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
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
2 
Report this post
Put down the tinfoil hat, sport. No one is forcing anyone to buy anything, and no one is being ripped off.
I may not want all of those things actively in my game, and this is a way for me to pick and choose what I want added into the game. All of this stuff natively added into my game that I wouldn't want is just bloat. And if I choose to purchase anything additional for whatever reason I so choose to? That is my business.
The problem with people using the word "projecting" is that usually they do so in a fit of irony, and the fact you love to abuse that word is hilarious given your lack of self-awareness.
To someone who mentioned unlocking items - we already have that, you fix shops in Sun Haven or unlock other towns (with their shops) with quests. This is pretty standard gaming way of unlocking things.
Majority of games don't have thing like in DST where you can use spool to make unlockables.
I probably should make the list of everything the devs put into the game after release for free (like babies, a whole new town, tons of new customisation and decor items, new marriage candidates, sheds, upgradable barns and more barn animals) and post it with a reminder that we wouldn't have any of that, if the devs decided to go like people were in the "good old days" and move on to next project instead of keeping working on the same game and supporting it with income from selling some (nicely separated into small packages so we wouldn't need to pay for stuff we are not gonna use bundled with things we like - some people want to have the one big combo DLC, I don't think I will ever understand that) extra customisation.
There is only so much times one can buy a single game. And it is not a game that has gone viral and became a genre "face" that even people who don't play think of when the genre is mentioned like Minecraft or Stardew Valley, so all the new people just keep coming and buying. It is a small, not very known game with small playerbase.
Without turning to subscription (which is easy but very financially favourable idea for consumers, especially for a single player game) the DLC way is the only way to keep somewhat reliable income while developing one game.
Some people keep glorifying "the good old days, where everything was better and realer", be it gamedev, medieval times or even soviet union. Most of that people never experienced these things they are keep talking about, have no clue except some vague historically inaccurate impression, and because of that seeing all this "why don't they just do it like in good old days" is ridiculous and frustrating at the same time.
Never forget, that "the good old days" were not "we get all the things the devs made after the game released for free instead of DLCs".
They were "devs release the game as it was at 1.0, move on to next project because money don't grow on trees, maybe drop some bugfix files on their site if they are still active and/or actually care", but for most games even that bugfix drop was not a thing. We just had to accept that the game is buggy and/or find a new one or rely on community developed fixes.
We rarely got DLCs (and most times the DLCs were big and pricy) because the logistics of releasing games and dropping DLCs was much more difficult with physical discs in physical shops.
I don't like the DLC sold inside tha game instead of steam page, but only because they didn't implement price localisations like steam does. And I can't gift that DLCs, which is inconvenient, because I often gift games and DLCs.
Anyways for people that don't read discord, devs director said that even tho putting the DLCs from the ingame store to steam isn't priority compared to bugfixes, improved stupid consoles support and some of new stuff they are already working on (like another custom flors inside our buildings, improved baby genetix and a whole another new region) it is on the list of things they will do (and implement properly done localised prices too).
_________________
And jees the only time I've ever saw anyone spend so much effort convincing themselves that they are totally not someone that could possibly ever be scammed was an auntie that kept loosing money on lotteries, "super awesome kitchen devises" from TV and "witch" promising her magical improvement in her life if she throws some money on "magic rituals", and then had a big realisation moment one day.
Or that "constant vigilance" Moody guy from Harry Potter lol.
If being scammed left a toll so big on your psyche that you feel the need to convince pople on internet that you are "not a mark", you probably should seek some psychological help.
Nowhere in the game description on steam shop page they claim to not have ingame shop with more DLCs, therefore it is not a scam to have this ingame shop.
They determined their prices, and since it is their product to sell, other people's expectations of how prices should be are irrelevant and devs not matching this expectations don't make the game a scam too.
Do you even know what scam is? Given how you use this word - probably not.
The only shady thing about this game is that they don't have proper, easily found credits.
Other stuff is legit, even if not all is something I like, find convenient or agreeable.
They were "devs release the game as it was at 1.0, move on to next project because money don't grow on trees, maybe drop some bugfix files on their site if they are still active and/or actually care""
Or they choose to be like BG3, Stardew Valley and No Man's Sky instead of the Sims 4. I doubt money grew on trees for Larian (who were almost bankrupt at one point), ConcepnedApe (who started his project as proof of concept to get a job) or Hello Games (who released a buggy mess and turned it into a staple of space exploration over years). There's always a choice.
You picked this part of my post and ignored the rest.
All three games that you mentioned are famous to the point if being the genre staples. They become known outside of gaming communities.
People will first buy that games when first going into relevent genres, or gaming in general. Oftentimes people then stay on their first game and don't buy more, because "why would I play simlar game when I have the best one already and like it?".
That means that money are much more limited to all the not-so-famous games, not only to Sun Haven.
The Sun Haven devs can't just "chose" to be famous, it doesn't work like that.
BG3 is a long awaited sequel to a very famous fandom. And it had a lot of marketing. The dev team had much more resources available even before they started developing BG3. Yes they almost got bankrupted, but they had a lot to work with, not only financial.
Stardew Valley was a very low budget tiny game that gone viral and became one of the most famous games in the world. CA don't need to go extra ways to get more money because his game is already cemented it's place in gaming history.
No Man's Sky was famous for it's ambition and bad implementation on release, I only learned of it's existence because it was so hyped up, and then people came whining on the net in dissapointment. Out of three games you mentioned it is one of least known. It is much less buggy and better balanced now. But it didn't get to the place it is here on pure developer's stubborness to keep their love project breathing - the unique community had a big role. Unique is the key word - because NMS has very unique aspect centered on community gameplay. Untill the better or just somehow more popular for whatever reasons alternative comes - they are the only place people searching for this kind of gameplay can go.
