, this can be a little sour.

MK8's DLC was announced 3 months after it launched, for comparison, and I bet some of the love people have for the way that game was handled was due to the launch and DLC being very spaced apart.

"In traditional Nintendo fashion, we don't know the full story, and won't until later"
This is tiring, but I dont doubt its true. I just think they needed to be clear with this stuff. If Hard Mode is in the base game and this is something else, they didnt communicate that well enough.
 
And since the first pack is coming out during the Summer, you can bet we'll hear more about it come E3 this year.
Notice though they're selling the season pas first?

It's not just Nintendo though. Most season passes you buy blind, that's one thing I hate about this more than anything. You're pre-ordering something unknown in many cases.
 
Nintendo's season passes arent really time sensitive. Hyrule Warriors pass was never dropped when all the DLC was revealed, you can still get it at that price.
I'm not seeing exactly where it says you have to buy the Pass to get both sets of DLC. You do need it for the bonus Nintendo Switch shirt, thats about it.

I'm starting to lean on the idea that new hard mode is a NEW hard mode, not the only one.
http://zelda.com/breath-of-the-wild/news/special-announcement-from-eiji-aonuma/
 
Starting when the game launches on March 3, players will be able to purchase an Expansion Pass for $19.99, granting access to two new sets of downloadable content for the game when they become available later this year. Immediately upon pre-purchase or purchase of the Expansion Pass, three new treasure chests will appear in the game’s Great Plateau area. One of these treasure chests will contain a shirt with a Nintendo Switch logo that Link can wear during his adventure, exclusive to the Expansion Pass. The other two will deliver useful items. The first content pack is scheduled to launch this summer, and will include the addition of a Cave of Trials challenge, a new hard mode and a new feature for the in-game map. The second content pack will launch in Holiday 2017, and adds new challenges that will let players enjoy a new dungeon and a new original story. The Expansion Pass will be available for both the Nintendo Switch and Wii U versions of the game and are identical. Content packs cannot be purchased individually.



So Nintendo says a new hard mode. Weird.

Packs can't be bough separately. So if you can buy it on the eshop shop without the season pass, you're pre-ordering it for those three extra chests. That's different, a pre-order bonus on a season pass.
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
Notice though they're selling the season pas first?

It's not just Nintendo though. Most season passes you buy blind, that's one thing I hate about this more than anything. You're pre-ordering something unknown in many cases.
To be fair though, we DO know what the season pass includes.

Its bad optics, which is par the course for Nintendo.
Yes, the game has gone gold, but you kind of want to announce this sort of stuff some point after the game's been released. It tempers statements like "this should have been in the game already". Zelda can kind of slide by this with most fans because we all expect this to be a fully featured, large, game, but for those that arent 100% sold, this can be a little sour.

MK8's DLC was announced 3 months after it launched, for comparison, and I bet some of the love people have for the way that game was handled was due to the launch and DLC being very spaced apart.

"In traditional Nintendo fashion, we don't know the full story, and won't until later"
This is tiring, but I dont doubt its true. I just think they needed to be clear with this stuff. If Hard Mode is in the base game and this is something else, they didnt communicate that well enough.
I get the impression that Nintendo does this line of teasing and giving us the full story later is because gamers forget shit, so Nintendo has to explain things multiple times, because lets face it, most won't even look shit up themselves, so it's up to Nintendo at this point. But I also personally like the idea of knowing something is in store, and then finding out more about it later. It's no different than movie trailers, or hell, game trailers. It's giving us a taste of what's to come, so I look at this type of scenario in the same vain.


Perhaps, I'm just not that bothered by this information. We know there's going to be additional DLC (some tidbits pointed out already), and a Season pass, but that is all. They never made a mention of a third DLC pack, or even other stuff. You could reasonable argue that the Season pass will include a 1-year anniversary DLC pack on March 3, 2018 in order. I guess my point is, we know enough to get by, but no the full story, again, in traditional Nintendo fashion.

I've learned to simply let Nintendo by Nintendo. If I don't like it enough, I'll respond with my wallet.
 
Zelda Breath of he Wild DLC is just anti consumer bullshit. Pay for increased difficulty option.... Eh, Nintendo has already gone down the trash heap after that Switch event, I wouldn't be surprised.

