it was very likely the most expensive F2P game in early access EVER in the history of Early Access.
If these developers did anything remotely close to what they did it would be all over the map with red raged fury
This is a perfect example of people not understanding what they are getting into. Life isn't that hard to figure out but people really do try their best to bork it up.
That "subscription in beta" is probably couched as supporting the development of the game. I think Pantheon has several instances of this.
It is not a subscription to play it is financially supporting beta, almost like a kickstarter but different.
You don't want to support the game in development? GREAT! Most people wouldn't and I completely understand why, especially if that game isn't guaranteed to launch. So you don't do it. You don't give them a monthly tithe or whatever you/they want to call it. Problem solved.
I will say it again.
If an indie developer did anything remotely close to something like Epic did for Fortnite absolute total hell would have been paid.
are you in any way saying that statement would be false? are you saying that if an indie developer did what Epic did that they would not get any more heat for it then Epic did.
seriously?
the double standard I see from my end is absolutely blindly obvious on multiple topics
Sean, this is just another example of why talking with you is so hard. I have no idea how you are wired.
If you had said "this is what Fortnight did and it was x, y and zed" I would then be able to fully look into it and make a better assessment of what you were talking about. But no you just throughout some examples and somehow we must mind read. You do this all the time.
then just dont.
I will say it a 3rd time.
If an indie developer did even 1/2 of what Dice did in any misunderstood obfuscated way whatsoever that could even remotely be construed as possibly doing what I laid out, people would have gone absolutely batshit crazy mad.
People put CR on fire for being a month late, can you imagine what people would have done even in any obfucated kinda sorta maybe have it kinda look like 1/2 of what I laid out?....
I mean for christ sake look at how much hell Ark got for having a DLC that had 'deserts' in them because 'deserts' where mentioned in the kickstarter. Compare that with charging the most expensive price ever for an early access game that is F2P? are you joking me?
Sean, it's very well could be different audiences.
You make this assumption that the same people are saying one thing about one company but not saying anything about another. If that's your position that's great, but "show your work".
The static level on game forums went completely mad when Ark did DLC 'deserts' , the game forums went absolutely batshit anytime CR sells ANYTHING or is even a micro-second late, now this developer is catching hell for what? charging a subscription while in early access? but when Dice did what they did..friggin crickets, silence, nothing, other than this guy and what those guys did isnt even remotely close to what Dice did.
basically 'trending' vs 'not trending'.
yes different people but look at the overall trends
And maybe the audience for one game doesn't care. Like, "they really don't care". And the Audience for another game does care.
It's very possible that there is a Venn diagram here but there are definitely people who would go nuts if a game required a subscription and another group who just want a subscription (to use an example). There are people who are "A-Ok" with lootboxes and paid DLC and others who throw a fit.
As long as they are truly different people in each category there is no issue. Now, if you do see specific people giving a game shit but are ok with another game doing something similar then that is another issue all together.
it was very likely the most expensive F2P game in early access EVER in the history of Early Access.
If these developers did anything remotely close to what they did it would be all over the map with red raged fury
This is a perfect example of people not understanding what they are getting into. Life isn't that hard to figure out but people really do try their best to bork it up.
That "subscription in beta" is probably couched as supporting the development of the game. I think Pantheon has several instances of this.
It is not a subscription to play it is financially supporting beta, almost like a kickstarter but different.
You don't want to support the game in development? GREAT! Most people wouldn't and I completely understand why, especially if that game isn't guaranteed to launch. So you don't do it. You don't give them a monthly tithe or whatever you/they want to call it. Problem solved.
I will say it again.
If an indie developer did anything remotely close to something like Epic did for Fortnite absolute total hell would have been paid.
are you in any way saying that statement would be false? are you saying that if an indie developer did what Epic did that they would not get any more heat for it then Epic did.
seriously?
the double standard I see from my end is absolutely blindly obvious on multiple topics
Sean, this is just another example of why talking with you is so hard. I have no idea how you are wired.
If you had said "this is what Fortnight did and it was x, y and zed" I would then be able to fully look into it and make a better assessment of what you were talking about. But no you just throughout some examples and somehow we must mind read. You do this all the time.
then just dont.
I will say it a 3rd time.
If an indie developer did even 1/2 of what Dice did in any misunderstood obfuscated way whatsoever that could even remotely be construed as possibly doing what I laid out, people would have gone absolutely batshit crazy mad.
