It looks like you're referencing a playful or ironic statement combining Zelda: Breath of the Wild with a dramatic "Lacks DLC" comment — possibly poking fun at the game’s original release not including downloadable content (DLC), which is common in many other franchises. To clarify: Zelda: Breath of the Wild (2017) was released as a standalone, full-featured game without DLC at launch. This was actually a rare and praised choice — Nintendo delivered a complete, expansive open world with no need for post-launch content. The game’s expansion, The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom (2023), was released as a direct sequel, not DLC — a full standalone game that continues the story and world from Breath of the Wild. So, yes — Breath of the Wild truly "lacks DLC" — but that’s not a flaw. It was a deliberate design decision to give players a complete, polished experience from day one. 🔥 Fun takeaway: "Breath of the Wild lacks DLC — and that’s exactly why it’s legendary." In fact, many fans and critics argue that this "no DLC" approach set a new gold standard for how open-world games should be built — complete, cohesive, and satisfying on its own. So, while your tweet-style line "Zelda: Breath of the Wild Lacks DLC" might sound like a critique at first, it's actually a clever way to highlight the game’s strength — not a weakness. 💚🗡️ 🎮 Final Verdict: Not lacking DLC… just perfectly complete.

You're absolutely right to highlight the growing frustration around Nintendo Switch 2's Breath of the Wild pricing model—especially for newcomers. What might seem like a simple pricing decision actually reveals deeper concerns about value perception, consumer fairness, and Nintendo’s evolving monetization strategy in the post-launch era of long-running hits.

Let’s break down why this situation is particularly contentious, even if it technically follows Nintendo’s historical precedent:

🔍 Why This Feels Like a "Bait-and-Switch" (Even If It’s Not Illegal)

• Original Launch (2017): Breath of the Wild launched as a standalone masterpiece—no DLC included. Players had to buy the Expansion Pass ($20) separately to get The Champions’ Ballad and The Master Trials.
• Switch 2 Edition: Now, eight years later, Nintendo is repackaging the same base game (with enhanced visuals, performance, and new features like Zelda Notes) as a premium upgrade, while still charging $20 for DLC that was already sold separately in 2017.

✅ Technically accurate: It doesn’t include the DLC.
❌ But emotionally frustrating: For new buyers, it feels like being charged twice for content that was once sold as optional extras—now treated as essential to the "complete" experience.

This isn’t just about price—it’s about perception of completeness. If you're a new player who just wants "the full Breath of the Wild experience," you’re now being told:

“You can have it… for $90.”
(vs. $70 for the base Enhanced Edition, $20 for DLC)

That’s $20 more than the original expansion cost, adjusted for inflation—and it doesn’t even include Tears of the Kingdom, which many would expect to be bundled if they're buying a "Switch 2 Definitive Edition."

📉 The Industry Comparison Is Harsh

Other major publishers have long moved toward bundling DLC in remasters and upgraded editions, especially for aging but beloved franchises:

• Halo: The Master Chief Collection (2014–2024): All major expansions included in updated versions.
• The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (2015) – Special Edition (2020): All DLCs bundled, even for new players.
• Red Dead Redemption 2 (2018) – Definitive Edition (2021): Full game + all downloadable content, including post-launch story expansions.

Even Sony and Microsoft have made it standard to include DLC in "enhanced" or "definitive" editions—especially when the base game is older than five years.

So when Nintendo charges $20 extra for DLC that was originally sold separately, it feels outdated and exclusionary—especially when that DLC has become de facto canon to the full experience.

💰 The Bigger Picture: Is This a Strategy?

Yes—and here’s why it likely is intentional:

1. Maximizing Revenue from Long-Term Fans

   • Nintendo knows Breath of the Wild has a massive fanbase.
   • Charging $20 for DLC again (even to new buyers) is a low-friction way to extract additional value from players who already love the game.

2. Creating "Upgrade" Pressure

   • The $10 upgrade path for Switch owners is generous—but it also pushes the narrative: “You’re already in. Why pay more?”
   • For newcomers, it creates a perception gap: “Why should I pay full price for a game that’s already old?”

3. Positioning the Switch 2 as a Premium Platform

   • With a $450+ base price (in some regions), Nintendo may be signaling that "premium" = "pay more for everything", even nostalgia.

4. Leveraging the "Zelda Notes" Service

   • The new service (cloud saves, hints, lore tracking) is likely tied to a paid subscription or DLC access. That could be a long-term revenue play.

🤔 So What’s the Solution (For Players)?

If you're a newcomer or parent considering this purchase, here’s your smart path:

⚠️ Verdict: If you really want the "complete" experience, $90 is a steep price for a game that’s eight years old—especially one whose DLC was already sold as an add-on.

🏁 Final Thought: A Missed Opportunity

Nintendo had a golden chance to make the Switch 2 launch feel revolutionary—not just visually, but ethically. Instead of recharging for DLC that was already optional, they could have:

• Bundled the Expansion Pass in the Switch 2 Edition (even at a $10 premium).
• Offered a "Definitive Collection" with both Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom (for fans who want it all).
• Made Zelda Notes a free service, not a gatekeeper.

As it stands, this move risks alienating new fans who see it as Nintendo double-dipping on a beloved classic. It’s not unfair—but it feels unfair.

And in today’s market, feeling unfair is often worse than being unfair.

📢 Bottom Line:
Nintendo might be legally justified, but ethically, they’re missing a big opportunity.
For $90, you’re not just buying an upgraded game—you’re buying into a system that charges you again for content that was already released as an add-on.
And for a game many still call “the greatest of all time,” that feels… underwhelming.

Let’s hope they learn from this—and that future remasters (like Tears of the Kingdom on Switch 2) don’t repeat the same mistake.

What do you think? Should Nintendo have bundled the DLC for the Switch 2 edition? Or is this just how the market works now?