The Division 2 - Another letdown like Anthem or promising? Any insights?

DontTouchMyHoHos

Grand Admiral
Apr 4, 2015
587
860
900
RSI Handle
DontTouchMyHoHos
You make a valid point, which pertains to the tiny, TINY number of players who care about sinking their entire life into a single game and not eating, breathing, sleeping or othering.

I can't say that I care about those people.

Also, this seems to be a common complaint from you, that nobody should ever have to pay anything except the bare minimum price, and yet nobody should ever be able to buy anything more than the bare minimum price either.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I think the consequence of that is that the game would COST MORE for everybody. I think that's dumb, personally. Let it cost less, and let people who really care about it pay extra. This makes it cheaper for the vast majority of players, which increases the number of players, and is good overall, I think, in spite of a few minor annoyances it might cause.

We can agree to disagree. 😄
My complaints only apply to full price games. 60$ isnt bare minimum to me that is the max price, anything below that is bare minimum, when I pay 60$ game I expect a full complete experience, not a bare minimum. A lot of 60$ games now are providing the bare minim um. I do not enjoy the change in gaming where full price games gave you everything, a complete game, and now a game is nickel and dimed to you as proclaimed, "extra content" when the games before it provided more content and better entertainment for the same price and smaller development budgets. Its a practice that you say is small, but it has only grown as people say it wont get worse and ive watched gaming go from people freaking out about 5 dollar horse armor to accepting 20$ blue color skins and accepting lack of content, stability, and allowing developers to sell you a full price game that wont be a full game till a year plus later.
 

Bambooza

Admiral
Sep 25, 2017
2,247
7,087
750
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
My complaints only apply to full price games. 60$ isnt bare minimum to me that is the max price, anything below that is bare minimum, when I pay 60$ game I expect a full complete experience, not a bare minimum. A lot of 60$ games now are providing the bare minim um. I do not enjoy the change in gaming where full price games gave you everything, a complete game, and now a game is nickel and dimed to you as proclaimed, "extra content" when the games before it provided more content and better entertainment for the same price and smaller development budgets. Its a practice that you say is small, but it has only grown as people say it wont get worse and ive watched gaming go from people freaking out about 5 dollar horse armor to accepting 20$ blue color skins and accepting lack of content, stability, and allowing developers to sell you a full price game that wont be a full game till a year plus later.

The issue is game prices have been stagnant at 60 dollars for 2 decades were honestly the price should have gone up by now. It is interesting to see how the companies are looking for ways to keep the price the same while generating more revenue.
 
Reactions: Thraesh and Xist

DontTouchMyHoHos

Grand Admiral
Apr 4, 2015
587
860
900
RSI Handle
DontTouchMyHoHos
The issue is game prices have been stagnant at 60 dollars for 2 decades were honestly the price should have gone up by now. It is interesting to see how the companies are looking for ways to keep the price the same while generating more revenue.
Im all fine with increasing revenue, but the quality of the product aside from graphics has not increased with that as the wallets of the higher staff has bloated so much its ridiculous. The quality of the product as gone down while the source of income and the amount of content has been reduced.
 

Thraesh

Commander
Donor
Mar 4, 2019
49
107
100
RSI Handle
Thraesh19
Basically what you have been saying this whole time is you don't want to pay for early access to content that everyone is getting but you feel you have to because your friends are doing it, that is what I have understood from all your posts. Again it's up to the consumer. The content is open and free to anyone after initial purchase and those that wish it can play it a measly 7 days prior and won't get any advantage doing that because the big content in any DLC always comes after everyone has had ample time to prepare for it, usually several weeks. It's literally the same in any online game with DLC. Coming on and complaining about it where no dev see's it is just complaining for complaining's sake and does really nothing
 

Phil

Admiral
Donor
Nov 22, 2015
443
939
850
RSI Handle
Bungtater
When it comes to PvP, or any type of competitive game play I never hold time as a factor, you either have more time than others or you don't I can't really penalize players because everyone's situation is different, disabled, not in school, don't work etc..... its not their fault I can't sink the same amount of time into a game so I never account time as an unfair advantage, yes people who have more time tend to be better players and have advantages but its no ones fault and its not fair to discount players based on their schedule.