"Want to carry more rupees? Please pay $4.99 for a larger rupee bag. - Nintendo in the year 2020" - Chadtronic the Nintendo Fan
 
Last edited:

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Zelda Breath of he Wild DLC is just anti consumer bullshit. Pay for increased difficulty option.... Eh, Nintendo has already gone down the trash heap after that Switch event, I wouldn't be surprised.

"Want to carry more rupees? Please pay $4.99 for a larger rupee bag. - Nintendo in the year 2020" - Chadtronic the Nintendo Fan
:rolleyes:
 
Nintendo making me pay for another difficulty level in the game is scummy no matter how many fanboys defend it.

"B-but Jack, there is already a hard mode in the game, thus your argument is invalid! So go kill yourself you Nintendo hating troll!"
Did I guess your thoughts? (Most likely)

Well, here is the thing, there are games out there that give you several different types of hard mode already packaged into the game for the full free experience. Zelda breath of the mild however, makes you pay just for a difficulty slider that is already free in most games.
 

DarkDepths

Your friendly neighbourhood robot overlord
Had a thought about the new "map feature." I wonder if it might be like a "Points of Interest" type thing. I mean, it's a huge world, they probably peppered it with cool "natural" formations and things to see. They undoubtedly want you to see all this cool stuff.

By introducing a POI system months after launch, it still gives people time to explore and discover and share. But then it also let's you get back into the world after some time and go sight-seeing.

Maybe it could even be populated by players. Like if someone on your friendslist tags a place, it show up on your map (would be able to disable icons obviously). What to do you guys think?

I haven't been able to come up with anything that makes any more sense to me.







@EvilTw1n you're still wrong about paid online! :mflirt:
 

Juegos

All mods go to heaven.
Moderator
Well, here is the thing, there are games out there that give you several different types of hard mode already packaged into the game for the full free experience. Zelda breath of the mild however, makes you pay just for a difficulty slider that is already free in most games.
Read before you post. It makes you look dumb when you come into a thread talking shit to people who have already made your point.
 

mattavelle1

IT’S GOT A DEATH RAY!
Moderator
Nintendo making me pay for another difficulty level in the game is scummy no matter how many fanboys defend it.

"B-but Jack, there is already a hard mode in the game, thus your argument is invalid! So go kill yourself you Nintendo hating troll!"
Did I guess your thoughts? (Most likely)

Well, here is the thing, there are games out there that give you several different types of hard mode already packaged into the game for the full free experience. Zelda breath of the mild however, makes you pay just for a difficulty slider that is already free in most games.
You only post when Nintendo does something that fits your narrative of them.
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
Nintendo making me pay for another difficulty level in the game is scummy no matter how many fanboys defend it.

"B-but Jack, there is already a hard mode in the game, thus your argument is invalid! So go kill yourself you Nintendo hating troll!"
Did I guess your thoughts? (Most likely)

Well, here is the thing, there are games out there that give you several different types of hard mode already packaged into the game for the full free experience. Zelda breath of the mild however, makes you pay just for a difficulty slider that is already free in most games.
I'm not defending Nintendo in this case, but I have nothing to defend them about. In traditional Nintendo fashion, we only have a teaser of what is to come, and until we have a full breakdown of what each DLC pack includes, all we can really do is wait.
 

Cubits

Well-Known Member
Announcing the DLC before the game releases was Nintendo telling people that the game would be expandable, that it could grow. For most people nowadays that's actually a positive feature, but Nintendo is the only publisher left that has to explicitly spell that out since their games have barely started to introduce the practice. They've done a pretty good job in that regard so far, so i'm not terribly worried here.

I'd be down for some side-story content which fills in some more lore, there's probably a tonne of background for this world which can be explored without it being seen as cutting into the base game. We'll have to see what the rest of the pack is about, but i can't see that "new hard mode" as being something as simplistic as a damage multiplier.

Them bothering with a pre-order for the DLC is simultaneously a bit on the nose and completely expected of the industry. The only real benefit to paying early is a bit more time with a switch tunic, which is hopefully in-lore correct garb and not a gross red promotional t-shirt. At least they're not locking content to pre-orders or otherwise trying to strong-arm customers into going in blind.

So there's plenty of time to decide if the DLC is worth the price, and the perceived value will not drop if you don't commit to it based on blind faith. That's about as good as paying for games gets these days.
 
