I noticed some back-and-forth about in-game exclusive content in the thread for Update 16 (exclusive in-game pet, etc). I'm not in the mood to argue about it, but I am curious what people here think about it, so here's a poll (and of course you can use the the thread to argue/debate/discuss/rage about it if desired).

 

I don't like it but accept it more-or-less without complaint if it's temporarily exclusive and later available to everyone.

 

Edited poll: Added "Don't care/not bothered" (requested by Monte Carlo).

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by ddillon

Not really a fan. For me, it kind of falls within the same bracket as small, pointless DLC. The only real difference is you pay for it before the game is out, instead of after.

 

Collector's items are great, but as far as the actual game goes, I really think it should be the same for everyone. And any additional game content should come in the form of an expansion pack (significant enough to warrant having it's own retail box) or not at all.

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by Piccolo

IF we are talking of something that just adds 'color' like a passive companion pet, which is not gonna be released for 3$ after the game release, then I'm fine with it.

If we start to talk about companions, shops, quests or items in general, available by preordering here or there and then made available for 10$ each after release, hell no.

Your poll, like 90% of the others here, is loaded and poorly considered. Where is the 'not really bothered' option, which is where I am?

 

Anything that raises more money, and doesn't impact on the game's critical path, is OK by me if it means ultimately there is more available content. Content doesn't come from the Gaming Fairies, it comes from people working and it costs money. QED.

Your poll, like 90% of the others here, is loaded and poorly considered. Where is the 'not really bothered' option, which is where I am?

 

Anything that raises more money, and doesn't impact on the game's critical path, is OK by me if it means ultimately there is more available content. Content doesn't come from the Gaming Fairies, it comes from people working and it costs money. QED.

 

Loaded? I expected those three options to more-or-less cover all camps that have an opinion. Would you like a "don't care/not bothered" option?

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by ddillon

'Don't vCare' is an important option in a poll - it provides a gauge to you as the initiator as to whether the issue you are raising is really of concern or not. IMO.

@Monte Carlo: Cool, added option.

I'm in the hate it camp, but at the same time something like a non-combat pet falls under the "digital goodies", rather than "content" category for me. So that doesn't bother me as much. Actual usable ingame items being made exclusive bother me more, but in this special case of backers actually putting money up front in good fate and it being available for every backer (that pledges enough for a copy) I'm not that fussed either.

 

An exclusive item at, say, $100 would annoy me greatly, even though I'm past that level myself.

Unable to choose any of the options.

 

If the exclusive content is a fluff pet, or gear that's only worth anything at low levels, or anything else that will have no real effect on the game, I think permanent exclusivity is fine. Temporary exclusivity is ok, too, but I'd lean more towards permanent- and I make this choice as someone who has missed out on items of this exact nature many, many times (items like this are frequently pre-order bonuses, and I either didn't pre-order or pre-ordered from a different place which had different or no rewards), and I was fine with it then and remain fine with it now.

 

If it's an actual companion/party member, or if it's a quest or dungeon or such that contains gameplay, or anything that actually has a real effect on the game, then temporary exclusivity (or charging extra for it post-launch) is fine. Don't like permanent exclusivity in this case, as I don't think any form of gameplay should ever be permanently withheld.

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by Shaz

Not a fan personally.

I can't say that I like these things. But if this exclusive content is just like the passive pet for the 50$ bakers, I have no problem with it.

 

Can I suggest to add an option: "I don't like it, but if it's only for little cosmetic items then it's ok" ?

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by Sick

i dont really care either way. it's not like its a competitive online game where extra items could make a difference (or make the others jealous if only cosmetic). so im not gonna lose my sleep over the fact that the guy with the 50$ pledge has a pet and i, with my 25$, dont have it, even if it was not just cosmetic

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by teknoman2

I'm ambivalent, I think in general I find it kind of silly. I voted option 2, because option 3 is something of an oxymoron, I hate it but I think exclusive digital content is ok but everyone should have access to it? Whaaaa?

 

Take FNV (or every other AAA game nowadays) depending on where you preordered it you got "exclusive" junk. Then you get the "Ultimate Edition" and you get ALL those things, which neglects the exclusivity and completely shatters the balance in the early game, what was the point?? Dishonored is getting especial and differential abilities, again depending on where you preorder it, it's almost insulting.

 

For a kickstarter I understand and kinda like some exclusive and small in-game rewards, but again I'm not sure how silly it can get and I'd rather there be the exact same game for everyone. So yeah, ambivalent.

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by Tychoxi

I don't like it personally, it divides people's gaming experiences. Even though I suppose I'd be in a pledge level that would get in-game exclusives I still vote against them. They're just as bad as the ridiculous retailer exclusives that annoy the bejesus out of many people from previous conversations on this subject. If they offer additional things for higher pledges make them tangible out of game items, or do it like they've done with the ability for higher pledges to design in-game items (under Obsdian guidance) for everyone to see and experience no matter their pledge level.

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by Clammo

A decent in-game item that others have to locate before they can use would be okay. I.e. like an easter egg.

No one would be upset if everyone got the same game, even exclusive cosmetic items upset people. From what I gather the only people that really love exclusive items are the people that sell games, because that is an easy way to make more money.

 

Their is no logical reason for any player to like content exclusivity, it divides player bases, ruins the experience for those that love to obsessively collect in game and makes regular players feel like they are paying for an inferior version of the game.

 

Additionally most people want everyone to have the same game, if you followed Shadowrun Kickstarter the community got very upset when they decided to make part of the game storyline only accessible to higher Kickstarter payment. They quickly changed their mind when they realised people do not like such corporate tactics.

