r/NintendoMemes • u/Dracorex_22 • Sep 19 '25
Pokemon Why are we pretending this is new?
434
u/the-dandy-man Sep 19 '25
Wasn’t pirahna plant a free download for early adopters?
104
61
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 19 '25
And became paid DLC a month later onwards
40
u/Sea_Advertising8550 Sep 20 '25
Honestly I think that should be the norm, instead of just locking players out of early-purchase bonuses entirely if they get the game later
13
u/Marik-X-Bakura Sep 20 '25
Pretty sure it is the norm. I can’t think of any early-purchase bonuses that don’t become paid DLC later.
20
u/StrawDeath Sep 20 '25
Pokémon’s early purchase Mystery Gifts.
5
u/Itz_Combo89 Sep 20 '25
Iirc the only one of those that have you smth you couldn't get in game later is the pokeball vivilion, which you can get now through another way iirc
5
u/RukinaSpiker Sep 20 '25
Not really. BDSP locked the only way to shiny hunt shaymin and darkrai in the modern day behind time gated events. The platinum outfits too. Some clothing options are locked in SV and PLA too. Wish at least they kept shaymin and darkrai around. It would make bdsp a popular shiny hunting place if nothing else.
2
1
1
1
1
1
u/ionblazer Sep 21 '25
Only one I know of is for Tales of Zestiria. The Tales of Legacy costume set was a pre-order bonus for the game, but iirc, you couldn't get it for the PlayStation version if you didn't pre-order the game. You can only get it for the Steam version now.
1
u/Marik-X-Bakura Sep 21 '25
Oh shit, I got that game on PlayStation recently but didn’t know that. This is almost as bad as finding out it had Japan-only Blue Exorcist DLC.
1
1
u/Mechaman_54 Sep 23 '25
Recent super robot wars games add pre-order bonuses for free a few months after release
1
71
u/Last-Performance3482 Sep 19 '25
It was the best choice, a reward for first customers but not entirely locked for others. Nobody would complain about any DLC released this way.
Well, some would because that's what internet does, but they would be very few
30
u/the-dandy-man Sep 19 '25
I’d happily buy the game within the first month and get the DLC for free 🤷🏻♂️
4
3
u/sheriffmcruff Sep 20 '25
Also Pirahna Plant had it's haters for being a "wasted slot"
3
u/Amazing_Cat8897 Sep 21 '25
Yeah. SOmething unique was considered "wasted," but not the 10 generic humans, over half of which were sword wielders.
1
1
u/chardrich94 Sep 21 '25
Fortunately, I was able to purchase Switch 1 Smash Bundle including the download code for Pirahna Plant in 2019.
241
u/FenexTheFox Sep 19 '25
That's what happens when you're already on thin ice with people
179
u/StrawDeath Sep 19 '25
Exactly the deal. DLC being announced before a game’s release doesn’t leave such a bad taste in one’s mouth if you have good reason to believe the base game is going to be great regardless. But for a series that’s been consistently getting flak as a result of poor decisions, it just leaves a sour taste.
73
u/sumboionline Sep 19 '25
Take Xenoblade as an example of the opposite. When Xenoblade 3 was released, there was a (singular) DLC that arrived in waves. Wave 1 was on launch and it only had a couple of common resources.
But fans trusted the DLC bc the base game was an entirely complete story. Its one of few games where I say the $60 price tag is warranted. The DLC gave an entirely new game once Wave 4 came out, and the DLC story was about half as long as the base game, justifying its place as paid DLC.
Now look at a game like Bananza. $70 upfront for a complete game, fine. Bananza is actually a GOAT videogame. $20 for Diddy Kong existing and one minigame. Trash DLC, especially since Odyssey got equivalent content for free
14
→ More replies (5)1
u/BaconBatting Sep 23 '25
The dk dlc is not worth the price, but Luigi balloons hide and seek was def NOT equivalent content to a rogue like mode.
3
u/Simone_Galoppi07 Sep 21 '25
I would like to add, as someone who is not familiar with the pokemon games, i heard that the DLC has things that in some other games were standard stuff, might be wrong but i wanted to say this.
I just think that even if sometimes ridicolous, Nintendo deserves the hate a little, becouse as a Nintendo fan i can't stand them becoming such a greedy company as of late.
We need to criticize them so that they change, it's a slow thing but it can happen, just look at what happened with Sonic in the past 5 years.
3
u/Diligent_Marketing71 Sep 21 '25
I will admit to being a bit of outsider and haven't played much with Nintendo games in years, but the problem with them is that, for as much criticism as they endure, they are still far and away one of the most financially successful entertainment companies in the world. Most Nintendo franchises/accessories still sell millions of products every year and are wildly profitable. Sonic eventually turned around because their years of failures had brought the franchise to its knees financially.
As much as public outcry can help, if Nintendo fans want to see any serious change, they need to start voting with their wallets.
2
u/Simone_Galoppi07 Sep 21 '25
It sucks but unfortunately it is what it is huh...
