Diablo 4 is bad.

[jackofwind]

No, because that was the whole point. I'm not sure where you're confused here.

The built the game. They sold the game.

They also had some folks make some additional cosmetics to fill their initial cash shop to be sold separately, never intended to be part of the core game, to begin generating sustained revenue from the cash shop leading into S1.

Just like they made additional cosmetics and had other rewards for more expensive versions of Diablo 4 that are unavailable to users unless they purchased them.

Literally the same thing, just one is in the cash shop and the other is attached to the game at the point of sale.

In his mind though everything created for the game needs to ship as part of the base game, otherwise "it's not complete".

You know, like how every Mario game ever made has shipped as incomplete because there were finished levels trimmed from the final product before release. I'm not sure if you're aware, but editing exists only to rip off the consumer, because more is always better.

[Endus]

Yes I did. When I purchased sonic 2, I got sonic 2 in its entirety. The end.

So shifting goalposts from D4 to Sonic 2. What was it you said a moment ago?

Don't move the goalposts because you started to realise what you were saying makes no sense at all.

Right. Take your own advice.

[jackofwind]

Yes I did. When I purchased sonic 2, I got sonic 2 in its entirety. The end.

Until they release a director's cut edition and you realize that you've just been fucked by big cinema yet again.

Curses!

[Kyanion]

Nothing you're saying is true.

There has never been a position that paying the base price for a game, or any product, entitles you to all the additional add-ons and accessories you could buy for that product. It's a meritless idea that was invented by gamers like yourself to launch an entirely dishonest attack on modern game monetization practices.

You paid the "base price". That means you're only entitled to what's included in that "base price". If you want more, you pay more. The same way paying for a pepperoni pizza doesn't mean it comes with free extra cheese and dipping sauce and a free side of wings. You want those things, you pay extra for them.

This idea that you're paying a "full price" for a game like D4 which should entitle you to all the content? It's a lie. Utterly fictional bullshit you made up. That's not what you paid. If you buy a new car and want the Touring package, you pay extra for that. If you later want to buy nicer hubcaps, you're gonna pay extra for that, even if they're from the dealership directly. That's how everything has always worked. Why would video games be any different?

I think they point they are making which is an outdated take in this modern era of gaming is that you used to buy a game and that was it, no extra cost involved later down the road. Full game, full stop. Then you had optional things tacked on, many of them ON THE DISC, but blocked by a paywall. The one that pissed me off back in the day was the DLC for Mass Effect 3 which was on the disc itself so you had to pay more money after buying the 'full game'.

In this modern era of gaming I don't anyone should get offended about DLC, cosmetics and other things added to a game after the initial payment to buy the game, as there is jack shit to be done about it as people will buy it and it will keep being a thing as long as enough people do it. The cosmetics are not required to play the game so I don't overly care.

- - - Updated - - -

I fucking love that you guys are so furiously defending blizzard, you are talking about car wheels and hood pins. Holy shit.

It isn't just a Blizzard thing, welcome to gaming in an online world, you said it yourself that shit started to change in the 2000s, it is 2023, that shit is a part of gaming now.

[arkanon]

In his mind though everything created for the game needs to ship as part of the base game, otherwise "it's not complete".

You know, like how every Mario game ever made has shipped as incomplete because there were finished levels trimmed from the final product before release. I'm not sure if you're aware, but editing exists only to rip off the consumer, because more is always better.

Which original mario game released with additional cost to unlock the remaining levels?

What you are doing is called a strawman argument.

[jackofwind]

I think they point they are making which is an outdated take in this modern era of gaming is that you used to buy a game and that was it, no extra cost involved later down the road. Full game, full stop. Then you had optional things tacked on, many of them ON THE DISC, but blocked by a paywall. The one that pissed me off back in the day was the DLC for Mass Effect 3 which was on the disc itself so you had to pay more money after buying the 'full game'.

In this modern era of gaming I don't anyone should get offended about DLC, cosmetics and other things added to a game after the initial payment to buy the game, as there is jack shit to be done about it as people will buy it and it will keep being a thing as long as enough people do it. The cosmetics are not required to play the game so I don't overly care.

"Full game" = no bug fixes, no tuning passes, no updates. Also you have no idea how much content was created for any of those games because you never saw what was left on the editing room floor. So by his own definition those games couldn't be called "complete" anyways.

It's just an overall stupid argument.

[Kyanion]

You don't think it's one HELL of a coincidence that this content that was "never intended to be par tof the game" was completed and ready and included in the game files on day one of release? That doesn't strike you as........coincidental?

Of course there is no coincidence, but now a days just because something is on the disc or download does not mean you get it when you buy the game, period. Welcome to modern gaming?

[Endus]

I think they point they are making which is an outdated take in this modern era of gaming is that you used to buy a game and that was it, no extra cost involved later down the road. Full game, full stop. Then you had optional things tacked on, many of them ON THE DISC, but blocked by a paywall. The one that pissed me off back in the day was the DLC for Mass Effect 3 which was on the disc itself so you had to pay more money after buying the 'full game'.

In this modern era of gaming I don't anyone should get offended about DLC, cosmetics and other things added to a game after the initial payment to buy the game, as there is jack shit to be done about it as people will buy it and it will keep being a thing as long as enough people do it. The cosmetics are not required to play the game so I don't overly care.

Yes, but the point is the idea of a "full price" that entitles you to all future optional content is one that's entirely fictional. It's literally no different than a Karen at Five Guys bitching that her burger should come with fries and she doesn't want to pay extra for fries. Literally the same "argument".

