Topic: Batman Arkham Origins DLC No Longer Coming to Wii U

[Killer_Man_Jaro]

Lack of demand for extra content means that the story ends here for Wii U owners.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/36448

The Wii U version of last year's action-adventure title Batman Arkham Origins will not receive the previously announced downloadable content.

Users who purchased the game's Season Pass, which had been sold for $19.99 in North America and £15.99 in the UK, will receive a full refund to their Wii U eShop account.

According to separate statements released by both Nintendo and Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment, the five pieces of DLC, which include two short add-on campaigns, were cancelled on Wii U due to a lack of demand for additional content on the system.

[Griffinclaw]

Well, I guess I no longer feel conflicted that I chose Black Flag over this one. I'll just buy this on PC like I originally planned.

[pokepal148]

No DLC, No Online Play, Final Destination

[KITT 10K]

First Injustice Gods Among Us does NOT get all the DLC the Xbox and PS got and no complete edition of the game, now THIS crap! Obviously Nintendo IS TRYING to put themselves out of business! THIS is one several reasons why the Wii U is doing so damn bad, because they are not doing what they need to. WAKE THE HELL UP NINTENDO!!!!!!! STOP DRAGGING YOUR FEET!!!!!!!!!

[KITT 10K]

AND because of this I will NOT be buying this game for the Wii U either! Also Griffenclaw I too choose Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag over Batman Arkham Origins.

[broodwars]

Well, at least the season pass folks got their money back, which was "the right thing" to do and more than I would have expected either Nintendo or WB to do. *shrugs*  Still, this is kind of what you get for buying what was already a known gimped version of the game right at the outset just because it was $10 less and on a platform with no 3rd party support.

[Pixelated Pixies]

I can't recall this ever happening before. Has there ever been a multiplatform game which sells a season pass but then does not deliver the DLC for a specific platform? It just seems odd to me that this DLC will be made available on other platforms but not Wii U. I appreciate that adding DLC to a game is not an entirely trivial effort, but I assumed that games were now built with future content in mind; In other words, that they're designed to be a platform for additional purchases. So, it's surprising to me that the ability to receive more content isn't baked into the porting process.

[tylerohlew]

Well, at least the season pass folks got their money back, which was "the right thing" to do and more than I would have expected either Nintendo or WB to do. *shrugs*  Still, this is kind of what you get for buying what was already a known gimped version of the game right at the outset just because it was $10 less and on a platform with no 3rd party support.

"What you get?" Pretty harsh words.


While this version was missing the multiplayer, it wasn't something I would play. On top of that, it was $10 cheaper, so the choice was clear for me. I wanted on the system that offered Off TV play.


Plus, this story illustrates the situation differently. The DLC is available on the Wii U, but this final piece of single player story DLC won't be making it. The skins and maps are all available.


As an owner of the Season Pass, I'm bummed that I won't get the most valuable piece of content, but I'm happy that Nintendo is refunding my money.

[the asylum]

Let's see a show of hands, who saw this coming? Everyone? Wow.

[broodwars]

Well, at least the season pass folks got their money back, which was "the right thing" to do and more than I would have expected either Nintendo or WB to do. *shrugs*  Still, this is kind of what you get for buying what was already a known gimped version of the game right at the outset just because it was $10 less and on a platform with no 3rd party support.

"What you get?" Pretty harsh words.

Dude, I'm sorry but WB showed with Injustice that they would pull DLC from the Wii U version of their games if they felt the demand wasn't high enough.  They cut the tacked-on multiplayer mode from the Wii U version of Arkham Origins explicitly because the Wii U's userbase is so small.  The warning signs were all there.

I kind of feel with that information if you bought the Wii U version of Arkham Origins and then paid WB $20 for the promise of future DLC support someday, you kind of deserved to get fleeced. Luckily for you, they refunded your money and you merely paid $50 for a mediocre Arkham game, but it's always been "Buyer Beware" on Season Passes (even on the other consoles) and Wii U devs have shown a reluctance to bring DLC to Wii U versions of their games.  At some point here, the buyer takes on some responsibility for using their money wisely.

[pokepal148]

WB has a sale on Wii U right now at least in the states

[Shaymin]

Wouldn't call it a sale... it's got no end date so it may be a permanent price drop.

