Bethesda = Greedy scum
 

What, don't they make enough $ as it is?

Already a thread on this. They didn't inflate it. They changed the pricing scheme so that you can't have everything for almost free. But if you already have the game but none or only part of the DLC you still get a major discount. Stop being spoiled gamer brats.

Also, the game has been out for 5 years. If you didn't buy it yet, then boohoo for you.

You could have easily come in here and told us that we were simply misunderstanding the equation but you didn't. I would have said, okay I was wrong. But you had to go ahead and be that gamer brat you accuse us of being. Btw, I already have the game nor am I spoiled.

This is true and I apologize. My annoyance is not directed at you specifically, but more of an exasperation of an already existing group that wants everything for nothing.

I'm with the CEO on this. It's your money; if you don't want to spend $60, don't. If I made a product I'd charge as much as I could make from it.

The article writer is just being really dishonest/can't do basic maths, and when they're called out on it, try to cover their behinds by complaining about something that Bethesda did not have any control over: How steam displays the price of bundles.

And down they go…

Dishonored 2 might be my last Bethesda game.

I never pre-order these days anyway. Yet another reason not to be a foolish lemming and give into marketing hype pre-launch (Bethesda titles or otherwise).

I don't personally see much of a problem. I always thought preorders were a bad idea, and if they want to make us wait post-release for the reviews, fine - I'll wait until I have the information I need. I wouldn't want to play most games until the patches are in, anyway.

Nice. I think Ill wait for this. Wonder if it messes up my save games.

Well I very rarely buy anything before the actual release, so this policy doesn't affect me at all. Waiting a month or two at the very least seems to be the best strategy.

I believe it is mostly about piracy. Preview copies of a game allow the pirates to release the game before Bethesda. This probably loses them millions.

Silly name for this thread. Bethesda's trying to make as much money as possible, big deal. That's what thier supposed to do.

It would be akin to devs calling customers cheap scum for looking for deals and discounts.

So, if I choose to preorder a game, I'm a foolish lemming?

pibbur

Well, I'd just say you were a fan. There are Cub fans paying $6000 for a ticket that cost $150.

I wouldn't say so. If the purchase of a piece of entertainment is comfortably within one's means, and you're excited for it, it's still a rational decision. It's an easily tolerable risk you choose to take.

With regard to the evil or otherwise of Bethesda, I think this is one scenario where it's fine to let the market sort it out. If some people choose to purchase something before they've seen impartial reviews, so be it. I don't think a fairy dies every time someone makes an early purchase they might regret.

This article amuses me. They're accusing Bethesda of doing this for maximizing profits and selling as much as they can right away, should the game get subpar ratings. Sounds like they're trying to sound edgy and give their journalism some hits.

But let's be real here. Is anyone really expecting a Bethesda game to come out that has shitty scores?

Really this just goes in line with what Mr Toddy Howard was saying a few months ago about waiting until the game was pretty much completed before announcing it.

I wouldn't make the case that Beth games are bound to get good scores - The Evil Within was mediocre, and some of their DLC has been poor. I just think that if the whole industry moved to abolish prerelease review copies, it would be no bad thing. For one thing, it puts the smaller independent reviewers on a more even playing field with the big review sites, who often have a cozy relationship with publishers. There's even been reports of prerelease review copies being withheld as leverage for better scores.

If some people rush out and buy on day one without the benefit of reviews, I don't care.

Bethesda as a company is awful (i.e, not customer friendly). They do produce some nice games but their corporate policies are among the worse (but not the worse). So you have to decide for yourself if you want to buy their games or not. I do tend to buy 'customer firendly' games at full price but as a policy do not buy 'customer unfriendly' games at full price no matter how good the game is (or might be). If you don't like the pricing pass there are plenty of good games on the market these days. If you like a game and find the company 'customer friendly' then by all means support that company products by buying it at a decent price.
-
A few examples of unfriendly companies include UBI, Bethesda
A few examples of companies not so friendly include EA, Blizzard
A few example of friendly companies include: xile, larian
(your opinion might differ from mine).
Friendly means willing to support their product, provide reasonable value and generally have a policy that will allow helping the consumer when feasible.
Unfriendly means doing things that deliberately cheat the consumer, dropping buggy games without making any attempt to fixing them, having a policy to mislead customers and et all.
-
Btw freedom of speech is also consumer friendly even if that speech is negative criticisim; HOWEVER freedom of speech does not require permitting personal attacks and threats.

