Support us on Patreon to get Early Access to new videos, exclusive Discord perks & more for just $2 per month ►► https://www.patreon.com/the_escapistJoin our...
Truly worth is subjective. The devs are welcome to raise the price for inflation. I know you can get thousands of hours in this game, but I personally don’t agree that a game should go up price even if the dollar drops in value.
Would you feel differently if no updates were released for the original game, and all development post release was bundled into a paid expansion? What if, after that, the game was only made available with expansion?
IMO, that’s all this is, with the nice bonus that people who bought in early get the expansion for free.
Other way around - base launches at $20, dlc comes out at $5, game and dlc get bundled down the line in a $25 pack, discontinuing the separate purchases.
Ok, thinking about it this is actually fair and probably the only argument I’ve seen that clicks to me as I know of games that have done this and have been fine with it. I think the reasoning is why I dislike the move, less-so the price itself. Calling it inflation when you have so many other terms to describe it is strange and kinda off putting to me. But I guess I’ve been conditioned to this idea of a game going down not up in price from my time gaming. The ones that do go up include the dlc and such, which I suppose is no different in this case
It’s very subjective, but that’s what they’re saying when they increase the price over time. Personally, the price of that game could keep rising a whole lot before I’d stop saying it’s worth the price to someone asking for my recommendation.
Truly worth is subjective. The devs are welcome to raise the price for inflation. I know you can get thousands of hours in this game, but I personally don’t agree that a game should go up price even if the dollar drops in value.
Would you feel differently if no updates were released for the original game, and all development post release was bundled into a paid expansion? What if, after that, the game was only made available with expansion?
IMO, that’s all this is, with the nice bonus that people who bought in early get the expansion for free.
I am a bit confused by what you mean. Are you saying something like Base game launches at 20 DLC brings it to current state with a 15 purchase
Later down the line they merge and the game becomes 35?
If that’s the case then yes, it’s pretty much the same concept and in fact I would actually see that as a bigger red flag.
Other way around - base launches at $20, dlc comes out at $5, game and dlc get bundled down the line in a $25 pack, discontinuing the separate purchases.
Ok, thinking about it this is actually fair and probably the only argument I’ve seen that clicks to me as I know of games that have done this and have been fine with it. I think the reasoning is why I dislike the move, less-so the price itself. Calling it inflation when you have so many other terms to describe it is strange and kinda off putting to me. But I guess I’ve been conditioned to this idea of a game going down not up in price from my time gaming. The ones that do go up include the dlc and such, which I suppose is no different in this case
It’s very subjective, but that’s what they’re saying when they increase the price over time. Personally, the price of that game could keep rising a whole lot before I’d stop saying it’s worth the price to someone asking for my recommendation.