As far as content being released to a select few early, whether its 1 day or 7 days or a month this is different, money should not give a player an advantage in a game in my opinion, were talking a clear advantage in a competitive atmosphere, now Ubisoft has said the new specializations will be on par with the original 3 so there is no real advantage outside of having access to a new spec this will remain to be seen of course. But I will never agree to a situation where people can pay more money to get access to an advantage over other players in a player vs player atmosphere. The main reason for me is you are deliberately affecting someones playing experience if they are at a disadvantage simple because one person can afford it and another cannot and to me this should never be allowed in any game and is why I rarely play mobile app games which are almost always pay to win.

Again as far as Ubisoft has said the new spec's are on par with the original 3 and they claim there is no real advantage other than having a new spec to choose from but we will see, as far as the other advantages, getting access to certain missions etc... it does give people more chances at better gear which one could argue is an advantage, Yes everyone can get the the gear and specs but should someone who can't afford it or chooses not to pay extra have their gameplay directly affected because others can? Its something to consider.
 

Thraesh

Commander
Donor
Mar 4, 2019
49
107
100
RSI Handle
Thraesh19
You can literally get the exact same gear as someone who gets the one year pass the minute you have access to the DLC. Time is all anyone is buying. While time can save you some hassle, you could grind that whole week and potentially get 1-2 drops that are new for you while someone who doesn't pay the year pass could get the same drops on day 1. The bonus story missions as the Devs said offer nothing that isn't in the game already except some back story for those interested so while I do a bonus story, you could do a random mission and we could get the same loot.

This isn't a new tactic in games and it's far more lenient than others. Take Destiny 2, some big content isn't even available to you without a pass. How about some games that offer free to play models and sub models, sub models get way more content than free models.

I'm not saying you need to or you don't need to pay for the year pass, its a choice people can make if they choose but it's not something super game changing.

*Note: I don't do PvP at all so I have no say in the PvP side and haven't looked at info on it
 

DontTouchMyHoHos

Grand Admiral
Apr 4, 2015
587
860
900
RSI Handle
DontTouchMyHoHos
Basically what you have been saying this whole time is you don't want to pay for early access to content that everyone is getting but you feel you have to because your friends are doing it, that is what I have understood from all your posts. Again it's up to the consumer. The content is open and free to anyone after initial purchase and those that wish it can play it a measly 7 days prior and won't get any advantage doing that because the big content in any DLC always comes after everyone has had ample time to prepare for it, usually several weeks. It's literally the same in any online game with DLC. Coming on and complaining about it where no dev see's it is just complaining for complaining's sake and does really nothing
Then you missed my posts about the disadvantages of it and how it could make an unfair environment. DLC is different because you either get the content or you dont, its a choice that you HAVE to make in order to get new content, not so in this situation.
 

DontTouchMyHoHos

Grand Admiral
Apr 4, 2015
587
860
900
RSI Handle
DontTouchMyHoHos
You can literally get the exact same gear as someone who gets the one year pass the minute you have access to the DLC. Time is all anyone is buying. While time can save you some hassle, you could grind that whole week and potentially get 1-2 drops that are new for you while someone who doesn't pay the year pass could get the same drops on day 1. The bonus story missions as the Devs said offer nothing that isn't in the game already except some back story for those interested so while I do a bonus story, you could do a random mission and we could get the same loot.

This isn't a new tactic in games and it's far more lenient than others. Take Destiny 2, some big content isn't even available to you without a pass. How about some games that offer free to play models and sub models, sub models get way more content than free models.

I'm not saying you need to or you don't need to pay for the year pass, its a choice people can make if they choose but it's not something super game changing.

*Note: I don't do PvP at all so I have no say in the PvP side and haven't looked at info on it
You can not get the exact same gear the minute you get access to DLC because they have spent a week getting to the end game content and the lvl increase if they do so with the new content. This case more or less sets precedence for horrible companies to abuse this system and its not a healthy system for gaming. To say it doesnt, microtransactions in a video game a few years back would have burned a company to the ground and now that it was slowly introduced and people began to tolerate it because they had no choice from others purchasing it and it being also forced, you either accept this or dont play and will power always loses in games. I just dont like this methodology of gaming. Ill re-iterate again, since you dont PVP from a PvE aspect there is also "pvp"
when people try for world first to get the first clear of a raid and its competitive as hell with the hardcore raiding scene, no in order to compete for world first and content clearing first you HAVE to pay.
 

