this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2025
335 points (98.8% liked)

PC Gaming

13050 readers
403 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 45 points 2 days ago (2 children)

They aren't bad, they just aren't doing anything out of the ordinary. Ubisoft keeps pumping out effectively the same game for every iteration of Assassins Creed and Far Cry. Activision is the CoD machine and has been for some time. EA is... EA. Microsoft refuses to make a good Halo game because they won't leave their developers alone long enough to see what they can come up with before mandating that it has to be X, Y, and Z.

It's no wonder that smaller, usually indie, developers are seeing such success. Sony's been doing well because the games they're publishing are legitimately good experiences, but that's only going to last so long before they get tired of spending oodles on singleplayer games and not seeing the returns they want.

Everything's turned into a live-service game because they're the only thing that actually generates any kind of consistent return on investment, and everything fancy in those games is out of reach for the common person struggling to get by, so the entire game is held up by a small group spending WAY too much on them.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Some “DLC happy” games seem to work in niches while mostly avoiding the micro-transaction trap. I’m thinking of Frontier’s “Planet” games, or some of Paradox’s stuff.

I’m confused at some games not taking the DLC happy route, TBH. 2077, for instance, feels like it’s finally fixed up, and they could make a killing selling side quests smaller in scope than the one they have.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 2 points 1 day ago

Some “DLC happy” games seem to work in niches while mostly avoiding the micro-transaction trap

Dude you should see the hardcore simulation scene, such as Dovetail's Train Sim or Auran's Trainz you buy the base, then you buy whatever maps and trains fit your niche interests within the niche of people interested in these simulators to begin with.

Auran literally has a subscription option for around $100/year that gives you access to everything and that's actually a pretty decent price given the cost of the base game and whatever routes you may want!

[–] Saffire@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

How does Paradox DLC work at all? The EU4 bundle with all the DLCs is on a 50% discount right now and still costs $142 CAD. Crusader Kings 2 is also over a hundred bucks at half off for all DLCs. And these are their old games that they already have sequels for. I'd literally play these games all day every day if I could but the price is prohibitively expensive and prevents me from doing so.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

The starter edition bundle is 11.99 us and the ultimate is 104.80 in USD. There's basically 2 different types of DLCs in the paradox model. The core expansion type that is released every year or so and adds or fleshes out an area of the game, these are generally must haves and reasonably priced if you have played the game for a year(s) to mix it up. The second is smaller focused packs that add a faction or some extra flavor to a more minor mechanic. These are relatively expensive for what they offer, but aren't always intended for everyone to buy.

If you are a hardcore completionist this model is bad for you, but if you can live with not having everything then it's not terrible.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Heh, that’s correct.

This meme video about sums it up:

https://youtu.be/n42JQr_p8Ao

The answer is “you play at release and buy them over time, like a crab in slowly boiling water,” though the absolutely incredible rate they introduce bugs into the games kinda knocks you out of the habit.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago

Speaking of DLC happy, hi, I'm the blood DLC for Total War games!

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 days ago

Right? After AC3 i stopped caring.