I’m curious: would people prefer a single upfront cost on a game, in-game purchases, or for the game to be free but you need to support the developer through voluntary donations (which carry no reward)?
The reward should not be at the cost of degradation of player experience of other players who do not pay. If you can do that, sure. Like cosmetic dice dlc for instance.
It all depends on the game. I play one game most of the time and others when I am not playing that main game. For my main game I pay a sub and expacs and occasionally for something from the store I like. Mostly I just raid and chill with my friends.
But in other games it’s casual. I’m ok with some transactions if I am enjoying myself. If it hinders my progress or is unnecessary then I’m just bored. Like Genshin. Beautiful game but way to gotcha. Plus the game control is ass. Gamers want a combo or something more interactive to do attacks with. Elden Ring was ok with that. But there are several games that forget it’s an interactive medium.
But I digress. Games like RDR2 I have never paid beyond the base game. But I will throw down for a Fortnite skin every once in awhile because I like it. It’s not a linear “if the game is free I will micro” kind of discussion. It’s if the game hits me right I will do it. Like fuck Battlefront 1 and 2. Never ever with EA again. Their customer support is shitty too.
I prefer a single upfront purchase, though I am not against the idea of expansion packs or meaningful DLC (extra character races, maps, campaigns, etc). For online games, I think cosmetic DLCs are a good way to bank server costs. People who don’t want to buy them aren’t missing out on anything really, and the people who do get some nice swag/street cred to show off.
What I am completely against is pay-to-win crap.
In PvP, skilled players are at a disadvantage against prepubescent kids with daddy’s credit card and that really ruins the experience.
The most ridiculous to me is when you can use real money to buy items/skills/exp for single-player games. I remember being shocked to see that there were several launch-day DLCs for Tales of Zestiria for packs of healing items or early weapons that are normally obtainable in-game, just to help you out in the beginning. There used to be cheat codes for this sort of thing, now the “cheat” is forking over cash.
Not only is it predatory, people are actually paying for something the game already gives them access to, essentially giving the publisher money for being able to play, and then giving them more money for being able to play less.
I’ve made some very small games as a hobby for game jams, but the main reason I’m not charging for them is that I know they wouldn’t be worth any tangible amount of money regardless.
If they contained, say, hours of voice acting, a wholly unique gameplay concept, and visuals that took hundreds of thousands of man-hours, then for its business model I’d suddenly be more doubtful of that “donate if you enjoy” model.
Honestly I really hate playing f2p games. Reason being is there is no leveling up to earn rewards for your time such as skins in old games think old halo games etc. Now all those times must be bought for 10+ $ for f2p or even in some cases full price games. I would rather slap down 60-70 and get everything earnable in game.
I prefer one single up-front purchase. That means there’s nothing for the game developer to gain by implementing predatory game design practices.
In-game purchases (excluding major expansion packs) should be reserved for f2p games only imo. And then the player should know exactly what they’re going to get. So no loot boxes.
I mean, there’s also nothing to gain for the developer by continuing development. Most f2p games only survive so long because of those microtransactions. Think about how long these games are supported, how much new content they get constantly. The “good old games” were one and done. If you got lucky, they might patch some bugs, but often that was left to the community.
It really depends on a game. The issue is greed will always corrupt any such system.
Compare BG3 to Solasta, or to the golden years of expansion packs like StarCraft and Red Alert 2.
On one end(Solasta): You have a “full” game experience, but there’s more that can be had. You don’t have to buy ALL of the expansion packs, unless there’s something you want in each, but each expansion comes with adventures to go on as well as an extra class and/or race or two. Granted, this also has built in tools to make your own adventures as well.
On the other, you have BG3(at least according to this image), where you get the whole kit and kaboodle up front. Pay once, play to your heart’s content. Granted, TMI, this lacks and will continue to lack tools for making your own adventures.
Then you have the golden years. You get one full game up front. Feature complete, full story arc for each race. Then later down the line, an expansion comes along that builds on it, using the engine from before(maybe with improvements), extra units, maybe a new race, and a new story line for each current race. IIRC, these older games included tools for making maps, but not quite full campaigns, but my memory is a bit fuzzy on that.
There’s also a game like Elite Dangerous. IMHO, it breaks a few rules. You have to pay up front, although only $20 for standard + $30 for odyssey, but you own it from then on. No monthly fees, or anything. Maybe the next huge release in 5 years will be another $20-$30. However, it’s an online game, going 24/7/365(minus a weekly reboot). They have to pay for the servers /SOMEHOW/. Only an idiot would buy the game more than once, so (try to) sell you paint jobs for everything, and gear for FPS mode, among a few other trinkets. I do appreciate how it’s 100% cosmetic only. Zero ptw whatsoever. Again, IMHO, this is the least bad way to do this.
Then there’s Eve Online. Free to play, but you’re limited in what you can use. Pay for a sub to get access to use anything(must still have character skill and buy it with in game money) and you can, in a round about way but a supported by the devs way, pay that subscription using in game money. They also have cosmetics. The downside, you can pay real money(or trade in game money with another player for this currency) to get a skill point injection kit* or open up to train on a second(maybe third?) character at the same time on the same account. The skill point injections aren’t 1 hour xp boosts, and they’re not instant lvl 60 potions, the more skill points your character has, the less you get from injecting. You don’t buy the injection, you buy the syringe, suck the sp out, and sell on the market. Those sp came from another player, and you don’t have to pay premium currency for it, can use the in game stuff. Again, it could be better, but it’s better than many others.
