theprodigy
Member
oh god, I don't just want DLC where it's x amount for a character, that would be lame
Super Smash Bros. for 3DS & Wii U Thread 7: How Can My Smash Brother Be This Cut
- Thread starter IntelliHeath
- Start date
Dimitri LH
Member
I am pretty sure Sakurai thinks the same way as Harada in that they believe in selling a complete fighting game for balance, character wise. If there is DLC it will probably be free characters or small fee stages/modes.
ZiggyPalffyLA
Member
Why? I would gladly pay for extra replay value as long as it isn't day 1 DLC.
Nothing to say DLC characters couldn't be designed with balance in mind.
I'd imagine everyone would be forced to download an update so that all players can play with those who have purchased the DLC characters. Maybe balance tweaks would be downloaded in the process.Scooter155
Member
I mostly don't want it, but it would be mildly interesting to see a League of Legends sort of model with a rotating stable of free characters, but you can pay to permanently unlock a character if you want to. Hmm? Of course, the game would have to come with a certain number of characters already unlocked, the rotating free DLC characters would be in addition to the starting roster.
Mr. Smiley
Member
Agreed. For a fighter, I'd like this strategy. I remember trying to decide to buy the season pass for Injustice, since I didn't know what characters were going to be added. I'm so glad I didn't.
Knowing what characters to be added ahead of time would make the decision easier and might save a few bucks if it's a character I don't care for.
This is more what I'm thinking. Six months after launch, the equivalent of an "Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3" or "Ultra/Super Street Fighter IV/Arcade Edition" is announced with new characters and other content. The new stuff can be downloaded piecemeal if you want to add to the vanilla version, or you can buy a complete retail version that has all of the DLC on disk for $29.99 or $39.99.
Beelzebufo
Banned
I kinda feel the opposite. I played like 100 hours of Injustice, but by the time the DLC characters came out, I was bored with the game and never got them. Same with MK, and games like Bioshock Infinite and ME3 that I loved and played the crap out of.
Scooter155
Member
Yeah, there are a lot of ways to do it right, and as long as the main game has enough content (which it certainly seems to) I'd never turn down more Smash content post-release, regardless of the delivery method.
theprodigy
Member
what
this is a horrible idea, especially considering you already have to pay $60 for the game unlike LoL which starts free >_>
well considering we've got one smash game (two if you include the weird portable version) to last us for the next 6+ years, I wouldn't mind the dlc being spread out a bit.
the last thing on my mind when cracking open a new smash bros game is "I want MORE content. Take even more of my money!"
Scooter155
Member
Just pointing out that I agree with everything you said, so I'm not sure what your argument is...? I did edit my post after the fact, but you quoted the edited post, so I assume you saw it.
I suddenly got it in my head that I really want Hawlucha as a playable character. He's probably the most Smash-worthy X/Y Pokemon they could add after Greninja. He'd bring a luchadore moveset to Smash, and who could say no to that! Only problem is the preponderance of Pokemon reps, between the four already confirmed and the two more that are likely (Jiggs and Mewtwo). Heck, even Squirtle and Ivysaur have a chance, for all we know. But even if you had all of them, I would still say add Hawlucha. Yeah, you'd have nine reps, but if any franchise deserves it, Pokemon with its ~720 characters and multi-billion-dollar cash-cow status does.
HAWLUUUUUUUUUCHAAAAAA!!!
HAWLUUUUUUUUUCHAAAAAA!!!
My frothing demand increases for this screenshot
PadWarrior
Member
I want a DLC pack with Andre from GameXplain and Adam Sessler.
No. Day 1 DLC is awful. Cheaper season pass? Don't mind. But DLC extremely close to when the game comes out is fucking stupid.
Light grapple based character with Falco physics, hell yes.
