Current Events > Is DLC really any worse?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Back in my day Mega Man 1-6 were all the same game. You just had to pay $75 for a new cartridge every year or so to play the new bosses/levels. People are mad Street Fighter 6 didn't come out with like 100 characters, but Street Fighter 2 had like a dozen versions expanding the roster to sell more cartridges.

The only series I can think of that changed with every sequel was Zelda, and ironically now the Zelda sequels are pretty much DLC, so as far as I can tell things aren't any worse. Modern gaming has its problems, but is DLC really one?

I mean they just had Street Fighter 5 with a bunch of dlc, now suddenly SF6, within the same generation, cannot possibly have a decent size starting roster? At least Street Fighter Alpha could keep adding to each sequel instead of starting from scratch again for the purpose of selling the same dlc again.

WarfireX posted...

the Zelda sequels are pretty much DLC

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/0/2/AAJMZcAADOhO.jpg

asdf8562 posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/0/2/AAJMZcAADOhO.jpg

It's just weird to me because you guys give Zelda a pass when the developers admitted it's literal DLC that they just decided to charge $70 for, but we have people whining on the RE4 board that Seperate Ways wasn't included with the original even though it never was to begin with.

Where's the eye roll emoji when I need it

angelkay16 posted...

Where's the eye roll emoji when I need it

But the Zelda devs literally admitted it is DLC. I am not making that up.

WarfireX posted...

But the Zelda devs literally admitted it is DLC. I am not making that up.

You are making that up as that's not what they literally said.

But shame on me for taking the obvious bait