For the most part, micro-transactions are a cancer on the gaming world, but due to human greed, I don’t see them going away in my lifetime. Now that most everything is being “published” digitally, we don’t have any actual scarcity of the games themselves. There’s no threat of not being able to get the game on launch, and having to wait months for a reprint missing having it for your birthday lan party. Early access is not a terrible thing, it should just be called what it is, THE ALPHA/BETA program, and should not be full price, unless you are getting some big rewards on/before launch, and those need to be properly disclosed ahead of time. Larian could have done better on this, but they’re at least not StarCitizen.
This is the right way, but also it’s entirely ridiculous that it has to be said.
If I owned a small grocery store chain, and I had a website FAQ, it would be weird if it said, “Will my kids be taken by strangers and trafficked out of the country while I shop?” And even if the answer was, “No. We firmly believe you should remain in possession of your children at all times and no one else, so that you can enjoy your family.” it would still be weird that we were talking about it in the first place - because yes, that’s nice and all, but it shouldn’t even be an issue worth discussing.
It shouldn’t have to be said, true, but if other grocery shops let this happen, and in fact designed the grocery store to make kidnapping easier, I would love to see it called out on your website.
Funny enough (and sad to say), he commented on it in this context actually in a VICE article,
A lot of the sketches in Mr. Show seem to carry added relevance today. The “Worthington’s Law” skit is basically Donald Trump. Is the show’s prescience eerie to you?Yes! I don’t like when reality is a joke—when it plays out like a by-the-numbers satirical comedy scene written by a bunch of goofballs. Reality should be more complex than that—it shouldn’t be so obvious. It should be more textured. But it isn’t! The “Fairsley’s Foods” skit was what happened in the last election. FOX News was Fairsley’s Foods, just throwing up these accusations that you have to respond to, and by responding them you make them legitimate. But you have to respond to them, so you’re just screwed.
The weirdest thing isn’t that Trump follows Worthington’s Law—it’s that so much of America would completely agree and live by the logic of “if you make more money, then you’re smarter.” They believe that’s true. I don’t know if they know that Jesus didn’t make a lot of money in his life, but supposedly they think he’s pretty smart. It doesn’t make any sense."
I didn’t even know about this. This is awesome, but the last thing I’d like to know is does it have predatory online requirements or can you play offline and not be forced to log in to play?
This used to be the way with all games. You had one version. It was one game and everyone got the same thing. All the additional stuff is just a normalized scam.
Better than releasing those early access as if they were full games at ridiculous prices just to then complete it by releasing the missing content as 20$ dlcs
I mean, there’s reasonable arguments for both approaches, but I can see why bigger companies don’t want unfinished versions of games out there for PR reasons.
They’re the ones doing it the most, and they mostly just say “oh sorry, we’ll patch it later” and proceed to make tons of DLCs to add anything other than bug fixing
Let’s hope they keep it this way for future games! I am not sure why this game got so much attention, games like this normally never draw this big of a crowd but I am happy it is. I am sad because I have to wait a month until the ps5 version drops but then again I’m also glad I am not waiting for the Xbox version either! It will definitely be a day one purchase just to support them as much as possible. Hope they sell enough to continue doing what they want.
The last DnD-based AAA game was like 15 years ago? People have been craving for this kind of game for years and had to satisfy themselves with remakes and ports until now.
BG1 and 2 are some of the most beloved CRPG games ever made. On reddit, the Baldur’s Gate sub was still very active and I would guess people were continuing to do full play-throughs at least once a year, myself included (and that’s like 20 years after BG1 came out). I don’t know of many other games with that kind of following, so I’m not surprised at the interest in BG3. Plus, it looks like the devs really took their time and delivered a great game at launch, which doesn’t really seem to happen much these days.
Game is an absolute masterpiece on top of it all. This kind of game needs unequal levels of support. They knocked it out of the park AND they did it all in the right way. I’m encouraging people to buy it and play if they like RPG, tabletop or even just interested in forgotten realms. One of a few games I’ve purchased for full price on Steam.
I love the modern XCOM games, I love card games, I love games where the story follows a new superhero in an established superhero universe, I love XMen.
Yet.
Whilst I obviously was so excited for Marvel’s Midnight Son’s I was planning ahead to ask for cash to buy it full price for a birthday or something rather (to both play right away and support games that heavily target my tastes) rather than just wait for a deep sale a few years later like I normally would, all the buy this version and add on bits ala carte or buy this version that has some things but not all things but who know which is which or buy this super version that has the entire game or buy this hyper-mega version that has all of that and also stuff that’s not actually part of the game or buy a version that has the stuff that isn’t part of the game and most of the game… bullshit, just completely killed any interest I had in it.
I might pick it up and play it one day when it’s literally a few quid but quite possibly not at this point.
Just sell me the thing. Don’t complicate it. If I need to spend ages figuring out exactly which parts of a game I haven’t even played yet I do and don’t care about so I can try to see how close to a normal price I can pay and still get all the actual game, I’d rather just use that time to go play a game that wasn’t designed by MBE’s.
Tbh I don’t get the hate for this model. I’d much rather be able to play these games for free and get to try them. Skin funded games mean I’ve played a lot of games for free, and I don’t care at all about the skins (and I don’t even get why people would) so I view the skins like a donation. If I really like the game I can spend a bit of money to get a skin to support them.
I’ve played league of legends for literally thousands of hours and never spent a cent on it. I have hundreds of hours on apex and also never spent anythings. It’s way better than games where you spend like 20 dollars and then also need to spend either hundreds of hours or dollars to unlock 2/3 of the playable characters.
Edit: The difference being with shareware you didn’t have to pay any money to try the game. Basically the game was the demo as well as a full game, and once you played the first part of it for free, and you decided you liked it, then you paid and the rest of the game you already had was unlocked.
