Already own it for some reason, still unplayed. Guess that is all the more reason to avoid it.
Comment has been collapsed.
IIRC Planetary Annihilation had $100 edition on Steam during Early Access for people who want to take part in Alpha and Beta ( the price was this so people who kickstarted the game wont feel cheated)
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually I dont think it was an option but they lowered the price after each phase ( Alpha -> Beta-> Release) .
Also fanbois will defend a game if the game itself cant speak for itself. Tbh if the game was now released and the €60 price tag included the expansion would have been okay but atm its just laughable .
Comment has been collapsed.
Once again, that $100 EA price was parity with the Kickstarter tier that offered alpha access and they were clear the price at release would be much lower. Honestly, I think they did EA exactly right: charge a higher fee for those who want to be early supporters and testers while simultaneously weeding out the "this EA game has bugs and doesn't work right boo hoo" crowd.
If that makes me a fanboy, despite never having played the game, then so be it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Some early access games, like DayZ and Ark, are like the "source of the stench" of all the early access games. They have their fanboys to defend them, but their devs hardly even care. Ark wasn't even complete but they suddenly decided to make an expansion pack. xD DayZ is still being developed after so many years. xD I mean, why the heck are these games still in the store? The 70 euros price is an insult.
Comment has been collapsed.
To be fair, "still being developed after so many years" by itself is not a good argument. Good games take years to make.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is. It came out with the promise to finish early access year(s) earlier. When your updates offer almost nothing new, but still try to convince people you're working on the game, it's like you're leeching money on a fake promise. Have DayZ and Ark done anything against the cheaters in a long time? No. Are they still full of bugs? Yes. When they tell you to buy it as an early access game in order to support its development and report any bugs you encounter, you assume that the bugs will eventually get fixed, the cheaters banned, and the game eventually released.
Comment has been collapsed.
"still being developed after so many years" by itself is not a good argument
Comment has been collapsed.
Approximately how long will this game be in Early Access?
“Approximately 1 year, with a full release planned for June 2016 coinciding with the console versions.”
nuff said.
Comment has been collapsed.
DLC still isn't included. Base purchase includes a PVP mode.
DLC is only in the Survivor's Pack or purchased separately.
Comment has been collapsed.
Its earliest pre-beta builds cost 60 dollars flat, actually, and it had like two sales before people started to catch on to the scam.
Now that game is actually officially abandoned and the entire production continued in TITANS. TITANS was supposed to be the expansion pack, but now it is a separate product costing even more money, and anyone who bought the core PA back then now has a barely-functioning game—which, ironically, still has a much bigger player base.
Comment has been collapsed.
Especially that thousands supplied the dev with the full 60-100 dollar purchase price hoping they will get Total Annihilation done even better, and now that project is officially abandoned and the money channelled to another one which they have to buy again to continue believing in that promise.
Comment has been collapsed.
Planetary Annihilation was so expensive on purpose - to discourage random people from buying it, making sure that only people who are really committed will buy it.
As development progressed, price was being taken down bit by bit.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because it wasn't a business decision. At that time, the game was already funded. They were looking for feedback from people who would commit to helping the development, not additional funds.
Comment has been collapsed.
PA had the price set so high to discourage uncommited people from buying it. As development went along, the price went down.
Comment has been collapsed.
I already have it, never played it. But wtf? 70 euros for a game? That's the first time seeing a base game having a price of 70 euros. xD Let me give it a negative review real quick. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Why though? Do the devs not want any new players to buy their game? Seems like a terrible business strategy, the game's still in early access after all.
Comment has been collapsed.
they're already just so rich. they don't care. same thing with dayz
Comment has been collapsed.
it's fine as long as they don't keep increasing the requirements to play it, i might be able to run it in 2030.
Comment has been collapsed.
Good thing I got it for free from their freeweekend promo some years ago (you needed to find supply drops, and there was a chance that it contained a code)
edit: btw still no DX12 support that was supposed to come out on 2015. august?
Comment has been collapsed.
Same here. Looking at their strategy (DLC while EA, now this) I'm glad I haven't paid anything for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It was anounced some time ago that it would increase price leaving early-access in one month.
