The Nintendo news and discussion thread

This is where you can deliberate anything relating to videogames - past, present and future.
User avatar
Magical_Isopod
Member
Posts: 718
Joined: May 29th, 2018, 11:57 pm
Location: London, ON, Canada

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Magical_Isopod »

I'm pretty pissed off about that Pokemon DLC. The core game was tremendously lacking in content compared to past entries in the series, and it cost twice as much. How on earth can they justify charging an extra $40 just to access content that should have been in the main game to begin with? It's really quite disgusting. If this is gonna be the future of Pokemon, I think they've lost me as a die-hard fan. I was totally okay with "Dexit", I thought it was a great idea. But this? This is just disrespect.

User avatar
Magical_Isopod
Member
Posts: 718
Joined: May 29th, 2018, 11:57 pm
Location: London, ON, Canada

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Magical_Isopod »

Really though, $120 CDN for the full version of Sword/Shield when Black/White 2 was $40 new. Triple the price for more or less the same content. Revolting.

User avatar
RinseWashRepeat
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: December 20th, 2019, 7:24 am
Location: UK

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by RinseWashRepeat »

The thing is, Black & White came out before Black & White 2, so odds are you ended up buying both - meaning you spent $80.

Also, those games came out nearly a decade ago. So if the cost of a 'full' Pokemon game has gone up by $40 in 9 years, that's not too crazy.

Here in the UK, DS games used to be about £30. So for me to go 'full' Black & White, I'd have spent £60. Pokemon Shield was £50, plus the pass is £30. So that's £80. So in 9 years, I'd say the price has gone up by about £20.

Maybe it's just that I've not really played a Pokemon game properly since Silver, but I can't get worked up about all this. I always thought Pokemon games had about 150 'mon to catch and that's that. If you then wanted the extended version, you'd end up buying the 're-release' (like Yellow) about 12 months later.

This seems better to me. It's £30 quid to have two expansion packs, which is cheaper than buying a whole new game. It also means you don't need to start all over again.

Maybe I'm missing something?

User avatar
JadePhoenix
Member
Posts: 78
Joined: May 30th, 2016, 6:14 pm

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by JadePhoenix »

Black, White, Black 2 and White 2 were all individually complete games, you did not have to buy both to get a compete experience.

User avatar
RinseWashRepeat
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: December 20th, 2019, 7:24 am
Location: UK

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by RinseWashRepeat »

So is the argument that some fans didn't buy the first release of the game and instead waited for the 'proper' release afterward - a 'proper' release which now isn't happening?

I mean, I see your point that there's now no way to get everything without buying the game and now an expansion pack. But did the scenario I mentioned above ever really happen?

You also say that Black & Black 2 are complete experiences. Does this mean you'd rather they release a full-blown new version? A 'Shield 2' that costs £50 as opposed to 2 expansions that cost £30?

I'm just wondering what it is that people think Nintendo should have done - because for me this is the absolutely ideal way of adding content to the game. There's no way I'd bother buying a whole new game and level up everyone again - just to get a new story and 50 (ish?) new monsters.

User avatar
dezm0nd
Moderator
Posts: 4160
Joined: August 28th, 2012, 9:48 am
Location: Leighton Buzzard

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by dezm0nd »

Any guesses for smash 5th dlc character?

User avatar
Flabyo
Member
Posts: 3512
Joined: August 8th, 2013, 8:46 am
Location: Guildford

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Flabyo »

Most of the net seems to have decided its Dante from DMC.

If they’re sticking to characters with some nintendo heritage I can see it maybe being Ryu Hayabusa from DoA.

But knowing Sakurai, it could easily be anything at all.

User avatar
Flabyo
Member
Posts: 3512
Joined: August 8th, 2013, 8:46 am
Location: Guildford

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Flabyo »

Well no one guessed that.

Ouch.

User avatar
JadePhoenix
Member
Posts: 78
Joined: May 30th, 2016, 6:14 pm

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by JadePhoenix »

Did anyone else get the impression that even the people making the video thought Byleth was a lame choice?

User avatar
Magical_Isopod
Member
Posts: 718
Joined: May 29th, 2018, 11:57 pm
Location: London, ON, Canada

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Magical_Isopod »

5th Smash character confirmed to be Leon Cox.

User avatar
Magical_Isopod
Member
Posts: 718
Joined: May 29th, 2018, 11:57 pm
Location: London, ON, Canada

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Magical_Isopod »

RinseWashRepeat wrote:
January 15th, 2020, 6:54 am
The thing is, Black & White came out before Black & White 2, so odds are you ended up buying both - meaning you spent $80.

Also, those games came out nearly a decade ago. So if the cost of a 'full' Pokemon game has gone up by $40 in 9 years, that's not too crazy.

Here in the UK, DS games used to be about £30. So for me to go 'full' Black & White, I'd have spent £60. Pokemon Shield was £50, plus the pass is £30. So that's £80. So in 9 years, I'd say the price has gone up by about £20.

