Fire Emblem introducing paid DLC to 3DS - Report

Nintendo confirms strategy series debuting on latest handheld April 19 in Japan; Nikkei reports game will be first to charge players for add-on content.

Nintendo first confirmed it would introduce paid downloadable content on the 3DS in August, but the company's plans are only now firming up. According to Andriasang, The Japanese Nikkei news outlet is reporting that the 3DS maker will roll out its first paid DLC next year with the portable's debut installment in the Fire Emblem series of strategy games.

Fire Emblem hits the Japanese 3DS in April.

In a video presentation following the Nikkei report, Nintendo president Satoru Iwata announced that Fire Emblem will arrive on Japanese shelves April 19. However, he did not unveil DLC plans for the game.

The Nikkei report did not include details on what the DLC would consist of or how much it would cost, but Iwata has previously addressed the company's general strategy for DLC. In August, he stressed that it would be unwise for Nintendo to pursue paid downloadable content of the small-scale variety, such as stat increases. Selling this type of content, he said, could increase short-term sales, but it would damage the long-term relationship Nintendo has with its customers. He added that the company also does not plan to pursue the free-to-play model, where developers release a game for free and monetize it through microtransactions. This type of business model, he said, would be a disservice to Nintendo's content.

Aside from dating Fire Emblem, Iwata's video presentation provided concrete details for numerous titles in Nintendo's Japanese first-quarter lineup. Of particular note, Iwata nailed down a March 8 release date for Metal Gear Solid: Snake Eater 3D, as well as a March window for Kingdom Hearts 3D: Dream Drop Distance.

Written By

Want the latest news about Kingdom Hearts 3D: Dream Drop Distance?

Kingdom Hearts 3D: Dream Drop Distance

Kingdom Hearts 3D: Dream Drop Distance

Follow

Discussion

118 comments
Zeus-Guy
Zeus-Guy

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

phrozac
phrozac

Not a fan of how the game looks and sounds more like FF than ever before... I hope this is coming to the US. Anyone know?

Algrado
Algrado

So it's like the free downloadable quests from Dragon Quest IX would be charged had that game been released several years in the future if Nintendo were to do DLC on it? This sounds bad =/

jimmyzeke13
jimmyzeke13

I hope they reconsider. I like the virtual console because it lets me play games that I never had an opportunity to play as a kid, but for DLC that's just add-on content to a game? No thanks. I only want to pay for a game once.

sknight175216
sknight175216

Hey let's make games 60 dollars then half ass the game because we know we can just put content in later and then charge people for it. OR hey people really like our completed game lets add some more content so they can keep playing. Hmmm. Lets hope its the latter. :P

craigprime
craigprime

Man, the Fire Emblem series has started to fall. I liked the ones for gameboy advance. Shadow Dragon for DS just didn't have the same intense touch, somehow. But having people pay for extra stuff? i just don't know. I'm alright if it's just reviving characters or new weapons, but I don't want to pay for a new map or character.

eliebaz
eliebaz

i find it weird how KH 3D is supposedly a sequel to KH2 yet both Sora and Riku look younger in this one than they did in KH2 :S

Sigil-otaku
Sigil-otaku

@HappyBB Say what? How can people agree with you that even (as you stated yourself) good content DLC is a ripoff? That doesn't make sense as you just said it was good content. There is always a bit of a problem with DLC (such as it not taking half the manpower, near the same time or rely on as much work yet still be priced disproportionately) but some DLC just is worth it. I've bought map packs for FPS before and ultimately I've turned against them, they don't add much and are not worth the money but single-player DLC tends to be pretty good. Maps are good, just need to be cheaper. DLC when done properly (after game is already finished, genuinely unique content and worth the price) is a very good idea and helps add longevity to games people love, the only problem is companies don't like to do it that way so far.