For example Dirt Rally increased price a lot too leaving early access.
But double is impressive yes ! XD
Comment has been collapsed.
Kona doubled it's price too after leaving EA. Ok it went from 10 to 20 dollars but still.
Comment has been collapsed.
Poorly optimized, sure, but it's one of the better crafting / survival games out there.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's kind of sad that the best option out there is a game that tries to milk everyone as much as possible. The DLC in Early Access, price inflation, slow progress.
That genre needs a new hero.
Comment has been collapsed.
70€ is way too expensive. It's not a bad game, but this isn't worth it.
It's still 27,99 on Humble Store (atm also 10% off) but who knows how long that lasts..
Comment has been collapsed.
If I wouldn't think this game is one of the biggest pile of ass that ever went on Steam (along with DayZ) and would have an almost genetic aversion to its entire genre, I may be a tad miffed as a European for this wonderful pricing.
In an unrelated addition, the wages here are a little lower than in Russia. Our prices are the one set as "Base" on the picture. Just so you know. And as a fun fact, the average wage in India is around 1/4 of that in Russia. Gotta love how "balanced" this system is.
Edit: second picture. Bwhahahaha! Now I wonder how long before its fanboys start to show up to downvote these and literally parrot the exact same excuse at everyone: "It is still Early Access (for two years now), it runs a ton better (if you have a GTX 1080) and they promise to fix the bugs (which they have been doing for two years)."
Comment has been collapsed.
We got used to $1=€1 and now a smart ass is trying to get us use to $1=€1.17 ... and here I thought that $1=€0.88 .... its a wonderful world.
Comment has been collapsed.
Difference is euro prices include taxes, so you need more than 1€ per $1 to cover those.
So if dev wants to be scummy 1.12€ per $1 is minimum to always cover taxes fully. Of course it means most of EU pay extra.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're forgetting that the exchange rate already more than covers taxes.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nope that might have been true 10 years ago.
Minimum VAT within EU is 17% and only Luxembourg has it and most of EU is 21% or above.
$1 + 17% = $1.17 = 1.03€
Comment has been collapsed.
What are you talking about? For years and years the exchange rate was more than twice the VAT, that's why Valve got so much hate when they tried the VAT excuse for their €1=$1 bullshit. And Valve has their European subsidiary registered in Lux specifically to pay the minimum VAT. So with the exchange rate being what it is now, your statement above, "Difference is euro prices include taxes, so you need more than 1€ per $1 to cover those.", makes no sense at all. They need to keep it at €1=$1 to cover taxes, anything beyond that is just gouging Europeans because they think they can get away with it.
Comment has been collapsed.
VAT is paid according to buyers country, not sellers (Since 2015), so even if Valve still had Luxemburg subsidiary, it wouldn't matter.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wtf? I tought steam could diferentiate countries so they treat all euro countries the same? (facepalm)
Not to mention i can't gift to you (brazil, brl). Way to go steam.
India's case may be because of offer and buyers profiles. I don't know, just making a wild guess, but the number of users/buyers may be lower then russias and perhaps income of buyers also higher. Im not familiar with India but from some news here, an article there and such i came unde the impression they're under a higher inequity regarding pc spread and internet access, much like here (brazil) years ago. A number of things could influence that - here both culture and ridiculous (like, really) taxes over eletronics were killers so those who owned pcs back then had better income.
I recall stumbling into one or 2 indian flags on steam. Russia i see all the time
Comment has been collapsed.
India's case is that they really can spend that much on game. Their prices are the reasonable one. Maybe a little higher than reasonable.
Comment has been collapsed.
But will the physical edition also have an "early access" warning banner ?
Edit: also seems like the store package now includes the Survival of the Fittest stand-alone spin-off thing for some reason. If that's wyat they did to keep parity with the physical edition, that's also silly. They should've st up a new package/bundle for that instead.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm glad I have bought it during the Summersale. I've waited a long time, bevause I didn't know if these kind of games are games I like to play. But I gave it a try.
70€ now without DLC is a lot of money. Sure, it was announced that the price increases, but that much? And even when they say it's out of EA, it isn't finished yet.
