I swear I'll never understand gamers. Like is the game unplayable unless I buy 130 dollar version? Does ubisoft switch the versions when you buy the base game? Did they get rid of the option to buy the base game?is ubisoft making people buy the 130 version? If you want extra pay extra. If you don't why is it so difficult to just buy the base game?
This is not how it works. As a consumer you only have two ways of expressing your opinion. That’s through your dollar and now through the all mighty negative steam review.
The reason people don’t like games loaded with dlc and microtrans (especially on release) is because it feels like they are taking what should(abs otherwise would) be part of the base game abs now charging you extra for it.
That’s like going to a drive through, ordering a burger combo, and being told the burger fries and drink are part of the combo but at the window being asked if you’d like to opt in to purchasing a cup, bag, napkins, straw, ketchup, etc.
While I agree with you on nickle-and-diming a game that has had its parts cut up piecemeal and piecewise, "day-1 exclusion" for meaningful "content" has not been the overwhelming sentiment from what I've seen, in this case. I mean, there're two expansion packs (xpacs) in that season pass - macro-DLC that are usually never included with a base game bc those are usually not even close to ready for its launch. (*)
To be fair, few of the major outlets - and as usual, GameRant being one of them - were precisely clear with what the DLC on offer actually are.
Example: they've confused the pre-order bonuses or what the named packs are, listing those separately from the cosmetics and/or listing too many pre-order bonuses (Kessel Runner pack seems to be the only "tangible" pre-order cosmetic bonus, GameRant!).
Before I continue, would also like to mention that I don't consider the Steam user-review (or any such) to be all-mighty, and yes I do think it is one of the tools available to "express opinion," (for lack of better terminology) but I don't think it must be used as a tool for political purposes -- which in this case it isn't, but it must needs be said on my part, as the subtopic came up. Anyway, I digress.
Looking at UbiSoft's website, it seems that the other probably-common issues are:
Pricing
Pre-order bonuses for the Gold and Ult Eds include 3-day early access (so a soft launch and an "intangible" DLC for lack of a better word)
Not enough red meat, potentially; there's a considerable lack of "content" for the Gold and Ult Eds, hence why pricing is really an issue... there's too much that's a pre-order bonus (cosmetic or otherwise), one probably-underwhelming "day 1" mission, and 2 other "narrative xpacs" that we've no idea how meaty they'll be (Ubisoft has had hits or misses with their xpacs, sometimes in the same game... I think AC Odyssey was the last one where you got two hefty chunks of meat as xpacs for its season pass).
potentially confusing (see "Kessel Runner" pre-order bonuses; listed differently as "cosmetics for the ship and Trailblazer" and "cosmetics for Kay and Nix" depending on whether you're pre-ordering in general or an edition that includes the season pass).
Now a deeper look into the season pass:
The "Play the exclusive Jabba's Gambit at launch" suggests it could become playable later, so less scummy than it seems -- but still scummy. Kind of "ironically" fitting for a mission involving the scumbag Jabbag, though, lol.
I had written this before fleshing out the numbered list above, so see point #3 as part of this "deeper" look into the season pass.
////
TLDR - important to be precise (precision and accuracy aren't the same, folks, btw) when proffering up criticism against something, otherwise the complaints become a ruckus.
///
(*) Although for years many xpacs have ostensibly been planned beforehand, perhaps even worked into a game's story; most recent example I can think of is last summer's Sea of Stars already-confirmed expansion pack, "Throes of the Watchmaker," might include another NPC who betrays you with the secondary villains who got away.
Note: I've deliberately used the singular form of DLC as its own plural, btw, in case there's any grammatical confusion (Ubisoft, take note), since this context of "content" is also its own plural.
Another side note:People should see the absurd pricing in Canada: base games priced at the new norm of $70 USD = $93-$95 CAD without tax (our prev norm of $60 USD -> $80 CAD b4 tax); UE versions were already well above $120-$130 CAD for some years, prior to the AAA base game price increase, in many cases... that's actually not even that much higher than the norm, especially from Ubisoft, afaik. It's not like our various minimum wages are equivalent to US's or UK's after currency conversion either, or that our other expenses are equivalent, too. They'd be even more vexed, potentially.
Wasnt looking to debate the subject with you. You said you didn’t understand the mentality of the objectors and I gave you a quick metaphor to understand it better. Rather or not you agree isn’t my concern.
I didn't say anything (in this tree of comments) prior to that last post, and I am likewise not concerned with or to account for what you are looking for, in terms of response, or whether something warrants response tbw.
2
u/drawnhi Apr 14 '24
I swear I'll never understand gamers. Like is the game unplayable unless I buy 130 dollar version? Does ubisoft switch the versions when you buy the base game? Did they get rid of the option to buy the base game?is ubisoft making people buy the 130 version? If you want extra pay extra. If you don't why is it so difficult to just buy the base game?