DLC out of control

[Willow Rivers]

If I knew there was going to be this much DLC I would never have bought the game. $140 of DLC on sale ridiculous.

Loved Stardew Valley and thought this was going to be like that but the DLC keeps coming.

Will never buy another game from this publisher again.

[Layla Spellwind]

Yes, you have every right to be wrong.
That's fine.
You do you boo boo.

[Legion]

Originally posted by Layla Spellwind:

Yes, you have every right to be wrong.
That's fine.
You do you boo boo.

When I'm wrong, I'll let you know. Until then, your crying changes nothing.

[Ring Master Jesus]

Originally posted by Layla Spellwind:

I'm very much a leftist, and proud.

Very much explains the mindset and attitude. Have a good day sir.

[Legion]

Originally posted by Ring Master Jesus:

Originally posted by Layla Spellwind:

I'm very much a leftist, and proud.

Very much explains the mindset and attitude. Have a good day sir.

Let's leave the politics out of it, mate. Both sides have their merits and negatives.

[lilac]

very telling how he says that in response to your comment layla and not the original comment calling you one for no discernable reason out of nowhere

[MoldySpork]

Originally posted by Ring Master Jesus:

It's really mind boggling how entitled and whiny gamers today are. The DLCs are purely optional my man. You can play the game from first to finish and access all areas and features without paying for any DLC. If you don't like the DLC then don't buy it, its really that simple. I don't understand the entitlement mindset of "the devs should focus on improving their game instead of making cosmetic DLCs". As far as I'm concerned, the devs don't owe you anything. When you paid for the base game, the current content is exactly what you get for the money you paid. Why do you buy a game and expect the devs to keep on throwing out free stuff or bug fixes? Does your purchase explicitly state that the devs become your slaves and keep on working on the game to please you? The game is like what? 15 usd? For 15 usd they should be your slaves? wtf dude!

I'm neither whiny nor entitled. I'm not asking for neverending, unlimited, constant free updates and content. The things I do expect are bugfixes, a finished story, being feature complete, CREDITS, that sort of thing. You should support your product. I hope we can agree on that.

It's a privilege to get additional updates and content beyond that for free, and I understand that.

But when it comes to DLC, I expect it to be worth the asking price. That's where we disagree. Releasing over $200 in cosmetics while your game still has issues just looks bad. Asking $5-15 for cosmetics is silly. Asking me to shell that out for something that's going to give me actual gameplay? Now we're talking. I'll support your studio if you give me something worthwhile in exchange. Give me a few hours worth of extra story, extra quests, items, weapons, whatever, and then, if it's appropriate, toss evergreen content in there with it, and we've got a deal. The base game should remain perfectly playable without it, but the DLC should be icing on the delicious cake, say.

I will never understand why it's bad or wrong to want value for my money, to feel like I actually got something for what I spent.

Finally, no, the devs don't owe me a thing after I paid for the game, but it sure would be nice to have bugs addressed, not just for me, but for anyone who purchases the game in the future. It would be nice for the credit issue to be addressed. And the DLC issue most definitely affects sales, even if only a bit. Had I not purchased the game before they released the avalanche, I might not have purchased it at all. There are games on my wishlist right now that I've held off on specifically because of the egregious amount of DLC (seriously, fish bait?! One sells fish bait!) and I don't even intend to buy the DLC.

At this point, does anyone even remember when loot boxes were controversial? I kinda feel like the same people who are all "but it's oPtIoNaL!" also don't have a problem with those. Or gacha games. Or anything else that's aimed specifically at getting you to part with your money for the least amount of effort. Just. Keep. Pulling.

[moth hunter]

Originally posted by Ring Master Jesus:

Why do you buy a game and expect the devs to keep on throwing out free stuff or bug fixes?