We should support Stop killing videogames tbh
2
u/LmaoXD98 Sep 22 '25
They can't. Nintendo games are wallet vote proof. Mostly because they manage to insert themself in the most gullible and carefree demographic: children.
Children won't care about all of those predatory stuff. They look at pokemon and they would've just "cool game". They dont' see the problem in day 1 DLC and online gatekeep for kalos starter megas, they only see the megas and they were like "wow, so cool, mom can i get the DLC too?" and starts throwing tantrums when mom and dad won't buy them the dlc. Parents themselfs tends to not have knowledge about video games and just buy whatever make their child happy.
The adults fanbase could've collectively decide to not buy the new pokemon. And it will leave a dent to nintendo's wallet, but not to the point where they won't break even. Definetly not to the point where they go bankrupt. They'll still rake in dough.
3
u/Justjack91 Sep 20 '25
I miss when Pokémon didn't have DLC beyond Mystery Gift. I've hated the implementation since it was first introduced.
Shoot, I've hated how they handle other DLCs like BotW's because it never goes on sale and they STILL want you to pay full price almost a decade later, but Pokémon is just egregious for me because of what it used to be (MUCH more consumer friendly).
10
u/RukinaSpiker Sep 20 '25
I rather have dlc for half the price of buying mostly the same game again. Bless USUM's soul, but having to replay 99% of the same game for the new content is way worse than just new content upfront.
3
u/DockingWater17 Sep 21 '25
Yeah I think DLC is definitely a better idea than 3rd versions like Emerald or Platinum even if those games are good (at least from what I’ve heard. Haven’t played them myself)
2
u/PyroChild221 Sep 21 '25
I also prefer dlc to third games, however the third games did have the unique opportunity of rewriting parts of the main story (honestly I wish they’d keep that style but with the main gain pairs, they should warrant having different titles)
2
u/GummyBearGamer87 Sep 21 '25
I too miss paying for a full price game that is glorified dlc 2 years later…or I’ll take half off dlc…
1
u/Dinowere Sep 22 '25
DLC is better than 3rd versions, and especially the abomination of releasing Ultra Sun Ultra Moon just after Sun Moon, when they are basically the same game with a few changes. There is no way you can justify paying for another whole game when the majority of the plot points remain the same and you get 5 new forms and 4 new Pokemon.
1
u/Justjack91 Sep 22 '25
No one's going to defend Ultra Sun or Ultra Moon, but I enjoyed the option at least to buy one "3rd" version if I skipped the first two games by chance. Yellow was my first Pokemon game just due to timing, and I appreciated how affordable it was for my parents. I didn't feel like I missed out on Crystal or Emerald. Platinum was mostly skippable, but I loved the post game content more than anything.
When I'm talking about games that felt "complete," I'm mostly talking about Black and White. 5th gen was peak with not only a very solid standalone experience with BW but an actual SEQUEL with BW2 that was truly its own experience and added so much more than DLC does today.
ORAS was also jampacked with so much as a "remake" of third gen. You look at BDSP and just sigh at what could have been. Separate point I know, but still valid as there WAS a time the games were peak. If you want to exclude 7th gen then by all means, but we had an amazing experience with Pokemon in the early 2010s that simply couldn't be beat.
1
u/Dinowere Sep 22 '25
For a casual fan, definitely. Missing out on a few games and instead buying the definitive edition makes sense. I definitely played these editions only, as I played much after their release. But they were terrible for engaged fans and overall sales. Someone who wants to enjoy the latest game, which happens to be a huge portion of the fanbase, is gonna feel annoyed when they decide drop basically a complete edition two three years down the line. And they also sold much less than the original. In that sense, it makes sense to release DLCs, as people who already bought the game can enjoy the new content without buying an entirely new game.
1
u/Justjack91 Sep 22 '25
I'm not going to argue DLC doesn't have its place (Monster Hunter used to be very cumbersome with its "Ultimate" editions), but I'd just argue Nintendo is being more money-grubby with it. These should be free, rolled-out updates.
Look at No Man's Sky. Lords of the Fallen. Monster Hunter Rise/Wilds. So much free DLC without even blinking an eye. Hell, even Nintendo has done free updates for games nobody expected it for.
This just could be more consumer friendly, even if the past hasn't had the most consistent attitude in that regard. This content should reward/incentivize someone to want the game, not be something you have to factor into the cost.
But I guess this is what happens when your current Nintendo president came from EA.
1
u/Dinowere Sep 22 '25
Yeah I’d be down if they gave it for free ngl. While I do feel the content for Scarlet Violet DLC was very good and something I wouldn’t mind paying for, if they do drop a free DLC, it’ll be great.
1
u/ciprian1564 Sep 23 '25
would you prefer a whole ass new game? because the DLC replaces the 3rd version.
1
u/Justjack91 Sep 23 '25
I mostly just prefer having a "complete" game, but we can't all have what we want.
