Many businesses(restaurants/etc) do it all the time. Imo it is fine if done for non-gameplay content and at a fair price...then people can skip it and enjoy the game anyways without missing out on much.

Exception to what? You think they can give you free stuff in a game and maintain servers for free?

At least she was honest and didn't intentionally mislead like some MSM outlets do with their stories.....also people should also be able to/should check all stories online(including the one posted in the OP) by default.

(Also funny pic somewhat related to the topic at hand)

This

(Also I wanted to ask you here as I wanted to keep such out of the thanksgiving thread and your PMs are friend only: One post on such in my thread is fine but if you could please try to keep the "thanksgiving bad" stuff to a minimum i'd appreciate it....I made the thread for good vibes/talk and well wishing, not bringing up the sins of the past. Thanks again and have a good holiday season)

S/he shared something s/he found on internet here in order to learn if it is true or not. What part of that you can't comprehend?

If you have access to such tools, why don't you check it yourself and share the results here so everyone else can benefit from it?

That's what the internet is for. Unless you're too lazy to type a few words into a search bar and hit [Enter]. In which case you expect someone else to do it for you.

I will never accept the 'it's just cosmetic' argument as valid, not in a paid product, cosmetics used to be rewards for playing, not charged for piecemeal. Also supporting these microtransactions just encourages them to carve out more cosmetics to charge you for, it's cyclical and I won't have a bar of it.

We rarely get many, if any, cosmetic rewards in games anymore because people have accepted them as paid extras.

I get what you're saying(even if I somewhat disagree) and I respect that, but would you rather they make such stuff that way or do it more for game content that's not cosmetic? One needs to have proper priorities when fighting such, at the very least.

Also them carving out some stuff for cosmetic dlc doesn't always mean they cut it from game content already made.

It's not an either/or scenario, as far as I'm concerned, microtransactions, cosmetic or otherways have no place in a game you just paid a premium for, there's no economy to support like free-to-play, you've already given them your money.

Fully fledged DLC is one thing, but under no scenario will I accept microtransactions as an acceptable, ethical business practice in a full price game and the argument that the likes of EA make of 'they need microtransactions because game dev has become too expensive' is a complete lie.

I simply don't agree with charging for simple cosmetics piecemeal, no not every instance is carved content but a hell of a lot is, and if not carved, it's deliberately left off the table for the base game. Cosmetics have become a cynical, greedy marketting tool instead of a reward for playing the game and I can't help but sneer at it conceptually.

Also anyone who says cosmetics don't affect gameplay is lying to themselves.

I hate to say anything nice about something from the house of Randy Bitchford, but Borderlands 3 has no microtransactions, it gives you all kinds of fun, unique, goofy and cool cosmetics as loot drops and the game is infinitely more satisfying because of that. It's rewarding to play and you feel good about finding some cool new thing just for playing. You're rewarded for gameplay, not for opening your wallet.

It goes towards future games, obviously...or at least it should(if there are any cases where it doesn't).

Well it is expensive for AAA titles, at the very least(mainly due to overblown marketing & other factors). I accept you holding such a stance, though.

I agree it is often a greedy marketing tool, and also when I said cosmetics I meant packs of them sold as dlc being acceptable, not sold individually(if that makes any difference).

They don't if we are talking about ability to finish a game and about truly cosmetic stuff and not stat boosting stuff(weapons/armor/etc).

Fair enough, but I also think some such things can be done well....I just cannot see everything so black and white(all bad or good), as I am not that kind of person.

Fair arguments, I guess I am rather hardline on some things, I'm just a grumpy old gamer who grew up without DLC and misses when games rewarded you for playing with bonus content and when I have an ethical objection to a business or a business model I just don't support it, i'd rather miss out on something than break my own code. Same reason why I've never given Steam a red cent.

I guess i'd be more open to larger cosmetic packs, as that usually indicates more time and thought has gone into it rather than just fleecing you one by one. (I'm looking at you Tecmo you greedy bastards).

I do think there's a solid argument to be made about the value of cosmetics in the gameplay loop though, it's hard to deny there's a satisfaction of being rewarded for achieving something in a game with bonus stuff that serves no other purpose than to make you smile, this may not help you beat the game, but it can and does increase the enjoyment of the process. Microtransaction cosmetics take that feeling away.

Or people an just not play them.

People are allowed to make exceptions or be a bit hypocritical from time to time, you know.

As said above, a bit of exception doesn't mean the end of the world or that people/companies are suddenly bad & shouldn't(in general, not by you per se) be blown out of proportion.
Fair stances, and understandable given the current environment for AAA gaming, even if I don't support such myself.

Or like the train game that sold each train for like 5 bucks and made dozens of train cars.

I think a bit of both works in such cases....the game comes with a bunch of free stuff and then the devs make some cosmetic multipack for cheap prices....then we all win to some degree. :)

I'm not sure if you're just playing dumb but here we go again.

1. I do not play those games so it does not hurt me but if you make those games then don't claim to fight for drm free and brag about the principles you previously had because certainly those don't mean as much as they once did. Secondly CDP and GOG should not embrace always online and MTX like Gwent because why should other publisher be held to that standard with no such practices if CDP and GOG don't care.

2. Yes you can make exceptions now and then but be sure to not undermine you own values too many times because once you go down deeper then you might not like the end result, GOG's only and real selling point is the offline installers and drm free. Many people are far less forgiving then me.

3. No one has said it's the end of the world and CDP is the worst, i just prefer them not going down the road that gwent did it's nothing more than that, i think it's you and the other one who think what i have written is more serious than it actually is when it's only my thoughts on the matter.

They have ONE such game....it's not like they are abandoning their principles in massive ways...that is what I am trying to say. They are still "fighting the good fight", even if they made one such game.

And some might come regardless who don't care as much about DRM as some of us do.....the number of customers won't necessrily go vastly up or down as a result.

Sorry if I took your words toot seriously....I was just trying to argue my own points a bit and talk on the issue at hand.