Xplode_77
Xplode_77

This could be really cool. I mean, have you ever seen an expansion to a Nintendo game before? Just think about it; what if Super Metroid on the SNES had DLC With new enemies and boss battles? That would be awesome. If they do it right it might be really cool.

vega13mv
vega13mv

@raahsnavj it's not that bad. All deaths are avoidable if the right move is made. Besides once you know the fight it doesnt take more than 10 minutes before you're back to where you died anyway. It's made me a better tactician and i find games like tactics ogre and FF tactics too forgiving.

firedrakes
firedrakes

biggist issue is this. most dlc is already on the disc( lets say ps3,xbox360) but is lock until you pay for it

Axe_Armor
Axe_Armor

Not you too Nintendo... Let's hope you handle this the right way. Don't release a half finished game at full price and then make us buy DLC to make it worth playing.

HappyBB
HappyBB

I really hate "priced" DLCs even if the content is good. It's a greedy business model! So far, I haven't bought any DLCs and I intend to keep it that way!

RavageCobra
RavageCobra

I just hope they don't succumb to the American greed and release extremely over priced DLC. ESPECIALLY CoD. How that game breaks records is beyond my comprehension. On a side note, CoD is but one of the many representations of that greed. Enough said.

ArabrockermanX
ArabrockermanX

Good to see Nintendo is getting in on the DLC BS... If they make the DLC worth buying I wont care but too many games have over priced DLC.

Los9090
Los9090

Nice quote Goldenlink64!

chyng85
chyng85

Expected more moves in battle scenes~

goldenlink64
goldenlink64

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad." Nintendo, PLEASE TELL ME YOU HAVEN'T FORGOTTEN THIS!

Los9090
Los9090

Yeah, but for guys that had strict parents and were not allowed to own an NES, I'm all about the VC. Not to mention the SNES games I missed out on because I was engrossed in other games

SapSacPrime
SapSacPrime

Im not going to jump to any conclusions here until the content is released but this is a worrying sign :(. Its a shame what DLC has become, I would like to think of Nintendo as less greedy but then I look at the virtual console...

Wormkid_64
Wormkid_64

@raahsnavj Well to each his own I suppose. Like I say,I've lost two people so far,and I just kept playing. I like it. However I do have a few characters who I'd reset a level to keep. But it obviously isn't bad enough to keep you from playing the series.

raahsnavj
raahsnavj

@Wormkid_64 Having played every Fire Emblem so far I would have to say permanent death is my least favorite part of it... even behind the constant micro management of weapons. Right now if I make a mistake, or an enemy gets a 5% critical hit on one of my characters it is an instant reset and try the level again. That isn't fun at all. So why do I do it? Because permanent death is stupid. I'm not going to lose a character 20 hours into a game that has been a staple of my characters and ruin the ending. I would rather replay 15 minutes of a level than the whole game again. Permanent death doesn't make anything sting except the pain I feel from starting the level over. despite how much I love the series, it is a horrible design decision.

mrzero1982pt2
mrzero1982pt2

um did DLC for rock band and guitar hero for the wii work? and if it is for something super small, this will backfire. nintendo, you are walking on shaky ground here....

CTBradums
CTBradums

Ugh. We need less of this DLC nonsense, not more. I admit that it can be a good thing, but it's usually just a marketing ploy to shamelessly trick people into paying for something entirely useless by marketing it as a big deal or a necessity. You hear me, Dragon Age? Eh? >.>

datbush
datbush

@nintendoboy16 Agian my point was missed. Maybe that wasn't the best example to use but i was only trying to make a point that just becasue nintendo, in the past have said that small scale or 'on disc' dlc wouldn't be something they wouldn't do, doesn't mean they will stay true to that. But if they actualy come out and suprise us then yay them. I would rather be wrong then have the industry have another contender in the dlc plague. If you want to keep argueing this then feel free, i've made my point.

