Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Wouldn't it make more sense to concentrate on actually releasing the game instead of making additional content (which are DLCs supposed to be, I believe) for an incomplete game?
Great!
Wildcard is not the first developer who offered DLC while the base game was still in EA.
Funny as it may sound the probability that the game gets completed may be higher now if
they get additional funding.
I am aware that my opinion will not be very popular and I would have preferred a complete
game before they release DLC but not all is black and white in life.
For all other purposes the game gets treated like every other release so DLC are completely legal.
Actually it's perfectly reasonable. I suppose this is there way of partitioning features and deciding which featureb sets to prioritize.. Not sure if it's worth the manpower and money to work on a particular set of content. Put it up as DLC and that will be your guide.
I personally think DLC for early access title is asinine HOWEVER, if one wants to buy DLC for Early Access and they know they are buying a DLC for an early access I fail to see how we should restrict those consumers from doing what they want
Then again, I have no horse in this race because I don't buy Early Access titles anyway and only got KSP while in EA as a gift from a friend. This step certainly doesn't endear me any further to the concept.
this is all under the assumption that all consumers without exception want a game to be finished. I for example do not. or rather do not care either way.
If people want to spend money on something that is seemingly ridiculous but does not affect health and safety then in my mind a good solid case has to be made as to why it should not be for sale. its not healthy to try and dictate to others what they can and can not purchase.
that is my view
Though I personaly do not agree with DLC for an Early Access Game (or microtransaction) it is their decision to make and their user base that decides if it is worth it.
I won't be buying the DLC until ARK is released and on a discount (Though that is because I am cheap with games), but it looks like there are many others who are willing to do so and have already done so.
They are not the first to have DLC before release, nor are they likely to be the last.
I do not think Valve has any rules against the release of DLC during EAG since, as I said before, others have done it previously.
seems very reasonable