This game is, around sims levels of DLC quantity.
(Sims 3, Sims 4 has gone to some insane level that nobody can quite comprehend)
But they also look what is inside the DLCs if there are some.
And Sun Haven is one of few games thet has done the DLC thing right - none of the DLCs lock any gameplay behind.
The total amount of DLCs matters only for compulsive buyers and completionists.
People without this psycological problems wouldn't buy the DLCs, unless they want to support the game in convenient way, and then the big amount of various styled DLCs is actually a good thing, because you can choose something you actually like and support the game at the same time.
No I did not. Stardew Valley didn't become a staple overnight. In fact, at first the creator was disappointed with it. No Man's Sky had a disastrous release. And Baldur's Gate 3 was in early access for so long that some people no longer believed it'd be out. Do you think these devs just thought: "Oh, let's make the best game in the genre"? It doesn't work like that.
And by the way, if you really want a recent example, look up Fields of Mistria. New game in EA with overwhelmingly positive reviews. And it has credits already. Hope the FoM developers continue to put more thought into their game than they do in an MTX shop.
And you don't get a unique community by trying to milk every cent out of your game before a promised Switch port that comes a year after release and the listing people who have worked on your game.
Come on. I love Sun Haven too. But supporting the devs in the current state of affairs is pure denial. I can see why the Sims franchise is still breathing though. So many people work so hard to justify the MTX shower business model.
Again, missing.
Maybe I phrased it badly, for that I'm sorry, I have ESL troubles sometimes.
It doesn't matter that CA was dissapointed with his game at a time, because it still managed to grab it's popularity. The market for this type of games was pretty dry, most of similar games were old and/or on consoles. It is only after the SDV going viral other devs started to try and replicate the seccess. Which isn't really possible due to pretty unique circumstances of having barely any competition.
Bad publicuty from the disastrous launch of NMS muliplied the positive wave after they managed to release the new release of NMS. The touching story of dev dedication for this long time project is a big part of the success - the success story itself. People like the zero to hero stories.
Regarding unique community, I meant that NMS provided (or at least used to provide) unique gameplay, and since the gameplay was unique, it grabbed all the possible audience for that gameplay. I am talking about the community exploration aspect, with the galactic atlas and all the confederation/alliances shenanigans.
Sen Haven on the other hand doesn't have anything unique gameplay-wise, it is just another "cosy new in town experience" with focus on farming. The most "unique" things Sun Haven has are multiple land plots/farms, no stupid stamina and the ability to change the day length - not really unique at all, just a rare thing to get all that together in one game.
It doesn't matter, that BG3 was long into EA. A lot of games spend years in EA. What matters, that the game already had franchise fans waiting for it even without seing any of the game itself or knowing any concrete dates of release, or even if it will be released or not. All that people waiting to throw whatever amount of money devs would ask, due to previously build up rep of the franchise itself and previous experiences of production team.
None of listed devs "just chose to make the best games in genre". But most of circuimstances that allowed for their success are not going to be repricated due to their uniqueness.
I have FoM, played it for couple of hours. Aestetically, it is nice to eyes, even though the pink is not the colour I like to be all in my face. Old school anime styled portraits are cute. Jumping and swimming is a nice fresh feature. Unfortunately is isn't optimised very well, and gameplay-wise (for me at least) it is a step back form SH - days are very short and the energy is there to ruin your immersion. It is still in the oven so to speak, that why I'm waiting to give it a second chance when it is fully out, and maybe a couple of balancing/optimisation patches later.
The Sims deserve to rest in peace. The base of the game is so old it can barely hold together all the content added on top of it all over the years. If they want to keep it going they'll have to rework it from the ground up, and that is basically what making a new iteration of the game in sims series is.
If they added all the gameplay into the base game, and throw 10 times more purely decorative kits to complement the theme of update, I'd support that. But they release both Expansions and kits, so they have no support for me, and basegame updates are too small to balance the amount of paid contents.
The "throbbing shopping cart on the live mode screen" was too much. Having all the available content somewhere in tha root menues is okay. IF I'm not subscribed the the newsletter, don't check the newsposts and store page, that is the only way I know something new is out.
Sun Haven not having the credits is a bomb that is already detonated. Since thay haven't fixed it when they had a chance, before ♥♥♥♥ hit the fan, the damage is already done, they will be known to be people who don't credit their contributors. I really wish they added the credits, it is an ugly situation.
But it has nothing to do with DLCs.
I never cared for any consoles and miss the times when it wasn't assumed that all the games should be ported to every possible platform. If SH devs actually promised the port without knowing how to do it, they should have maybe hired extra devs who have that competence. But the credits situation probably made that harder.
And I don't understand why MTX are a problem. You didn't say any concrete thing about that.
Why "milking" your product is bad? You worked hard on it (results may vary lol), spent time and money, and want some time and money back, why is that bad?
If I'm a troll, you're just a whiny leftist. You don't understand a simple concept of demand and supply. Go back to school.
But whiny? No, I just like games to be good.
Once upon a time, you'd buy a game, you'd unlock the cosmetics in game and that was awesome.
When horse armour became a thing, people were outraged. But game developers kept pushing out more drek like it. And now it's just accepted.
I have every right to complain, and if you don't like it, then maybe you should just block me. Because I'm not going to stop.
And we have every right to criticize you for being childish over something completely optional.