You're viewing a single thread.
No, because that might be an incentive to buy it. Being a pirate is probably more fun anyway, though.
Perfect answer, don't give Bethesda and Microsoft your money!
Oh why not, it's a really good game. Did Beth do something evil or something?
Yes, a LOT of things! Fallout76 is the worse example (the internet historian video about it is good), Fallout 4 to some extend, the endless rereleases of Skyrim with no additional value, their shitty launcher, their constant selling of rippoff merch and so on. It's a terribke company that was good ages ago and still profits from their prior reputation, well and now it's owned by Microsoft too!
Fallout76 was a bad game. Not really evil though. And I heard it got much better, admittedly long after launch. I really enjoyed Fallout 4 but I get that I was in the minority there. Either way, I don't think a company should be totally panned just because they made the main character voiced instead of silent. Re-releasing Skyrim got old, but you don't have to buy it, lol. I don't know what you mean about their launcher. Was it bad? You could always start the games from the exe as well. You'll be happy to know there's no launcher for Starfield anyway.
I think they've made something amazing with Starfield, although it starts quite slowly.
Pirate the game if you want, no judgement from me, but don't justify it by pretending its some moral good.
I agree with you but the Fallout 76 had some evil things related to merch, special editions and etc. That's the part of Bethesda as a company doing shit and not the game developers side.
Well, everybody is entitled to a own opinion but I highly recommend that Internet Historian video because you certainly don't seem to understand the degree of garbage they did with Fallout 76, I am definitely happy they don't force there launcher anymore tho!
From the article it looks like that was an issue with ZeniMax Online Studios
Horse armour......
That's actually mostly on Microsoft. Fuck Microsoft.
The predatory game monetization tactics of today began with Microsoft. After experimenting with paid DLC for its first-party titles on the original Xbox, Microsoft planned to launch the Xbox 360 with a storefront populated by the newfangled "microtransaction." Speaking to WIRED in 2005, Microsoft described the microtransaction system as one that would provide a profitable new revenue stream for publishers - one they would be foolish to skip out on. According to USGamer, Bethesda was the first third-party publisher to accept Microsoft's idea, offering a pack of in-game horse armor for Oblivion players at a $2.50 price point. Oblivion Horse With Elven Armor
This resulted in outcry from fans who found $2.50 far too expensive, especially for a cosmetic item in a single-player game, where no other players would even see it. Speaking about the issue later, Elder Scrolls director Todd Howard claimed Bethesda had tried to price the pack lower, but someone at Microsoft insisted on $2.50.
It seems like the only thing Microsoft really forced onto Bethesda was the price tag, Bethesda was all too willing to start loading up their game with microtransactions.
agreed, Microsoft bad Bethesda good =)
(I am biased, I have a lot of hours in Skyrim)
They milked Skyrim for all it was worth tbf. And while they are fully dependent on mods to keep up that popularity they don't give a lot back.
Probably crunch but that's every studio