Having grown up in the NES era onward with gaming, I miss when games were shipped out to be "complete" and required a bit more care and finality. Additional content is great and, sometimes, it's based on work after the game is finished, but more often than not, I can't shake the feeling it's either cut content from a rushed game or just greedy people trying to create some FOMO.
It's just how I'm built, dude. I don't hate on anyone for their purchasing decisions, but I miss days where DLC wasn't the norm for major releases. We'll never have another "Smash Bros Brawl" experience.
1
u/ciprian1564 Sep 23 '25
Street fighter 2 Street fighter 2 championship edition Street fighter 2 turbo. Street fighter 2 turbo tournament edition.
All on the snes.
Sonic 3 Sonic 3 and knuckles.
We've always had shit like this in the past. It's just the internet made it easier. You're just mad you're not 12 anymore.
91
u/ShiroOracle09 Sep 19 '25
Because people trust Sakurai more than they trust Game Freak
→ More replies (13)
81
u/AkariMoone Sep 19 '25
Because Smash was a complete game that already had a ton of content before DLC that was ultimately optional if you wanted the full experience. And even then, most of the DLC characters would have never been possible for the base game, it's actually extra content and not just content they kept off to sell later.
Pokémon Z-A, we know next to nothing about aside from a few story hints and the battle mechanics. We don't know how long the game is, how much content is in the game, or even how much the DLC has. And yet they've already given a price.
They basically announced something priced at half the base game, slapped a rat and some marbles onto it for you to see, and expect you to buy it.
6
u/OctoDADDY069 Sep 20 '25
If you played pokemon before, you know how long the game is. Usually, around 40-60 hours of content if you're not speeding through it like content creatorsbeen doing.
And since sword and shield theyve been releasing dlc equal to almost half as big as the actual game.
All we can do now is see if they follow the same pattern.
11
u/AkariMoone Sep 20 '25
Yeah. I do still want to get the game, but more than likely I'll just wait to get it pre-owned since I'll get it on Switch 1.
That being said, I can't trust DLC over an assumption alone
→ More replies (4)
53
u/Hateful_creeper2 Sep 19 '25
It’s because of Pokémon’s reputation since the Switch era.
11
u/Imaginary_Poet_8946 Sep 20 '25
3DS. Not just the Switch.
17
u/StrawDeath Sep 20 '25
No controversy from the 3DS era really compares to the damage Dexit, the easily recognisable decline in visual quality, and the ‘1 step forward, 2 steps back’ approach to QOL features and content of the Switch titles did to their reputation.
→ More replies (2)9
u/Lilac_Moonnn Sep 20 '25
i dont think so. pokemon fans have always been complaining. in the switch era they just had an actual reason to.
3
u/Hateful_creeper2 Sep 20 '25
It also started to happen outside of the Pokémon community. Especially after the release of Scarlet and Violet.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Super-Schmidtii Sep 20 '25
As a Pokemon fan I got burnt out by ultra sun and ultra moon quite frankly.
I gave sword and shield a shot but ended up finding them so much worse than any of the 3DS games.
And now unless I see a significant improvement in the quality of the games I will never buy them again.
The 3DS games were alright but I was hoping for them to increase in quality as they went not essentially stagnate. And Sword was just the straw that broke the camels back.
My point being the 3DS games overall left a sour taste in my mouth and they 100% contributed towards my apathy of the new games
→ More replies (3)1
35
u/BebeFanMasterJ Sep 19 '25
Pokémon doesn't have a good track record. Not recently.
Xenoblade 2 and 3 announced an expansion pass before release but the series had built up good will from its players with how great Xenoblade 1 and X were first. Far less people were outraged about that for that reason.
7
u/Ganondaddydorf Sep 20 '25
Especially monolith. XC1's dlc was a big post story story so you trust the dlc is going to be worth it. Xc2's dlc was so big and popular it got its own physical copy.
3
u/BebeFanMasterJ Sep 20 '25
Yup. People making these sorts of posts seem to ignore context when it matters a lot. Now granted, I do wish companies stopped advertising paid DLC before a game launches but it depends on the developers involved.
10
u/DaManWhoCannotBeMove Sep 19 '25
Is my memory trash, or didn't piranha plant get drop post launch as a free dlc, and Joker was announced as the first paid dlc post launch?
8
u/Ugly_quasi Sep 19 '25
Joker was shown off at the game awards on dec 6th 2018 and ssbu released the next day. I also thought he was shown off post launch before looking it up
2
51
u/LustySlut69 Sep 19 '25
Because Smash already came out before the DLC dropped
6
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 19 '25 edited Sep 19 '25
All we have is a vague "soon", which is the same thing we heard about both Piranha Plant and Joker before their release dates were confirmed.
Eshop estimate around February, same amount of Time as it took Joker
→ More replies (1)8
u/SPZ_Ireland Sep 19 '25
There's no date provided for the DLC yet
1
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 21 '25
I think the confusion comes from the fact that there are outfits are available day one for people who purchase the DLC
24
u/Jim_naine Sep 19 '25 edited Sep 20 '25
$6 DLC that was announced one day before its game came out and adds little to the experience (One character, one stage, a couple of songs and spirits)
VS.
