Well this obviously means the game wasn't completed before release with content held back at a premium.

Eh, music games tend to lend to this sort of thing. Dissidia Duodecim actually did music packs as well.

So long as there are plenty of default songs - and I can't imagine that not being the case - its a welcome addition, especially if I can get some of my favorites from FFXI and FFVIII in there.

My concern is the nickel and diming of game content that third parts seem to ritually engage in. I'm hoping Nintendo will stand on the side of meaningful content additions rather than the general bullshit we've seen elsewhere.

Edgar and Sabin's Theme as DLC, I'd welcome that.

Considering the amount of great music there is in the whole series, there's probably gonna be a lot of DLC.

The faces in this game make feel uncomfortable

its pretty sad that people think "nintendo is finally moving forwards" for allowing companies to charge extra money for incomplete games

So now I can expect non definitive versions of games on my nintendo consoles? I guess, if that's what magnalon talking about.

I was going to preface my post with what Silent basically said to basically shut down lame comments like what Wrath and Pride said.

DLC can be a good thing. Just because it's abused by EA and other companies doesn't mean that every other company has to abuse it as well. Many, many developers have embraced DLC and done a bang up job with it, like SuckerPunch and Valve (on the 360, where you have to pay for DLC).

Yes, I hate day one DLC just as much as everyone else (ie incomplete games), but c'mon guys - the game has 50 songs included on the cart. It's nice to have some optional content to add to the game that maybe couldn't be adapted for the final release. Would you rather have Theatrhythm 2 as early as 2013?

Of course, Nintendo fans have no experience with DLC; just what they hear on popular blogs about it, and associate it instantly with a negative connotation. So we all know when Nintendo's Fire Emblem's DLC comes out and adds campaigns they will act like Nintendo invented paid DLC, and how it adds "even more value" to Nintendo products.

I have nothing against DlC, I have defended it various times from people who generalize DLC and tag it to crapcom or EA. That being said, Nintendo had always had the pleasure of not offering dlc, this pressures company's to fit as much as they can into a cart or disc, knowing that it's the only definitive version that they can offer.

I was actually glad when I read the title, but then I read your comment and considering that nintendo tends to do good with what they offer within the content of a game, I found it a bit ill placed. I have never felt nintendo and the games devs make for it needed dlc, and that's because devs would normally try to fit as much as they can, but with things like this now, they will be in no real pressure to give it all they have.

Fair enough.

@TheSilentProtagonist & Magnalon

I disagree with the idea that paid DLC could ever make a game better. Why? Because any game could have been better if it shipped with whatever that content may be in the first place. DLC is just one of the paths that developers can utilize to put content in a game. One way is actually completing the game before release, and the other way is making people pay multiple times for DLC so that they can get the final/better version of the game. When you put paid DLC in a game, you essentially admit that the composition of the game means crap because it's okay if it is chopped into pieces and some people are playing the incomplete version, and you make money a barrier to accessing everything the game has to offer. Of course you have to pay for games in the first place, but at least that used to mean that you got the whole thing at once.

The only DLC that doesn't make me avoid purchasing a game is strictly free DLC (which I include patches and updates to be a part of). This is because it is made available to everyone who owns the game and has the ability to download it. Still, what's better than ever having free DLC is having all that crap from the very beginning.

Now I'm avoiding Theatrhythm as well as Fire Emblem, two games I was about 70% sure I would pick up if I had the money. As you can tell, I'm not happy with the last huge developer/publisher that generally didn't support paid DLC (Nintendo) jumping on this bandwagon. Maybe if Theatrhythm and Fire Emblem get "GOTY" editions then I'll pick them up, but as of now it's a no.

I'm sure somebody is going to reply with "You should be happy with it because they are companies and they need to make money", but fuck that. To make that money, a seller must come to a mutual agreement with a customer that they will trade this money for that product. And the only products I'm interested in game-wise are one's made with artistic integrity. It's no skin off my back if they don't get my money because they aren't making something I want to buy.