I think wizards of the coast will demand more products that are part of baldur’s gate 3. Tbf, baldur’s gate 1 and 2 are known for their expansions. I wouldn’t be opposed to an expansion or two.
That’s not really “DLC” in the conventional sense, that’s a deluxe edition. You’re not getting new content, just some bonus items for the base game, but a good chunk of what you get is actually outside of the game entirely (soundtrack, artbook, D&D character sheet).
I mean it’s being sold as “Digital Deluxe Edition DLC” and it contains in-game items, which I’d say goes against “a complete and immersive gaming experience without the need for additional purchases” (apart from the stuff that’s not in the game that you have to purchase.)
Which, to me, isn’t a severe knock against Baldur’s Gate - it just showcases how pointless some of the lamentations about “every other game” are, when usually it’s…kind of easy to say no and ignore it.
That’s fan service. That’s not part of the game. It’s the game’s soundtrack plus some artwork. Plus some in-game paintings depicting characters from their other games. Then they added some bonus goodies to make the deal even better. All for 10€. So yeah, it’s a typical deluxe edition. They’re made for fans and fans like collecting them. I don’t personally need that stuff so I didn’t get it, but I don’t see anything wrong with it. It’s a win-win.
If you really wanna equivalate that with shipping incomplete games and selling the rest as dlc or selling hero skins for 20€, I’d say you’re just looking for reasons to be mad.
So in the end, there’s zero principle involved here, and it’s all just picking and choosing which DLC YOU happen to think is totally fine.
For reference, what you just described is like 90% of the day one DLC ever. Some basic skins, some inconsequential ingame items/things, maybe some art or music.
This all would be fine, but it’s the insane vitriol everyone else is throwing at microtransactions AND the mightier than thou attitude of the game devs that makes this horrendously hypocritical. I don’t have a problem with this DAY ONE DLC FOR BG3, but I’m also sane enough to not pretend that all microtransactions are evil, categorically.
Right, so if that’s all the paid dlc for that game then yeah, I guess 90% of them are fine.
Ppl are talking about the likes of mass effect where you have to buy the extra missions and followers, etc.
And not sure where you got any hate. I was just defending what I believe to be a fairly moral company. And never said they’re the only one.
To be fair, Deluxe editions have been available since decades. In a way it is similar that you are not getting ‘all of the game’ without it - though this often includes items next to the game (soundtrack etc.) that have no direct influence on your enjoyment. With MT you directly influence the game and repeatedly, as in, I can buy 1,2,3… “super potions” or whatever. For me they are quite distinct while similar on the surface.
idk why people are tying to cope this like they’re paid by the studio. this is why we got to the MTX hell we are in right now, because people like you hand waved this kind of shit and bought it.
There’s some serious false equivalency going on if you think a $10 “support the devs” pack (that was given out to free for everyone who bought early access) is worthy of ire like the usual AAA MTX hellscape.
A full price game should just not have MTX at all. No matter if they’re cosmetic or not. I pay upfront and want the full game that includes cosmetics that I wanna earn within the game. Cosmetic MTX are acceptable in F2P games only. This deluxe edition seems like some stuff that isn’t even part of the game.
Considering that everyone in this thread is acting like ANY kind of microtransaction is the spawn of Satan, I really don’t think it’s a wrong equivalence.
The obvious, boring answer on both sides is, of course, nuance. Microtransactions and DLCs are not categorically evil. And also, this little bit of launch DLC ain’t gonna kill anyone (just like 99% of launch DLC). It’s always just some small, inconsequential cosmetic or truly mediocre micro-mini-sidequest.
I know this is a bit different and I also know Larian and their games, but the “it’s only cosmetics” DLC stuff also gets very heavily criticized by a lot of people because, “they could have put it in the base game” or something. I don’t really care about cosmetic DLC’s, but a lot of people do. Horse armor yada yada, you know the drill.
I mean what if Skyrim had locked Dragonbone (or whichever) armor behind a 10$ paywall. Sure, it wouldn’t be 100% necessary to beat the game, but it would still suck.
I’ve always viewed Digital Delixe thru the lens of a collectors edition without the $200 statue. Horse armor is how we got to $20 for a skin in Overwatch. They aren’t entirely unrelated but are genuinely different product categories.
Which is what 90% of day 1 DLC is for most other games.
It would be fine, but it’s the mightier than thou attitude and the blind exceptionalism from rabid fans that makes this so hypocritical.
Are you just Diablo bashing because it’s in vogue? Because this is just bashing any game that does micro transactions. I don’t see how it’s specifically calling out Diablo.
Their point is that they are good because they don’t have MTX and offered a “complete” game for your money. Except that last part isn’t exactly true, since they were charging for early access of an incomplete game. EA isn’t necessarily bad, but I hate the disingenuous statement.
Their statement said nothing about giving a complete experience from day one. You cut out the central part of the whole statement which is “without the need for additional purchases”.
The whole point of the public statement is about not requiring users to spend additional money to get the whole game. It got nothing to do with early access.
I mean yeah but gamers keep supporting shitty companies that provide the exact opposite in record numbers so we don’t get stuff like this much anymore.
You’re absolutely right, complacency on behalf of the consumers is what has given rise to the trend of spending real physical money on in-game currency.
The problem with DLC, is that content is undifferentiated. Meaning things like skins, music, artwork, etc. Are in the same boat as new zones/maps, characters, equipment, etc. Publishers use FOMO by bundling cosmetics with actual ‘new’ experienceable content.
Absolutely, there’s a reason that ABK hired psychologist to work for them and you damn well know it wasn’t for them to have in house mental health services for their developers.