Comment has been collapsed.
70€ for early access survival game, holy shit I'm dying xD
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, even better. I thought Scorched Earth was already included but it's this other thing
Comment has been collapsed.
Would be fair if the DLC would be included, but no, you have to pay nearly 90€ to get the complete game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bethesda is winking towards paid mods again
Bethesda randomly RU tags half of Europe's New Vegas
Take-two bans modding on GTA 5
Steam API fucks up
EA dino game with EA DLC raises price while making it artifically expensive in Europe
slightly off: Alex Mauer issues fake DMCA takedowns by a hundred on youtube and when people complain to her, she tries to rally them up against a studio that - according to her - didn't pay her. And this goes on for like a good week :D
Can't say we have a boring time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bethesda is winking towards paid mods again
Not really the case, it's mostly people who didn't bother to read the material, misrepresenting what is being planned.
Put simply, it's a lot closer to 3rd party DLC, with deadlines, paid development thresholds, internal QA, and other things that mean they aren't "paid mods again". They've basically removed most of the issues from the paid mods initiative they attempted on Steam years ago and it's a way to outsource micro-DLC. In any case, mod makers getting paid for their work is not inherently wrong.
If you don't like the microtransaction aspect, that's a different thing.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Also, the Mauer thing is still ongoing. They've been served, had their Youtube account suspended and Steam has issued a warning that they'd be banned if they continued misusing the copyright system (or something like that).
Comment has been collapsed.
Say that to the "Dwarven mudcrab skin". Just because your trash has a ribbon on it, doesn't make it a good gift.
Comment has been collapsed.
You should try reading. I haven't said anything about the quality of content that the program will produce, especially since we don't know anything about it.
That said, just because the examples from the trailer were bad or probably jokes(like the horse armor one), it doesn't mean everything will be, not to mention there was no information on price, cost or upcoming content. So, if something like that skin is sold for 10 cents someone might still want it.
But sure, disqualify the whole thing because you didn't like an example which might not even be real.
You should put away your pitchfork and wait and see what comes of it.
Once the facts are out, if the content in it is expensive and valueless, I'll agree with your all-too-early conclusion but not while it's unfounded.
Comment has been collapsed.
You yourself are trying to add validity to the whole concept by saying that it's totally fine because Bethesda pays and supports the creators.
"Might not be real" - It's their official trailer... it's literally their own storefront... if it wasn't real, why'd they peddle basic skins instead of showing off something amazing and later claiming that it isn't?
But yeah, let's call it what it is. DLC. It's just 3rd party DLC.... So what? Is the name so important to you that you'll forget the thing you used to dislike (unless you actually wanted those paid mods) and just support it based on them saying that it's "official"?
I doubt that it'd be only 10 cents as well. It's Bethesda we're talking about. The company that'd ruin their own franchise lore just for a little mission. The company that purposefully leaves their games unfinished because the mods will fix it. The company that makes shallow games that have the main goal of keeping the player playing it forever at the cost of having a lesser experience.
I shouldn't put away my pitchfork. I find it interesting that you won't pick one up. I personally find it to be a good thing to criticize something that has the potential of screwing over so many people with the biggest positive being that 2-3 huge mods might be made every 5 years or so (with them getting paid for it slightly more depending on whether Bethesda screws them over or they just screw them over a bit less). You're not responsible for the past, but you are responsible for the future.
In the end, who the hell cares because they're obviously not making quality items. Skins and new weapons shouldn't be charged for anyways. 10 cents, 5 cents, 20 cents. Shouldn't really matter. History has repeated itself and the mistakes of the past will most likely be made once again.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, the fact that they are not mods gets in the way of calling it paid mods.
And. the fact that they've addressed most of the problems with "paid mods" with this solution matters. Take a minute to stop ranting ignorantly and read the details of the system.
There's the fact that existing mods can't be used or ported to it and the fact that there Bethesda would become responsible for the content and its compatibility, and pay independent developers to make that 3rd party DLC. All this is doing is opening up an internally funded platform for third party DLC working with individual creators rather than companies.
