Hypocrisy: Season passes

TransgenderVaultDeweller said:
Bollocks, painting the assertion that it's merely optional and therefor not a problem is not a valid reason to speak up and object.


I don't like season passes, but if i did and i complained about EA and how their doing the same shit as Bethesda with content in the future being promised without us knowing. Without speaking the same about bethesda? I'd ideologically be inconsistent and by that extent a hypocrite.

Besides you don't even know what you are getting with seasons passes, what if you don't like it or fallout 4 for the matter? You are pretty much cuckold and fucked. Unless you want to go through steam, Federal Trade Commission and Better Business Bureau.
Click to expand...

You're trying to claim Angry Joe ranting about content held back is the same as DLC, it isn't. Season Passes and cutting content to sell later in microtransactions are not at all the same thing.

I personally don't like season passes, but you have a choice to buy it and you know what you're getting into. Don't buy it if you don't want it, simple. Don't pre-order either because it's stupid.
 
The difference is that Fallout DLC tends to be more expansion-ish and actually well worth the money, whereas EA DLC tends to be stuff that should have been in the game on launch, such as extra multiplayer maps or weapon skins.

I predict that Fallout 4's DLC will be a mix of previous expansion-like releases with some microtransaction-esque bullshit mixed in too.
 
Ahh... The Mass Effect 3 Day One DLC. How could I forgot. Oh, EA you are truly run by a bunch of greedy monster!:mad:

And I'm not going to lie, Beth does add quite a bit of new content in their DLC's that make them worth the money. Of course there are a few exceptions *coughHorseArmorDLCcough* but they have seemed to learn their lesson with that. Well at lest for the time being anyway.
 
Walpknut said:
People should stop buying things that don't even exist yet. Bethesda already said that they don't even know what the DLCs are gonna be about but they are ready to sell them to you on day 1, no wait BEFORE day 1. It's just in general a complete lack of respect towards us as consumers and as people.
Click to expand...

I know why they don't say it, but actually people like Joe, Streamers and other kinds of game reviewers should be actually more complaining about the fans and people that buy it rather than to be always angry with EA, or Ubisoft, or Bethesda or what ever company is releasing something similar to that. Not to mention he already said he hates EA bla bla but his angry army will go and buy the game anyway because they want to support Battlefront, so much for that.

Because let us be honest, those companies would not do it, if it wasn't most of the time successful. It has become hip to be angry with EA, like all the time, because of their honestly shitty consumer practise. But this is a coin with two sides. There are the people that do it, and there are the people that allow EA to do it with them. Trick me once, shame on you, trick me twice, shame on me. I always had this habit of blaming the big companies for doing it as well. But at this point? After so many years? It's simply not the full story.
 
Last edited:
Angry Joe is such a lame idiot. He just yells at what is hip to be angry at and his entire shtick reeks of egocentrism, not to mention I automatically have a dislike for those who play up the "loud latino" stereotype.
 
And he flip flops his opinion like a motherbitch. Like he was all "Yeah I am excited for the Xcom FPS because I am more of an action gamer", then after the debacle and public outcry at that thing (why can't it happen with Fallout?) he suddenly became a fan of the original and called the FPS stupid. I can respect him having a different opinion (as long as he is not an idiot about it) but very obvious dishonesty? I just can't, and won't.
 
I have no respect for Joe, or ProJared for that matter, after the whole Mass Effect 3 debacle. Really? The extended cut fix everything? The game is one of the best you've played? People who have legitimate reasons as to why the game was terrible beyond its ending are just haters? Tell me how much was your soul worth to EA? :mad:
 
I would like to know what the hell does a season pass give? Does is grant subscription? To be honest I really don't care. I laugh at all the suckers running today buying these AAA games and get shafted. They actually believe they're getting a deal. I haven't supported these AAA brands over a decade. I'll stick to the oldies or if newer ones become bargain bin deals. :) I do miss the old days of games. When you really got your moneys worth. New starwars battlefield is a pathetic joke. But I believe these AAA brands are just releasing digital drugs. All the weak minded need there next fix..

The only place I buy games now are from gog or supporting what I believe reasonable deals on kickstarter. But I'll confess I was suckered into witcher 3.. That downgrade was more than just graphics. But hey at least CDprojekts apologizes for ripping us PC gamers off.
 
