How will we find out when new levels are ready for download for NSMB2? This woulds be my first DLC game
Fire Emblem: Awakening for Nintendo 3DS set for 2013, also to feature postrelease content.
New Super Mario Bros. 2 will feature paid downloadable content after its August 19 release, as will Fire Emblem: Awakening, which is now set for 2013. Nintendo announced the news last night in a 3DS-centric Nintendo Direct broadcast online.
New Super Mario Bros. 2's Coin Rush mode, a competitive race to collect as many coins as possible in randomly selected levels, can be expanded for a price with additional stages after the game's release. Reggie Fils-Aime, president of Nintendo of America, emphasized that the DLC does not mean a reduction in content or quality of the base product.
"Make no mistake, out of the box this is a full-featured Mario game as full-featured as we've ever made," Fils-Aime said.
New Super Mario Bros. 2 will be available both in retail and on the 3DS eShop on the day of its release.
So now they are releasing DLC for a game that is basically just a copy of every 2D Mario from the last decade? Maybe now people will finally start to understand why I don't like Mario anymore.
I've noticed that many people hating that Nintendo now has DLC. But, has everyone forgotten the e-Reader cards for Pokémon LeafGreen/FireRed and for Super Mario Advance: Super Mario Bros. 3? Quite possibly others out there too, but they're notable ones.
Those ones you had to buy cards for and weren't neccessarily sure on what you were going to get either. It may not have been downloadable content, but it's certainly still add-on content in the form of extra levels or characters all the same.
That game should be release on PSP because PSP can handle this kind of graphics ! and why they didn't released that game on DSi ?
if nintendo are going to sell us dlc, what do you think the price would be? if it was £5 for an extra 2 levels in coin rush, why would you buy that? i believe DLC should be free. We bought the product so nintendo should be happy with that. They are making profit now. Why should improvements to a game cost us money? They shouldn't need to do this as they will make more than their loss in the future. If DLC was free, then more people would buy the game. If it costs around 20-25 quid for each game and they sold it at £35 each, they are making healthy profit. Nintendo just needs time to fix their problem.
Really dislike the DLC phase, sad that Nintendo are taking that route. Just imagine buying a CD then having to pay for an additional track, what a crock. If it gets any worse, I might by an old64 & just start retro gaming till it blows over.
Honestly, some people can't see honesty for a second. This isn't something like, say, Skylanders, where all the data is already on the game, and they make you pay for stuff you've already paid for. I'm pretty sure it's just what Reggie says. They can't fit any more stuff into the game. You want extra stuff, you pay extra money, I don't see a problem with that.
Funny, because both Reggie and Iwata are both on record denouncing the practice. Can't blame them too much; the gaming community has proven itself all too willing to support the nickle-and-diming.
"DLC does not mean a reduction in content or quality" of course it's, just like when they said they weren't releasing another version of the 3DS ... oh wait!!
This is a direct result of all the morons out there paying tons of money for DLC. If there is money to be made, they will make it! Its a business!
Dont buy DLC from Nintendo.. please. Its the one company that shouldnt have DLC. What happened to the days of actually having to BEAT A GAME to unlock new content???
I had a great funny picture of Mario Bros and a mushroom but I can not find it at the moment :/ So I will show you another one http://yeeti.com/22381 Angry Birds :D
Unfortunately practically everyone is doing this now so can't hate them any more than the other 2 console makers but with the Wii only having flash memory and no hard drive, it wouldn't surprise me if this is on disk download content. Then I will be upset at Nintendo.
" DLC does not mean a reduction in content or quality of the base product."
That's what they said now, just wait and we will see how they mess up. They have done a lot of dumb things lately.
Since Fils-Aime said it, it must be true... yeah right. He's selling it, of course he's going to say that. As the consumer, I'll decide for myself before my purchase.
Nintendo has not proven to me that they plan on following the lead of the other developers that improperly use DLC by removing some of the content from the main game and selling it as DLC. Until that happens, I honestly believe Nintendo when they say will never create games that feel incomplete because some of the content was removed and sold as DLC.