I will never understand the drones of humanity buying the same CoD game over and over. They literally remade older ones because they have no other ideas to milk their fan base. It’s horrible.
BattleBit scratched my Battlefield itch after all these years of shitty games from DICE.
This isn’t “gamers”. It affects pretty much everything for everyone. People these days have no backbone anymore. Everything just has to be easy and convenient and going against greedy practices is not convenient so companies can push the limits.
It’s true, you get microtransactions for everything these days. I pay a fee (technically I don’t get a discount) because I told my cell phone provider to stop sending me spam multiple times a week. I’d rather pay the couple bucks per month extra then have to deal with that bullshit.
It is fucking bullshit. Look at some vehicle manufacturers limiting their cars unless a subscription is paid. Printers. If I buy the god damned thing I should be able to use it at its full potential until I no longer want to.
Oh God printers, there was a post that made it to the frontage I think yesterday that showed a email or something from HP that stated they disabled their printer, well the ink cartridge they paid for at least, because they didn’t renew their ink subscription.
Yeah, I like Valve but fuck those loot boxes, their tolerance of gambling, and screw that bs excuse of “it’s only cosmetic” because we know it’s not and it preys on the same insecurities and uses the same psychological tools to maximize profits using addiction.
The argument of cosmetic only microtransactions is also a bit of a weak one because it’s the sort of content that would usually just be in the base game, unlockable via gameplay or tied to cheat codes. At least this used to be the case.
Cosmetic only is still better than other types but it’s still a case of the lesser of two evils.
What’s wrong with it? Literally every single gameplay-related item in both Dota and CSGO are free. 100%, no strings attached. You can experience the entire game and what it has to offer without spending a dime. At some point you have to charge for something. These companies aren’t making these game out of charity, they are in fact businesses. You can criticize the methods they use to push them (lootboxes, BP, etc) but I don’t see a problem with the concept.
We game for what we game for. Some people game for the cosmetics. They are selling what consumers buy. I’m not saying it’s right. But if they keep buying why wouldn’t they sell it?
I like the way Grinding Gear does it with POE, a FTP game supported by cosmetic-only micro transactions. The stash tabs are the closest thing to “pay to win”.
Yeah, the only reason anybody says that is because we’re so desensitized by pay-to-win mechanics and games being released half finished with day 1 dlc to fill the gaps, so we say “at least it’s better than that”
Remember horse armor? I bet there’s plenty of video games out now with cosmetic horse armor for sale.
Yes, Valve’s CS loot boxes and ignoring of the gambling sites that profit off of gamers addiction is absolutely bullshit but you’re a disingenuous troll if you think Valve is the leading offender of shitty monetization rampant in the industry.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Rules
1. Submissions have to be related to games
Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.
This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.
2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.
We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.
3. No excessive self-promotion
Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.
This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.
4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you’re submitting before posting to see if it’s already been posted.
We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.
5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW
Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.
No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.
6. No linking to piracy
Don’t share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.
We don’t want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.
I’m curious: would people prefer a single upfront cost on a game, in-game purchases, or for the game to be free but you need to support the developer through voluntary donations (which carry no reward)?
The reward should not be at the cost of degradation of player experience of other players who do not pay. If you can do that, sure. Like cosmetic dice dlc for instance.
Pay upfront, buy DLC’s
It all depends on the game. I play one game most of the time and others when I am not playing that main game. For my main game I pay a sub and expacs and occasionally for something from the store I like. Mostly I just raid and chill with my friends.
But in other games it’s casual. I’m ok with some transactions if I am enjoying myself. If it hinders my progress or is unnecessary then I’m just bored. Like Genshin. Beautiful game but way to gotcha. Plus the game control is ass. Gamers want a combo or something more interactive to do attacks with. Elden Ring was ok with that. But there are several games that forget it’s an interactive medium.
But I digress. Games like RDR2 I have never paid beyond the base game. But I will throw down for a Fortnite skin every once in awhile because I like it. It’s not a linear “if the game is free I will micro” kind of discussion. It’s if the game hits me right I will do it. Like fuck Battlefront 1 and 2. Never ever with EA again. Their customer support is shitty too.
I prefer a single upfront purchase, though I am not against the idea of expansion packs or meaningful DLC (extra character races, maps, campaigns, etc). For online games, I think cosmetic DLCs are a good way to bank server costs. People who don’t want to buy them aren’t missing out on anything really, and the people who do get some nice swag/street cred to show off.
What I am completely against is pay-to-win crap.
In PvP, skilled players are at a disadvantage against prepubescent kids with daddy’s credit card and that really ruins the experience.
The most ridiculous to me is when you can use real money to buy items/skills/exp for single-player games. I remember being shocked to see that there were several launch-day DLCs for Tales of Zestiria for packs of healing items or early weapons that are normally obtainable in-game, just to help you out in the beginning. There used to be cheat codes for this sort of thing, now the “cheat” is forking over cash.
Not only is it predatory, people are actually paying for something the game already gives them access to, essentially giving the publisher money for being able to play, and then giving them more money for being able to play less.
Most people would prefer the third option - and would be very, very quiet in online discussions as to why.
Which is exactly why I prefer a fair upfront cost
@Katana314 @Narrrz i do games as an hobby and using the last one.
I’ve made some very small games as a hobby for game jams, but the main reason I’m not charging for them is that I know they wouldn’t be worth any tangible amount of money regardless.
If they contained, say, hours of voice acting, a wholly unique gameplay concept, and visuals that took hundreds of thousands of man-hours, then for its business model I’d suddenly be more doubtful of that “donate if you enjoy” model.
@Katana314 i dont do jams and started only in December. But have around 1k hours in 2 games 😅
But im gonna make the 3rd one (something alot bigger) for donor’s only during early access.
