Activision, now rigging you to buy micro transactions.

[Lahis]

Javik didn't get "cut from the base game". That's baseless nonsense. He was never shown in any promo material until they announced the From Ashes DLC itself. Nor does any of his interactions actually contribute meaningfully to the plot in any way whatsoever. He's entirely superfluous. That he HAS interactions is just standard for a party member.

You're really just saying he's cool and you wanted to have that content, but didn't want to pay for it. Well, tough. He wasn't included in the base game; he was a Collector's Edition bonus that you could also purchase as a standalone.

That's the facts. It doesn't make me a "corporate shill" to point them out. There's plenty of cases where companies have made decisions I did think were "bad", but the existence of day one DLC is not one of those, and I have never heard an argument about such that made the least bit of sense, when you actually look at what they're saying.

I will never understand the attitude that it is OK to cut content from the game to shill for extra $15 on the release day. But you do you.

[Endus]

I will never understand the attitude that it is OK to cut content from the game to shill for extra $15 on the release day. But you do you.

You've provided fuck-all to support your claim that content was cut to put in as DLC. Your claim that this happened with the From Ashes DLC is demonstrably wrong, since that content was never presented in the marketing prior to the announcement of the DLC itself, as DLC.

You are making things up and twisting the facts to fit your presumptions, which isn't how anything works.

[Lahis]

You've provided fuck-all to support your claim that content was cut to put in as DLC. Your claim that this happened with the From Ashes DLC is demonstrably wrong, since that content was never presented in the marketing prior to the announcement of the DLC itself, as DLC.

You are making things up and twisting the facts to fit your presumptions, which isn't how anything works.

If it's developed and finished before game goes Gold, it fuckign shoudl be included in the game. Instead of shillign for 15$ on a content they fuckign knew no fan could pass up.

[ReD-EyeD]

I don't see an issue with sparing those that are better then you. Learning from those that are better then you is a great way to learn.

Better =/= spend more money

[Endus]

If it's developed and finished before game goes Gold, it fuckign shoudl be included in the game. Instead of shillign for 15$ on a content they fuckign knew no fan could pass up.

You haven't provided any explanation for this. It's a ridiculous idea.

McDonalds has warm pies sitting in the warmer when I get my value meal; why won't they give me one for free?
The car salesman has the same car I want with and without leather seats; why is he charging me more for the upgrade when he's got it on the lot?

It doesn't make any sense when applied to any OTHER product, and it doesn't magically start to make any sense when you apply it to video games.

[GKLeatherCraft]

TL;DR Activision just patented a system

False, no they didn't, You didn't read the article before your knee jerk reaction to quickly post on MMO-C, They didn't "just" do anything, it was filed in 2015, Quite some time ago.

IF this has been mentioned in the past 12 pages, then apologies

[Edge-]

If it's developed and finished before game goes Gold, it fuckign shoudl be included in the game.

Because?...

If it was never scoped out as part of the core game, why do you deserve it for free? Doubly so if it is only partially complete because only some work was done pre-launch by the time the game mastered and it was always planned to be completed and released after launch.

Instead of shillign for 15$ on a content they fuckign knew no fan could pass up.

I'd like to consider myself a fan, I don't think I purchased it.

[Lahis]

it was always planned to be completed and released after launch.

How is fucking launch day "after launch"?

[LaserChild9]

That's not exactly what it says. It says match "with", not match "against". It is likely referring to building a team vs. team lineup, so it could mean each team has a veteran and lesser skilled players are paired with the veterans so the newer players see the guys with all the shiny shop items to encourage them to spend money in the shop.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough but that is exactly what I meant. Let's be honest, matching someone to someone else based on the fact that one of them has used the store to buy gear is not matchmaking and it has no place at all in a matchmaking system. Matchmaking should be about the skill of the players, and if not skill the at the very least experience.

Using a matchmaking system to try to make money from micro-transactions has no place at all in matchmaking, no matter how low the priority, unless you make the game more about gear than skill.

[Edge-]

How is fucking launch day "after launch"?

After = at, my mistake.

Either way, you can dislike the practice (I'm not a big fan of day 1 DLC in the slightest), but you aren't owed it for free.

[Lahis]

After = at, my mistake.

Either way, you can dislike the practice (I'm not a big fan of day 1 DLC in the slightest), but you aren't owed it for free.

I'm paying for the game, it should have all release content with it.

[Okacz]

Hidden MMR has been a thing for a few years now. Mostly mobile games, but PC games as well, like World of Tanks or League of Legends.

The most common practice is to significantly decrese your Hidden MMR for a few rounds after you have made a purchase to match you with worse players and make you win easily. The player subconsciously feels like making the purchase was a good move for the gameplay, and WILL have the trigger imprinted that will cause him to visit the store when he starts losing games. As I'm saying, probably around 50% of popular games with MMR/Skill rating system and in game purchases use this trick.

Other common practice is to leave your MMR untouched, but match you against an opponent who is easier to counter using the thing you just bought. I believe even HS uses this system, if you pay for packs and get a legendary, you will suddenly find youself up against a lot of enemies who struggle against your deck with new card in it.