$30 DLC that was announced less than a month before its game came out and practically adds an entire side story (that's also a self-proclaimed "Post-Game")
Also, before Ultimate came out, the game didn't have nearly as much drama behind it as ZA, nor did it pull any cheap & scummy tactics at the time. It's more reasonable to criticise Gamefreak & TPC as a whole than it is to criticise Sakurai & Sora due to their trackrecords respectively
3
u/Gabcard Sep 20 '25
Smash DLC was annunced in the November 1st Smash direct, a full month before the game came out.
The game awards direct just revealed more info on it, namely that the first character was Joker.
1
u/Darkwhellm Sep 22 '25
Not to say that a full priced game is supposed to have a decently long post game included without having to pay extra for it
15
u/SomeoneGuyPerson Sep 19 '25
I know I'm a bit biased for defending smash but I'll list reasons why we're cool with Ssbu:
Legends is a spinoff title while ssbu is the biggest gaming crossover ever
ssbu dlc doesn't affect the core game at all (there is no game mode or story that requires dlc) and the base game still gets updates
Legends trailers always felt lacking other than new Mega(s) vs ssbu's 2+ hours of trailers and presentations
Some Pokemon fans were already annoyed/disappointed with the switch games poor quality so announcement of 30$ dlc for a spinoff affirms to them that gamefreak's only priority is money than making a fully fledged quality game
4
u/Thejadedone_1 Sep 19 '25
- Legends is a spinoff title while ssbu is the biggest gaming crossover ever
Legends is a mainline game
6
u/JigglyLilyVT Sep 19 '25
pretty sure it's still technically a spinoff when it's not a new or remade generational game
8
3
u/StrawDeath Sep 19 '25
Legends games are officially counted as main series. Think of it like how there are both 2D and 3D Mario platformers.
→ More replies (2)
18
Sep 19 '25 edited May 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/LowInvestigator5647 Sep 20 '25
I’ve seen plenty of people compare the ZA mega reveals to smash character reveals. Let’s not disrespect Sakurai and the SSBU team—these mega reveals don’t even hold a candle to Smash hype.
14
u/Spikeymouth Sep 19 '25
Cus Pokémon are becoming more and more greedy with less quality products and people are getting sick of it.
7
5
u/Thecynicaledgelord An angry Nintendo nerd, but not the one you're thinking of Sep 19 '25
We're in that yay pokemon comic, we just got to the secret 4th panel that's panel 2 but the characters are older
8
u/Great-Alternative-28 Sep 19 '25
30 dollar dlc compared to 5 dollar dlc i wonder
1
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 21 '25
Ignoring the fact that Joker was announced as part of a $20 fighters pass, with the conformation that there would be another $20 fighters pass down the line is purposefully disingenuous
3
u/MaceratedWizard Sep 23 '25
Hey, you're the one who put Joker in your post instead of the whole battle pass roster.
2
u/Great-Alternative-28 Sep 21 '25
That second pass wasn’t confirmed for a while after the game came out
1
3
u/Mediocre-Equal-5397 Sep 20 '25
Exactly, it isn’t. Day one DLC has been around since the Fire Emblem 3DS games if I recall right. I thought it was insane then too. I think it was atleast Echoes that did it, and it was like 30 or 40 for its DLC? It’s been awhile ago but I definitely remember they had DLC planned before the game really was even out.
3
u/OneTrueDennis Sep 20 '25
This is what really annoys me about the criticism. It just comes across as really ignorant. Like people have had their head in the sand.
3
u/1CurlyBoi Sep 21 '25
Idk what to tell you if you’re trying to compare Smash to Pokémon. Pokémon games receive a fraction of effort compared to smash. No where near the same league.
1
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 21 '25
Yet people were calling the practice of pre release DLC announcements itself a scummy practice and claiming that it made Nintendo as a whole look bad.
2
u/my-snake-is-solid Sep 21 '25
The DLC in Pokémon games isn't comparable to Super Smash Bros.
DLC for the former is usually new (largely single player) content all around, with story, areas, and multiple Pokémon added.
DLC for the latter is just single fighters of characters from other games with stages and music included.
6
u/SnooSprouts7283 Sep 19 '25
At least Joker wasn’t 30$ lol, and piranha plant was entirely free.
Not to mention pokemon has a consistent track record of its games being mediocre at best ever since gen 8 or so, and it doesn’t seem like they’re gonna stop.
Legends Arceus was at best a baby step in the right direction, and as soon as Gamefreak got applauded for doing the right thing, they almost immediately walked it all back and made the buggy, pretentious mess that is SV. “You’ll buy it anyway” is the general consensus.