[arkanon]

I think they point they are making which is an outdated take in this modern era of gaming is that you used to buy a game and that was it, no extra cost involved later down the road. Full game, full stop. Then you had optional things tacked on, many of them ON THE DISC, but blocked by a paywall. The one that pissed me off back in the day was the DLC for Mass Effect 3 which was on the disc itself so you had to pay more money after buying the 'full game'.

In this modern era of gaming I don't anyone should get offended about DLC, cosmetics and other things added to a game after the initial payment to buy the game, as there is jack shit to be done about it as people will buy it and it will keep being a thing as long as enough people do it. The cosmetics are not required to play the game so I don't overly care.

.

I think one of the other early ones was a fighting game - maybe tekken or street fighter or something - where they charged a lot of additional money for fighters........that were included on the disc. This caused a lot of outrage at the time, but now its just considered so normal, people have completely forgotten how games used to release.

[Kyanion]

Yes I did. When I purchased sonic 2, I got sonic 2 in its entirety. The end.

That's the hill you want to die on? Because things worked that way 20+ years ago it must stay the same now?

[Edge-]

Which original mario game released with additional cost to unlock the remaining levels?

What you are doing is called a strawman argument.

Eyo remember that time they updated Mario to fix some major bugs? And when they did the free balance patch that really improved things? How about those additional levels they added for free?

Or are we going to pretend that literally nothing has changed between the time Mario released and today?

[Kyanion]

Yes, but the point is the idea of a "full price" that entitles you to all future optional content is one that's entirely fictional. It's literally no different than a Karen at Five Guys bitching that her burger should come with fries and she doesn't want to pay extra for fries. Literally the same "argument".

Agreed, the argument they are making is wholly dishonest when viewed in the modern era of gaming. I could understand being pissed off at 'on disc DLC' that was a surprise to people buying the game that they did not get everything they paid for but even ME3 was in 2012, shit is way different now. In no way are you entitled to the 'complete' game when you buy it, because DLC/cosmetics and so on are there for companies to make more money and to cover the cost of games not really rising much in price over the past 20 years.

[arkanon]

Or are we going to pretend that literally nothing has changed between the time Mario released and today?

Pretend nothing has changed? The conversation is literally about how much things have changed......why would you ask that question?

[Kyanion]

I think one of the other early ones was a fighting game - maybe tekken or street fighter or something - where they charged a lot of additional money for fighters........that were included on the disc. This caused a lot of outrage at the time, but now its just considered so normal, people have completely forgotten how games used to release.

No one has forgotten, it is just they either don't care or they accepted it as part of the process now. Like I used Mass Effect 3 as an example as a character in the game was locked behind DLC that was on the disc you bought. Trying to use 'it used to be this way' as an argument is an exercise in futility.

[Kumorii]

Funny thing is. If the cosmetics in the shop weren't there or even in the game. The game would be considered "complete".
Which is wild.

you can cut 20% of the game and the game would be considered complete because you can't pay for it as an option.

[Kyanion]

"Full game" = no bug fixes, no tuning passes, no updates. Also you have no idea how much content was created for any of those games because you never saw what was left on the editing room floor. So by his own definition those games couldn't be called "complete" anyways.

It's just an overall stupid argument.

No question on the stupidity of the argument. Though I think that is taking a bit far with things that were not included and left on the editing room floor. I just focus on the 'sonic 2' portion of when you bought that game that was it, you got everything on the cartridge. Those days are long gone and not likely coming back.

[Edge-]

Pretend nothing has changed? The conversation is literally about how much things have changed......why would you ask that question?

Then I'd hope you'd understand that, "What makes a complete game." has also changed given that you can now sell things and update via patches. That you can sell a complete game and still have separate cosmetics available for sale at launch. You don't have to be happy about it or like it, but it is what it is.

That's it from me on this topic, if you want to continue doubling, tripling, quadrupling, quintupling, etc. down, go for it. I guess you're trying to live up to your PFP or something.

[jackofwind]

Which original mario game released with additional cost to unlock the remaining levels?

What you are doing is called a strawman argument.

The Lost Levels (ie: SMB 2) was initially developed from a series of extra hard levels put together while Nintendo worked on the SMB arcade game. So yeah, they had levels already made that they made you pay more for after.

[Kyanion]

Pretend nothing has changed? The conversation is literally about how much things have changed

I see you changed your quote to something I said. Pretty fucking sad you take it out of context like that. When you buy a game in 2023 do you expect to get all DLC/cosmetics for free? If yes, why? Should they change the sticker price to 100 or 120 dollars so you can buy the complete game? I'd rather they charge you that and I'll pay the lower price and pick cosmetics only if I want them.

[Endus]

Agreed, the argument they are making is wholly dishonest when viewed in the modern era of gaming. I could understand being pissed off at 'on disc DLC' that was a surprise to people buying the game that they did not get everything they paid for but even ME3 was in 2012, shit is way different now. In no way are you entitled to the 'complete' game when you buy it, because DLC/cosmetics and so on are there for companies to make more money and to cover the cost of games not really rising much in price over the past 20 years.

Even back then, it was silly. Games have always been license-driven, and the license always carried restrictions. It's why early consoles could get region-locked, and why downloading the content off a cartridge was always problematic. ME3 was right around when DLC was first emerging; I had issues with that choice because of how integral Jarvik was to the story, if you had him. If they'd had a dozen alternate characters that weren't story-relevant or a bunch of cosmetics for characters locked up the same way, I don't think the backlash would've been nearly as strong; it wasn't the practice but the specific nature of how integral the particular content was that sparked the outrage, for the most part, IMO.