What you need to know

  • As Dragon’s Dogma 2 launched on PC Thursday evening, a previously hidden suite of microtransactions became available for purchase.
  • Things you can buy for the single player ARPG include fast travel points, Rift Crystals for hiring Pawns and buying special items, appearance change and revival consumables, a special camping kit that weighs less than normal ones, and a few others.
  • In response to the microtransactions, Dragon’s Dogma 2 is being review bombed, with the game currently sitting at “Mostly Negative” on Steam.
  • li10@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    156
    ·
    8 months ago

    Yeah, too many “journalists” chuck around the term review bombed to mean when a AAA game gets a load of (deserved) hate.

    • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Good journalists go back, edit their original review to call out the bait and switch of hiding the microtransactions from reviewers, and adjust their score accordingly with microtransactions taken into accout.

      And release a follow up “article” just letting people know what happened and that they’ve updated the review, so it doesn’t fly under people’s radar.

      Seriously, reviewers need to stop softballing when this shit happens. It’s one thing for review copies to maybe be missing the final coat of polish. It’s something completely different to completely leave out a feature known to be contreversial in an attempt to pump up scores, then turn it on after the initial wave of buyers can no longer return their purchase. Not like they spontaneously developed this shit since review copies went out.

      • harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Too many reviewers don’t want to get kicked out of getting early releases and review codes so they can earn those yummy clicks.

    • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s still a form of review bombing. If the game is good (I have not played it nor seen any review so I don’t actually know, but the article is making it sound like the only issues are the mtx) aside from the predatory mtx, does it deserve a mostly negative rating ?

      I wouldn’t necessarily disagree, but I can also see reasons to if one thinks that you are not getting a much worse experience by not paying for these micro transactions.

      Also, it’s fucking Capcom. They have good studios but they have always been greedy bastards. So I can’t say I’m surprised by any of this.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        8 months ago

        If the game is good (I have not played it nor seen any review so I don’t actually know, but the article is making it sound like the only issues are the mtx) aside from the predatory mtx, does it deserve a mostly negative rating ?

        Yes. Yes I think it does. Seems like many other people agree!

        • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Well I agree too but it’s not a fucking law of physics, the journalist is allowed to have a different opinion on that

      • Doug7070@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        8 months ago

        The microtransactions are one issue among many. To be frank, putting microtransactions in a $70 USD title would still warrant negative reviews in and of itself, but the the game is also having catastrophic performance issues and crashing on PC for what seems to be the majority of players, to the point of many Youtube channels covering it that did not get press copies being all but unable to play at all.

        It doesn’t matter if a game has a lot of good elements, if it has bad ones and people cite those bad elements in negative reviews it’s not review bombing, it’s consumers giving an honest review of a product.

      • rtxn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Imagine that you’re having the best dinner of your life. Everything you like, jizz-in-your-pants delicious, served by beautiful people of your preferred sex. Then dessert comes, a massive cake, but while you’re enjoying it, you notice a different flavor. And a smell. You look and in the middle of the cake, there is a half-consumed turd.

        Would you still rate it “9/10 great except for the turd”? Or would you remember it as the restaurant that served you a turd?

        (I stole this hyperbole from the Angry Joe Show’s GOT review)

      • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        Lmao, ok, downvote me for providing context. I’m not even disagreeing. Personally I don’t think this is review bombing. Y’all need to chill.

        • squirrels@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          Personally I don’t think this is review bombing.

          You’re replying to a comment where you say

          It’s still a form of review bombing.

          Be better at lying.

          • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            Sorry, it should have been “it can still be considered a form of review bombing. However I am on my smoke break and will not spend 15 minutes writing and proofreading a message when I know I will get piled on by internet strangers regardless of how obvious I make my own opinion while trying to explain what it sounds like the writer’s point of view is” but I was pressed for time