• ampersandrew@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    What’s with this focus on the word “complete”? Usually I just see it from people salty about the idea that a game ever gets DLC, but we’re rarely seeing the kinds of things we saw in the late 00s and early 2010s where games would have a “missing chapter” or whatever, so if something about modern games is being described by how “complete” they are, it seems like a bad descriptor to me.

    • TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      More that now that patches are easy to implement across any platform you don’t have to ship something that works well day 1 anymore, nor does it need everything that should be out at release. Often that means people release a game well before it should have released and charge full price for a game that is literally incomplete. Great example would be No Man’s Sky which was “complete” (based on their advertisements) maybe 3 years ago(whenever they implemented actual multiplayer finally)? And came out 7 years ago.

    • VoterFrog@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      There’s a kind of qualitative difference between a game that was built to be played and later has DLC released for it and a game that is essentially built as a DLC platform. The latter has become extremely common in AAA games and it winds up feeling incomplete because the insertion points for planned DLC are usually quite noticable.