Diablo 4 is bad.

[jackofwind]

TLL is smb2. It was not something they sold separately for additional cost - they were smb2.

TLL is SMB 2 and it uses levels and assets that were developed alongside SMB 1, but then they were *gasp* not included in the game and you had to buy them later when TLL came out! That means SMB 1 cut content that was good enough to release and made you buy it separately. Damn Nintendo, always out to pillage your wallet at every opportunity.

The content in question in D4 was NEVER "edite out of the game and added back later" - it was always part of the game, from day 1 - they just chose to ask for more money for that stuff.

Prove that the shop items for Diablo 4 weren't at one point assets to be included in the base game that were then edited out or otherwise cut before release. You can't, because no one but the developer teams know what got kept and what got scrapped.

If it was cut it's not part of the game anymore. It's extra, and you can pay extra for it. Just like you can field your Space Marine army with generic iconography out of the box or you can pay extra to get their particular chapter badge decal sheet.

[rhorle]

TLL is smb2. It was not something they sold separately for additional cost - they were smb2.

It is a sequel to Super Mario Bros. (1985) and was originally released in Japan for the Famicom Disk System as Super Mario Bros. 2 on June 3, 1986. Nintendo of America deemed it too difficult for its North American audience and instead released an alternative sequel, also titled Super Mario Bros. 2, in 1988. The game was renamed The Lost Levels and first released internationally in the 1993 Super Nintendo Entertainment System compilation Super Mario All-Stars. It was ported to the Game Boy Color, Game Boy Advance, Wii, Nintendo 3DS, Wii U and Nintendo Switch.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_...he_Lost_Levels

For NA it was sold as an extra cost.

It is also strange your argument is now that when additional content is included from the start of the game it means it was cut from the base game. Do you have any evidence that it wasn't developed concurrently because they had the monetization model figured out?

[XDurionX]

Among many stupid arguments in this thread, this has to be one of the most stupid.

[arkanon]

[I]
It is also strange your argument is now that when additional content is included from the start of the game it means it was cut from the base game.

Im not saying that at all - im saying the exact opposite. Im saying it was very clearly part of the game, but had an additional cost attached to it.

[Seezer]

I bust cheeks

[rhorle]

Im not saying that at all - im saying the exact opposite. Im saying it was very clearly part of the game, but had an additional cost attached to it.

That is exactly what you are saying. That it was part of the game and put behind a paywall. Do you have evidence that it was part of the base game and wasn't developed as an extra thing? Being in the game files at release does not prove that. So there is no need to re-post that as an answer. You claim it would have existed without additional monetization but have nothing to back that up other than you say so.

Others, including myself, are saying that they only exist because Blizzard needed to create things so they could monetize it. Extras. In the past those extras would have been a sequel, expansion, map pack, or other similar terms. They would either have been cut from the game or sold at some point. The same as now.

[Fencers]

The content in question in D4 was NEVER "edite out of the game and added back later" - it was always part of the game, from day 1 - they just chose to ask for more money for that stuff.

Uh, yeah. Because those cosmetics are not sold as part of the game. You are not entitled to something they are not selling inclusive of the game package you bought.

If you went to buy a car there are many extras and amenities you do not get with the standard model. With the price difference in the thousands.

[arkanon]

Uh, yeah. Because those cosmetics are not sold as part of the game. You are not entitled to something they are not selling inclusive of the game package you bought.

If you went to buy a car there are many extras and amenities you do not get with the standard model. With the price difference in the thousands.

Find me a car where the "extras" add up to multiple times more than the base car itself. The fact it is a difference of "thousands" means nothing when the item in question cos TENS of thousands.

[Endus]

Find me a car where the "extras" add up to multiple times more than the base car itself. The fact it is a difference of "thousands" means nothing when the item in question cos TENS of thousands.

Utterly irrelevant.

Your entire argument is a meritless whinge that you want stuff but dont want to pay for it. End rationalization. You have no other justification or argument to add. Just a stamped foot and a strident "But I want ​it!"

[arkanon]

Utterly irrelevant.

Your entire argument is a meritless whinge that you want stuff but dont want to pay for it. End rationalization. You have no other justification or argument to add. Just a stamped foot and a strident "But I want ​it!"

Calm down, it was a direct response to someone who introduced that point - they brought up value, not me. Relax.

[Pohut]

Copium is strong in this thread. People getting screwed over and asking for more. When I pay 70 dollars for the game I expect to receive the full game for that price.

[Stickiler]

Copium is strong in this thread. People getting screwed over and asking for more. When I pay 70 dollars for the game I expect to receive the full game for that price.

Good news, you do!

[Fencers]

Find me a car where the "extras" add up to multiple times more than the base car itself. The fact it is a difference of "thousands" means nothing when the item in question cos TENS of thousands.

That's nonsense and has no relevance to what you are entitled to at the point of sale. You are arguing on a sliding criteria to suit your personal view of "complete" and that has neither relevance nor accuracy to what a consumer is entitled to at the point of sale.

[Biomega]

Copium is strong in this thread. People getting screwed over and asking for more. When I pay 70 dollars for the game I expect to receive the full game for that price.

Because you have no idea what you even MEAN by "full game", and you're just parroting a talking point. "Full game" is a meaningless phrase that AT BEST comes down to technicalities, because yes technically you aren't getting everything that's possibly available for this game in any possible way but that's completely empty and vapid rhetoric considering those extras are 1. cosmetic only; and 2. only exist BECAUSE they're being sold.

I'd suggest thinking about two seconds before repeating something you heard on YT, because "full game" or "complete game" are red herrings, not actual arguments - what matters is the AMOUNT you get for the price, not whether or not there's other stuff you can get on top for extra money. Otherwise you're basically saying you'd rather have one whole apple for $10 than paying $10 for a fruit basket that's got ten different fruits in it, but only half of each; just because you're getting a "complete" fruit with one and not the other.

[Aoewy]

Copium is strong in this thread. People getting screwed over and asking for more. When I pay 70 dollars for the game I expect to receive the full game for that price.

Looks like D4 will be perfect for you since you do have the entire full game for that price, amazing isn't it!

[Endus]

Copium is strong in this thread. People getting screwed over and asking for more. When I pay 70 dollars for the game I expect to receive the full game for that price.

If you mean "the game and all optional additional content", then no. Just factually wrong. Literally the same thing as a Karen insisting that a $10 burger has to come with fries and a drink, even if the menu never suggests any such thing. It's just a naked, baseless entitlement complex.

[arkanon]

Looks like D4 will be perfect for you since you do have the entire full game for that price, amazing isn't it!

Except for the content you have to pay extra for.

[The Oblivion]

Except for the content you have to pay extra for.

which luckily, is not part of the base game. so you pay 70, you get all of the diablo 4 game. everything else came after the base game as extra content never intended to be in the base game

[arkanon]

That's nonsense and has no relevance to what you are entitled to at the point of sale. You are arguing on a sliding criteria to suit your personal view of "complete" and that has neither relevance nor accuracy to what a consumer is entitled to at the point of sale.

If it's not relevant, why did YOU bring up the price ??? I didn't, you did. "THOUSANDS of dollars" you said. Not me. You.

- - - Updated - - -

which luckily, is not part of the base game. so you pay 70, you get all of the diablo 4 game. everything else came after the base game as extra content never intended to be in the base game

After? It was available the second the game launched. It wasn't after - it's literally included in the game files you download. Again, not after - same time.

[rhorle]

Except for the content you have to pay extra for.

The extra content you pay extra for. You get the full game just not the full+extra game.