Honestly I really hate playing f2p games. Reason being is there is no leveling up to earn rewards for your time such as skins in old games think old halo games etc. Now all those times must be bought for 10+ $ for f2p or even in some cases full price games. I would rather slap down 60-70 and get everything earnable in game.
I prefer one single up-front purchase. That means there’s nothing for the game developer to gain by implementing predatory game design practices.
In-game purchases (excluding major expansion packs) should be reserved for f2p games only imo. And then the player should know exactly what they’re going to get. So no loot boxes.
I mean, there’s also nothing to gain for the developer by continuing development. Most f2p games only survive so long because of those microtransactions. Think about how long these games are supported, how much new content they get constantly. The “good old games” were one and done. If you got lucky, they might patch some bugs, but often that was left to the community.
Donations to a company? 🤨🤨 Bro just make games
@Lemmynkainen @Narrrz i do games as an hobby on my free time and using the 3rd.
Everything is free and rely on donations.
It really depends on a game. The issue is greed will always corrupt any such system.
Compare BG3 to Solasta, or to the golden years of expansion packs like StarCraft and Red Alert 2.
On one end(Solasta): You have a “full” game experience, but there’s more that can be had. You don’t have to buy ALL of the expansion packs, unless there’s something you want in each, but each expansion comes with adventures to go on as well as an extra class and/or race or two. Granted, this also has built in tools to make your own adventures as well.
On the other, you have BG3(at least according to this image), where you get the whole kit and kaboodle up front. Pay once, play to your heart’s content. Granted, TMI, this lacks and will continue to lack tools for making your own adventures.
Then you have the golden years. You get one full game up front. Feature complete, full story arc for each race. Then later down the line, an expansion comes along that builds on it, using the engine from before(maybe with improvements), extra units, maybe a new race, and a new story line for each current race. IIRC, these older games included tools for making maps, but not quite full campaigns, but my memory is a bit fuzzy on that.
There’s also a game like Elite Dangerous. IMHO, it breaks a few rules. You have to pay up front, although only $20 for standard + $30 for odyssey, but you own it from then on. No monthly fees, or anything. Maybe the next huge release in 5 years will be another $20-$30. However, it’s an online game, going 24/7/365(minus a weekly reboot). They have to pay for the servers /SOMEHOW/. Only an idiot would buy the game more than once, so (try to) sell you paint jobs for everything, and gear for FPS mode, among a few other trinkets. I do appreciate how it’s 100% cosmetic only. Zero ptw whatsoever. Again, IMHO, this is the least bad way to do this.
Then there’s Eve Online. Free to play, but you’re limited in what you can use. Pay for a sub to get access to use anything(must still have character skill and buy it with in game money) and you can, in a round about way but a supported by the devs way, pay that subscription using in game money. They also have cosmetics. The downside, you can pay real money(or trade in game money with another player for this currency) to get a skill point injection kit* or open up to train on a second(maybe third?) character at the same time on the same account. The skill point injections aren’t 1 hour xp boosts, and they’re not instant lvl 60 potions, the more skill points your character has, the less you get from injecting. You don’t buy the injection, you buy the syringe, suck the sp out, and sell on the market. Those sp came from another player, and you don’t have to pay premium currency for it, can use the in game stuff. Again, it could be better, but it’s better than many others.
For the most part, micro-transactions are a cancer on the gaming world, but due to human greed, I don’t see them going away in my lifetime. Now that most everything is being “published” digitally, we don’t have any actual scarcity of the games themselves. There’s no threat of not being able to get the game on launch, and having to wait months for a reprint missing having it for your birthday lan party. Early access is not a terrible thing, it should just be called what it is, THE ALPHA/BETA program, and should not be full price, unless you are getting some big rewards on/before launch, and those need to be properly disclosed ahead of time. Larian could have done better on this, but they’re at least not StarCitizen.
This is the right way, but also it’s entirely ridiculous that it has to be said.
If I owned a small grocery store chain, and I had a website FAQ, it would be weird if it said, “Will my kids be taken by strangers and trafficked out of the country while I shop?” And even if the answer was, “No. We firmly believe you should remain in possession of your children at all times and no one else, so that you can enjoy your family.” it would still be weird that we were talking about it in the first place - because yes, that’s nice and all, but it shouldn’t even be an issue worth discussing.
It shouldn’t have to be said, true, but if other grocery shops let this happen, and in fact designed the grocery store to make kidnapping easier, I would love to see it called out on your website.
Obviously you haven’t been to Gibbons Markets.
It’s the Fairsley Difference
https://youtu.be/tP4yX2rkpBc
Glad someone picked up what I was putting down :)
Funny enough (and sad to say), he commented on it in this context actually in a VICE article,
A lot of the sketches in Mr. Show seem to carry added relevance today. The “Worthington’s Law” skit is basically Donald Trump. Is the show’s prescience eerie to you? Yes! I don’t like when reality is a joke—when it plays out like a by-the-numbers satirical comedy scene written by a bunch of goofballs. Reality should be more complex than that—it shouldn’t be so obvious. It should be more textured. But it isn’t! The “Fairsley’s Foods” skit was what happened in the last election. FOX News was Fairsley’s Foods, just throwing up these accusations that you have to respond to, and by responding them you make them legitimate. But you have to respond to them, so you’re just screwed.
The weirdest thing isn’t that Trump follows Worthington’s Law—it’s that so much of America would completely agree and live by the logic of “if you make more money, then you’re smarter.” They believe that’s true. I don’t know if they know that Jesus didn’t make a lot of money in his life, but supposedly they think he’s pretty smart. It doesn’t make any sense."
