• schmidtster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    It is kinda funny how people have no issue paying for it all together as bundle, but separate it so people can pay for things individually is silly and everyone is suddenly offended?

    I would rather have a story for $10 and $1 outfits I can ignore, than to spend $30 on a story and bunch of cosmetics that don’t add to the game.

    This is just marketing, nothing more. They make more money forcing you to buy everything than letting you pick what you want.

    • Ogmios
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Eh… It’s more than just paying, but that a lot of the stuff which is now a standard microtransaction used to be integrated into the total experience, so you’d unlock outfits and such for finding secrets or completing challenges. That sort of content was integral to the over all experience, not just an extra to tack on as an afterthought.

      • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I assess the contents of the game as-is with its current price, determine if I want it, and pull the trigger or don’t. What it could have or might have or might have separated is immaterial to me to be frank. If you gut a bunch of stuff and make it DLC to the point where the game is no longer worth the price, I’m probably passing on your game. Ultimately I just don’t want to participate in FOMO or guessing nonsense and companies that do it don’t get my money.

        If you’re a good company and your mtx or DLC make sense then I’m all in. Suzerain is a great recent example.

      • schmidtster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        That’s also just an affect on the market of people wanting more choice and not wanting to be forced to pay for stuff they don’t want.

        Of course it can be swung in a negative light too, because it affects developers bottom lines, and they always want the most money possible. CDPR is no different.

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          The outcome of splitting the content is that there are a lot of people who want to have everything and they will end up paying far more for a la carte than for an expansion. The people who wouldn’t have bought the expansion still buy nothing, and pretty much nobody just buys a couple of things to save money.

          Microtransactions is a system designed to prey on completionist whales. Barely anyone only buys a couple of things and doesn’t end up spending more than $30 over time as the content is drip fed and the new hotness comes along to replace the old hotness. Those that don’t spend anything, or just buy one thing before catching on, weren’t going to spend the $30 anyway.

          It is false choice that negatively impacts the game experience.

          • schmidtster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            8 months ago

            The outcome of splitting the content is that there are a lot of people who want to have everything and they will end up paying far more for a la carte than for an expansion

            So if they want the content, they can support the devs so they make more.

            The people who wouldn’t have bought the expansion still buy nothing, and pretty much nobody just buys a couple of things to save money.

            So no lose there, but they could buy an outfit if they liked it and want to support the dev.

            …… that’s actually the majority of gamers…… 2% of the player base accounts for most of the purchases, that means the other 98% is still buying stuff, just not everything. So that’s not even remotely close to reality, most people pick and choose the content, which is literally why this because a thing, because the market wanted it….

            • snooggums@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Unless the entire game is developed by an independent studio and is entirely funded on microtransactions, buying micro transactions is just there for more company profit on top of the regular game sales by stripping content out of a full release. It isn’t supporting the development.

              The market didn’t want it.

            • metaStatic@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              just like the market wants nothing but superhero movies? This doesn’t work anything like a free market. people would buy full games if they where available, devs just figured out they could drip feed the content and make significantly more money at the expense of a good product so you don’t get to choose the good product because it doesn’t exist. That’s not the market choosing crap it’s the market makers only providing crap.

              • schmidtster@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                They still buy full games though, using old as seats to make new content for an “old” game is a great way to have more income come in. Most would probably prefer to make a new game, but that takes longer as well.

                So if it’s a dlc a year at $15 for 4 years, or a game every 4 years for $60… what’s the difference in the end? Other than what you think is going on inside your head? It’s the same content, same price, same everything, you just get content yearly instead of every 4 years. Bonus for everyone since they can than use that money after the first year to maybe make the other better.

            • Ogmios
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              because the market wanted it

              I can’t possibly roll my eyes any harder at this statement, with gaming companies practically competing to go under as fast as possible over the past decade.

              • schmidtster@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                What…? Most people want more content more often with more options, not everyone wants a release every 4 years that’s the same content and story rehashed.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      People did have issues paying for it all together, back when they were called “expansion packs.”

      I don’t mind paying for more of the game. I do mind paying for fixes to a broken game. I don’t mind optional cosmetic upgrades, but I don’t like pay-to-win, even in single player (looking at you, Nintendo amiibos).

      But regardless, people are going to complain, and many of their complaints will be valid.

      • schmidtster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        People had different issues with those, that was because online was a portion of it, and people thought devs were holding content back just to make more money. Obviously some did that, but they started painting every dev with that brush and they needed to adjust to save their bottom line from being affected.

        Every change has been a reactionary effort to adjust for the market changes and people suddenly not wanting what they just wanted a few years ago, and using it to their marketing advantage. Of course not everyone is going to be happy, it’s just funny that certain devs get defended for doing what everyone else does since their marketing gets eating up.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      You know, the way you phrase it I’d be fine. Only in your example, instead of 60 for it all, it is now 60 for 80% of the story, another 2x15 for the remainder, and 10 per Outfit.

    • Bone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think some people like to know when it ends. Microtransactions can make it seem endless. Once you’ve done that a few times it makes you want to know about as much as you can upfront.

    • Don_alForno@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      The thing is, you actually get 30$ story and 5$ per outfit instead of a 30$ Expansion.

      And cosmetics do add to the game for a big part of the market.