People put CR on fire for being a month late, can you imagine what people would have done even in any obfucated kinda sorta maybe have it kinda look like 1/2 of what I laid out?....
I mean for christ sake look at how much hell Ark got for having a DLC that had 'deserts' in them because 'deserts' where mentioned in the kickstarter. Compare that with charging the most expensive price ever for an early access game that is F2P? are you joking me?
Sean, it's very well could be different audiences.
You make this assumption that the same people are saying one thing about one company but not saying anything about another. If that's your position that's great, but "show your work".
The static level on game forums went completely mad when Ark did DLC 'deserts' , the game forums went absolutely batshit anytime CR sells ANYTHING or is even a micro-second late, now this developer is catching hell for what? charging a subscription while in early access? but when Dice did what they did..friggin crickets, silence, nothing, other than this guy and what those guys did isnt even remotely close to what Dice did.
basically 'trending' vs 'not trending'.
yes different people but look at the overall trends
When SWBF2 launched EADICE got killed for their monetization. I'm not sure if you missed the news for a week or so... but their stock tanked by I think about a billion dollars (and still has only partially recovered)
If you think EA (DICE) gets a pass on anything... I'm not sure what world that's in but it sure isn't Earth.
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.
The static level on game forums went completely mad when Ark did DLC 'deserts' , the game forums went absolutely batshit anytime CR sells ANYTHING or is even a micro-second late, now this developer is catching hell for what? charging a subscription while in early access? but when Dice did what they did..friggin crickets, silence, nothing, other than this guy and what those guys did isnt even remotely close to what Dice did.
basically 'trending' vs 'not trending'.
yes different people but look at the overall trends
When SWBF2 launched EADICE got killed for their monetization. I'm not sure if you missed the news for a week or so... but their stock tanked by I think about a billion dollars (and still has only partially recovered)
If you think EA (DICE) gets a pass on anything... I'm not sure what world that's in but it sure isn't Earth.
yeah actually to be honest that SWBF2 was an odd reaction from the community given the pattern, I think maybe because its EA.
but yeah, DICE ABSOLUTELY got a pass on Fortnite. I have zero question in my mind that if an indie company charge ANY amount, even $20 in early access for a game that would be F2P at release if anyone could even find that game by digging around for it for hours, they would lite it up like a pinata. Never mind the fact that Fornite was expensive for an early access game no matter how you slice it and never mind the fact that it had paid for lootboxes while in early access AND never mind the fact that those loot boxes really were P2W.
if Ark did all those things....? oh my frggin god
picture in your mind 'H1Z1 has loot boxes' now picture Rust now has lootboxes...holy friggin smokes
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
The static level on game forums went completely mad when Ark did DLC 'deserts' , the game forums went absolutely batshit anytime CR sells ANYTHING or is even a micro-second late, now this developer is catching hell for what? charging a subscription while in early access? but when Dice did what they did..friggin crickets, silence, nothing, other than this guy and what those guys did isnt even remotely close to what Dice did.
basically 'trending' vs 'not trending'.
yes different people but look at the overall trends
When SWBF2 launched EADICE got killed for their monetization. I'm not sure if you missed the news for a week or so... but their stock tanked by I think about a billion dollars (and still has only partially recovered)
If you think EA (DICE) gets a pass on anything... I'm not sure what world that's in but it sure isn't Earth.
The static level on game forums went completely mad when Ark did DLC 'deserts' , the game forums went absolutely batshit anytime CR sells ANYTHING or is even a micro-second late, now this developer is catching hell for what? charging a subscription while in early access? but when Dice did what they did..friggin crickets, silence, nothing, other than this guy and what those guys did isnt even remotely close to what Dice did.
basically 'trending' vs 'not trending'.
yes different people but look at the overall trends
When SWBF2 launched EADICE got killed for their monetization. I'm not sure if you missed the news for a week or so... but their stock tanked by I think about a billion dollars (and still has only partially recovered)
If you think EA (DICE) gets a pass on anything... I'm not sure what world that's in but it sure isn't Earth.
That's a great example.
so you think the overall static noise on the interwebs if Rust came out with a $40 charge on a Early Access title, F2P at release and paid for lootboxes all while in early access that RUST would get just as much heat as Dice did.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Life is Feudal has hit Early Access and the price ranges from $40-$90 depending on which 'package' you get. 'packages' will contain free lootbox keys but otherwise you will have to spend money on the lootboxes. Oh and when the game is released it will be free to play
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Life is Feudal has hit Early Access and the price ranges from $40-$90 depending on which 'package' you get. 'packages' will contain free lootbox keys but otherwise you will have to spend money on the lootboxes. Oh and when the game is released it will be free to play
Imagine this ...