Maybe it's just that I've not really played a Pokemon game properly since Silver, but I can't get worked up about all this. I always thought Pokemon games had about 150 'mon to catch and that's that. If you then wanted the extended version, you'd end up buying the 're-release' (like Yellow) about 12 months later.

This seems better to me. It's £30 quid to have two expansion packs, which is cheaper than buying a whole new game. It also means you don't need to start all over again.

Maybe I'm missing something?
Considering that Sword/Shield is a *significantly* smaller game that even Black/White 1, no, the increase in price is not justified. Like, at all. Sword/Shield legit feels like a Gameboy game with modern graphics in terms of its scope and feature set. It's a barebones experiences. Sun/Moon was pretty bad too, and with similar graphics to Sword/Shield... Cost a full $30 less for the base game. For a more meaty gaming experience. And it didn't have DLC, unless you count $5 a year for Bank. And worse still is that the "expansion pass" has completely unique content for each version - so to get the full game, you need to buy Sword AND Shield ($160) Plus 2x expansion pass ($60). So now we're nearing the price of a Switch Lite just for a new Pokemon. It's not acceptable.

User avatar
Alex79uk
Member
Posts: 6677
Joined: September 2nd, 2012, 12:36 pm
Location: Walsall, UK.
Contact:

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Alex79uk »

My younger two (3 and 4) absolutely love Mario Odyssey. I've got some Xmas cash left and am trying to decide whether to get Mario Bros Wii-U Deluxe, or Mario Maker.

Any thoughts on the best one for young kids? Can both be played in co-op as that would be good I think.

User avatar
Suits
Member
Posts: 3170
Joined: October 28th, 2015, 3:25 pm
Location: Chelmsford, UK

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Suits »

Alex79uk wrote:
January 16th, 2020, 2:55 pm
Any thoughts on the best one for young kids?
Mario Bros. Wii U DELUX would be much better suited for younglings just wanting to pick up a Mario 2D platformer and squish Goomba’s.

The combination of many hours of ready made gameplay, with increasing challenge and simplicity, makes it an easier choice.

User avatar
ratsoalbion
Admin
Posts: 7415
Joined: August 28th, 2012, 9:41 am
Location: Brighton, England
Contact:

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by ratsoalbion »

There’s no ‘Wii’ in the title of New Super Mario Bros. U (Deluxe).

I know it doesn’t matter, it’s just aggravating my pedantry gland.
😆

User avatar
Alex79uk
Member
Posts: 6677
Joined: September 2nd, 2012, 12:36 pm
Location: Walsall, UK.
Contact:

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Alex79uk »

ratsoalbion wrote:
January 16th, 2020, 3:08 pm
There’s no ‘Wii’ in the title of New Super Mario Bros. U (Deluxe).

I know it doesn’t matter, it’s just aggravating my pedantry gland.
😆
No matter, I'll probably just get them to play Alex The Kidd or Super Mario Kart 64...

:lol:

@Suits, yeah that was my initial though, but I'm not sure if the older one in particular would enjoy the creation side of MMaker 2...

User avatar
Suits
Member
Posts: 3170
Joined: October 28th, 2015, 3:25 pm
Location: Chelmsford, UK

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Suits »

I enjoyed NSMBD quite a bit, firstly on the Wii U then again on the Switch - but SMM2 blows it out of the water completely in terms of fun and general interest.

It’s probably best as a complement to the main line games, here play this, then if you want more, here, play this.

It’s accessible too, you just have to know how to use the tools it gives you efficiently - which is too much of a barrier for most people, certainly little ones.

That’s totally ignoring the massive potential there is in the building and messing about with levels.

The story is great, in terms of challenge but I’d all over the place and disjointed not only in its aesthetics but it’s goals and difficultly too.

Super Mario Maker is the Majora’s Mask to the Mario series in a funny way.

User avatar
Mr Ixolite
Member
Posts: 131
Joined: April 10th, 2018, 3:02 pm

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Mr Ixolite »

Magical_Isopod wrote:
January 16th, 2020, 2:54 pm
RinseWashRepeat wrote:
January 15th, 2020, 6:54 am
The thing is, Black & White came out before Black & White 2, so odds are you ended up buying both - meaning you spent $80.

Also, those games came out nearly a decade ago. So if the cost of a 'full' Pokemon game has gone up by $40 in 9 years, that's not too crazy.

Here in the UK, DS games used to be about £30. So for me to go 'full' Black & White, I'd have spent £60. Pokemon Shield was £50, plus the pass is £30. So that's £80. So in 9 years, I'd say the price has gone up by about £20.

Maybe it's just that I've not really played a Pokemon game properly since Silver, but I can't get worked up about all this. I always thought Pokemon games had about 150 'mon to catch and that's that. If you then wanted the extended version, you'd end up buying the 're-release' (like Yellow) about 12 months later.

This seems better to me. It's £30 quid to have two expansion packs, which is cheaper than buying a whole new game. It also means you don't need to start all over again.