Made me wishlist just now
I didn’t even know about this. This is awesome, but the last thing I’d like to know is does it have predatory online requirements or can you play offline and not be forced to log in to play?
If it ticks that box I’ll buy this.
Edit: found it in the FAQ, yes you can!
Give them money
This used to be the way with all games. You had one version. It was one game and everyone got the same thing. All the additional stuff is just a normalized scam.
Ok, but then every game will have to go though years of early access to fund it in advance rather than recouping the costs post launch.
Better than releasing those early access as if they were full games at ridiculous prices just to then complete it by releasing the missing content as 20$ dlcs
I mean, there’s reasonable arguments for both approaches, but I can see why bigger companies don’t want unfinished versions of games out there for PR reasons.
They’re the ones doing it the most, and they mostly just say “oh sorry, we’ll patch it later” and proceed to make tons of DLCs to add anything other than bug fixing
Let’s hope they keep it this way for future games! I am not sure why this game got so much attention, games like this normally never draw this big of a crowd but I am happy it is. I am sad because I have to wait a month until the ps5 version drops but then again I’m also glad I am not waiting for the Xbox version either! It will definitely be a day one purchase just to support them as much as possible. Hope they sell enough to continue doing what they want.
The last DnD-based AAA game was like 15 years ago? People have been craving for this kind of game for years and had to satisfy themselves with remakes and ports until now.
Yeah but you also had the Owlcat Studios Pathfinder games, which didn’t draw as much of a crowd despite being the same genre.
I might be wrong, but I’d wager it has to do with the popularity of DnD vs Pathfinder. That and the nostalgia from BG 1 and 2.
I don’t even know if the Pathfinder games are co-op. BG3 is co-op and it is coming to PlayStation very soon
BG1 and 2 are some of the most beloved CRPG games ever made. On reddit, the Baldur’s Gate sub was still very active and I would guess people were continuing to do full play-throughs at least once a year, myself included (and that’s like 20 years after BG1 came out). I don’t know of many other games with that kind of following, so I’m not surprised at the interest in BG3. Plus, it looks like the devs really took their time and delivered a great game at launch, which doesn’t really seem to happen much these days.
I think it has to do with the current popularity of DnD in general.
This is a breath of fresh air and has convinced me to get this game.
Huh. I must not have woken up yet.
Buy the game. That’s it. You bought everything you need.
That is what I miss seeing in games.
Game is an absolute masterpiece on top of it all. This kind of game needs unequal levels of support. They knocked it out of the park AND they did it all in the right way. I’m encouraging people to buy it and play if they like RPG, tabletop or even just interested in forgotten realms. One of a few games I’ve purchased for full price on Steam.
deleted by creator
It’s just called “Game”? It kinda reminds me of this game store in the UK also called “GAME”, all caps this time.
I love the modern XCOM games, I love card games, I love games where the story follows a new superhero in an established superhero universe, I love XMen.
Yet.
Whilst I obviously was so excited for Marvel’s Midnight Son’s I was planning ahead to ask for cash to buy it full price for a birthday or something rather (to both play right away and support games that heavily target my tastes) rather than just wait for a deep sale a few years later like I normally would, all the buy this version and add on bits ala carte or buy this version that has some things but not all things but who know which is which or buy this super version that has the entire game or buy this hyper-mega version that has all of that and also stuff that’s not actually part of the game or buy a version that has the stuff that isn’t part of the game and most of the game… bullshit, just completely killed any interest I had in it.
I might pick it up and play it one day when it’s literally a few quid but quite possibly not at this point.
Just sell me the thing. Don’t complicate it. If I need to spend ages figuring out exactly which parts of a game I haven’t even played yet I do and don’t care about so I can try to see how close to a normal price I can pay and still get all the actual game, I’d rather just use that time to go play a game that wasn’t designed by MBE’s.
If you’re a fan of xcom, midnight sons will disappoint you. The tactical depth is reduced, and it’s all around less replayable than any xcom.
I don’t need it to be XCOM.
When buying the game actually meant something.
Whereas I love playing AAA games for free because other people spend money on cosmetic items I just don’t care about.
Apex Legends? Yes please, keep charging for skins and not the game.
Tbh I don’t get the hate for this model. I’d much rather be able to play these games for free and get to try them. Skin funded games mean I’ve played a lot of games for free, and I don’t care at all about the skins (and I don’t even get why people would) so I view the skins like a donation. If I really like the game I can spend a bit of money to get a skin to support them.
I’ve played league of legends for literally thousands of hours and never spent a cent on it. I have hundreds of hours on apex and also never spent anythings. It’s way better than games where you spend like 20 dollars and then also need to spend either hundreds of hours or dollars to unlock 2/3 of the playable characters.
Yep, I bought the Original Sin 2 for full price and planning to get this for full price too.
Between this, Armored Core 6, and Starfield it looks like my gaming backlog is filled until end of year.
Good luck playing them all.
I literally bought OS 1 & 2 because of how much I enjoyed the EA of BG3 and how much I like the studio’s style. They deserve every penny.
Is OS1 as good as 2 though? I don’t know much about it.
I’ll be honest, I haven’t played yet. It’s on the list though!.. cries in Steam backlog
I’m curious what bs Bethesda is going to have for Starfield. From horse armor to weak mods you pay for they keep trying something with every game.
I would like games to arrive as a single complete package, but I was relatively fond of expansion packs from games like RollerCoaster Tycoon.
They took the game you already had, and pretty much doubled it, they were fantastic!
Far better than any modern DLC for sure.
Expansion packs are the grandparents of DLC. They took something great and corrupted it to try and wring us for all we’re worth.
removed by mod
That was Shareware, not DLC.