Nintendo was extremely hesitant at first when it came to jumping on board with the DLC train, which makes me believe that they will actually take DLC seriously.
Although it was reported that the DLC for this game would be for Coin Rush mode, I really hope that the extra courses will be playable in the regular mode.
I always thought that all DLC excluding expansion packs should be free. It just makes so much more sense. Not liking what Nintendo's doing here.....
(o_o) You do realize that D.L.C. IS expansion packs, right, only you download it instead. There are companies who don't realize this and use it for stupid things like GUNS or costumes, things that don't expand the game. So no, DLC should not be free, though, it really should be up to the developer, since there is some free DLC and others, cost. I don't mind paying for REAL DLC, but something on disk (NO WAY), something that doesn't expand the story (YUCK), or stuff that should have been on that you need, because it's apart of the story (>_<). But this DLC that Nintendo's doing isn't so bad, it does expand the game, you don't need it to play the game; so I don't mind. I would step back and see what Nintendo does, they've always lived up to their core beliefs and willing to state when things aren't working. Your beef is with the people who don't know how to use it, not Nintendo. DLC should be evaluated case by case, company by company as to trust them or not trust them. Nintendo has a clean rep in DLC, Capcom not so much. When a company does it correctly, with DLC I like and want, it's a way to support the company.
But I do look at the reputation of the company, first, so should you.
@Cait If it's coming at the same time that the game is released, it's not really an expansion pack, it's more like a "we could have put this on the disk but we'd rather have you pay for it" pack.
@harold317 Are you aware that it would be just a little bit unbalanced if people were paying the usual 50 bucks for a game with twice as much data? Would you prefer the companies go bankrupt because they kept putting more stuff in a game for the same cost? Companies have limits, you know. It's like saying " I bought a PS3 and it only came with one controller? How !^$# up is that? They should have put more controllers in there for free because they can."
You're not even safe from DLC scams on Nintendo systems anymore. Get ready to have unlock Mario and everyone else with real money. So Sad. Seeing Nintendo support this only confirms that next gen will be worse. I don't even buy games new at full price anymore because of the way the industry devalues games. I just wait for the complete edition now or for it to hit the bargain bin.
The video game apocalypse is upon us!! Repent, and refuse to give them thine gold, and thou shalt have money in thy pocket.
Why are people so damn level-headed when it comes to DLC? I'm not a DLC enthusiast, I think most DLC is over-priced, and if DLC is not included in my copy of the game (pre-order, collector's etc), it has to be something very special for me to buy it. Just making it clear.
PS2 games were 40? here at launch, and some were 50?. "Okay" price, since my SNES games were more than 60-70? (translated from my country's then currency), and were just a fraction of what my PS2 games were, content-wise and quality-wise. But, with PS3 and X360, the development costs for almost every single game have risen dramatically since the PS2 era. We have many more new, much more complex and capable engines, that produce amazing technological results. The bar has been set much higher, seeing what can this generation of consoles/games still give us. But we want everything for less.
Some like to think that it had no cost behind writing X engine, that the developers needed no money during the whole process (which takes months, or even years). Now that the developers and publishers spend 50 million dollars for games like LA Noire, Battlefield 3 etc, but the price of the game is still at 50? (same as the expensive PS2 era games, in my country), people moan, cry and kick because they dare release post-launch content. The horror! Because covering the production costs and THEN making any income turn to profit is a taboo. Because the publishers and the developers are selling us an incomplete game, EVERY ONE of them. Because gamers are always right.
No, we aren't always right. Games like Asura's Wrath, yes, I will definitely agree that DLC for those games is a damn joke and should be included in the game. But the case here is additional stages for a certain mode. Yet, people moan because it should have "been included". Okay, take a "complete" game. With 3-4 games releasing each month, and at least one of them being high profile, how the eff will the developers and publishers keep you from buying it, and keep you playing their game? Let me think... post-launch DLC? Make you wait and want more content for your game, and buy them time until they develop their next game that will interest you. But no, these are shady tactics and blah blah the gamer's always right. Sorry for trying to talk some sense, where do I ride the "fuck DLC incomplete games greedy devs" bandwagon?