Calling it paid mods without even reading what is proposed is foolish, and being outright opposed to mod authors getting paid, is just selfish.
I doubt that it'd be only 10 cents as well.
Stop acting like you know.
criticize something that has the potential of screwing over
Yeah, criticize the straw man you create in your head. An idea which doesn't and might never exist as if it was real. Yeah, that's reasonable. Not, waiting for the details to be out before joining the mindless outrage machine.
biggest positive being that 2-3 huge mods might be made every 5 years or so
Again, you don't know. Mod donations don't pay authors, because people don't donate. People being able to live through the content they develop could allow for more, and better content, and the generation of a continuous stream of it.
with them getting paid for it slightly more depending on whether Bethesda screws them over or they just screw them over a bit less
No detail on that yet. But if they are being hired as contractors, they might not get a cut from the final sales, just from their salary during development.
Skins and new weapons shouldn't be charged for anyways
Yeah, there is the crux of your outrage. You see it as no more free stuff for you.
Would I like optional stuff like that to be free, yes.
Do I feel entitled to getting everything for free once I bought a game, no.
Comment has been collapsed.
"There's the fact that existing mods can't be used or ported to it" - They say so, yet their trailer shows a survival mod. Overall just a survival mod. Those have already been done. Here. If it doesn't have any of these features, then it's going to be a pointless, lackluster DLC. If it does, then they go against what they themselves believe.
"Stop acting like you know." - Well, stop acting like you know. You're literally doing the same thing. Also, we're going the route of "you can't predict anything with a lot of certainty because technically it might not be like it"? We all predicted a Fallout 4 VR. We all predicted that it'd lack an in-depth story too. We also predicted that Bethesda would make damn sure that people would never stop playing Skyrim and they added infinite leveling, more endless quests, and various versions. Oh, we also predicted that the Remastered Edition wouldn't really change anything. So, yeah, sometimes things can change, but Bethesda burned the chance of having the benefit of the doubt in 2014.
"Yeah, criticize the straw man you create in your head." - Predicting what might happen isn't strawmanning. It's called being rational. But yeah, let's pretend like there wouldn't be any reasonable chance that this could turn out to be: A) A failure or B) A detriment to the average consumer.
"Again, you don't know." - Of course I don't know. I only have the hindsight of 6 years of Skyrim modding. Only that. That's pretty much nothing here. You keep accusing me of strawmanning and generally saying that I'm too critical while at the same time you have your blinders on and think that criticism is the devil. It'd be great if this became an amazing product and we'd get quality DLCs. Yes, it'd be great. It's just that their own trailer shows that they're making either stuff that's been done or stuff that's so minor that it should never be with a pricetag. Those big mods will be made for a very long time. Years, in fact. Bethesda themselves describe their payments as payments that you'll get after publishing a project. But, since when have mods become these things that people have to get money for? I mean, people want money for anything these days, but it's never been about that. It's been about your love for the game and the project. I can understand making a Patreon to fund your stuff. Or even a Kickstarter. But forcing people to pay for mods? Nah.
"No detail on that yet. But if they are being hired as contractors" - Yeah, but again, there's hindsight. Steam got 30%, Bethesda got 45% and modders a measly 25%. If that's not scraps then what is. And if you do say that "Well, now there's no Steam involved", then look at the percentage again and say that Bethesda realized that modders aren't getting anything and did something about it. (Also, if you say that this is a strawman, then for god's sake :D)
Also "contractors" means literally nothing. It's like saying "They're hiring people as workers". Literally describes nothing other than that there's a contract and there's an exchange of services for goods or currency.
"Yeah, there is the crux of your outrage. You see it as no more free stuff for you." - I'll take your favourite argument. Well, two of them. You can't know that and stop strawmanning. In fact, I don't care whether I get a free weapon. If they'd start charging for it, I couldn't care less. The issue that I have is the principle of it all. They're charging for pointless faff. People complained about horse armor, Evolve's skins and other such stuff, but when dear old Bethesda does it, no one cares. But also... you should feel entitled for a game that literally advertises their huge modding scene in their storefront's description.