I guess that is the other side of the early-access-coin... people got so used to devs continuously adding content that it never occurs to them that a game might legitimately be feature complete at some point when it leaves EA - or was never EA in the first place.
I've seen people complain to ConcernedApe (of all people!) that he didn't continue adding enough content "just because Stardew Valley is out of early access" - which it never was

Edit: that only applies to the "free stuff" though. Bugfixes is something players have a right to, as it was a flaw in the delivered product.

[moth hunter]

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

Asking $5-15 for cosmetics is silly. Asking me to shell that out for something that's going to give me actual gameplay? Now we're talking. I'll support your studio if you give me something worthwhile in exchange. Give me a few hours worth of extra story, extra quests, items, weapons, whatever, and then, if it's appropriate, toss evergreen content in there with it, and we've got a deal.

So what you are saying is that the problem is that they *don't* lock the gameplay content behind the DLC paywall together with the cosmetics??
Think about this for a second! You would be fine to pay the price for the content you now get for free plus the cosmetics, but you are angry about "having" to pay only for the cosmetics alone?

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

At this point, does anyone even remember when loot boxes were controversial? I kinda feel like the same people who are all "but it's oPtIoNaL!" also don't have a problem with those.

1) yes, I do, but apparently you don't: the most controversial part about loot boxes was the gambling mechanic where you didn't know what you would get, had an actually extremely low chance to get what was promoted and most people wanted, which led people to keep throwing money at it - same as with regular gambling. Which is also why they are banned in several countries now.
Cosmetic DLCs where you exactly know what you will get have absolutely nothing to with loot boxes.
2) your caps key seems to be broken, maybe invest in a new keyboard.

[Legion]

Originally posted by sasha:

very telling how he says that in response to your comment layla and not the original comment calling you one for no discernable reason out of nowhere

Learn to read, mate.

I am calling out the person who insulted them based on their political leaning. can you not read how quotes and replies work?

[Ring Master Jesus]

Originally posted by Con(troll) Artist:

Originally posted by Ring Master Jesus:

Very much explains the mindset and attitude. Have a good day sir.

Let's leave the politics out of it, mate. Both sides have their merits and negatives.

Sure my bad. I'm not a right winger either but leftists are always the bunch who speaks through emotion and very little logic.

As for the topic, I'm done. Let them complain and whine all day but as long as the devs make money from these DLCs its really not gonna change anything. I myself don't plan to support the cosmetics in this game, I think they are overpriced but I will let my wallet do the talking no need for posting whiny entitled topics in a forum. As for the base game, I think I got my money's worth. They mention bugs and stuff but I encountered only the grass bug and maybe some unresponsive UI but that's it, although maybe because I'm only about 50 or so hours in we'll see later if I encounter more.

[MoldySpork]

Originally posted by moth hunter:

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

Asking $5-15 for cosmetics is silly. Asking me to shell that out for something that's going to give me actual gameplay? Now we're talking. I'll support your studio if you give me something worthwhile in exchange. Give me a few hours worth of extra story, extra quests, items, weapons, whatever, and then, if it's appropriate, toss evergreen content in there with it, and we've got a deal.

So what you are saying is that the problem is that they *don't* lock the gameplay content behind the DLC paywall together with the cosmetics??
Think about this for a second! You would be fine to pay the price for the content you now get for free plus the cosmetics, but you are angry about "having" to pay only for the cosmetics alone?

Uh, I'm not angry about anything, and my problem is releasing literally hundreds of dollars worth of cosmetics, this latest batch in one giant dump that isn't even on the Steam store, while there are so many issues to address. There's a lot wrong with it. It's predatory. It preys on people who have that whole "collector" mindset. There's very little value to asking so much for so little. There are people making the argument that it's a way to "support the devs." My argument is that I'd much rather "support the devs" by purchasing DLC that's worth a damn and not cosmetic fluff that I'll forget about after I deal with the deluge of items in my mailbox.

CDPR just released an update for Cyberpunk 2077 that had some cosmetic stuff in it, along with QoL stuff, some neat features, whatever. Also has a nice paid expansion. It's an expensive expansion. At full price, both that expansion AND the base game were way less than Sun Haven and all its DLC. Like, why does this not percolate in your dome?