Had a thought about the new "map feature." I wonder if it might be like a "Points of Interest" type thing. I mean, it's a huge world, they probably peppered it with cool "natural" formations and things to see. They undoubtedly want you to see all this cool stuff.

By introducing a POI system months after launch, it still gives people time to explore and discover and share. But then it also let's you get back into the world after some time and go sight-seeing.

Maybe it could even be populated by players. Like if someone on your friendslist tags a place, it show up on your map (would be able to disable icons obviously). What to do you guys think?

I haven't been able to come up with anything that makes any more sense to me.







@EvilTw1n you're still wrong about paid online! :mflirt:
Didn't they use that in the "trailer" with Miyamoto and Anouma sitting and talking? Well, in that video he touched the map and it made a marker in the world like Skyward Sword.

Then again as I type that up I remember they took out touch screen functions apparently.

That'd be shit eh? Take out a feature only to incorporate back into DLC.
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
Things that used to be free ain't no more, my friends. That's why I was so salty with paid (non-dedicated server, "listen" server into peer hosting) online. Tbh, I find paid DLC far more defensible. If you're OK with previously-free modes now locked behind a wall in one place, then you gotta be OK with them elsewhere, too.
Let's be clear here, nobody is happy to pay for features that were once free. I think some of us are simply quicker to accept that this is the way things are now. Like I said before, game prices are relatively inexpensive compared to the SNES and N64 days. We should have seen game prices rise to $70-80 by now. Instead of giving consumers sticker shock with upfront cost, they now nickel and dime us a bit with DLC.

As distasteful as some of the DLC can be, it's far less offensive than in game purchases that many free to play games employ.

It always sucks to pay more, but I can at least understand it from a business sense. Nintendo was simply late to the party, and we benefited. I still believe Nintendo tries hard to give consumers value for their money. MK8 DLC was the most impressive DLC ever, it practically doubles the scope of an already terrific package.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 
Doesnt matter, the fact still stands that you have to buy a difficulty slider behind a paywall... HOLY SHIT, THIS IS THE FUTURE NAO! NEXT, NITNENDO WILL MAKE US PAY $5 DOLLARS TO PLAY FOR EACH HOUR FOR EACH OF THEIR GAMES IN 2030! But would Nintendo even be alive by that time?

I guess Iwata's ghost is living in the Switch.
 

Juegos

All mods go to heaven.
Moderator
Instead of giving consumers sticker shock with upfront cost, they now nickel and dime us a bit with DLC.

As distasteful as some of the DLC can be, it's far less offensive than in game purchases that many free to play games employ.
Overwatch is an interesting example, as it has an upfront cost of $60 ($40 on PC) with which you can play the game online forever (for the time being), but it also has a lootbox system in which you can buy a box that contains cosmetic items for customizing your characters. You can get the boxes just by playing, but the process is very slow so if you really want to own a specific skin, for example, chances are you're going to have to shell out for it. Because the contents of each box are randomized, you are never guaranteed to get some item you want, so you can pretty much think of it as gambling. So technically the upfront cost covers the price of the game's development, while the lootbox revenue covers the actual cost of ongoing service (new characters, new maps, balance updates, internal testing, bug fixes that follow any update, community moderation, the cost of creating all the cosmetic items, server maintenance, and finally the actual server traffic).

In my opinion that's the best system for an online game that I've encountered. Regular players can pay an upfront cost for a complete game with access to any new maps, characters, skins, etc, that get created; and the gamblers and completionists pay a heavy price at the benefit of the whole community. I think if Nintendo games offered that kind of system instead of asking people to pay a monthly online fee, people wouldn't be so critical. Regardless, Splatoon seems like it will incur all the same costs as Overwatch (or League of Legends, or Street Fighter V, or any other serious competitive game), so those costs need to be accounted for one way or another.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Doesnt matter, the fact still stands that you have to buy a difficulty slider behind a paywall... HOLY SHIT, THIS IS THE FUTURE NAO! NEXT, NITNENDO WILL MAKE US PAY $5 DOLLARS TO PLAY FOR EACH HOUR FOR EACH OF THEIR GAMES IN 2030! But would Nintendo even be alive by that time?

I guess Iwata's ghost is living in the Switch.
 
Top