(in my irrelevant opinion)
A "right" way of doing DLC doesnt exist. If a team wants to add content they do it BEFORE releasing the game. Then, after proper testing the game (so it doesnt need patches after launch) they release the game with the content that they want (what they have done during the last 2/3 years, thats enough). Now, after releasing the game, the team (or some people of the team) can start working on something else (whatever nintendo wants). If they are going to make a sequel, they can use the ideas that they didnt use in this one in the sequel. End. You pay for the game once. Everyone pays for the game once, and everyone plays the same content. That content is enough or, at least, it was enough before DLC started
(in my irrelevant opinion)
I feel kinda like this... but it doesn't go away. I still play Melee every week, and it's never not interesting. Waiting a generation for the next Smash Bros. is part of what makes each entry so exciting. A character being stuck as DLC would be worse than getting stuck as an assist trophy or boss... it ruins their chance to be exciting.
I could stomach it if they did a Capcom kind of updated edition though. Then I could look at Super Duper Ultra Smash Battle Bros. 4 and think of it distinctly. But any more than 1 of those would be too often. Just let the games be, Nintendo. ;_;
0_o(in my irrelevant opinion)
A "right" way of doing DLC doesnt exist. If a team wants to add content they do it BEFORE releasing the game. Then, after proper testing the game (so it doesnt need patches after launch) they release the game with the content that they want (what they have done during the last 2/3 years, thats enough). Now, after releasing the game, the team (or some people of the team) can start working on something else (whatever nintendo wants). If they are going to make a sequel, they can use the ideas that they didnt use in this one in the sequel. End. You pay for the game once. Everyone pays for the game once, and everyone plays the same content. That content is enough or, at least, it was enough before DLC started
(in my irrelevant opinion)
Are you me? I thought I was the only one still so hung up on it.
tirkaroKujo
Member
I'm starting to legit believe the whole "Smash Bros 6" thing was for developing a potential DLC update in 2015.
Other than that, I can imagine they'd give the Wii U version extra characters, later implemented into the 3DS version as DLC, to keep the hype up for the Wii U version. It makes sense, really; New characters are what push new trailers for this game, which'll be vital if Nintendo doesn't want the excitement going for the Wii U version to fizzle out the coming months.
Other than that, I can imagine they'd give the Wii U version extra characters, later implemented into the 3DS version as DLC, to keep the hype up for the Wii U version. It makes sense, really; New characters are what push new trailers for this game, which'll be vital if Nintendo doesn't want the excitement going for the Wii U version to fizzle out the coming months.
fredrancour
Member
(in my irrelevant opinion)
A "right" way of doing DLC doesnt exist. If a team wants to add content they do it BEFORE releasing the game. Then, after proper testing the game (so it doesnt need patches after launch) they release the game with the content that they want (what they have done during the last 2/3 years, thats enough). Now, after releasing the game, the team (or some people of the team) can start working on something else (whatever nintendo wants). If they are going to make a sequel, they can use the ideas that they didnt use in this one in the sequel. End. You pay for the game once. Everyone pays for the game once, and everyone plays the same content. That content is enough or, at least, it was enough before DLC started
(in my irrelevant opinion)
Capcom's iterative fighting game updates and RPG expansion packs existed way before modern dlc. There have long been alternatives to regular sequels.
Solid Samus
Banned
He's the most Smash-worthy Pokemon in X/Y by far, even beyond Greninja.
Oh man, when I read the pre-Direct leak Hawlucha was my biggest hope, something like Meta Knight except with press and grapple moves
SenorArdilla
Member
Aren't DLC characters usually banned in the competitive scene?
Now that you mention it, I'm not sure Sakurai ever said the entire roster will be available in the 3DS version from Day One. There might be wiggle room in his verbiage for "Most of the roster in the 3DS version from launch and then the rest as free DLC when the WiiU version launches with the complete roster." So ultimately, both versions have the same roster.
theprodigy
Member
Well, if neither had been announced yet and I could only pick one, I'd still pick Greninja, and I'm stoked he is in fact playable. But man, both Greninja and Hawlucha would be dreeeeeeaaamy. <3 <3 <3
Yes, I'd LOVE to have playable Lucina. Her mask can be an alt, but I want her default form to be her unmasked with her hair flowing behind her. Just make her a Marth clone with tweaked properties (I.E. lighter, etc).
Only if they're exclusive to a single system, from what little I know of the competitive scene. Wouldn't be an issue for Smash in any case.