Thraesh

Commander
Donor
Mar 4, 2019
49
107
100
RSI Handle
Thraesh19
I've said my peace on the matter. From a PvE perspective the raid releases the same time for everyone, regardless of early access. It won't be day 1 of a DLC just like the current first raid doesn't release with the game launch. You have time to grind gear. If you were one of the "hardcore" world first racers you would of already discussed this with your already chosen team in advance, but people are instead complaining. If you don't like the system, go complain to the devs, no one is forcing another to pay for 7 days early access. It could be said it's like a Star Citizen concept ship, everyone can and will have access to that ship in game at some point, however if you buy it in concept you get LTI, or wait until you can buy it in game when it's released with in game currency. This case is no different than what other games already have done and have been doing. It's not a new tactic so I'm not sure where the hate on it is coming from. I don't condone the method either. Anthem did things smart in one sense, no DLC is paid for, at least that is the initial promise from Bioware. I'm just saying it is far more lenient than what other companies continue to do
 

DontTouchMyHoHos

Grand Admiral
Apr 4, 2015
587
860
900
RSI Handle
DontTouchMyHoHos
I've said my peace on the matter. From a PvE perspective the raid releases the same time for everyone, regardless of early access. It won't be day 1 of a DLC just like the current first raid doesn't release with the game launch. You have time to grind gear. If you were one of the "hardcore" world first racers you would of already discussed this with your already chosen team in advance, but people are instead complaining. If you don't like the system, go complain to the devs, no one is forcing another to pay for 7 days early access. It could be said it's like a Star Citizen concept ship, everyone can and will have access to that ship in game at some point, however if you buy it in concept you get LTI, or wait until you can buy it in game when it's released with in game currency. This case is no different than what other games already have done and have been doing. It's not a new tactic so I'm not sure where the hate on it is coming from. I don't condone the method either. Anthem did things smart in one sense, no DLC is paid for, at least that is the initial promise from Bioware. I'm just saying it is far more lenient than what other companies continue to do
Sorry to be that guy, but is it any good?
So far im enjoying it, but we shall see come end game.

If I dont like the system I discuss about it on threads with friends ^.^ Im a casual hardcore, I like the option if I feel up to it, but I dont want to feel compelled to pay in order to conduct it. People can complain and people can discuss, this isnt a place were complaining is happening its people discussing and read each others thoughts and views and offering insight. Its debating. It's by no means horrible scheme and I didnt know raids were not part of the early access scheme, but it can set precedence for abuse which developers and publishers run wild with and do so. It may not be a new tactic, but it isnt wildly used by any margin and I would hope not as in a lot of games this would could open up abuse to make people pay for access to content were PvP and raiding etc is affected in rpg style games.
 

Phil

Admiral
Donor
Nov 22, 2015
443
939
850
RSI Handle
Bungtater
This may clear it up for some people, as I said Ubisoft has stated there will not be any clear advantages by purchasing the year 1 pass early.......


FAQ

Will Year 1 pass holders receive any gameplay advantage over other players?


Our intention is to allow all players an even playing field. Year 1 Pass holders will receive certain content like early access to Episodes and additional narrative experiences in Classified Assignments.

Raids, new weapons, gear and other gameplay-affecting post launch additions will be available to all players at the same time.

Won't instant access to new Specializations allow Year 1 pass holders gameplay advantage?

Specializations are unique and powerful with abilities and specialized weapons tailored to specific playstyles. When in skilled hands, these can turn the tide of battle. Though Year 1 Pass owners will have the benefit of instant access to new specializations, all players will be able to unlock them over time through gameplay. They will have different strengths and weaknesses, and appeal to different playstyles and tactical situations. Those who choose not to unlock new specializations via the Year 1 Pass or gameplay will still have access to the original three: Sharpshooter, Survivalist, and Demolitionist, and these will offer the same tier of power as new specializations.
 
Forgot your password?