By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
ohmylanta1003 said:
Puppyroach said:

Which is what the market is about. If people feel that it is ok to pay 60$ för the game (which is the price on X1 atleast) then that is the standard that you are for. If the game would sell badly, people would most likely feel that it should have been priced lower, which is the standard I am for. Me hoping it will sell badly does not mean that your opinion is worse or better, just different, and the market decides what the result will be for the game.

What we can be sure of, is that if these games with lesser content than other 60$ games sell very well, developers will continue to reduced content for full-priced games, so your willingness to fund this practice contribute to the rest of us consumers getting less value for more cash in the future.

What other way do you think there is to affect these developers to change their practices, other than through our wallets?

This has sufficient content for the people looking to play it as a multiplayer only game. Most people don't care about a campaign. It only costs $40 if you have a computer better than a potato.

So what you are saying is that we have really lowered our standards for games to such a degree that we even excuse them for being lazy enough to not even make a single player campaign?