Well yeah. Some people that wouldn't buy the game will try it, and some people that would buy it won't because of game pass, that's obvious. But you get paid for the people that went through game pass instead of buying AND the people that wouldn't touch the game normally (which is a much bigger number) and that tried it on GP.
I don't agree with his reasoning though.
"Because a lot of people just go in and try it, and they don't invest. If they don't like the first 10 minutes? That's it."
As opposed to what? People buying it not liking it and having to deal with refunds which is complicatd on some plateforms?
People DLing it on GP aren't supposed to buy it either, they try it, stop right away or play some more and you still get paid anyways. They aren't expected to convert that to a buy. Some do, but it's not the point of the service.
Soo.. Either people go through GP, and their "try" is monetised for him. Or they buy the game, then he is back to the premium model. What's the issue? Why publish on GP if you only like the premium model? Isn't it because you make MORE money that way? Then why complain?
@Lach0121: Remove funding from disney? You mean the big mega corporation that funds itself with billions in profit?
Passing laws? That's fine its legal and both sides do it and abuse it.
Calling for boycotts? There are always people from all side calling for some. One side does it much more than the other doesn't it? Like their whole thing is about being mad and offended and cancelling. That should ring a bell. Not saying that other side is any better, it has its own ridiculous things too (stance on abortions, gun control you name it)
If you think just not agreeing with you is being right wing. You are being desingenuous yourself, or just kidding yourself and showing a typical unreasonable black and white left wing kind of person where I HAVE to agree with you or I am right wing. Frankly, both sides in the US are batshit crazzy. Yours as well.
I would never want to side myself with either of your ideologies. So ridiculous and pointless.
You can ignore replies, and give yourself an excuse not to engage. Still posting mine though.
@Lach0121: But it is voting with your wallet. This is proper demand and offer economics. It's not contacting advertisers to remove funding, it isn't causing an outrage on social plateforms to scare sponsors and partners away, it's not harassing the hosting with dmca and others.
It's not a minority bullying to get what it wants even if it's not marketable to a big chunk of the population. It's simply people not paying and not watching what doesn't interest them.
Oh nice, that was my main gripe with BotW. I imagine they will most likely still not be asdungeony as other zelda games but will be somewhere in between those and the ones from BotW, which I can live with.
@boodger: I actually have reasonable arguments, you are just close minded and simping.
You are actually on the side of displaying less information and not to be accurate because... Well because it most likely wouldn't be in the favor of the game.
To be fair, I am just saying this should be included in the reviews, you are the one mad I am suggesting it ;) Remember, I posted my opinion, it triggered you and you responded. So accusing me of being mad doesn't really work here and is funny ^^
@boodger: Can't see it huh. You are burying yourself in your trenches not acknowledging anything I said.
Yes people were tricked. When you plan to release extra monetisation after the reveiws so that this monetisation is not mentionned in those reviews... that is trickery.
What actually takes a lot of mental gymnastic is convincing yourself that this is perfectly fine and there is nothing to see here and that buyers should not be warned.
@boodger: The review is there to reflect what the game offers, how it offers it, and how good it is. It doesn't matter what your personnal opinion on a change is, how it is monetised is revelant. You personally thinking it is nitpicky matters not.
As long as it is concerning, interesting, and useful to people it should be reflected in the review no matter what your feelings are. The devs certainly though it would be revelant to reviews as they hid it until those reviews came out.
What I find the most interesting in this is how you are simping for a companing that, basically, just tricked you. That is the "LMAO" part of this discussion :p.
Funny and sad. People get taken advantage of and tricked and they defend the ones responsible. So sad.
Slash_out's comments