And the last 4 of your social security number!
Railworks 2013 survives off content made not only by the main studio, but by fans / smaller dev studios that create DLC as well. The models are usually very well detailed (they’ll feel the wrath of fans if they are not) and that takes time to research / implement.
It’s not rape. It’s paying what it’s worth for a smaller market game. You pay $2 for Horse Armour because they had a huge client base / studio. They know they can recoup the costs.
Heck, I was just talking to a guy yesterday whose company paid $150,000 for 1 piece of very obscure software that has a very small userbase.
Anyway, I hate people making fun of Railworks…because I LOVE IT! I have about 50 pieces of DLC for it already (granted bought on sale).
That’s sewn into the band of all my underwear so I’d be surprised if someone DIDN’T know that.
I hate when people bitch about a company’s pricing model. If the game isn’t worth it, don’t buy it. You won’t be ripped off that way (unless a game sucks of course).
Y’all do realize that Gulf Of Araby is just the latest incarnation of ExecutionerFive/DarkStar One/Defcon One here at qt3, and is also better known to old-school OO folks as BPlotkin, kahless, Green Grocer, Ihatemorrowind, and the ever-endearing White Pride. Y’all knew that, right?
Also worth noting: the gender of this person has been known to fluctuate.
Really?
“Abusive or improper treatment; violation”
“an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation”
English, motherfucker, do you speak it?
I vaguely recall DefconOne and I seem to recall it ending in some sort of ban.
And no, I didn’t know.
I think this person has had two accounts banned with prejudice here, yes.
Understand this: I don’t care if you’re a female or not. As I said in my post, I find the general habit of using “rape” as a substitute for “beat in a game” or “cheated out of money” or “an expensive service” or any other phrase not actually about rape to be objectionable.
It’s especially dumb when buying DLC for a videogame is a choice that anyone can easily not do.
reads thread
Well. That escalated quickly.
On the topic of inflating the cost of DLC, I think it’s very much on a case-by-case basis determined by the content offered in each particular product. In this case, or the case of the many Train Simulator games and their multitude of tiny DLC packs for inflated value, I would agree that charging extra for miniscule content add-ons that could have easily been in the core game is pretty outrageous. Even Call of Duty map packs are a better justifiable value than these.
That being said, you don’t have to buy any of the extra stuff and, generally, I tend to stay away from games that rely so heavily on DLC. It’s stupid and outrageous and abusive, sure, but that doesn’t mean you have to force yourself to become a victim of the gouging!
Is this a DLC competition? I would keep an eye on Hyperdimension Neptunia™ Victory. $90 of DLC so far, but NIS has not stopped adding more every week since the game came out. It seems the original Neptunia had just over $90 of DLC also.
The core complaint strikes me as similar to playing a “F2P” game then getting upset that they’re trying to suck your wallet dry a dollar at a time. Granted, I get upset when a subscription game I’m playing goes that way (cough lotro cough), but most of the time you know what you’re getting into. My impression is that the flight sim market is relatively small but expensive anyway.
Hell, at this point I’d argue that even with most “subscription” games you know you’re really getting into that business model in a few months ;)
ExecutionerFive which DLC???
Arma 3 should go this route. There’s a lot less equipment assets in Arma 3 than vanilla Arma 2, and the hardcore players are griping non-stop about it now. I think BI has been put in the difficult position of having their newest game judged against the stellar amount of stuff in Arma 2, despite Arma 3 having vastly improved infantry movement, shooting, and animations.
They could start releasing single vehicle DLC at $10-$20 a pop and watch the fans go nuts.
I’m filing charges against this thread for sexually assaulting me.
I don’t think really expensive add-ons is really in the same ballpark as the really objectionable Free To Play games. Yeah, the add-ons are expensive, but they’re a one-time charge, and it’s hardly an impulse buy. The nasty FTP games try and entice you to pay a lot of money without realizing what you’ve done, by charging you small amounts repeatedly for continuing to play the same game. As I mentioned in the Candy Crush thread, my wife spent $70 on a match-3 game in one weekend, $1 and $3 at a time, and she had no idea she’d spent that much.
Thanks to this thread, I learned roughly how much I’ve spent on Rise of Flight over the two years or so I’ve been playing.
Then I thought about how much I’ve spent on DCS aircraft, and now I feel a little bit better. …well, about Rise of Flight, anyway.
I thought the train simulator game already had this award locked up in perpetuity…?
It’s hard to tell because of all the sales and changing prices. I’m sure I’m around $150. This business model definitely got me. But I was happy to pay it because it was the first airplane flight sim that clicked.
They have massive sales on the website every few months. For lurkers thinking about this game, I wouldn’t pay for anything unless it’s 60% off. See if they do the same discounts for Steam.
The big problem I have with this kind of thinking is how does it relate to the old standard in flight simulators. You could pay $50 and get a Lock-On that was a survey simulator with a selection of aircraft, or you could pay the same and get Falcon 3.0 which only had a single aircraft. Using the logic in the initial post, wouldn’t that mean that Falcon was assaulting you while Lock-On was the correct way? Games like Rise of Flight, and especially DCS, are designed to be full simulations of each aircraft modeled. This higher fidelity means that you pay for these aircraft individually. Because they use the same engine and can be played with the same shared assets that means they must be judged as a single title with the expected $50 price tag and not as a platform that supports single aircraft releases?
I think the same logic holds for the train simulators as well, especially Train Simulator. Again, you purchase the platform with a couple of vehicles and then add new vehicles as they are developed and you are interested in playing them.
Agreed, in both accounts.