The Video Game Critic

But the point being made by Scotland was that there was no "good/bad dlc" discussion until Nintendo got involved.

Plenty of companies have done the Mario Kart 8 approach, long before Nintendo made it popular for the Nintendo faithful. Prime example: From Software. Dark Souls 1 and 2 were absolutely, undeniably 110% complete games upon release. I don't think that Dark Souls 2 saw it's first batch of dlc until six-plus months after release. Where were the accolades from the likes of you?

The problem isn't with anybody else. They've very clearly offered examples, verbatim, of you lumping all dlc in together. I can think of a ton of instances, when Nintendo was still content with solely doing split-screen, offline gaming, where developers released a slew of fantastic dlc. Call of Duty, GTA (which, like Dark Souls 2, didn't see day 1 dlc and they also provided plenty of content for the price), and Assassin's Creed aren't the only games in town.....but they seem to be the ones you reference the most.

[QUOTE=BanjoPickles]But the point being made by Scotland was that there was no "good/bad dlc" discussion until Nintendo got involved. Plenty of companies have done the Mario Kart 8 approach, long before Nintendo made it popular for the Nintendo faithful. Prime example: From Software. Dark Souls 1 and 2 were absolutely, undeniably 110% complete games upon release. I don't think that Dark Souls 2 saw it's first batch of dlc until six-plus months after release. Where were the accolades from the likes of you? The problem isn't with anybody else. They've very clearly offered examples, verbatim, of you lumping all dlc in together. I can think of a ton of instances, when Nintendo was still content with solely doing split-screen, offline gaming, where developers released a slew of fantastic dlc. Call of Duty, GTA (which, like Dark Souls 2, didn't see day 1 dlc and they also provided plenty of content for the price), and Assassin's Creed aren't the only games in town.....but they seem to be the ones you reference the most. [/QUOTE]

That's fine Banjo, but I am not the only person on this board who could have been posting examples of 'good' dlc in those topic.

Those topics were about BAD  dlc, and how much it sucked. And yes, bad dlc sucks, so why would I find the bright side of bad things?

It should be a nuanced topic, why should there be one set of rules and thinking for vastly different examples? Every piece of DLC has to be judged 1.  for its own content and price AND 2. for the game it is being released for - was it withheld to grossly exploit the customer, or is it true  expansion?

Why should I be getting flak for celebrating good, expansionist DLC while still being a harsh critic of bad, exploitative dlc? This is obviously not a contradiciton, and I have not 'switched sides'.

Except you never made these nuances, and spoke about DLC as a whole. Time to move on, this is unproductive, and a little sad, actually. Topic locked.