What you need to know

  • As Dragon’s Dogma 2 launched on PC Thursday evening, a previously hidden suite of microtransactions became available for purchase.
  • Things you can buy for the single player ARPG include fast travel points, Rift Crystals for hiring Pawns and buying special items, appearance change and revival consumables, a special camping kit that weighs less than normal ones, and a few others.
  • In response to the microtransactions, Dragon’s Dogma 2 is being review bombed, with the game currently sitting at “Mostly Negative” on Steam.
  • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    43
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s still a form of review bombing. If the game is good (I have not played it nor seen any review so I don’t actually know, but the article is making it sound like the only issues are the mtx) aside from the predatory mtx, does it deserve a mostly negative rating ?

    I wouldn’t necessarily disagree, but I can also see reasons to if one thinks that you are not getting a much worse experience by not paying for these micro transactions.

    Also, it’s fucking Capcom. They have good studios but they have always been greedy bastards. So I can’t say I’m surprised by any of this.

    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 months ago

      If the game is good (I have not played it nor seen any review so I don’t actually know, but the article is making it sound like the only issues are the mtx) aside from the predatory mtx, does it deserve a mostly negative rating ?

      Yes. Yes I think it does. Seems like many other people agree!

      • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        Well I agree too but it’s not a fucking law of physics, the journalist is allowed to have a different opinion on that

    • Doug7070@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 months ago

      The microtransactions are one issue among many. To be frank, putting microtransactions in a $70 USD title would still warrant negative reviews in and of itself, but the the game is also having catastrophic performance issues and crashing on PC for what seems to be the majority of players, to the point of many Youtube channels covering it that did not get press copies being all but unable to play at all.

      It doesn’t matter if a game has a lot of good elements, if it has bad ones and people cite those bad elements in negative reviews it’s not review bombing, it’s consumers giving an honest review of a product.

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Imagine that you’re having the best dinner of your life. Everything you like, jizz-in-your-pants delicious, served by beautiful people of your preferred sex. Then dessert comes, a massive cake, but while you’re enjoying it, you notice a different flavor. And a smell. You look and in the middle of the cake, there is a half-consumed turd.

      Would you still rate it “9/10 great except for the turd”? Or would you remember it as the restaurant that served you a turd?

      (I stole this hyperbole from the Angry Joe Show’s GOT review)

    • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      3 months ago

      Lmao, ok, downvote me for providing context. I’m not even disagreeing. Personally I don’t think this is review bombing. Y’all need to chill.

      • squirrels@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Personally I don’t think this is review bombing.

        You’re replying to a comment where you say

        It’s still a form of review bombing.

        Be better at lying.

        • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          Sorry, it should have been “it can still be considered a form of review bombing. However I am on my smoke break and will not spend 15 minutes writing and proofreading a message when I know I will get piled on by internet strangers regardless of how obvious I make my own opinion while trying to explain what it sounds like the writer’s point of view is” but I was pressed for time