Edit: The difference being with shareware you didn’t have to pay any money to try the game. Basically the game was the demo as well as a full game, and once you played the first part of it for free, and you decided you liked it, then you paid and the rest of the game you already had was unlocked.
removed by mod
You’re being purposely confusing and intellectually dishonest, in an attempt to control the narrative.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shareware
removed by mod
I think wizards of the coast will demand more products that are part of baldur’s gate 3. Tbf, baldur’s gate 1 and 2 are known for their expansions. I wouldn’t be opposed to an expansion or two.
There is literally day one paid DLC though lol
That’s not really “DLC” in the conventional sense, that’s a deluxe edition. You’re not getting new content, just some bonus items for the base game, but a good chunk of what you get is actually outside of the game entirely (soundtrack, artbook, D&D character sheet).
I mean it’s being sold as “Digital Deluxe Edition DLC” and it contains in-game items, which I’d say goes against “a complete and immersive gaming experience without the need for additional purchases” (apart from the stuff that’s not in the game that you have to purchase.)
deleted by creator
So you could also said that sentence in OP, even if there’s a lot of microtransaction cosmetics as long as it’s not immersive?
Ouch. Yup, that, to me, is basically MTX.
Which, to me, isn’t a severe knock against Baldur’s Gate - it just showcases how pointless some of the lamentations about “every other game” are, when usually it’s…kind of easy to say no and ignore it.
That’s fan service. That’s not part of the game. It’s the game’s soundtrack plus some artwork. Plus some in-game paintings depicting characters from their other games. Then they added some bonus goodies to make the deal even better. All for 10€. So yeah, it’s a typical deluxe edition. They’re made for fans and fans like collecting them. I don’t personally need that stuff so I didn’t get it, but I don’t see anything wrong with it. It’s a win-win.
If you really wanna equivalate that with shipping incomplete games and selling the rest as dlc or selling hero skins for 20€, I’d say you’re just looking for reasons to be mad.
So in the end, there’s zero principle involved here, and it’s all just picking and choosing which DLC YOU happen to think is totally fine. For reference, what you just described is like 90% of the day one DLC ever. Some basic skins, some inconsequential ingame items/things, maybe some art or music.
This all would be fine, but it’s the insane vitriol everyone else is throwing at microtransactions AND the mightier than thou attitude of the game devs that makes this horrendously hypocritical. I don’t have a problem with this DAY ONE DLC FOR BG3, but I’m also sane enough to not pretend that all microtransactions are evil, categorically.
Right, so if that’s all the paid dlc for that game then yeah, I guess 90% of them are fine. Ppl are talking about the likes of mass effect where you have to buy the extra missions and followers, etc.
And not sure where you got any hate. I was just defending what I believe to be a fairly moral company. And never said they’re the only one.
To be fair, Deluxe editions have been available since decades. In a way it is similar that you are not getting ‘all of the game’ without it - though this often includes items next to the game (soundtrack etc.) that have no direct influence on your enjoyment. With MT you directly influence the game and repeatedly, as in, I can buy 1,2,3… “super potions” or whatever. For me they are quite distinct while similar on the surface.
idk why people are tying to cope this like they’re paid by the studio. this is why we got to the MTX hell we are in right now, because people like you hand waved this kind of shit and bought it.
It’s the same shit
I boot the game up through Steam and before their
UNNECESSARY LAUNCHER
loads, the button for
UPGRADE TO MORE MONEY
loads before the
PLAY GAME button loads.
I have a high end machine and gigabit.
Don’t defend this. It’s a great game but… c’mon.
There’s some serious false equivalency going on if you think a $10 “support the devs” pack (that was given out to free for everyone who bought early access) is worthy of ire like the usual AAA MTX hellscape.
Launcher is trash though.
Lololol there was/is endless bitching and cosmetic mtx in d3, I guess larian gets a pass here 🤷♂️
A full price game should just not have MTX at all. No matter if they’re cosmetic or not. I pay upfront and want the full game that includes cosmetics that I wanna earn within the game. Cosmetic MTX are acceptable in F2P games only. This deluxe edition seems like some stuff that isn’t even part of the game.
Considering that everyone in this thread is acting like ANY kind of microtransaction is the spawn of Satan, I really don’t think it’s a wrong equivalence.
The obvious, boring answer on both sides is, of course, nuance. Microtransactions and DLCs are not categorically evil. And also, this little bit of launch DLC ain’t gonna kill anyone (just like 99% of launch DLC). It’s always just some small, inconsequential cosmetic or truly mediocre micro-mini-sidequest.
I’d agree with you if the game wasn’t paraded around as the perfect example for not having additional purchases.
–skip-launcher
Add that to the startup commands in steam for Baldur’s Gate.
Holy dick, thank you much!
i wonder if this works for other games i hate games that launch into launchers
Wow 😔😢 I knew it was too good to be true
Have a look there https://libregamewiki.org/Main_Page
There’s plenty of good games and good devs, don’t expect anything good to come out from the rigged industry
Ive had a look at the supposed Day 1 DLC. Its mainly cosmetics and crossover items from Divinity Original Sin 2.
From the steam page: “All as awesome as they are wholly unnecessary.”
Fortnite skins are also unnecessary
fornite is free to play, that’s not the same as a game with a box price locking content behind more payments like this.
I know this is a bit different and I also know Larian and their games, but the “it’s only cosmetics” DLC stuff also gets very heavily criticized by a lot of people because, “they could have put it in the base game” or something. I don’t really care about cosmetic DLC’s, but a lot of people do. Horse armor yada yada, you know the drill.
I mean what if Skyrim had locked Dragonbone (or whichever) armor behind a 10$ paywall. Sure, it wouldn’t be 100% necessary to beat the game, but it would still suck.
