this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2024
994 points (95.3% liked)

Games

32579 readers
1538 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Ignoring the lack of updates if the game is buggy, games back then were also more focused on quality and make gamers replay the game with unlockable features based on skills, not money. I can't count the number of times I played Metal Gear Solid games over and over to unlock new features playing the hardest difficulty and with handicap features, and also to find Easter eggs. Speaking of Easter eggs, you'd lose a number of hours exploring every nook and cranny finding them!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NielsBohron@lemmy.world 47 points 7 months ago (3 children)

That's some survivorship bias shit right here. I can't tell you how many shitty, buggy games I played in the days of early console and PC gaming. Even games that were revolutionary and objectively good games sometimes had game-breaking bugs, but often it was harder to find them without the internet.

Plus, don't you remember expansion packs? That was the original form of DLC.

[–] Don_alForno@feddit.de 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There are different kind of DLC, and the kind that's similar to actual expansion packs is usually not criticized (or not by most).

[–] noobnarski@feddit.de 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, if a DLC isnt just content taken out of the main game (in a way that makes the main game worse) and is reasonably priced for the amount of content it contains, then it is a good way for developers to get paid for continuing development of a game after launch when it was already finished at launch.

The Witcher 3 DLCs for example were pretty good.

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Oh man, while I was reading the first part of your comment I was thinking of the Witcher 3 DLCs the whole time, I'm so glad that you mentioned them at the end there!

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Expansion packs were more complete experience than DLCs sold piece by piece.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I don't see how the amount of "completeness" can even be measured. Is it really so much worse that you can buy extra fighters for the Street Fighter 6 that you already own rather than buying Super, Turbo, and then Super Turbo at full price every time? Or that you can choose to buy just the stuff you want for Cities: Skylines for half the price instead of paying twice as much to get stuff that don't care about along with it? Plus, expansions like Phantom Liberty and Shadow of the Erdtree are bigger than most entire video games from the 90s.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 1 points 7 months ago

THANK you. Fuck the upvotes, that person is objectively wrong. Maybe they just didn't play that many games during the early PC/console era?