There is a group of people who play indie games, "indie games" have a very specific meaning to them and they have been playing these games made by small groups, with a passion for games, a good portion of their lives. Now, an indie game "Life is Feudal" comes out but adopts the practices that large game companies are using for their AAA games ....
There is ANOTHER group of people who don't play indy games, never have, think they are junk. They solely play AAA games. Maybe they are young, don't know any other way when a game company includes loot boxes and paid DLC and benefits for signing up and paying money before the game is launched.
See what I mean?
Though as Slapshot points out, EA didn't do so well with their attempt at "paid extra content".
Life is Feudal has hit Early Access and the price ranges from $40-$90 depending on which 'package' you get. 'packages' will contain free lootbox keys but otherwise you will have to spend money on the lootboxes. Oh and when the game is released it will be free to play
Imagine this ...
There is a group of people who play indie games, "indie games" have a very specific meaning to them and they have been playing these games made by small groups, with a passion for games, a good portion of their lives. Now, an indie game "Life is Feudal" comes out but adopts the practices that large game companies are using for their AAA games ....
There is ANOTHER group of people who don't play indy games, never have, think they are junk. They solely play AAA games. Maybe they are young, don't know any other way when a game company includes loot boxes and paid DLC and benefits for signing up and paying money before the game is launched.
See what I mean?
Though as Slapshot points out, EA didn't do so well with their attempt at "paid extra content".
I understand that they are different people.
I am talking about 'Trending'.
You know when you see 'trending' on news articles what that means is that a lot of people are talking about it. What I am saying is that the TREND in internet chatter that gets attention is extreemly biased against indies and a double standard exists in the trend.....TRENDING.
So when you look at over all 'chatter' you see a lot more 'chatter' complaining about indies do far less than AAAs do but the 'chatter' level of the 'trending' is much lower in complaining when AAA do far more....
trending...chatter, overall internet forums activities.
but the next question is why I am having to argue this observation? why is the observation that I am making so infurating? Think about it. based on your own perspective, at most my observation should have just been 'true dat' not a multi hour debate.
lets just move on, my observation got a lot more heat then it really should have
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Ok, every game needs Alpha, Beta stages. The question is how long should the beta last? I'm sure I read one game (fully launched as far as I was concerned, with cash shop etc) celebrating coming out of open beta - which it had been in for a year. Pretty soon we are going to see permanent open beta games, with expansion after expansion, still not officially launched.
Ok, every game needs Alpha, Beta stages. The question is how long should the beta last? I'm sure I read one game (fully launched as far as I was concerned, with cash shop etc) celebrating coming out of open beta - which it had been in for a year. Pretty soon we are going to see permanent open beta games, with expansion after expansion, still not officially launched.
I don't know if they will actually even have to go to the open beta stage...We are seeing with many of these games in alpha now that there is alot of money to be made and they have zero pressure to actually release the game.....To me its a very dangerous precedent and I don't really think the industry should go there even though the whales may not agree.
Ok, every game needs Alpha, Beta stages. The question is how long should the beta last? I'm sure I read one game (fully launched as far as I was concerned, with cash shop etc) celebrating coming out of open beta - which it had been in for a year. Pretty soon we are going to see permanent open beta games, with expansion after expansion, still not officially launched.
First it was sign up for access to Alpha, beta.... Then it was pay a modest fee to be in the "Founding of the game" Now its monetize every aspect of the game and prolong it as long as possible so they can absolve themselves of actually putting out a quality game and what they promised, but still charge and keep all that money as if it was a finished product.
Just look at SC. All that money and no game. But the cash shop works 100 percent. You can buy ships, land, and tanks. But the game is still in some form of development that no one even the makers have an idea of what state it is in.
Not only do I wait for a finished product I wait for the game to go on sale. I play games that came out 2-3 years ago. All these new games are sub-par and seriously lacking for the prices they are charging.