I think you are giving piracy more credit than it deserves. Its about negative reviews and marketting, not the small amount of money "lost" to piracy between the review release and actual release.

Eh, hate to agree with…whatever that is, but with the current trend, there are no customer pros here.
Still, I can't blame Bethesda after Fallout IV for not having confidence in the quality of their games. :P

And shouldn't this be moved into News section?

The last Bethesda game I bought was Oblivion… have not been interested in any of their games after that. I have not trusted official reviews for years, those are a joke anyway. Most of the AAA games seemed to always get 90% or higher from review sites. In terms of affecting good and useful reviewers (however small their number, not many of them out there really) who are actually honest and objective, and review games from a player friendly perspective, yea, this sucks for them… but I usually don't buy games until a long time after they are released anyway. The only exceptions are when I back games on kickstarter, and those are old school rpgs from Inxile and Larian, the creme of the crop, basically.

So, yea, its a negative story, but for me, very minor… its not like I'm a fan of Bethesda anyway… and I don't trust official game journalism/review (like PC Gamer for example) sites anyway. They lost my trust a long time ago.

Oh hey! I remember when you laughed at me when I compared Skyrim sales to the movie Titanic. You said their final sales numbers would be would be a small fraction. Well we're up to 1.4 billion so far… :p

I don't recall that, but fine, whatever. I never saw the movie Titanic, just wasn't interested, (and I don't care how mega popular the movie was, sometimes that can even be a turn off to me when it comes to movies) and am not interested in Skyrim either, so that is something else they have in common.

If I had to guess, the conversation probably went something like this….

Those are some great search skills there Wisdom.

Big publishers no longer need the media anymore to marketing etc. Reviews were part of the marketing process. Exclusive review copies were used to keep some media people happy. In fact almost all the pre release reviews were usually very positive for big publisher games since they are essentially bribed (direct and indirect) marketing.

Take a look at the new Red Dead Redemption 2 announcement by Rockstar. They posted a single cryptic tweet and the whole thing exploded on social media and everybody and their mother was picking the story up. Free marketing.

In years past, a big release like this would first be announced via pres release and some big outlets might even get exclusives info to go alone with that. This is now becoming things of the past now.

No you are not a foolish lemming for pre ordering. However you are foolish lemming if you pre order and then claim the publisher mislead you since you no longer like the game now :)

This is true!

Ah. Thanks.

pibbur who usually doesn't blame anybody. Except himself.

take a look at Skyrim budget, it take millions to make such complex games, take a look at GTA VI cost around 400 million, gave more than 1 billion, but what if it was a flop? Making AAA games is a huge risk and gambling.

Complex? LOL
How about looking at Gothic budget?

While I replayed each and every Gothic (except abomination with #4) I'll never ever replay any TES game nor overhyped boredom GTA5 (and I suspect older Need4Speed with a story are the same bore).

Making any game is a risk, it doesn't have to be AAA.
If one does not want to take any risks, there are always phonegames idiots pay2win in.

Gothic is an exception though. It's flat out spectacular for the first game of a newly started studio with a small budget.

While witcher 3 budget was huge (but probably a lot less than skyrim); witcher 1 was a fantastic game with a relatively low budget.

the majority of which went into marketing, PR and hollywood (voice) actors

Vanilla Skyrim ran on ancient and horrid FPU code from the mid-1990s (introduced with Pentium 3) and devs compiled the game initially without optimization flags


they are lazy/sloppy or greedy, but probably both

http://www.pcgamer.com/elder-scrolls…-hall-of-fame/

What do you say about that? Make products fans have to fix themselves and you get yourself an award. For what? New cheap labor strategy I guess.

First world problems. Us gamers are an entitled bunch.