nintendoboy16
nintendoboy16

@datbush You realize WHY Nintendo has been a bit stingy on publishing M rated games? It's because two Gamecube games, Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem (by Silicon Knights) and Geist (by n-Space) did horrible in sales. The only M rated success they ever had was Perfect Dark (by Rare) on the N64. It's exactly why they let third party developers and publishers like Grasshopper (No More Heroes 1 and 2), Activision (Call of Duty), and Capcom (Resident Evil) handle it. That and according to other sources, Tecmo's Fatal Frame IV was riddled with bugs and no one seemed to have even bothered fixing them. Can't blame NoA for not localizing that then. The only mature oriented title Nintendo is going to publish at this time is Capcom's Resident Evil: Revelations for the 3DS, but by their European branch. So I wouldn't call them off on that just yet.

datbush
datbush

@nintendoboy16 nintendo hasn't exactly kept their word on these kinds of things. I seem to remember how they were saying that not enough devs were making mature games for the wii and then nintendo refused to release fatal frame 4 outside of japan and i know this isnt the only example. Yes some dlc is worth it but most is not. If nintendo can break this bad habit plagueing the industry then i will admit being wrong. @finaleve way to miss the point i was making. A good expansion pack back in the day would give you all those 15$ map packs as well as a new single player campaign, plus new enhancements (new weapons, units, chars, graphic updates blah blah blah) all for one 30$ (or less) price tag. are you really going to tell me its better to buy all those thing seperate for 10-15$ a pop and end up practicaly paying for the game again and still get less content? Edit: I tolaly agree with you on how bioware/EA does dlc for mass effect is just awful

Los9090
Los9090

So one would pay for owning a 3DS and pay for owning the game. Then pay while one owns the game for add ons? eeeYeah. Bad move

XanderZane
XanderZane

I really have no plans on getting this, especially if they are going to be overcharging gamers for content that should already be in the game.

Wormkid_64
Wormkid_64

@Flint247 Wow. I certainly do hope that gets fixed. Thanks for the link.

Wormkid_64
Wormkid_64

@raahsnavj Sorry for the huge post... Anyway,I do see your point about paying for keeping your characters alive.That's ridiculous. And paying real money to get to choose who joins the game?Also not worth my money. ON a journey,you have no control over who you meet.You meet them,and if you become friends,that's the way it is.If not,you move on.But if you could spend Play Coins to hire certain individuals that perhaps you meet on the road to your destination,or that members of your party know,that'd be cool.It's get more 3DS's walking around exchanging data. As to DLC in general,it isn't bad if it's meaningful,and Iwata said they WILL NOT be diving out the $5 map pack style of DLC.He doesn't think it's right.So it will probably DLC in the vein of Portal 2's recent package,with an all new chapter to play in multiplayer. As i said before,I'd payed a couple bucks for that,as it was more game.I'd pay for more game on 3DS too.

Wormkid_64
Wormkid_64

@raahsnavj I read an article once about more consequence in games,and it spoke of how permanent death,while at first,very imposing to a gamer,can actually be a good thing. I don't know why,but I never played a Fire Emblem game until The Sacred Stones came out in the 3DS ambassador program. When I first saw that dead characters didn't come back,I was very put off,but I kept playing.I've lost two characters so far,and the permanent death actually makes the game much more engaging,especially when you like the character who died.It deepens the necessity for strategy,and gives the results of your actions more impact. Today's gamer is quite often spoiled with too many retries,checkpoints,and other kinds of help that the punishing games of yester-year were unwilling to lend.Of course we need accessibility,but a game with those kinds of consequences is nice to play too.

raahsnavj
raahsnavj

Wow. Just wow. I'm trying to figure out of all the games they could pick how they would DLC this to death. it has to be a recruiting thing. Pay some money get Stephen... While that beats putting random character on said random square on another random level to recruit him, please... I also think it is super sad that people would be willing to pay extra to work around the horrible design decision that is permanant character death. It is no wonder people have a hard time getting into these sort of games. They make them unaccessible for just about everyone that isn't willing to retry levels over and over until you get by without having anyone die off.

mr_squibble
mr_squibble

I'd pay a little extra to have my Fire Emblem characters die less...