The static level on game forums went completely mad when Ark did DLC 'deserts' , the game forums went absolutely batshit anytime CR sells ANYTHING or is even a micro-second late, now this developer is catching hell for what? charging a subscription while in early access? but when Dice did what they did..friggin crickets, silence, nothing, other than this guy and what those guys did isnt even remotely close to what Dice did.
basically 'trending' vs 'not trending'.
yes different people but look at the overall trends
When SWBF2 launched EADICE got killed for their monetization. I'm not sure if you missed the news for a week or so... but their stock tanked by I think about a billion dollars (and still has only partially recovered)
If you think EA (DICE) gets a pass on anything... I'm not sure what world that's in but it sure isn't Earth.
yeah actually to be honest that SWBF2 was an odd reaction from the community given the pattern, I think maybe because its EA.
but yeah, DICE ABSOLUTELY got a pass on Fortnite. I have zero question in my mind that if an indie company charge ANY amount, even $20 in early access for a game that would be F2P at release if anyone could even find that game by digging around for it for hours, they would lite it up like a pinata. Never mind the fact that Fornite was expensive for an early access game no matter how you slice it and never mind the fact that it had paid for lootboxes while in early access AND never mind the fact that those loot boxes really were P2W.
if Ark did all those things....? oh my frggin god
picture in your mind 'H1Z1 has loot boxes' now picture Rust now has lootboxes...holy friggin smokes
Maybe DICE got a pass on Fortnite because it wasn't even their game?
Dunno.. just saying...
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.
In case it matters, which it really shouldn't, I voiced my opinion about DICE / EA just as much in regards to SWBF2 lootboxes, even though I never purchased the game. As for Fortnite, I never purchased it either. As for Ark selling an expansion during BETA, yes, another map is the same as an expansion in my opinion, however, for the sake of staying true to the new term of DLC, who cares. Adding content such a a new map does not go against the intention of the original game. Not every developer has to offer free DLC. The fact it was issued while Ark was still in BETA doesn't really bother me. If the original Ark game had a subscription, that is a completely different thing.
EDIT: To make myself clear, it doesn't matter about Ark's DLC because you didn't need it to play the original game. It was DLC for those interested in it.
Ok, every game needs Alpha, Beta stages. The question is how long should the beta last? I'm sure I read one game (fully launched as far as I was concerned, with cash shop etc) celebrating coming out of open beta - which it had been in for a year. Pretty soon we are going to see permanent open beta games, with expansion after expansion, still not officially launched.
And?
If a shop adverises oranges and delivers orange pips they are "guilty" of "deceit" basically.
If they advertise orange pips - that they hope will germinate into trees and give oranges ...... ?
A developer should not be spending the money you spent on their game ,showing confidence in that developer on a DLC BEFORE getting the game in order.By this i mean fully fledged content,bugs "i mean bad coding"fixed,everything is working properly,people not getting crashes /unplayable game etc etc. When you ignore or show no effort in the product you blatantly sold as unfinished you are deceiving and ripping off your customers.EVERY single place in real life,if we buy a defect,we get a refund or a replacement that works properly,seems the gaming industry gets away with crappy business practices.
If you buy a car and the stereo is missing or the spare tire is missing ,you get it upon mentioning it,you don't pay a DLC to get what is missing.When you advertise the word "GAME"that means the entire game,not bits and pieces of a game and if you want the rest you can buy it in the cash shop or in our next DLC or in loot boxes.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
A developer should not be spending the money you spent on their game ,showing confidence in that developer on a DLC BEFORE getting the game in order.By this i mean fully fledged content,bugs "i mean bad coding"fixed,everything is working properly,people not getting crashes /unplayable game etc etc. When you ignore or show no effort in the product you blatantly sold as unfinished you are deceiving and ripping off your customers.EVERY single place in real life,if we buy a defect,we get a refund or a replacement that works properly,seems the gaming industry gets away with crappy business practices.
If you buy a car and the stereo is missing or the spare tire is missing ,you get it upon mentioning it,you don't pay a DLC to get what is missing.When you advertise the word "GAME"that means the entire game,not bits and pieces of a game and if you want the rest you can buy it in the cash shop or in our next DLC or in loot boxes.
no effort?
are you aware that this game has been in development for years and started with a micro-sized team? no effort? are you aware that the private server version has been out for sometime now?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Imagine if it were still in pre-alpha and had a massive cash shop, subscriptions, and the cash shop was selling usable, powerful, in game items. People would be outraged, right?
Nah, they'd just buy more spaceships.
Companies can do this because they don't even need to make a game in order to get millions from overeager hyped up idiots. There's a ton of failed kickstarters and crowdfunded games that take the money and never come close to a release. But they sure got paid.
Don't blame the game companies - they're just exploiting a resource of idiots flush with cash.