What I'm saying, Activision simply made the mistake (or just didn't care) of spilling the beans. It's still the same old shitty video game market, with the same greedy fish in it. "Vote with your wallet" is a noble cause, but futile, since many games tricking players to make in-game purchases are actually pretty good (Clash Royale, World of Tanks etc). I have myself bought Shadow of War with the greediest, most disgusting lootbox system I've ever seen in a while, and STILL don't regret it, since the game kicks major ass. I am a part of the problem, so is everyone else who doesn't "vote with your wallet" - but we are beyond the point of no return, really. This thing will keep going, and soon we'll see advertisments and paid endorsement even in AAA, 60 buck releases. People will buy the next Call of Duty even if the ground will be littered with Mountain Dew cans, and soldiers will be mentioning Taco Bell in every second dialogue.

[Edge-]

I'm paying for the game, it should have all release content with it.

It did have all release content with it, the day 1 DLC was never part of the release content. Unless you can find any marketing/promotional materials that say otherwise.

You don't deserve it for free. You can disagree with and dislike the decision to make it day 1 DLC (I'm on that boat), but that doesn't mean you get it for free.

[Endus]

I'm paying for the game, it should have all release content with it.

If by "release content", you mean the content included in the base game, you did.

If you mean "all content available at release", then no, you were never entitled to that, have provided no argument to justify that sense of entitlement, and are refusing to actually defend it rationally.

It's just as silly as buying the DLC and only the DLC, and expecting that they'll give you the base game for free because the DLC is useless without it. You've made up a sense of entitlement that has no basis in fact nor reality.

[Lahis]

What I'm saying, Activision simply made the mistake (or just didn't care) of spilling the beans. It's still the same old shitty video game market, with the same greedy fish in it. "Vote with your wallet" is a noble cause, but futile, since many games tricking players to make in-game purchases are actually pretty good (Clash Royale, World of Tanks etc). I have myself bought Shadow of War with the greediest, most disgusting lootbox system I've ever seen in a while, and STILL don't regret it, since the game kicks major ass. I am a part of the problem, so is everyone else who doesn't "vote with your wallet" - but we are beyond the point of no return, really. This thing will keep going, and soon we'll see advertisments and paid endorsement even in AAA, 60 buck releases. People will buy the next Call of Duty even if the ground will be littered with Mountain Dew cans, and soldiers will be mentioning Taco Bell in every second dialogue.

I'd rather get games via alternative means than pay for them, even upfront, when things have gotten this shitty.

Gotta look into finding a way to play Battlefront 2. The multiplayer never interested me, only the canon single player story. But with the MP being teh Lootbox mess it is, I can't give them anything near the full price for the SP component.

- - - Updated - - -

If by "release content", you mean the content included in the base game, you did.

If you mean "all content available at release", then no, you were never entitled to that, have provided no argument to justify that sense of entitlement, and are refusing to actually defend it rationally.

It's just as silly as buying the DLC and only the DLC, and expecting that they'll give you the base game for free because the DLC is useless without it. You've made up a sense of entitlement that has no basis in fact nor reality.

To use your McDonalds argument, sellign Day-1 DLC iks like chellign cheeseburger without a beef.

[Endus]

To use your McDonalds argument, sellign Day-1 DLC iks like chellign cheeseburger without a beef.

Not even a little bit, no. The game without the DLC in question is totally fine. A burger without the burger isn't a burger. And ME3 without Javik was still a perfectly functional ME3.

So it's more like selling a cheeseburger without bacon, and charging an extra $0.50 for bacon. It was never marketed as a bacon cheeseburger, and you had no reason to expect bacon to be included, and just because the bacon is there and ready to go when you order, that doesn't give you any argument that you should get it for free.

And again, you'll note that the above is exactly how fast food joints work, and nobody thinks it's "unfair".

[Drungan]

Hold on a sec ...... is this the reason they stopped supporting servers to control how you get matched with ..... one could think so tbh. as in many games matchmaking seems utterly broken, no i can not prove it, but i would not be shocked if it came out.

[Edge-]

Hold on a sec ...... is this the reason they stopped supporting servers to control how you get matched with ..... one could think so tbh. as in many games matchmaking seems utterly broken, no i can not prove it, but i would not be shocked if it came out.

No, because this system doesn't even exist yet.

[Halicia]

TL;DR Activision just patented a system for Destiny 2

"Bungie also confirmed to Glixel that the technology isn't being used in Destiny 2."

Which is it... the OP or the article ?

[Vankrys]

I'm paying for the game, it should have all release content with it.

the content released at launch was clear, there was no secret.
never bioware promised from ashes would be free, never bioware promised a prothean companion in the base game.

you knew the content, you knew the price, it's a capitalist world, if you find the product is worth the asking price, make your purchase, if not, don't. simple as that.
But a company does not owe any content to their costumer that they didn't advertise for, regardless of when it was produced.

if i make two songs, it is my choice wether i want to sell each individually or bundled together, i do not owe the costumer a free song because they were produced at the same time.