I suppose this is the end. DLC isn't just about whether it was stripped from the game or developed while the game was developed. It's about the notion that if we buy a game, we aren't done paying for it - that the game is incomplete until its producers tell us it is. And if it's come to Mario Brothers it can pretty much go anywhere from here.
@strayfies The concept of DLC. Expansion packs have been around for well over 10 years. Expansion packs are okay. Alternate costumes or w/e can be okay too if priced well. What's bad is stupid stuff like the "True Ending" DLC for Azura's Wrath, or disc locked content. That's stupid. But this is extra stages for coin rush, not even main game. NOt having this detracts nothing from the actual game, it's not bad.
I have faith that Nintendo will buck the trend and give us some really worthwhile DLC. I'm not that interested in the Wii U, but the more developers that set a good example here, the better. Look at Rockstar. I didn't get any of Red Dead's multiplayer DLC (I'm just not into multi-player), but I thought Undead Nightmare was outstanding, and a real bargain at ten bucks. And I heard the two DLCs for GTAIV were really good, too. After four years, GTAIV is FINALLY starting to grow on me, so I may check them out.
Because "Paid DLC" is totally synonymous with "Content stripped from the game to sell to you later." Namco does it, Sega does it, EA does it, Activision does. Bethesda is proof it's not always the case, seeing how completely tangential their DLC is to the game itself, given how completely detached it usually is from the rest of the game.
"...emphasized that the DLC does not mean a reduction in content or quality of the base product."Emphasize it all you want, but it doesn't make it any easier to believe.
@josh1billion I'm thinking Red Dead Redemption's main campaign was never intended to include zombies, and I don't think too many people felt cheated that it wasn't in the main game.That said, I agree with you in principle. That's a well-founded concern with DLC, and a lot of companies prove it to be a valid one. BUT, there's also been a lot of great examples of how to do it RIGHT. It's our responsibility to remain vigilant and vocal on this issue. When they make a worthwhile DLC, reward them with your business and throw some praise their way. When it's a rip-off, let them know it and withhold your money.
@Nathan_R_Rork Well said, and I agree completely. As long as the content is proportional to the price, there's no issue, but most companies seem to be obnoxious about it (maybe the worst being Nippon Ichi, which tries to sell dozens of unlockable characters at $2.99 a pop in Disgaea 3 and 4).Hopefully Nintendo is reasonable about it, but planning DLC of "additional stages" for a minigame at this point doesn't reassure me much.
I often use Borderlands as an example of how to do DLC. While it walks the line as far as "could have been included", the releases were spaced, and for the price, the content on each was HUGE.
Especially in comparison to $15 map packs.
Instead of complaining "omg how could Nintendo jump into the DLC trainwreck too!", I'll give them the benefit of the doubt how they handle DLC. We'll see.
"this is a full-featured Mario game as full-featured as we've ever made"
XD Reggie can't be serious, Mario 64 saids hi, and dedicated fans have been waiting almost 16 years for a true sequel. Lol get out man
16 years, eh? How's the rock? Mario Sunshine (Same concept), Mario Galaxy 1 & 2 and I have no idea if I'm forgetting any. Unless the key is your use of the word "TRUE", and you don't consider these sequels. Then, I have to say...(o_o) I'm still waiting for a true sequel to Super Mario World, where you play not Yoshi, but Mario again. Oh wait, there are no true sequels to Mario games, either they have the same concept or they don't. Sequels would imply time and there is no time in the Mario world.
@Cait The intro message to Super Mario World says "Looks like Bowser is at it again!", confirming that events concerning Mario and Bowser had happened previously.
A true sequel did come out. It's called Super Mario Galaxy. @R2BDSi
Content you might like…
Users who looked at this article also looked at these content items.
Playing Xbox One games on somebody else's console will also require a check-in every hour. Full Story
- Posted Jun 7, 2013 6:41 am SST
Xbox boss Don Mattrick believes concerns over connectivity are overblown, recommends Xbox 360 for those without an Internet connection. Full Story
- Posted Jun 12, 2013 8:52 am SST