"with Mods, there are no limits to what you can experience. " Source
Also, let's not call it paid mods, even though the only difference is that it's endorsed by Bethesda now. Let's just call them "sub-par DLCs that used to be free".
Comment has been collapsed.
Mods can break after an update. Paid or otherwise. This time Bethesda will ensure they don't. That quality control is a very important distinction.
Also Bethesda will approve a project after an idea is pitched and start paying the development before its even finished and well before sale. This is in line with how third party devs are treated.
Without seeing any examples it's too early to call it paid mods. Just wait and see before grabbing that pitchfork.
Comment has been collapsed.
Now, this actually makes more sense. Mods can break for sure.
The main thing that they have to do is make sure that you could run literally every mod that they publish together. If not, then the updating is completely pointless. For one, Bethesda stops updating its games pretty quickly. Also, most important mods do get updated because the creators actually have passion and aren't just working for a paycheck.
In the end, does it matter whether they're called mods or DLC? As I said, I can call them DLCs. It's just that this whole thing makes the word DLC even more of a pathetic excuse to make your product seem better than it is. It's like clothes. The same factories make similar clothes with the same quality. It's just that one has a name on it that makes it more expensive. This seems to be the case. They offer reassurances that needed to be offered anyways. If they ask for money, then they obviously need to make their product work. Stuff like that shouldn't be applauded. It's a given.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Dwarven mudcrab skin" was a joke. That trailer was full of jokes. There even is a horse armour set featured in that trailer. "Dwarven mudcrab skin" is a reference to a fake DLC advertisement poster made by someone after Horse Armour dlc happened.
Comment has been collapsed.
Uhuh... Yet they made a house building DLC which had been made as well on a mod. Also, the horse armor was just the name of the mod. That's the joke. Yet at the same time, it was in Fallout 4 (as opposed to with
Look, it could be a joke, but then again they had "Survival Mod" (not much of a joke that) and also just furniture reskins.
Same goes with the mods on Skyrim.
You say that the Dwarven Mudcrab thing is a joke while at the same time a single bow cost twice as much as the "joke". They're obviously going to pump out random garbage that:
A) Doesn't take much effort
B) Shouldn't be charged for
I'm all for rewarding the actually good and big mods. That's fine. But it's stuff like the bow that annoys the hell out of me. That's not something that needs money. That's not something that needs QA (like Bethesda actually would do that).
Comment has been collapsed.
Is it a mod? Yes it is. Do you have to pay for it? Yes you do.
Bethesda are trying to push paid mods again, no matter what their pr team says.
Comment has been collapsed.
By that "logic" - in quotations because you obviously haven't read what the program actually is - then the devs should just give away DLC, because all DLC is nothing but mods the developers made themselves.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah they should. DLC is fucking evil. I'm amazed we have to discuss this now. Fucking hypernormalization I swear.
Anyhows, my logic is sound. People make mods, bethesda sells those mods. Ergo they are creating a paid mod program.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, it isn't. How do you define a mod?
The creator of Nexus has made his opinion on it clear and you are not more of an expert on mods that he is.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you need a quick review on fallacies?
Anyhows, what's the Nexux mod guy gonna say if he's gonna get another source of income. "No guys, don't give me money, please, Bethesda is evil"
I swear to god people you should stop having PR messages for breakfast.
A game mod is an alteration of a game, by generally an user or player. Changes can be simply small cosmetic things, tweaks, bug fixes or even full new complete games.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, I don't.
The appeal to authority is not a fallacy when the expert explains and justifies it.
I'm not saying it's true just because he said it, I'm saying that being the expert on the subject he has the authority to define what a mod is or isn't especially since he has justified why that distinction exists.
Using a dictionary is the same thing, it's using an expert to define the common terms being discussed. If there is no understanding there, there can be no discussion.
Regarding fallacies, and I'm not addressing that ad hominem against Scott, but I'll address the appeal to emotion below.
I've read the details of the creator club, and it's not "paid mods", I have no judgment on if it's a good or bad implementation yet. I'm waiting to see how it ends up. But sure, I drank the cool-aid, because I didn't get triggered and read up on it.
