513
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
513 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
19932 readers
141 users here now
Sub for any gaming related content!
Rules:
- 1: No spam or advertising. This basically means no linking to your own content on blogs, YouTube, Twitch, etc.
- 2: No bigotry or gatekeeping. This should be obvious, but neither of those things will be tolerated. This goes for linked content too; if the site has some heavy "anti-woke" energy, you probably shouldn't be posting it here.
- 3: No untagged game spoilers. If the game was recently released or not released at all yet, use the Spoiler tag (the little ⚠️ button) in the body text, and avoid typing spoilers in the title. It should also be avoided to openly talk about major story spoilers, even in old games.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Gamers throw a fit when content is locked behind a paywall because it is somehow unfair. Gamers are currently throwing a fit about content not being locked behind a paywall because that is also somehow unfair. Does that make sense to you?
It seems to me that this publisher heard the complaints about the way microtransactions were being implemented and decided to give people what they were asking for and now they're getting crucified for it. Gamers got what they wanted. If that wasn't what they really wanted they should have been asking for something else.
Your attitude towards it is why they exist in the game in the first place. There should be no micro-transactions.
The game is a $70 singleplayer experience. It should have no online requirement, no microtransactions.
I don't own this game nor have I ever completed a microtransaction in a major title. My spending habits don't support the concept in any form. You know what my point is and you're trying to high-horse your way past it. If you want to take a stand refund the game and vote with your wallet. No one wants to hear complaints about the price of cosmetics and getting in game currency quicker. It's the most first world problem imaginable.
I dont buy these games, nor do I verbally defend such practices in them. I understand your point, but the real issue is them existing, not the form in which they exist in this case.
The whole "first world problem" is always hilarious when brought up. You can discuss or argue over anything you want, everyone experiences life differently. Just because there's people starving, that doesnt mean you cant talk about capitalist issues either. Its such a shitty dismissal everytime.
You're free to call it what you wish. Complaining about voluntary purchases in a video game you also don't need to buy is a vapid pursuit only engaged in by those with an excess of time and money and a lack of real world problems. If you want to waste your time debating the ethics of such a system existing then be my guest but don't pretend you're engaging in some lofty moral exercise. You're just bored and looking for something to occupy your time so you chose to bitch about something inconsequential on the internet.
Yet here you are doing the same thing. Pot calling the kettle black.
Making up something dumb to complain about is not the same as telling you to shut up about said dumb thing but I know you don't really believe that anyway. You're just trying to get a smug jab in and that's the best you can come up with.
You are complaining about people complaining, talking down on people to get a feeling of superiority. If you dont like a conversation just move on with your life. Or is it that you have nothing better to do, so you choose to bitch about something inconsequential on the internet?
Upvoting your own comments too :)
I wont engage any further with this, its just gonna go in circles. Have a good one.
I don't have anything better to do. I happily acknowledge that. My life is going pretty great all things considered, but then I'm not the one pretending to be an oppressed victim fighting a corrupt system via complaints about stuff I don't need to buy. That's what you're doing.
Also, Lemmy defaults to upvoting posts you make. That's something you should probably know before you criticize people for not going out of their way to downvote themselves. It makes you look kind of dumb to say stuff like that since you could have figured that out for yourself if you thought about it for more than two seconds, which now that I think about it is a pretty good summary of the rest of the things that you've said in this conversation.
So you agree that it is a problem.
I agree that the way they've been implemented in many other titles is annoying so I choose not to engage with them in that form. This implementation doesn't impact anything so why would you be annoyed by it much less take the time to complain about it?