@xrizz1066: 'Do you use your brain at all??'

Of course he understood - he was probably just giving you a 'taste iof' your own medicine...

@xnshd: But you've already given them $60 and as you've already mentioned, the content is on the disc, so what are you actually achieving by not buying the DLC? Not getting access to content you already have? And what, you think that by refusing to buy it they're suddenly going to say 'Okay then, have it for free'? At best, if enough people did it, all they'll do is just not bother producing any additional content for the next game and sell you the same, half baked experience but with a shit load more real-money transactions in it. They'll do **** all about this one.

And for all your big (and poorly capitalized) words, you're probably going to buy it later anyway once you feel you're missing out. So who'll be the little fucking casual then, big man?

I'm all for care in the community, but allowing the mentally incompetent free access to computers is clearly not the way to go here, is it?

@Pyrosa: It looks a lot like Dungeon Keeper - is that a fair comparison?

@xnshd: Oh, that will make all the difference.

/sarcasm

@xrizz1066: Are you familiar with the concept of irony?

@insothinktank: I don't think there are actually that many 4K monitors out there in the wild and the Steam surveys tend to disagree with you about the numbers regarding hardware in use that would actually support that.

Sure, there are some people who do game at that, but it's still pretty niche even in the PC market...

@BassMan: If you're coding a DX12 game then it very definitely IS reality. That is still the caveat though, but if you're coding for the machine you're going to be doing that anyway.

@bdrtfm: It doesn't - salty is as salty does...

@freeryu: I'm actually agreeing with you, and pointing out that it's just not an 'exclusives' game anymore. They're literally just there to make the libraries look full, and a very small percentage actually buy them.

@CyberEarth: Nice try yourself - look further back, when Nintendo refused to throw any more money at them which was the reason they were up for sale in the first place (which Activision eventually passed up on leaving the door open for Microsoft). Or perhaps further back still, when they effectively put U.S. Gold out of business after they were bought by them (having previously been known as 'Ultimate Play The Game')

As the track record states, the only ones responsible for Rare going downhill are Rare themselves. They've been given far more latitude than practically any other first party studio - literally any one of the 'failures' they've had would have been enough for the likes of Nintendo or Sony to drop them like a hot rock. As previously said, even Activision backed off as they didn't think that they were worth the risk.

Or how about this take on 'Evil Microsoft' and how they 'ruined Rare':

https://arstechnica.co.uk/gaming/2015/12/rares-management-to-blame-for-kinect-focus-and-not-microsoft-says-ex-employee/

Incidentally Tossell was the one actually given the job of mentoring the younger staff in 2009 and encouraging new game development, so make of that what you will...

And Sea of Thieves? Great fun - I know that because I've played it (although I'm guessing that you haven't).