I guess this is probably going to be the new shitty norm with bait and switch for reviews then nickel and dime afterwards.

  • Bone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Right. Some people wouldn’t bother with a game at all if they knew there would be this. It’s very deceptive.

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Knowing they were charging for new characters was almost a dealbreaker for me. This would have stopped me if I had known.

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

        Paying extra for characters IS a deal breaker for me in fighting games. It’s literally pay to win.

        That said, I’ve been playing Tekken since ps1, so I’ll probably just pirate this whenever it’s available.

    • Chozo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      9 months ago

      Some people wouldn’t bother with a game at all if they knew there would be this.

      Perhaps if this was unusual for the genre. But it’s a AAA fighting game. Anybody who is familiar with the genre knows that MTX is normal and expected, because it’s going to have several years of support from the developers. I’d have a hard time believing that any Tekken fan bought this on the premise of it remaining MTX-free.

        • Chozo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          9 months ago

          Doesn’t it, though? This is what the players wanted, and the industry listened. They asked for support for the game after its release, and the industry said “Sure, but in exchange at least some of you should pay extra”.

          This isn’t forced upon anybody. Just because Mazaratis exist doesn’t mean that you have to buy one if you want a car. It only becomes a moral problem if somebody’s choices are circumvented, but that’s not really what’s happening here.

          • Jomega@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Doesn’t it, though?

            It used to normal to beat your kids. It was wrong then and it’s wrong now.

            This is what the players wanted, and the industry listened.

            The reason we are having this conversation in the first place is because people didn’t want it.

            This isn’t forced upon anybody.

            They added it the game post-launch, after reviews had already come out. Anyone morally opposed to micro transactions (which as I’ll get to in next point, have a very good reason to be opposed to on principle) who had bought the game has been tricked into supporting a business practice they despise. This is incredibly scummy and should rightfully be seen as a dick move.

            It only becomes a moral problem if somebody’s choices are circumvented, but that’s not really what’s happening here.

            Micro transactions as a concept are strategically designed to exploit people with addictive personalities. This is not a theory on my part, this is legitimately what the intent behind them is. But don’t take my word for it, here’s a video discussing that very thing.

      • yamanii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        There’s a pretty big difference between new gameplay (characters) and cosmetics that were clearly removed to be sold.