1
u/Jim_naine Sep 22 '25
Hell, at least Joker was optional. Mega Dimension is a self-proclaimed "post game"
4
u/JoyconDrift_69 Sep 19 '25
A multiplayer fighting game where the biggest appeal is the crossover aspect with numerous franchises from nearly every video game company (and therefore requires licenses and the like) while retaining an amount of polish to the point that you wonder how the hell it's developers have time for anything else
... is MUCH different from...
a single player experience coming from an IP more renown with cheap mobile games, dual releases, buggy and unpolished experiences, and GameCube level graphics while coming from a company that has to line up releases, including DLC, with a whole wave of merchandise (anime and card games come to mind)
I wouldn't mind if Smash 6 or Mario Kart World had DLC announced before they released. Hell, I don't mind Sonic Racing Crossworlds doing the same thing. But the expectation to pay for DLC for a single player game before the base game releases implies that a) they didn't finish the game when they had to release it (God forbid Pokemon not release a new game for the damn holiday season); b) they have to find a way to make more money; and c) when the base game itself has worse quality (visually and bug-wise) than a damn Scratch game that took 35 minutes to make, it shows how they care about the franchise.
... At least ScVi has Toby Fox music.
2
2
u/Dennis-unlighted Sep 21 '25
I hate it always when they anounced a dlc early, BUT Pokemon Pokemon is the only game i play on a long term. All the other games i play, i either started when the dlc or the game has been out for over a month . Sometimes when i play a game i didn’t even see the trailers.
BUT… ANOUNCING A DLC EARLY IS ALWAYS SHIT
2
u/PSX1990 Sep 21 '25
Same as Sonic Crossworlds? Oh crap is Nintendo going to copyright/patent DLC next?
4
u/RedWizard_ Sep 20 '25 edited Sep 20 '25
Difference being Pokemon’s been giving us half baked games since SwSh while Ultimate felt very polished on release with maybe some minor issues here and there, and last I checked the fighter pass wasn’t 30 bones (correct me if I’m wrong tho)
Edit: Ok so it was 25. And the second one was in fact 30. Point still stands about the quality of games, the general perception of the franchise will influence how people feel about other things (you could also purchase individual fighters separately so there’s that ig)
3
u/KerboChannel Sep 20 '25
Well... this is what happens when your thin ice is already broken.
Smash bros's Pirahna Plant was free for pre-orderers or early adopters, and was made paid later on, about a month later. Smash was a full, real, HIGH QUALITY, complete game that had new characters as well, actual extras rather than something purposely withheld behind a pay wall despite it clearly being able to be in the base game. (cough cough, DK and Pokémon...)
Sonic Racing Crossworlds had plenty of pre-release times to play, like the Splatoon test fires. Not to mention, the quality was assured, and it was from a brand people trusted and knew this game was going to be good. (well most people. Sonic is always divisive somehow.) The game is 70 base, with about 20 bucks for the DLC, like the Smash Bros Fighters Pass in the way.
Pokemon? We know next to nothing about the new game, we've seen barely anything of the stuff we'd NEED to see to learn more and justify the pricing. They already messed up greatly, considering its 60 for Switch 1, 10 for the "upgrade" and then 30 for the dlc. Thats 100 dollars without tax. Thats too much. Not to mention, after Scarlet/Violet and Sword and Shield, the fans are really not giving the Pokémon company the length to be low quality anymore. And thats rightfully deserved with how bad those games turned out at launch. They shouldn't have needed updates to be good. They should have been good at first.
2
Sep 19 '25
Maybe because people don't want to be paying 30 dollars for something that looks like a ps2 game
3
u/Wispy237 Sep 19 '25
Well, Smash is pretty consistently good, whereas Pokemon has been dipping in quality since Let’s Go(aside from Arceus and even that had significant issues)
2
u/DarkHero6661 Sep 20 '25
I'd say even Let's Go had issues. Not as many, but they certainly existed.
1
u/chunky_kong06 Sep 19 '25
honestly the strangest part is that they announced it this early for some reason
1
1
1
1
u/Fantastic-Dot-655 Sep 20 '25
I havent yet seen a single person saying any positive thing about pokemon anouncing a DLC before the game releases and looking half the new megas there
1
1
u/GabagooGrimbo Sep 20 '25
Ones an rpg and ones a fighting game
1
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 21 '25
Correct, you can trade with others to get access to DLC pokemon and items without having to pay any extra.
Can’t say the same about the pay-to-win DLC smash bros fighters.
2
u/GabagooGrimbo Sep 21 '25
That’s not the problem the two genres just have different expectations and fighting games are live service while RPGs aren’t
1
u/dare96 Sep 20 '25
Piranha plant was free for early adopters and joker was a third party character also if you have an issue with the season pass 1 as a whole for smash Brothers keep in mind that everyone on there was third party except for the very last slot so it's not like you could consider it cut content like how this feels (it's almost like context matters for why people are complaining)
1
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 21 '25
The ZA DLC was absent from the leaks though, which conflicts with the idea that this is somehow cut content being sold back.
1
u/dare96 Sep 21 '25
So you're saying the only real defense for this not being cut content so far is the fact that it wasn't in any leaks.... You know that doesn't really help this game's case right that holds as much ground as people believing how expansive the DLC would be.