If you don't want to make a distinction between mods and DLC, expansions, etc all it does is derail the discussion. Make mod a uselessly broad term to the point it's meaningless.
You should watch the video by Total Biscuit on it, and read Robin Scott's explanation.
Comment has been collapsed.
I made a disctintion. Mods are external modifications to a game done by its userbase. How's that a useless definition?
It is paid mods. They sell mods on a store, you buy them with funbucks., you can use said mods. It's paid mods, crystal clear.
I don't need to watch a 10 hour TB video where he just spouts the same nosense 1000 times. I saw Bethesda's presentation, I read their press release and I've made my own opinion. I don't need to adopt anyones.
Creation Club is paid mods, and a blind person who sees is better than a seeing person who is blind.
Stay blind.
Also it's not a fallacy fallacy. I'm not saying your point's stupid cos Nexux dude said it. I'm just saying that Nexus dude's opinion's irrelevant.
Comment has been collapsed.
If someone is being hired by a company to make something for them, they are not making external modifications for the game as part of the userbase. They are a third party contractor making dlc.
You can rant and rave about the evils of DLC and how everything should be free to you because you paid for something once. You can go on and on about how you don't care if the people developing the games you play get paid, and blindly go on hating something that makes it more likely that there will be high quality content and fewer abandoned projects. Or, optionally, you could stop being entitled and demanding that everything be given to you for free.
I don't expect you to stop demanding everything for free, but you should know that that's not how the games industry or the world at large works.
Comment has been collapsed.
I never asked for everything for free. And just because I want fair bussiness practices I'm not an entitled brat demanding stuff. So if we could please stop with that.
Once we've left your temper tantrum aside. Let's see, Bethesda is already a fucking scummy company that releases at best half-finished games and banks on their community to fix them for free.
Now they are not going to have these people fix their games for peanuts, but they'll turn a profit by doing so. And people still defend them. My fucking face when.
Comment has been collapsed.
"jonlevir
By that "logic" - in quotations because you obviously haven't read what the program actually is - then the devs should just give away DLC, because all DLC is nothing but mods the developers made themselves."
"MrCastiglia
Yeah they should. DLC is fucking evil."
Your definition of "fair business practices" seems to be that developers should just give away anything that isn't part of the base game, and mod authors should depend on the goodwill of the fanbase for any support rather than be paid for their work. That doesn't sound like fair or sound business practices. That sounds like someone whining about how they won't get everything associated with the game for free.
But you obviously aren't interested in facts or logic, since you labeled my calling out your bullshit a "temper tantrum", lol. I'm done with this discussion.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank god you're done then. I was starting to get tired of having to defend my "arguments" (read the shit you wanted to read and put on my mouth)
Anyhows, keep calling me a whiner and a spoilt brat, and tell me it's not a temper tantrum. You can also piss on me leg afterwards and tell me it's raining if you want, mate.
Comment has been collapsed.
Mods are external modifications to a game done by its userbase
So when Bethesda handles the development, outsourcing the work to individuals, vetting them, approving the project and paying for it, that is still a mod to you.
So, all DLC are mods if the people developing them play the games.
Yeah sure...
You like to use the word fallacy to make you think you have a point but all you state are ad hominems with no substance behind them.
I'm just saying that Nexus dude's opinion's irrelevant.
Yeah, and a mammologist's definition of what is a cat is irrelevant to a discussion looking to distinguish a cat from a tiger.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Comment has been collapsed.
I mean, my reasoning is mostly empty because there's not much to discuss.
Bethesda is going to sell mods. by hjiring from their playerbase creators to make them. II say they are paid mods, you say they aren't.
I mean from my humble point of view and with my limited intelligence I think it's pretty clear if these paid mods are indeed paid mods. (Hint, they are)
And his opinion's irrelevant, Every single person's opinion is fucking irrelevant. You got facts on one side, and people trying to spin them on the other. I'd stay with the facts, those being Bethesda plans to sell mods.
Comment has been collapsed.
by hjiring from their playerbase creators to make them..
All you keep saying is DLC=mods.