Imagine if it were still in pre-alpha and had a massive cash shop, subscriptions, and the cash shop was selling usable, powerful, in game items. People would be outraged, right?
Nah, they'd just buy more spaceships.
Companies can do this because they don't even need to make a game in order to get millions from overeager hyped up idiots. There's a ton of failed kickstarters and crowdfunded games that take the money and never come close to a release. But they sure got paid.
Don't blame the game companies - they're just exploiting a resource of idiots flush with cash.
Except that is in fact illegal. Hence the reason game developers and studios can't be trusted to regulate themselves when it comes to advertising their products.
Imagine if it were still in pre-alpha and had a massive cash shop, subscriptions, and the cash shop was selling usable, powerful, in game items. People would be outraged, right?
Nah, they'd just buy more spaceships.
Companies can do this because they don't even need to make a game in order to get millions from overeager hyped up idiots. There's a ton of failed kickstarters and crowdfunded games that take the money and never come close to a release. But they sure got paid.
Don't blame the game companies - they're just exploiting a resource of idiots flush with cash.
Except that is in fact illegal. Hence the reason game developers and studios can't be trusted to regulate themselves when it comes to advertising their products.
so think about this
'its illegal' 'which is why they need to be regulated'
no..if its illegal then THAT is the regulation
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
ProTip - When trying to figure out the state of a game - only ask one question:
Will there be a future database wipe?
if NO - the game is LAUNCHED - regardless of what the label is (alpha, beta, early access etc...)
if YES - then the game is still in testing
This is all that really matters
Simply ignore all other labels (pre-launch, early access, pre-alpha, beta etc... simply don't pay any attention to any of those anymore)
Or you can take a look if the game was released as final, read post launch reviews, watch post launch videos, etc. and make an educated decision if you want to purchase the game or not.
One problem is, some people haven't learned to tell the difference between planning, hype, and the ability to deliver. Completely different things. Some Devs are good at planning, some at hype, and some at delivery to various degrees.
Say a game has a great plan with fantastic demos but everything in their alpha is buggy and not one thing has been completely finished. The odds are that if they can't deliver a decent alpha then the beta and launch will be screwed also. FF managed to deliver but they had to close down and redevelop the game in order to do it, something most failing games won't do to such a degree.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
One problem is, some people haven't learned to tell the difference between planning, hype, and the ability to deliver. Completely different things. Some Devs are good at planning, some at hype, and some at delivery to various degrees.
Say a game has a great plan with fantastic demos but everything in their alpha is buggy and not one thing has been completely finished. The odds are that if they can't deliver a decent alpha then the beta and launch will be screwed also. FF managed to deliver but they had to close down and redevelop the game in order to do it, something most failing games won't do to such a degree.
right.
what I have found is that unless a game exists that I can buy and I can download I consider it nothing more than an idea. intresting perhaps but tell me when I can download it and only then will i look into details.
works well for me personally
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Well, it seems Life is Feudal: MMO has it's hands full with uber damage control on Discord. The new craze is the infestation of gold farmers and the fact they are in utter denial of it, despite a gold selling site is already actively selling gold, horses, gear and what have you. Not to mention the NA server is in an uproar over the amount of resources being stripped from the world in order to fund said actions.
Comments
It's very possible that there is a Venn diagram here but there are definitely people who would go nuts if a game required a subscription and another group who just want a subscription (to use an example). There are people who are "A-Ok" with lootboxes and paid DLC and others who throw a fit.
As long as they are truly different people in each category there is no issue. Now, if you do see specific people giving a game shit but are ok with another game doing something similar then that is another issue all together.
If you think EA (DICE) gets a pass on anything... I'm not sure what world that's in but it sure isn't Earth.
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.
but yeah, DICE ABSOLUTELY got a pass on Fortnite. I have zero question in my mind that if an indie company charge ANY amount, even $20 in early access for a game that would be F2P at release if anyone could even find that game by digging around for it for hours, they would lite it up like a pinata.
Never mind the fact that Fornite was expensive for an early access game no matter how you slice it and never mind the fact that it had paid for lootboxes while in early access AND never mind the fact that those loot boxes really were P2W.
if Ark did all those things....? oh my frggin god
picture in your mind 'H1Z1 has loot boxes' now picture Rust now has lootboxes...holy friggin smokes
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Life is Feudal has hit Early Access and the price ranges from $40-$90 depending on which 'package' you get. 'packages' will contain free lootbox keys but otherwise you will have to spend money on the lootboxes. Oh and when the game is released it will be free to play
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
There is a group of people who play indie games, "indie games" have a very specific meaning to them and they have been playing these games made by small groups, with a passion for games, a good portion of their lives. Now, an indie game "Life is Feudal" comes out but adopts the practices that large game companies are using for their AAA games ....