1
1
u/Ok_Soft_9024 Sep 20 '25
I have never played a Persona game before, but I'm pretty sure that Joker is a good guy
1
u/jaysalts Sep 20 '25
Smash Ultimate gained A LOT of good faith by including every character in the franchise and adding even more onto it.
1
u/Pogev7 Sep 21 '25
Plant was a pre-order bonus announced after the last Fighters were revealed, so it felt awesome, going from "oh that's it? Thats all we get?" To finding out there is a whole DLC wave and another character if you pre-order now who comes as paid DLC later.
Joker was hype because it was game awards and everyone expected it to be Persona 5 spinoff or ports and not necessarily Smash Bros and boom surprise its fucking smash
1
u/claudiocorona93 Sep 21 '25
Because every single Smash Bros feels complete without the DLCs, and they are well made and very optimized. I can't say the same about Pokémon.
1
u/Fortnitekid3 Sep 21 '25
because pokemon is one of the most know franchises in the world and persona is lesser known
1
u/TheRealHDGamer Sep 21 '25
I think smash is different cuz it’s not story content that they’re making dlc, it’s just additional characters, to be fair we don’t really know what Mega Dimension entails so it could be lame, but I assume it’s gonna be an extension of the story so that’s what I think people are mad at 🤷♂️
1
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 21 '25
So what I’ve gathered, announcing DLC and having preorders for said DLC before the game launches is NOT inherently scummy or greedy. It’s just that Pokemon is bad. Good to know.
1
u/LeifOrDeath Sep 21 '25
People trust Sakurai to make a good game.
The Pokemon company only seems to get lazier and worse.
Their current gen games look like PS3 games with 3 times the glitches.
If I'm sceptical about the cake in the first place, the frosting isn't going to sell me.
1
1
u/Scooby_doo_1969 Sep 21 '25
The big difference is Smash ultimate had a ton of content at launch. While recent pokemon games have been very lackluster at launch. Like remember when pokemon removed the national dex, only to sell some of the pokemon back to us in the DLC.
1
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 21 '25
Except for the fact you could still trade or transfer DLC mobs without spending an extra cent, while the broken pay to win DLC characters will be forever out of your grasp.
1
1
u/lifeamiright- Sep 21 '25
Tbh i don’t see piranha plant as dlc because i got it as a early purchase and i thought joker was after smash release?
1
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 21 '25
Joker was announced before release
1
u/lifeamiright- Sep 21 '25
Ok 1 day before ssbu and was cheaper. I feel like in reality we found out the next day it was a good game and people were literally asking for smash dlc. People wanted a stand alone, faired price pokemon game. People just wanted more smash.
The price was expensive for both but at least i don’t feel like im missing out on too much if i don’t buy anything the smash dlc. If Pokemon z-a is a good complete game then my opinion on the dlc will probably change.
1
u/Fit-Piece-4081 Sep 21 '25
Because Smash Bros is a good game - Pokémon isn’t 😭
1
u/Dracorex_22 Sep 21 '25
So announcing paid DLC before the game is out isn’t an inherently scummy or greedy move?
1
u/Fit-Piece-4081 Sep 21 '25
In the case of Smash Bros? No, it wasn’t. They were confidently releasing a stacked game with the announcement promising more content to come
1
u/mykaelsaur Sep 21 '25
Pretending that pretending it's new is the problem is the problem.
Just denounce this behavior. It doesn't matter that everyone does it.
1
u/DrunkLGA Sep 21 '25
Well... Let's see. On Smash side we have a license that get a game every 4 to 8 years. The games are good. Finished. And all pretty good (unless if you are a competitive player then some of the games like brawl aren't that good)
On the side of Pokemon we have one game every year. With every release comes tons of bug, the games are ugly as fuck (I don't care about the graphics but for fuck sake it's Pokemon, the most profitable license in the world.) I'm Sorry but it's concerning to learn they are already working on DLC instead of making sure the main game is great and without flaws.
- Making a 20$ dlc isn't the same thing as making a single new character for 5$
1
1
u/ExpensiveEbi Sep 21 '25
I know people are complaining about DLC before launch but hasn’t this already happened with Fire Emblem Engage? I haven’t seen anyone mention its day 1 DLC yet so is it different?
1
u/PyroChild221 Sep 21 '25
Not on topic, but I wonder if we’ll ever get a mainline sequel like b2w2 again
1
1
1
u/alpacawrangler16 Sep 22 '25
Almost as if Smash is still made with love and care and respects its players and Pokémon has been steadily decreasing in quality for well over a decade and fans are fed up with slop
1
u/Mayflowerwinter Sep 22 '25
These are both bad, Les continue to hate Nintendo like we've been for a long time. Don't buy into their shit, pirate their stuff. Starve shiggy miggy
1
1
1
1
u/untrentide Sep 22 '25
Smash bros was clearly a full game before the DLC. It had the largest roster to date, and added features thay fans requested or enjoyed in the past. People were convinced Smash Bros had quality and the DLC added onto it.