Last edited:
Well, to be fair, this is the first time Bethesda is doing a Season Pass (IIRC). How many times has EA done Season Passes?
Maybe there is a reason why he's singling out EA and not talking about Fallout 4.
 
Kilgore Trout said:
In today's market, you should just wait for the GOTY/Ultimate edition (or equivalent edition with bundled DLCs and patches).
Click to expand...
It's no brainer to do this with Bethesda game, especially considering the ever praised mods for their games.
 
Mr Fish said:
Well, to be fair, this is the first time Bethesda is doing a Season Pass (IIRC). How many times has EA done Season Passes?
Click to expand...

EA just did it for their multiplayer shooters, didn't they? Like the whole idea was "we're going to do map packs for DLC, so if you're sure you want to get all the MP maps for Battlefield or whatever, you can buy the season pass and get a discount." EA never did them for Bioware games, the closest analogue to what Bethesda's doing here.
 
The reason we complain about other DLC and not BethSoft DLC?

Most DLC: Super Awesome Map Pack! 4 multiplayer maps for $14.99!

BethSoft DLC (post-Oblivion): A whole new campaign roughly half the (physical) size of this $60 game and easily worth a few dozen more hours worth of unique content for $14.99!
 
Ben Soto said:
The reason we complain about other DLC and not BethSoft DLC?

Most DLC: Super Awesome Map Pack! 4 multiplayer maps for $14.99!

BethSoft DLC (post-Oblivion): A whole new campaign roughly half the (physical) size of this $60 game and easily worth a few dozen more hours worth of unique content for $14.99!
Click to expand...
Point Lookout, Operation Anchorage, The Pitt, Broken Steel and Mothership Zeta were all individually half the size of FO3?
 
Ugh, yeah, you are right. Point Lookout was pretty big though, easily another dozen hours of content. The others... eh, you got me there. I was thinking more along the lines of Dawnguard, Dragonborn, Shivering Isles, Point Lookout, Old World Blues/Honest Hearts (debatable, but still) etc. etc.

The Pitt and Broken Steel were also fairly long, I suppose.
 
I think potentially the difference between Fo4 and Battlefront is that for all it's (many) faults there's still a whole lot of stuff in there to do, but Battlefront seems a little light on content so the $50 season pass seems cynical, at best. Of course, we only know this now that both games are out.
 
Bethesda's DLC has been pretty good (I consider The Pitt and Point Lookout to be better than Fallout 3) so I guess £25 for the whole lot seems like a good deal to me (unless it was nothing but mothership zeta dlcs, in which case I wasted £25 on lackluster dlc).
I think it comes down to both price and quality. Battlefront we know is going to be more maps (and from what I've heard, there's not many maps in BF as it is) not only that, but it's a high price for a game that will only have a life span of two years as most, and with the way things are going, I'd say it's lucky if it reached a year before you find people get bored with it. In many ways, BF relies on other players playing the game, and with a season pass that's $50, you may my get your money's worthy. Now take F4, it's going to last as long as the player wants it to, not only that but we know we're going to get some kind of expansive story (I know people bring up horse dlc, but that was nearly 10 years ago, I think it's time to let shit like that go).
But who knows, if we get DLC which is written as well the Pitt, then it would be 'worth the price of admission' as Mr New Vegas would say.

Edit. I also want to point out that even through we seem to be bashing on EA, Dead or Alive wins it for worst season pass, they made 3 fucking passes for nearly £100 each. That's £300 for costumes in a (now) £15 game. That's just greedy (plus some costumes are exclusive to the season pass).
I know it's kind of off topic to burst out in a rant like that, but I really need to rant about that shit.
 
Last edited:
Corporate greed will be corporate greed. No one can change that, so it's sort of pointless to point it out.
And to be honest... a lot of people see Bethesda's Fallout as good games, and as an extension of that, they see their expansion as good expansions. And as a result, people trust Bethesda to deliver.
Hell, all they have to do is throw in the Memory Den DLC, Underwater Exploration DLC, Lovecraft Mythos DLC, and call it a day, and people will consider the season pass worth it.

After all, even the Witcher 3 had a season pass. If a company is reputable, there's nothing wrong with... this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top