JWeinCom said:
Majin-Tenshinhan said:
I never moved any goalposts at all, I said exactly the same thing from the start to the end. I'm not going to quote the posts because I don't want to give notifications to people who aren't interested, but here are select quotes:
Zippy6: "Oh wait they had $20 DLC waiting for less than 2 months after launch. I can't comment in the quality of the content included with the DLC as I've yet to play it but it's the timing that's objectionable. Your $70 wasn't good enough for Nintendo. This should have been a free update regardless of it's quality."
Zippy6 again: "Pretty much yes. While it may be the same product and same price the timing matters greatly. You just paid them $70 for a game and then immediately they're banging on your door asking for another $20. The close proximity to release also gives the impression it's something that they could have finished earlier and included with the game for added value, or it could have just been a free update to the people who had just bought an expensive $70 game less than 2 months ago." curl-6: "Nah, I'm a big fan of Nintendo and Bananza is my game of the year, but $20 DLC coming out like 2 months after the game itself is kinda iffy. I'm not too pissed as the base game is already a complete experience on its own, and the extra stuff isn't my thing, but the circumstances do smack of greed." curl-6 again: "As Veknoid says, it's more about context; the fact this followed so closely after the base game is just not a good look as it suggests it could have been included but was held back to get another $20 for us."
Veknoid_Outkast: "I think this is more about optics than anything. [...] That said, the timing of this DLC suggests a certain cynical, money-grubbing approach by Nintendo. Had they held onto it and released it next summer, I think there would be far less disappointment and skepticism. I don't think the problem is the existence of the DLC, or even the price tag; it's that we can all tell it was developed in tandem with the base game but sold à la carte."
JackHandy (btw the same person you used a comment from earlier, clarifying that the development team has no bearing on his frustrations): "If a publisher plans on DLC before the game even drops, even if it's from another team, then to me it might as well be from the same team because you literally had the chance to include it."
Otter: "For me, If it's completed near enough to the time of launch and the game is already expensive, I do expect any successful company to incorporate it as free content to support its on going sales or at least be very cheap. Essentially its something they have to be conscious of imo."
So I find myself having to apologise - there were only 7 comments, not 10, so forgive my exaggeration. That's still 7 compared to the single one you presented, which also clarified in a later comment that they did not have any concern on whether it was a different developer or not.
You can re-read my comments and see very clearly that whatever goalposts you imagined to see were never moved - I said the exact same thing the entire way through. You highlighting "I actually don't see a single comment that directly addresses the different developer issue" is exactly in line with my point - that it being different developers or not is not actually part of what people are taking issue with, at the very least in this thread. Many people here acknowledged that even if it's made by a different developer, the close proximity to the game's launch and a separate price tag is what irks them.
You can very freely disagree with me - but stop being so unnecessarily aggressive. I stated one point - which I've maintained - and I've continued to show how that point is reflected right here in this very thread. You are actively calling it bullshit, accusing me of random stuff and insulting my intelligence. Calm down, dude. |
When you said that "nobody was saying that" and I pointed out someone was saying it in the exact comment that OP was responding to, that is indeed moving the goalposts, on that point. Your overall opinion on the matter may remain unchanged, but on that particular point your original position was proven wrong and the goalpost was initially moved. |
I'm just going to address this part because as I've said multiple times - I'm not personally invested in this issue and I don't particularly care - I did not say that to begin with. My post to you was:
"But you don't know that's what people are upset about. From my experience, people are upset because they already paid for the game just 2 months ago and now are asked to pay more. Whether it was developed by the same developer or not, you're still being asked to pay again in very short order. I could be wrong, but that has been what I've seen most frustration with and this thread also seems to reflect that, given that many posts are saying that they'd be fine with it if it came out 6-12 months later than it did. Who developed it doesn't seem to be particularly relevant - the fact that the content is totally ready so short after launch makes it feel like it was held off on from release, regardless of who made it.
That's how it looks to me anyway. Again, I don't have a personal horse in the race, I just don't think that argument at all addresses the issue people actually have. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but almost every post I see seems to reflect it."
The part that you're caught up on is probably my next post which said: "When it doesn't seem to be what anyone in the thread is saying" ... which I still maintain to be the case, based on the posts that I highlighted. If you disagree, that's fine, but even the post you showed had the person point out in his very next post that the developer difference (which apparently isn't even true it turns out) doesn't matter to him.
I don't know why you're putting words in my mouth, but I am not going to defend things I never said to begin with. I never said "nobody said this", I said "this does not seem to be the general sentiment based on this thread". Especially when I said multiple times that I could be wrong and I was just basing it off of the vibe I got from the thread's posts. I've been consistent in my statements, I've stayed consistent, and staying consistent - I am also not interested in continuing this conversation. I don't think it's a good argument, you do - and that's fine. I'd like you to apologise for insulting my intelligence and coming with completely unwarranted hostility, but since you totally glossed over that part I'm guessing that won't happen. Have a good day, I guess. Hope you don't jump at everyone you see online like this, because it's thoroughly unpleasant.