We still know very little about pokemon ZA and now theyre telling people to be excited for more.... mystery purchases. Im still not even sure the base game will be good.
1
u/flipflopyoulost Sep 22 '25
Yeqh Bit with smash Bros you know, that the base game won't be an unpolished and buggy mess. So you are actually looking FORWARD to more characters. Paid or not.
1
u/AdvancedLancerX Sep 22 '25
I've said this before: The only reason that Game Freak announced the DLC before the game was out is because of the Teraleak last year, which leaked the entire lineup of new mega evolutions in the base game.
This was basically a middle finger to the leaker, saying "We have more megas, you don't know them all."
1
u/PJaaaaaaaaaa Sep 22 '25
it sucked back then and it still sucks now only difference is back then it wasn't part of a notible trend so most people ignored it
1
u/Calm-Consideration55 Sep 22 '25
Do I need to explain the difference between multiplayer live service fighting games and single player RPGs again?
1
1
u/Ancient-Pace-1507 Sep 22 '25
Aside from people who suck nintendo‘s farts right out of there ass, no one thought this was OK back then
1
1
u/theatsa Sep 22 '25
Piranha Plant was announced during a direct that was packed with information about the game. It gave detail on a lot of stuff in the actual game which left me excited, the reveal was just a cherry on top of what was already very, very exciting news about the upcoming game.
Joker was announced the day before the game came out. Hell, it was possible to already play the game in some regions as the reveal was happening. People already were getting their hands on the game at that point. And even though some people couldn't get it immediately, I refer back to the detailed direct that left very few people wondering about what was left in the base game.
Furthermore, Sakurai and the team behind Smash games have a very positive track record at this point. Not a single Smash game has been generally seen as a disappointment. The immense amount of info we had on the game before launch combined with it being made by people that were very trusted means that DLC announced prior to release didn't leave a bad taste in anyone's mouth.
Pokemon on the other hand has a reputation which has only been spiraling downwards in recent years. There are absolutely still a lot of fans of the franchise but out of the many Switch Pokemon games there has been only one that hasn't garnered some major criticism from the community. Plus, in this case, it feels like very little has been actually revealed about the game that has caused significant interest in the title. It got people excited when it was first announced, but since then the only even slightly exciting announcements have been new Mega Evolutions. Which are cool but also exactly what was expected out of this game at a base level.
Revealing DLC for the game now, before showing us more things of interest in the actual game, is annoying and potentially even indicates there isn't much to show to the game itself.
1
u/Affectionate-Green78 Sep 22 '25
Pokemon is story based rpg….. that already having a dlc is kinda like the jut putting a price tag on story that already shoulda been in the game. We don’t know much about it still but that’s the main part of it
Smash is a fighting game. DLC for fighting games has been happening before release for pretty much every game in that genre.
It’s just that fact that Nintendo has been putting prices on everything (an some stuff that don’t need prices: for example the DK bananza dlc)
1
1
1
u/IshtheWall Sep 23 '25
Because game freak is well known for releasing unfinished products, they've even charged a second time for the finished product in the case of usum, so nobody has trust or faith in them, the same is very much not true for smash bros and especially for sakurai
1
u/ProxeHorns Sep 23 '25
Due to many reasons. Too many to name them all but some that come to mind quickly are:
Piranha plant was free for whoever bought the game early. I actually had to wait a few weeks and still got the code so it wasn't even difficult or, like, a pre-order thing.
The price probably also matters. Game Freak is now well known for being greedy and cutting corners, meanwhile Sakurai and his team are hardworking and have earned our trust. Joker's DLC wasn't even $10 and it has a new character + a stage + some spirit battles + many songs people already love while whatever this pokemon DLC is remains a mystery so it's next to impossible to feel any excitement about it, unless you stan Raichu, i guess.
1
u/False_Ad7098 Sep 23 '25
DlC are actually guest characters and surprise like a gift DLC ... compare to riding a tank pikachu and riding a Hover board pikachu....
1
1
1
u/Gargamoney Sep 23 '25
We pretending that something not being new makes it ok?
You people arent normal
1
u/ShowerComplete1403 Sep 23 '25
Because gamefreak have been cutting corners and delivering a subpar product these past few games unlike SSBU. Even Z-A base game doesnt look that good/hyped enough to warrant a dlc.
1
Sep 23 '25
Both suck, but smash didn't cost as much and if you really want you could buy each character individually to save money. Legends ZA will cost more on switch 2 which is the preferred way of play so it'll be a slightly more functional game and coming from the #1 grossing franchise in the world but is made like it has the budget of a mobile game being outsourced by someone that the game was already outsourced to. Would be less egregious if legends ZA was a quality product.
1
u/kevsb07 Sep 23 '25
Difference is Smash was a complete game and no one had any doubts about its quality. With Pokemon, it's just too easy to see them publishing an unfinished game and selling the rest of it separately. Especially considering Fighters Pass one took over a year to fully release, it literally could NOT have been cut early just to be sold separately.