If you want to stick to just strictly smaller titles, we can. Graveyard Keeper's about $50 total without the OST and artbook when not on sale. You absolutely do not need the DLC to enjoy the base game, but I'd recommend it, because I like the game. Again, I recommend it... BECAUSE I LIKE THE GAME.

This is just a really mindboggling argument for me to have. Your whole position just seems to be "But it's fluff! Don't you want to pay for fluff? Why would you want to buy substance when you could have fluff!!!!11!!1!"

Originally posted by moth hunter:

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

At this point, does anyone even remember when loot boxes were controversial? I kinda feel like the same people who are all "but it's oPtIoNaL!" also don't have a problem with those.

1) yes, I do, but apparently you don't: the most controversial part about loot boxes was the gambling mechanic where you didn't know what you would get, had an actually extremely low chance to get what was promoted and most people wanted, which led people to keep throwing money at it - same as with regular gambling. Which is also why they are banned in several countries now.
Cosmetic DLCs where you exactly know what you will get have absolutely nothing to with loot boxes.
2) your caps key seems to be broken, maybe invest in a new keyboard.

My caps key is fine, but I wonder about you. It doesn't matter if cosmetics are known or a mystery since the "it's optional" argument has been used to justify both. That's the connection you completely missed. Gambling was a controversial part, yes, but so was the very act of having to spend real, actual money for something in-game, ESPECIALLY if you didn't know what you were going to get, and it was even worse if there was no built-in bad luck protection. Gacha games are like the evolution of that. I notice you didn't mention them, or do you not realize people spend incredible amounts of money trying to get characters and cosmetics and whatever else with no guarantee of getting what they're actually after? ...just like people did with loot boxes. You know, that thing you accuse me of not remembering.

Question: do you think any of those mechanics would exist if game companies hadn't realized at some point that people really like their cosmetics and will bend over backwards to get them?

There was a time when gamers really really really did not like being asked to spend additional money for microtransactions. I don't know when that changed, but here we are.

The last thing I want to point out is how absurd it is to have a problem with gambling and the ludicrous amounts of money that people can spend on it, but you don't have a problem with practices that encourage people to spend large amounts of money just because they don't involve gambling. The end result is the same. Unless you don't have a problem with gambling. Maybe you're cool with loot boxes, too. You didn't clarify. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt on that one!

[MoldySpork]

Originally posted by Ring Master Jesus:

Sure my bad. I'm not a right winger either but leftists are always the bunch who speaks through emotion and very little logic.

Your words betray you by the very fact that you use "leftist" as a pejorative and then proceed to say something that sounds more like a self-description.

But do take care wherever your road leads you, friend.

[moth hunter]

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

This is just a really mindboggling argument for me to have. Your whole position just seems to be "But it's fluff! Don't you want to pay for fluff? Why would you want to buy substance when you could have fluff!!!!11!!1!"

Quite to the contrary: my argument is "But it's just fluff! Why would you want to buy it in the first place? Why would you rather have the substance locked behind a paywall together with the fluff, than get the substance for free and ignore the fluff if you don't want it?"
And yes, having an argument about this is mind boggling to me as well.

To the best of my memory I have never bought a single piece of cosmetics DLC for any game in my life. I don't even make use of most of the base game cosmetics or decorations. So literally the opposite of what you try to frame my argument as.

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

fluff!!!!11!!1!
[...]
My caps key is fine

You sure?

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

It doesn't matter if cosmetics are known or a mystery since the "it's optional" argument has been used to justify both. That's the connection you completely missed. Gambling was a controversial part, yes, but so was the very act of having to spend real, actual money for something in-game, ESPECIALLY if you didn't know what you were going to get, and it was even worse if there was no built-in bad luck protection. Gacha games are like the evolution of that. I notice you didn't mention them, or do you not realize people spend incredible amounts of money trying to get characters and cosmetics and whatever else with no guarantee of getting what they're actually after? ...just like people did with loot boxes. You know, that thing you accuse me of not remembering.