vega13mv
vega13mv

I'll give you a quarter if you let me revive my units

finaleve
finaleve

@datbush You do realize that Map Packs don't exactly count as expansions, ever, right? Map packs do not exactly "Expand" a game by making it longer. Thing with multiplayer games is the reason you play as long is because of a number of factors, many of which do not include the maps you play. Dragon Age had an expansion pack. It was pretty good. It also had a bunch of DLC but those were mainly side-stories and What ifs, which had no real impact on the story except for the last one with Morrigan. Borderlands had 4 DLC packs, all of which are a lot of fun and replayable (except the Zombie pack but that is because of how boring it got). It has no impact whatsoever to the main story (even if it really lacked in that department) and was worth it, both in single-player and multi-player. Mass Effect 2 had DLC (and this one I point out a lot to people). In the game, there was a quest line involving discovering the whereabouts of the Shadow Broker. You do 2 things and suddenly it stops. It felt short. Nothing progressed after that. Turns out there is DLC that you have to PAY to actually progress the storyline. Mass Effect 2's other DLC actually has an impact on Mass Effect 3. From what I've read, Shepard will be on Trial at the beginning of ME3 because of an event that happened in ME2 with a certain DLC. This, right here, ruins the story because most people will be missing out on this.

atopp399
atopp399

Unless it is basically full scale downloadable expansions like they used to have on PC I will not purchase any, ever. DLC has negativity impacted gaming development. So many games are release buggy, unfinished or extremely short.

Wormkid_64
Wormkid_64

@Flint247 I've heard someone else talking about this glitch,but I've never seen it happen. What is it? And,I think a patch for a glitch in a game is something they'd fix through a Spotpass update.DLC is more for optional things.So if the glitch is going to be fixed,we may even get the patch before Fire Emblem starts the 3DS DLC library,because they could do that any day.

nintendoboy16
nintendoboy16

@datbush Regardless, they can both expand a finished product, which is why I compared them. And again, not all DLC is bad. I mean, yes it can be abused with on-disc crap (Activision and Capcom), but still. Nintendo hasn't even specified on this too well. All we know that is they aren't interested in stuff like stat increases, as they feel they would lose customers (they even state that in the article above). Jeez, and people wonder why I compare Nintendo to Sonic Team. They both have a reception where negative conclusions are being jumped on.

datbush
datbush

@nintendoboy16 there is a difference between an expansion pack and dlc addons....especialy this day one and on disc bull crap. Most expansion packs give you your moneys worth and are made at least a year after the game was made, while dlc usualy does not and gets cranked out shortly after the game ships. Do i really have to go over the content difference between 30$ brood war and 2 15$ COD map packs? Oh and with an expansion pack you get a nice disc case and manual that you actualy OWN.

Freezezzy
Freezezzy

Well, it's official. The apocolypse is upon us. Of all the video games companies there are, I thought Nintendo would be the last one to submit to DLC greed. Still, as others have said, if they stick with new, quality content, and don't go the on-disc (or on-cart) route by nickel-and-dime'ing us for stuff we've already paid for, then it should, at least, be ok.

Bubbagum_Bish
Bubbagum_Bish

I can't wait to see what they do for this when Smash Bros. 3DS comes out!

Darkflare_EX
Darkflare_EX

I read an article about how Nintendo planned to make reasonable DLC that actually expanded upon a complete product rather than make an incomplete one and nickel and dime us for the complete experience. Let's see if they keep to their word.

ZabuzaR
ZabuzaR

If DLC is done right then I will see no problem with it. Don't put the "DLC content" into the game on release and forcing us to pay for whats already on the game. Just create newer content that is worth my time, and money and it will go well.

HappyBB
HappyBB

No Nintendo, please don't turn your games into many of today's "incomplete" games by following the trend of releasing DLCs and definitely no free-2-play style of games. I would rather pay a game in full and enjoy its content in a complete package rather than buying DLCs and microtransactions!

svaubel
svaubel

As long as the DLC is worth it I dont really care. Though for most games I dont even buy any.