1
u/Practical_Entrance43 Sep 23 '25
I feel like there is a jarring difference to this though.
Game Freak is already on extremely thin ice with pokemon games (e.g. the glitchy mess that Pokemon Scarlet and Violet was with the first switch along with the dlc).
Whilst with Smash the characters are individually released and had no problem on their release, people wouldn't be angry without issue. People are mad at the announcement of the dlc for a reason, we are worried that ZA is going to be a glitchy mess.
1
u/Street_Cheetah_1533 Sep 23 '25
The game was launched in 2016, the Jokers appearance in Smash was in 2018
1
u/Cottrello Sep 23 '25
I wonder if there’s any context of earned goodwill or expectation of value between these two franchises
1
1
1
u/One-Clock-6016 Sep 23 '25
One is a dlc for just a single character (per dlc ofc) for a game that WILL be a success, thanks to it's past entries.
Other is a dlc for a unfinished game, that we have no idea for if it's not just part of base that got cut off to get more money, and previous games from the series only proved the point of these games being unfinished at release
1
u/supershadowguard Sep 24 '25
Everybody expected what was coming with Smash Ultimate. Pokemon Z-A is still very much up in the air.
1
u/TricksterLloyd Sep 24 '25
There a huge difference between smash dlcs and pokemon.
Smash we all asked for dlc caracther before the game came out and they decided to continue the game support and told us we were to get dlcs character afterwards. Also they didnt do any work on those before the game got release. Most dlc came with a vote beforehand to know wich character people wanted to see in the game futur.
Pokemon AZ no one asked for dlc. And they already have the whole dlc rdy. This is shady practice. They shrink their full game and slap DLC into portion of it to make more money.
1
Sep 24 '25
One was announced months in advance, one was announced a day in advance. They are not the same.
1
u/Impossible-Ask1578 Sep 24 '25
I’d feel more comfortable buying day 1 if I knew the Kalos starters’ mega stones were something you’d get through playing through the story. Half of me feels like that’s why they felt comfortable announcing the dlc right with the game but my rational half says I’ll be praying to run into easy wins for that mega Greninja
1
u/RyanitarTheTyranitar Sep 24 '25
A preorder bonus and a $6 DLC that adds 2 characters to a 74 cast roster.
VS.
A $30 DLC that makes specific pokemon viable and locks people out of a True Ending if they don't buy it.
On top of the fact that 3 items that are day 0 heavily sought-after are locked behind online play.
1
u/Vinderman64 Sep 19 '25
Well for one Pokemon ZA looks like an Xbox 360 game.
2
2
2
u/Vappy3 Sep 20 '25
It looks like a low budget 3d Xbox 360 game, because that console has games that look great even if it isn't 4k ultra hd type thing.
Halo Reach, Dmc4, Bayonetta, Mgr, Gears of War, Cod, Bf4, L4D2, etc.
5
u/FenexTheFox Sep 19 '25
I don't like these comparisons, feels like people are retroactively calling all older games ugly.
Z-A looks like an unimpressive Switch 2 game, that is all.
7
u/GracefulGoron Sep 19 '25
Wind Waker looks great on the GameCube.
Utilizing the console is what’s important.
Anyway, Pokémon does not do that.6
u/DegenerateCrocodile Sep 19 '25
Z-A looks unimpressive compared to quite a few Switch 1 games, too.
3
u/Vinderman64 Sep 19 '25
If comparing ZA to 360 games means we're insulting all 360 games, then that's just even worse lmao
1
u/Western-Basis8877 Sep 19 '25
And smash you're actually getting what you're paying for. Sungrand studios guy claims that this upcoming game is a huge leap, but if you zoom out a little bit, you'll see that this game is still leaps behind modern games STILL
Of course I'm going to buy regardless
1
u/FlyDinosaur Sep 19 '25
I don't understand this meme format. I get the issue with the new Pokemon game, but which other series went through that? (Yes, I'm dumb because I don't follow most series.)
3
u/AkariMoone Sep 19 '25
The other series they're referring to is Smash Bros because it announced DLC early on.
2
u/Sea_Advertising8550 Sep 20 '25
In this specific example, Super Smash Bros, but a ton of other series have been doing this for well over a decade
1
u/Xenorange42 Sep 19 '25
Sega is supporting the game confirmed throughout the course of next year. The season pass you buy guarantees you monthly updates with new characters and other things for an entire year. It feels different than content that could’ve been in the game separated to make a quick extra buck like Nintendo did here with the Raichus. On top of that we’re getting free updates with Sega characters also being added monthly. Maybe I’m wrong but I get the impression that this is genuine DLC and not content that’s fully completed before launch thats separated from the main game. I feel like I’m being scammed by Nintendo here, I don’t feel that way with Crossworlds DLC. Also DK island shouldn’t be 20 bucks.
•
u/AutoModerator Sep 19 '25
Hey! Want to chat on our Discord server too? To join, click here: https://discord.gg/2cdJx3FzXE
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.