I have never really played Skyrim. Is that a cosmetic armor? If so, I wouldn’t really care about it.
It’s not. It’s the best armor in the game.
Then it’s not really a good argument
I’ve always viewed Digital Delixe thru the lens of a collectors edition without the $200 statue. Horse armor is how we got to $20 for a skin in Overwatch. They aren’t entirely unrelated but are genuinely different product categories.
Which is what 90% of day 1 DLC is for most other games. It would be fine, but it’s the mightier than thou attitude and the blind exceptionalism from rabid fans that makes this so hypocritical.
so i can’t get the complete game without buying it because it has in-game content. cool.
it’s also free for anyone that played in early access.
in other words, if you didn’t buy the base game before reviews came out, you don’t get the whole game unless you spend more.
deleted by creator
they said complete, its not complete. stop giving them credit for lying to you LOL.
Throwing direct shade at Diablo right here. Love to see it.
Doubt.
Are you just Diablo bashing because it’s in vogue? Because this is just bashing any game that does micro transactions. I don’t see how it’s specifically calling out Diablo.
Wasn’t this game released in paid early access a while ago?
Sounds like you are missing the point completely, likely in bad faith too
Their point is that they are good because they don’t have MTX and offered a “complete” game for your money. Except that last part isn’t exactly true, since they were charging for early access of an incomplete game. EA isn’t necessarily bad, but I hate the disingenuous statement.
Their statement said nothing about giving a complete experience from day one. You cut out the central part of the whole statement which is “without the need for additional purchases”.
The whole point of the public statement is about not requiring users to spend additional money to get the whole game. It got nothing to do with early access.
I mean yeah but gamers keep supporting shitty companies that provide the exact opposite in record numbers so we don’t get stuff like this much anymore.
You’re absolutely right, complacency on behalf of the consumers is what has given rise to the trend of spending real physical money on in-game currency.
The problem with DLC, is that content is undifferentiated. Meaning things like skins, music, artwork, etc. Are in the same boat as new zones/maps, characters, equipment, etc. Publishers use FOMO by bundling cosmetics with actual ‘new’ experienceable content.
“IT MUST BE THE NEW WAY” They thought.
And so they continued going that way.
Because psychological manipulation is more effective than competence and honesty.
Absolutely, there’s a reason that ABK hired psychologist to work for them and you damn well know it wasn’t for them to have in house mental health services for their developers.
I will never understand the drones of humanity buying the same CoD game over and over. They literally remade older ones because they have no other ideas to milk their fan base. It’s horrible.
BattleBit scratched my Battlefield itch after all these years of shitty games from DICE.
This isn’t “gamers”. It affects pretty much everything for everyone. People these days have no backbone anymore. Everything just has to be easy and convenient and going against greedy practices is not convenient so companies can push the limits.
It’s true, you get microtransactions for everything these days. I pay a fee (technically I don’t get a discount) because I told my cell phone provider to stop sending me spam multiple times a week. I’d rather pay the couple bucks per month extra then have to deal with that bullshit.
It is fucking bullshit. Look at some vehicle manufacturers limiting their cars unless a subscription is paid. Printers. If I buy the god damned thing I should be able to use it at its full potential until I no longer want to.
Oh God printers, there was a post that made it to the frontage I think yesterday that showed a email or something from HP that stated they disabled their printer, well the ink cartridge they paid for at least, because they didn’t renew their ink subscription.
Bread and circuses. Rulers had it figured out millennia ago.
We REWARD incompetence and liars by doing pre-orders and still buying games that have been reported to be buggy or full of in-app purchases, etc.
So why is anyone surprised that this shit happens?
Yeah, shitty companies like Valve with their lootbox nonsense and other gambling mechanics are really bringing the industry down.
They’re entirely cosmetic in Valve games as far as I’m aware
Yeah, I like Valve but fuck those loot boxes, their tolerance of gambling, and screw that bs excuse of “it’s only cosmetic” because we know it’s not and it preys on the same insecurities and uses the same psychological tools to maximize profits using addiction.
The argument of cosmetic only microtransactions is also a bit of a weak one because it’s the sort of content that would usually just be in the base game, unlockable via gameplay or tied to cheat codes. At least this used to be the case.
Cosmetic only is still better than other types but it’s still a case of the lesser of two evils.
What’s wrong with it? Literally every single gameplay-related item in both Dota and CSGO are free. 100%, no strings attached. You can experience the entire game and what it has to offer without spending a dime. At some point you have to charge for something. These companies aren’t making these game out of charity, they are in fact businesses. You can criticize the methods they use to push them (lootboxes, BP, etc) but I don’t see a problem with the concept.
We game for what we game for. Some people game for the cosmetics. They are selling what consumers buy. I’m not saying it’s right. But if they keep buying why wouldn’t they sell it?
I like the way Grinding Gear does it with POE, a FTP game supported by cosmetic-only micro transactions. The stash tabs are the closest thing to “pay to win”.
Cosmetic-only microtransactions in Free to Play games are absolutely fine, and should be encouraged. Those games wouldn’t exist without them.
In paid games it’s a different matter though, sure.
Yeah, the only reason anybody says that is because we’re so desensitized by pay-to-win mechanics and games being released half finished with day 1 dlc to fill the gaps, so we say “at least it’s better than that”
Remember horse armor? I bet there’s plenty of video games out now with cosmetic horse armor for sale.
Yes, Valve’s CS loot boxes and ignoring of the gambling sites that profit off of gamers addiction is absolutely bullshit but you’re a disingenuous troll if you think Valve is the leading offender of shitty monetization rampant in the industry.