(in my irrelevant opinion)
A "right" way of doing DLC doesnt exist. If a team wants to add content they do it BEFORE releasing the game. Then, after proper testing the game (so it doesnt need patches after launch) they release the game with the content that they want (what they have done during the last 2/3 years, thats enough). Now, after releasing the game, the team (or some people of the team) can start working on something else (whatever nintendo wants). If they are going to make a sequel, they can use the ideas that they didnt use in this one in the sequel. End. You pay for the game once. Everyone pays for the game once, and everyone plays the same content. That content is enough or, at least, it was enough before DLC started
(in my irrelevant opinion)
That's so antiquated though. Who says there will be a squeal? Who says they will ever have the same devs working on the title 3-4 years down the line. Why not keep them around a little longer to finish up that additional content and release it to the public. Then you don't need to shoehorn left over ideas into a new squeal. The DLC doesn't even have to be all paid for. I'm guessing any characters added will be Free while stages and other things will have a small fee.
It's usually platform exclusive characters that get banned for fighting games (like Megaman in Street Fighter x Tekken). That's not really a problem for Smash though.
SenorArdilla
Member
Shadow Hog
Member
I'm going to disagree. If the authors of a game want to add additional content to their game once it's already completed, by all means, let them. Expansion packs are frequently quite cool things.(in my irrelevant opinion)
A "right" way of doing DLC doesnt exist. If a team wants to add content they do it BEFORE releasing the game. Then, after proper testing the game (so it doesnt need patches after launch) they release the game with the content that they want (what they have done during the last 2/3 years, thats enough). Now, after releasing the game, the team (or some people of the team) can start working on something else (whatever nintendo wants). If they are going to make a sequel, they can use the ideas that they didnt use in this one in the sequel. End. You pay for the game once. Everyone pays for the game once, and everyone plays the same content. That content is enough or, at least, it was enough before DLC started
(in my irrelevant opinion)
Dimitri LH
Member
Only if they are console exclusive.
Examples: Street fighter x tekken Infamous cole , playstation cats being on playstation 3 only.
Soul calibur 4 with yoda and darth vader until they were both made available later on as DLC
Edit: beaten hard....man I hate slow typing on mobile
theprodigy
Member
given this discussion about tournaments, I'm surprised you didn't quote my post about the MLG qualifiers Anth0ny
While the leaked "Super Smash Bros. 6" being a Street Fighter-style update is an intriguing theory, and while I'd definitely like it, I do wonder how much Nintendo would want to "add" to any given installment of Smash, if only because it means they would have less material to work with for the next generation.
But again, to be absolutely clear, I'm all for an update six months to a year out that has Lucina, Hawlucha, etc, exploding off the cover in a gloriously expanded roster (assuming they don't make the cut the first time around).
But again, to be absolutely clear, I'm all for an update six months to a year out that has Lucina, Hawlucha, etc, exploding off the cover in a gloriously expanded roster (assuming they don't make the cut the first time around).
Freezie KO
Banned
given this discussion about tournaments, I'm surprised you didn't quote my post about the MLG qualifiers Anth0ny
What's the best way to find the streams for MLG qualifiers? Smashboards?
Save 'N Quit
Banned
For DLC.
I want my extra content after the game releases.
I want my extra content after the game releases.
theprodigy
Member
well crafted.
ShockingAlberto
Member
I still think the Smash 6 thing was Soul Calibur.
NeonZ
Member
A "right" way of doing DLC doesnt exist. If a team wants to add content they do it BEFORE releasing the game. Then, after proper testing the game (so it doesnt need patches after launch) they release the game with the content that they want (what they have done during the last 2/3 years, thats enough). Now, after releasing the game, the team (or some people of the team) can start working on something else (whatever nintendo wants). If they are going to make a sequel, they can use the ideas that they didnt use in this one in the sequel. End. You pay for the game once. Everyone pays for the game once, and everyone plays the same content. That content is enough or, at least, it was enough before DLC started
We're talking here about Nintendo series that don't even get sequels in the same system though, and are just treated as one per generation releases. There's likely going to be a sequel, but not until years later. People have always wished for more content in these games even before DLC was a thing due to how Nintendo handles them. It wasn't uncommon to see wishlists for more characters as soon as Melee's and Brawl's full line ups leaked.
Similar threads
- Poll