Again, there is a distinction between DLC and mods, that distinction has to be made for the words to match their common use meaning.
If you want to pretend there isn't one, just to scream "paid mods" as if that is inherently a bad thing that is simply idiotic.
You are not entitled to other people's work just because they play the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
If mean, if you wan't to pretend they are not paid mods you can keep not only getting fucked, but also paying for the room.
If you're fine lying in Bethesda's bed and defending them over the internet as if you worked for them, I mean. in my opinion's pretty sad to identify that strongly with an entity that only wants your money. But to each their own.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've read your comments here, and it seems like you're saying that people who create content for games after their release shouldn't be allowed to be paid for their work. Am I correct?
Very often--and this applies to many companies/games, not just Bethesda--DLC is made while the people who actually make the games (artists, programmers, etc) are "in between" games. The game they were working on is finished, and the next project they're slated to work on isn't in a state where the workers can do active development on it (pre-planning). So they create DLC for the already-finished game so that they can have something to do that gives players more content. It's less work than creating a new game, because the framework is already there, but that doesn't mean that the DLC just gets conjured up out of nowhere. The workers get paid for the work they do on the DLC. If the DLC is paid, then the company gets money that they can put towards the next game(s).
That's the difference between DLC and mods. Certainly some companies abuse the concept of DLC, but from my perspective, saying that all post-release content for a game must be free is saying that the people who work on that content shouldn't be paid for that work. If a modder wants to create mods out of their love for the game in their spare time, and distribute those mods for free, that's great. It really is. I firmly believe that modders are an essential part of gaming communities.
I also firmly believe that people who are hired to do work should be paid a reasonable amount for that work, and that people should be allowed to charge payment for stuff they worked on. "Exposure" is not payment. And I don't know about you, but I don't know of any grocery stores or pharmacies out there that accept exposure as currency...
Comment has been collapsed.
Are these developers on fucking crack or something? Holy shit. To think I actually liked Studio Wildcard.
Comment has been collapsed.
You pull down the price to 9 eur quite often. You have your sale charts in front of you... "Ooooo, I know! Lets make it 70eur!!! THAT SURELY IS GONNA SELL IT BETTER!!!" 😎
Good luck with selling an unoptimized piece of garbage for that genius price. Make the community hate you even more after what you did with the expansion! 😎 Doooooo it, doooooooo iiiiiiiiit, you can dooooooooooo iiiiiiiiiit! 😁
Comment has been collapsed.
This isn't the first time an EA has gone up in price. The Long Dark used to be $20 and it's now $35.
Comment has been collapsed.
If they have released their story mode, then I don't see the issue.
It started off cheap and went off to a price that's still cheaper than the "cheap AAA games".
ARK started at the "cheap AAA game" price (40€) and climbed up to an insane 70€.
Even complete games that are way better than this (The Witcher 3 comes to mind) aren't as expensive as this travesty.
Comment has been collapsed.
They haven't -- story mode gets released in a few weeks. They increased the price in anticipation of the story mode release.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, as long as that happens in the near future, then their price increase is completely justified in my eyes.
Comment has been collapsed.
Live footage of the developers. (Fans are held off-camera to keep their anonymity.)
Comment has been collapsed.
The part I love most is on the standard version with no DLC, it states...
"Includes ARK: Survival Evolved and ARK: Survival Of The Fittest"
And here I thought Survival of the Fittest was free...
Comment has been collapsed.
So people seriously can't get it free now? I can't tell because I already have it in my library.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's correct, but yeah if you installed it, you got to keep it.
Comment has been collapsed.
How's it free? You can only buy it with the original ARK.
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess they like getting negative reviews! I already have the game and it's definitely not worth that much.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's $60 now. Or
70€edit: after backlash, Euro - and some other probably too - price went down to more standard 60€. Yup, Check your price on Steamdb or straight on SteamOfficial tweet about retail parity
Oh, and you still have to separately buy the infamous Early-Access DLC/expansion.
So, if for some reason you couldn't get it during Summer Sale... I guess you should look at some reseller-sites like G2A until they don't catch the price-hike...
Comment has been collapsed.