Maybe I'm missing something?
Considering that Sword/Shield is a *significantly* smaller game that even Black/White 1, no, the increase in price is not justified. Like, at all. Sword/Shield legit feels like a Gameboy game with modern graphics in terms of its scope and feature set. It's a barebones experiences. Sun/Moon was pretty bad too, and with similar graphics to Sword/Shield... Cost a full $30 less for the base game. For a more meaty gaming experience. And it didn't have DLC, unless you count $5 a year for Bank. And worse still is that the "expansion pass" has completely unique content for each version - so to get the full game, you need to buy Sword AND Shield ($160) Plus 2x expansion pass ($60). So now we're nearing the price of a Switch Lite just for a new Pokemon. It's not acceptable.
The content from the expansion pass are not version unique. For 30$ you get both packs, regardless of if you bought sword or shield, so a total of 90$ for the base game + extra content.

And Sun/Moon and Ultra Sun/Ultra Moon cost 40$, for a total of 80$...which is of course 10$ less than Sword/Shield + expansion pass, but seeing as how 40$ and 60$ are the standard first-party prices on the 3DS and Switch respectively, thats not really something Gamefreak can be blamed for. If Sword/Shield had adhered to the standard business model of Gamefreaks "third releases", the total price would've been 120$ for two switch games.

User avatar
Magical_Isopod
Member
Posts: 718
Joined: May 29th, 2018, 11:57 pm
Location: London, ON, Canada

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Magical_Isopod »

Sure. Assuming there's only one expansion pass. Not sure I'd make that assumption. And as for the "standard prices" argument? I would agree if it were to the same standard as other full-priced Switch releases. It's not. It feels like an upscaled 3DS game - though it feels cheaply made even by that standard.

User avatar
RinseWashRepeat
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: December 20th, 2019, 7:24 am
Location: UK

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by RinseWashRepeat »

Magical_Isopod wrote:
January 16th, 2020, 2:54 pm
RinseWashRepeat wrote:
January 15th, 2020, 6:54 am
The thing is, Black & White came out before Black & White 2, so odds are you ended up buying both - meaning you spent $80.

Also, those games came out nearly a decade ago. So if the cost of a 'full' Pokemon game has gone up by $40 in 9 years, that's not too crazy.

Here in the UK, DS games used to be about £30. So for me to go 'full' Black & White, I'd have spent £60. Pokemon Shield was £50, plus the pass is £30. So that's £80. So in 9 years, I'd say the price has gone up by about £20.

Maybe it's just that I've not really played a Pokemon game properly since Silver, but I can't get worked up about all this. I always thought Pokemon games had about 150 'mon to catch and that's that. If you then wanted the extended version, you'd end up buying the 're-release' (like Yellow) about 12 months later.

This seems better to me. It's £30 quid to have two expansion packs, which is cheaper than buying a whole new game. It also means you don't need to start all over again.

Maybe I'm missing something?
Considering that Sword/Shield is a *significantly* smaller game that even Black/White 1, no, the increase in price is not justified. Like, at all. Sword/Shield legit feels like a Gameboy game with modern graphics in terms of its scope and feature set. It's a barebones experiences. Sun/Moon was pretty bad too, and with similar graphics to Sword/Shield... Cost a full $30 less for the base game. For a more meaty gaming experience. And it didn't have DLC, unless you count $5 a year for Bank. And worse still is that the "expansion pass" has completely unique content for each version - so to get the full game, you need to buy Sword AND Shield ($160) Plus 2x expansion pass ($60). So now we're nearing the price of a Switch Lite just for a new Pokemon. It's not acceptable.

I will admit that Shield is the only game that has actually crashed on my Switch so far. So there might be something to the idea that it's 'not quite right'. Also, how they've not done VO for these games yet is beyond me. It's not perfect - I'm not defending it. I'm just trying to understand what people wanted to happen in terms of post-release support.

Maybe it's just that the last Pokemon games I played were on the Game Boy Color. That's why I don't feel like it's 'scaled-down' at all. Also, mentioning that the two versions have different content is kind of a moot point. I mean, Pokemon Red and Blue had content that you'd only see by trading. It's kind of what the whole game's about? No one buys both Sword and Shield - surely?

Also, you mention Sun/Moon - that had Ultra Sun/Moon release about a year later. A full-priced game that you couldn't carry your save over from Sun, right? I just wouldn't want that for Shield. To start all over again? To buy a whole new game? How is that better?

My question is still - what SHOULD they have done if not DLC? Should the DLC be free because the base game only has 400 creatures?

User avatar
Magical_Isopod
Member
Posts: 718
Joined: May 29th, 2018, 11:57 pm
Location: London, ON, Canada

Re: The Nintendo news and discussion thread

Post by Magical_Isopod »

I'm not even worried about the number of monsters, I actually like a trimmed roster is a great idea - forces you to use different ones, which I like. My primary issue was how there's no post-game. You just beat the 8 gyms, and that's pretty much it. That's abnormal for Pokemon games. That, paired with lousy animations, lack of voice acting, removal of cool ideas like mega evolutions, a practically non-existent story... It's just not worth the asking price.

Post Reply