Do you realise that you spent 2/3 of that paragraph backing up my point? i.e.: that the gambling part is the big problem with loot boxes?
And no, I didn't mention Gacha games. Why would I? The fundamental problem (as you have highlighted) is the same as with loot boxes, and Sun Haven has neither.

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

The last thing I want to point out is how absurd it is to have a problem with gambling and the ludicrous amounts of money that people can spend on it, but you don't have a problem with practices that encourage people to spend large amounts of money just because they don't involve gambling.

Gambling mechanics can cause crippling addictions specifically because of the uncertainty what you will get. Coupled with an infinite loop where you can always play "just one more time" this leads to people very quickly losing first control and then everything else.
The other thing you describe is simply called capitalism. And I didn't say I don't have a problem with it, but it is what we've got, and under those circumstances I'd argue that the approach of "substance for free, fluff for cash" is better than most.

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

Unless you don't have a problem with gambling. Maybe you're cool with loot boxes, too. You didn't clarify. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt on that one!

I was the one who pointed out how the big problem with loot boxes was the gambling mechanic, which is not present in cosmetic DLCs. Now you try to imply I'm pro loot boxes and pro gambling. But you give me the benefit of the doubt on whether I hold the opinions you try to put in my mouth and which I have argued the opposite of. Yes, I can see you really are trying hard....

[MoldySpork]

Originally posted by moth hunter:

Quite to the contrary: my argument is "But it's just fluff! Why would you want to buy it in the first place? Why would you rather have the substance locked behind a paywall together with the fluff, than get the substance for free and ignore the fluff if you don't want it?"
And yes, having an argument about this is mind boggling to me as well.

To the best of my memory I have never bought a single piece of cosmetics DLC for any game in my life. I don't even make use of most of the base game cosmetics or decorations. So literally the opposite of what you try to frame my argument as.

Oh, my great Jesus Christ. And *I* get called entitled. The devs are clearly a charity and should just keep working for free after a game is released. Yep. Great.

We're clearly never going to come to any sort of understanding.

Originally posted by moth hunter:

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

fluff!!!!11!!1!
[...]
My caps key is fine

You sure?

Absolutely. One wonders how long you've been around, though.

Originally posted by moth hunter:

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

It doesn't matter if cosmetics are known or a mystery since the "it's optional" argument has been used to justify both. That's the connection you completely missed. Gambling was a controversial part, yes, but so was the very act of having to spend real, actual money for something in-game, ESPECIALLY if you didn't know what you were going to get, and it was even worse if there was no built-in bad luck protection. Gacha games are like the evolution of that. I notice you didn't mention them, or do you not realize people spend incredible amounts of money trying to get characters and cosmetics and whatever else with no guarantee of getting what they're actually after? ...just like people did with loot boxes. You know, that thing you accuse me of not remembering.

Do you realise that you spent 2/3 of that paragraph backing up my point? i.e.: that the gambling part is the big problem with loot boxes?
And no, I didn't mention Gacha games. Why would I? The fundamental problem (as you have highlighted) is the same as with loot boxes, and Sun Haven has neither.

*sigh* The money. The real life honest-to-god actual factual straight-out-of-my-bank-account currency. That's the problem. I gamble all the time in games that use in-game currency. Why? Because it's not actually costing me anything. Who cares if it takes a while to get something to drop from a box if I'm only spending currency I can earn in-game without spending a dime. It's no different than low drop rate loot from a boss, which also costs me nothing.

...are you swiping Mommy's credit card? Or are you just a whale? Oh, wait, that's right. You expect free stuff.