[broodwars]

Wouldn't call it a sale... it's got no end date so it may be a permanent price drop.

It's a fire sale. "This platform's a failure, so everything must GO!!!" :p

[tylerohlew]

Well, at least the season pass folks got their money back, which was "the right thing" to do and more than I would have expected either Nintendo or WB to do. *shrugs*  Still, this is kind of what you get for buying what was already a known gimped version of the game right at the outset just because it was $10 less and on a platform with no 3rd party support.

"What you get?" Pretty harsh words.

Dude, I'm sorry but WB showed with Injustice that they would pull DLC from the Wii U version of their games if they felt the demand wasn't high enough.  They cut the tacked-on multiplayer mode from the Wii U version of Arkham Origins explicitly because the Wii U's userbase is so small.  The warning signs were all there.

I kind of feel with that information if you bought the Wii U version of Arkham Origins and then paid WB $20 for the promise of future DLC support someday, you kind of deserved to get fleeced. Luckily for you, they refunded your money and you merely paid $50 for a mediocre Arkham game, but it's always been "Buyer Beware" on Season Passes (even on the other consoles) and Wii U devs have shown a reluctance to bring DLC to Wii U versions of their games.  At some point here, the buyer takes on some responsibility for using their money wisely.

You're cracking me up. Where is this attitude coming from? What of mine are you reading where I feel fleeced? Or have complained about the situation?


What went down was fair, from my perspective.


I am well aware that Season Passes are a fools game. I just like the ability to buy it all at once rather than piece meal. I took a gamble, but no one deserves to lose money or content. Regardless of prior experiences, going into this game the intention was the DLC would be delivered (no Season Pass was sold for Injustice, which you cite as a previous example of this situation).


We're talking about people here, let's stay off the high horse.

[pokepal148]

It isn't the version the Wii U needs...
It's the version the wii u deserves...

[Oblivion]

Well, at least the season pass folks got their money back, which was "the right thing" to do and more than I would have expected either Nintendo or WB to do. *shrugs*  Still, this is kind of what you get for buying what was already a known gimped version of the game right at the outset just because it was $10 less and on a platform with no 3rd party support.

"What you get?" Pretty harsh words.

Dude, I'm sorry but WB showed with Injustice that they would pull DLC from the Wii U version of their games if they felt the demand wasn't high enough.  They cut the tacked-on multiplayer mode from the Wii U version of Arkham Origins explicitly because the Wii U's userbase is so small.  The warning signs were all there.

I kind of feel with that information if you bought the Wii U version of Arkham Origins and then paid WB $20 for the promise of future DLC support someday, you kind of deserved to get fleeced. Luckily for you, they refunded your money and you merely paid $50 for a mediocre Arkham game, but it's always been "Buyer Beware" on Season Passes (even on the other consoles) and Wii U devs have shown a reluctance to bring DLC to Wii U versions of their games.  At some point here, the buyer takes on some responsibility for using their money wisely.

Oh, really, he deserved to get fleeced? Don't you think that's a little harsh? I think you deserve to hit get by a truck, isn't that the same fucking thing?

[broodwars]

I think you deserve to hit get by a truck, isn't that the same fucking thing?

If, along the way to my gruesome demise, I was walking across a road where accidents have been known to occur (Nintendo's history with 3rd parties); passed by several truck crossing signs (the general support for DLC on the Wii U); multiple other accidents along the way (WB's previous late/pulled Wii U DLC support with Injustice); while simultaneously staring at the ground (the already lacking DLC and online support for Arkham Origins) and wearing headphones blasting loud music (the general hit-or-miss track record of season passes)...

...then yes, it would be the same ****ing thing.

[broodwars]

Addendum (since we can't edit posts here): "...then yes, it would be the same ****ing thing. And I would deserve my fate for being a dumbass. You get very little sympathy from me when you make a choice that goes poorly where there was every evidence that it would go poorly."

[Oblivion]

Did you seriously bleep yourself? This isn't your parents house, it's okay to swear.

[broodwars]

Did you seriously bleep yourself? This isn't your parents house, it's okay to swear.

You only just now noticed that I do that?  Sorry, but as much of an asshole as I can come off being, I at least try to be a little considerate to others here on some matters. 

[broodwars]

And yes, that last post was intentionally ironic.  :