Originally Posted by DrBrogbo
I don't think you understand what I
wrote, actually. You said (and I quote) "re-purchase what they already purchased in order to get an arguably smaller set of content." That is false. Completely false. Scholar of the First Sin is bigger in every way. No matter what people had before hand, anyone that purchases SFS will be getting an upgrade from what they had. And yes, a discount would be a good idea, to help win over some good-will from fans. They absolutely should NOT be expected to do it (entitlement), but it would be a smart business decision.
You are arguing over how I described Scholar's instead of my point that FROM should be doing a win-win with early adopters.....
. We technically agree on the same point aside from the conclusion that everyone who does not want to pay has an entitlement problem instead of simply not wanting to have to double-dip.
This is NOT a paywall! A paywall is when content in 1 game is locked until you purchase it. Paywall content is special weapons in an f2p game that only purchasers can get. Paywall content is when certain campaign missions are locked except for pre-orderers. A paywall is when an MMO is "free" except that they cap you at level 20 if you're not a subscriber. A paywall is when DLC for a game is programmed in from day 1, is in the release code, and is unavailable unless you purchase it.
A paywall is NOT when a game developer delivers a fully functional product to users, and then delivers a separate game later on and charges for it. GOTY editions are not paywalls. Director's Cut editions are not paywalls. Enhanced Editions are not paywalls.
This part is just a pointless debate on semantics. I described paywall as being an excess of currency required to access certain content instead of paying for the content itself, rather it would be more apt to call it unnecessarily forced double-dipping
for those who already have the game. Apologies for the confusion.
The point being that existing players have to pay more to access content that new players get instead of just paying the difference. As far as games I own turning into GOTY, those versions are almost always aggregations of the game with DLC that is available to purchase separately (regardless of pricing), even new directors cut content. Locking new content to GOTY/DC/EE version and asking people to pay full price for something they already own falls under what I described as forced double-dipping.
Originally Posted by B-rock
You guys do know that the biggest gripe with SOFS is that it splits the community, right? DX11 cant play with DX9 (current) players and saves wont transfer. I believe thats why most people are upset.
^ This. They are not being very smart when their releases segregate their customer base.