Originally posted by moth hunter:

Gambling mechanics can cause crippling addictions specifically because of the uncertainty what you will get. Coupled with an infinite loop where you can always play "just one more time" this leads to people very quickly losing first control and then everything else.
The other thing you describe is simply called capitalism. And I didn't say I don't have a problem with it, but it is what we've got, and under those circumstances I'd argue that the approach of "substance for free, fluff for cash" is better than most.

...did you just exclude gambling from capitalism? Do you not understand that some people feel compelled to buy all the DLC a game has to offer because they *must* own the "complete" version of a game, or because they are completionists and need every obtainable item/pet/mount/etc? Again, it's predatory, just like the $99 or $119 or whatever they've gotten up to super ultra mega editions of AAA games with 3 days of early access and exclusive items and skins and other shinies.

We've gone from "it's optional!" to "it's capitalism!" Anything to excuse ripping people off.

Originally posted by moth hunter:

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

Unless you don't have a problem with gambling. Maybe you're cool with loot boxes, too. You didn't clarify. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt on that one!

I was the one who pointed out how the big problem with loot boxes was the gambling mechanic, which is not present in cosmetic DLCs. Now you try to imply I'm pro loot boxes and pro gambling. But you give me the benefit of the doubt on whether I hold the opinions you try to put in my mouth and which I have argued the opposite of. Yes, I can see you really are trying hard....

And you completely missed the connection I was making. Microtransactions cost... say it with me now... money. Cash. Currency. Dolla dolla bills, y'all. Loot boxes were EXTRA ♥♥♥♥♥♥ because you didn't know what you were getting, but they were awful enough simply because they cost money. That gambling factor just meant you'd end up spending more, say it with me now, money. Money for... what? Fluff. And when it became not cool to blow loads of money on loot boxes, we just moved to games charging loads of money outright for fluff. Look at Overwatch 2.

All of this made possible by people like you who don't see a problem paying for nonsense.

This was all fun while it lasted, but I think I've had my fill. Y'all enjoy supporting shady business practices. Call me names if you want. (Not you, specifically, moth, you've been great.) I am, in fact, a dirty emotional leftist with no brain, after all.

I hope everything gets sorted and turns out well. I really do like this game, even if I have a love/hate relationship with it at times.

[moth hunter]

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

The devs are clearly a charity and should just keep working for free after a game is released.

So... you say what the devs are doing is bad and greedy, but at the same time if I point out how their approach benefits us then I'm entitled and want them to be a charity?
Which one is it? Greed or charity?

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

One wonders how long you've been around, though.

Long enough to be over people trying to troll others with random caps and punctuation.

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

*sigh* The money. The real life honest-to-god actual factual straight-out-of-my-bank-account currency. That's the problem. I gamble all the time in games that use in-game currency. Why? Because it's not actually costing me anything.

What are you talking about? The whole discussion was about purchases with real money. Why are you suddenly talking about non-purchasable in-game currency?

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

...are you swiping Mommy's credit card? Or are you just a whale? Oh, wait, that's right. You expect free stuff.

I don't expect free stuff, but when I get cool stuff for free I say "thanks" rather than calling the devs greedy because they also offer less important stuff for cash.

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

We've gone from "it's optional!" to "it's capitalism!" Anything to excuse ripping people off.

Cosmetics are optional. Getting people to spend lots of money on stuff they don't need is capitalism. And I did say I also have a problem with the latter.
And a bit further up you accused me of exploiting the devs by taking the free stuff in the updates while not buying the optional cosmetics they offer for sale.

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

Unless you don't have a problem with gambling. Maybe you're cool with loot boxes, too.

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

And you completely missed the connection I was making. Microtransactions cost [...] money.

And that commonality is enough for you to insinuate I was pro gambling and loot boxes?

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

All of this made possible by people like you who don't see a problem paying for nonsense.

I never bought a loot box or a cosmetic item, never payed more than 60€ for a game and never bought any "super ultra mega editions". And you say people like me are the reason all these things exists?

Originally posted by MoldySpork:

I really do like this game

Well, one thing we can agree on.