There is ANOTHER group of people who don't play indy games, never have, think they are junk. They solely play AAA games. Maybe they are young, don't know any other way when a game company includes loot boxes and paid DLC and benefits for signing up and paying money before the game is launched.
See what I mean?
Though as Slapshot points out, EA didn't do so well with their attempt at "paid extra content".
I am talking about 'Trending'.
You know when you see 'trending' on news articles what that means is that a lot of people are talking about it. What I am saying is that the TREND in internet chatter that gets attention is extreemly biased against indies and a double standard exists in the trend.....TRENDING.
So when you look at over all 'chatter' you see a lot more 'chatter' complaining about indies do far less than AAAs do but the 'chatter' level of the 'trending' is much lower in complaining when AAA do far more....
trending...chatter, overall internet forums activities.
but the next question is why I am having to argue this observation? why is the observation that I am making so infurating? Think about it. based on your own perspective, at most my observation should have just been 'true dat' not a multi hour debate.
lets just move on, my observation got a lot more heat then it really should have
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I'm sure I read one game (fully launched as far as I was concerned, with cash shop etc) celebrating coming out of open beta - which it had been in for a year.
Pretty soon we are going to see permanent open beta games, with expansion after expansion, still not officially launched.
Then it was pay a modest fee to be in the "Founding of the game"
Now its monetize every aspect of the game and prolong it as long as possible so they can absolve themselves of actually putting out a quality game and what they promised, but still charge and keep all that money as if it was a finished product.
Just look at SC. All that money and no game. But the cash shop works 100 percent. You can buy ships, land, and tanks. But the game is still in some form of development that no one even the makers have an idea of what state it is in.
Not only do I wait for a finished product I wait for the game to go on sale. I play games that came out 2-3 years ago. All these new games are sub-par and seriously lacking for the prices they are charging.
Dunno.. just saying...
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.
EDIT: To make myself clear, it doesn't matter about Ark's DLC because you didn't need it to play the original game. It was DLC for those interested in it.
If a shop adverises oranges and delivers orange pips they are "guilty" of "deceit" basically.
If they advertise orange pips - that they hope will germinate into trees and give oranges ...... ?
A developer should not be spending the money you spent on their game ,showing confidence in that developer on a DLC BEFORE getting the game in order.By this i mean fully fledged content,bugs "i mean bad coding"fixed,everything is working properly,people not getting crashes /unplayable game etc etc.
When you ignore or show no effort in the product you blatantly sold as unfinished you are deceiving and ripping off your customers.EVERY single place in real life,if we buy a defect,we get a refund or a replacement that works properly,seems the gaming industry gets away with crappy business practices.
If you buy a car and the stereo is missing or the spare tire is missing ,you get it upon mentioning it,you don't pay a DLC to get what is missing.When you advertise the word "GAME"that means the entire game,not bits and pieces of a game and if you want the rest you can buy it in the cash shop or in our next DLC or in loot boxes.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
are you aware that this game has been in development for years and started with a micro-sized team?
no effort?
are you aware that the private server version has been out for sometime now?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
the outrage is that there is a subscription in 'beta' and a active cash shop in 'beta'
hmmmm sound familiar to anyone other than me?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Nah, they'd just buy more spaceships.
Companies can do this because they don't even need to make a game in order to get millions from overeager hyped up idiots. There's a ton of failed kickstarters and crowdfunded games that take the money and never come close to a release. But they sure got paid.
Don't blame the game companies - they're just exploiting a resource of idiots flush with cash.
'its illegal'
'which is why they need to be regulated'
no..if its illegal then THAT is the regulation
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Say a game has a great plan with fantastic demos but everything in their alpha is buggy and not one thing has been completely finished. The odds are that if they can't deliver a decent alpha then the beta and launch will be screwed also. FF managed to deliver but they had to close down and redevelop the game in order to do it, something most failing games won't do to such a degree.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
what I have found is that unless a game exists that I can buy and I can download I consider it nothing more than an idea. intresting perhaps but tell me when I can download it and only then will i look into details.
works well for me personally
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
RIP