 

Such practices are common with companies like EA, which should be a fine example of why one should not do it. As for Obsidian, this pet thing should be for everyone, it is the kind of thing that would make me rethink my paypal purchase, if I could.

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by Aedelric

I'm rather "meh whatever" about it. If the in-game pet was a code or something, I'd just give it away to someone who really wants something with no in-game plot/story/combat value.

 

Additionally most people want everyone to have the same game, if you followed Shadowrun Kickstarter the community got very upset when they decided to make part of the game storyline only accessible to higher Kickstarter payment. They quickly changed their mind when they realised people do not like such corporate tactics.

 

Hold up there. Apples and oranges. A cosmetic pet with no redeeming in-game value* is absolutely not the same as plot/story/combat content. The former is more like "get a free sticker with this lotion" while the latter is "get 25% more lotion for the same price!"

 

 

*(It had better not, Obsidian, so don't make me look the fool.)

They said it would just be cosmetic.

 

But I am of the standpoint that content is content, even if it is a consumable beer or a three hour quest. To me it is like penalising a fan just because they are not as rich as the next man, every fan deserves gratitude for their support.

 

I think I also read that they are considering it an unlock after completion of the game but accessible from the start for $50 plus pledge, which I think would be a good compromise.

I wonder why this hate against collectors edition exclusive Ingame things especial if they are just for visuals with no real game effect.

And yes its about money, be happy that you can get more ingame content over all thanks to the people who think this small visual addon is wort extra money for them.

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by Adauli

I wonder why this hate against collectors edition exclusive Ingame things especial if they are just for visuals with no real game effect.

 

People draw different lines in the sand.

To me it is like penalising a fan just because they are not as rich as the next man, every fan deserves gratitude for their support.

 

Well, by that logic, everybody should get all the rewards of the $5000 tier (not just the pet), even if they only pledged $1.

Yes, some fans are more affluent than others, but different fans of comparable affluence also choose to give different amounts.

 

Its not like the pet is at a really high tier. It's at $50. That's a sum which everyone who is rich enough to have a computer with Internet access, can afford - if they want to. Of course, if you have different priorities, that's fine - but I don't think there's anything wrong with a cosmetic in-game token of appreciation for those who do choose to give that much.

 

 

Anyways...

If the game is properly moddable, every piece of "exclusive" content will be recreated by modders anyways, so no need to worry.

Although such mods will probably only start to pop up some weeks or months after the release, so for a limited time, the content will indeed be exclusive. Which I think is perfectly fair.

Edited October 7, 201213 yr by anek

The little pet thingy, that doesn't impact gameplay is a completely different thing than buying a collector's edition of a game with additional classes, quests, and gameplay affecting items. So in the case of the former I couldn't care less, while in the case of the latter I can't say I'm a huge fan.

Well, by that logic, everybody should get all the rewards of the $5000 tier (not just the pet), even if they only pledged $1.

Yes, some fans are more affluent than others, but different fans of comparable affluence also choose to give different amounts.

I believe anyone who buys the game should get the reward, 1$ does not get the game. As for higher rewards, they do not add content, they add ability to design content. You are trying to dismiss my personal opinion by applying insane logic that is not even applicable.

 

Its not like the pet is at a really high tier. It's at $50. That's a sum which everyone who is rich enough to have a computer with Internet access, can afford - if they want to. Of course, if you have different priorities, that's fine - but I don't think there's anything wrong with a cosmetic in-game token of appreciation for those who do choose to give that much.

 

Rewarding those that give that much, but anyone that gives less get a middle finger? Even if they gave $25 pledge with a $25 addon for beta access? No, I can not bring myself to see it from any other way than being ungrateful to those that can not pledge more.

 

Anyways...

If the game is properly moddable, every piece of "exclusive" content will be recreated by modders anyways, so no need to worry.

Although such mods will probably only start to pop up some weeks or months after the release, so for a limited time, the content will indeed be exclusive. Which I think is perfectly fair.

 

As for modding it all in, I agree it is likely and probably will happen regardless, but that would not be entirely legal, nor a reasonable compromise.

As for modding it all in, I agree it is likely and probably will happen regardless, but that would not be entirely legal, nor a reasonable compromise.

Why would it not be legal or reasonable? This is exactly the same thing as what happened with Baldur's Gate 2 and the "exclusive" pre-order item store. It was exclusive for a while, then modders added it in and then it was added officially. I don't see anything wrong with that, particularly since the content here is cosmetic while in BG2, some of those items were the best available even including the high-level expansion.

As for higher rewards, they do not add content, they add ability to design content. You are trying to dismiss my personal opinion by applying insane logic that is not even applicable.

 

Higher tiers add lots of different rewards. Some are digital, some are physical. Some have symbolic value, some have monetary value. Some will affect the game itself, some not.

 

You haven't given a single reason why your 'poorer fans should not be discriminated!!' argument should be explicitly applied only to this one single reward (in-game pet), when it fact it is an abstract argument that applies equally (and equally weakly) to all of them.

 

Rewarding those that give that much, but anyone that gives less get a middle finger? Even if they gave $25 pledge with a $25 addon for beta access?

 

No, you don't get a middle finger, you get the rewards of those tiers.

Which includes the highly sought after 'beta access' reward, which those choosing the $50 tier will not get.

 

If you think this $25+$25 tier combination is a bad deal compared to the additional rewards of the $50 tier (which, among other things, includes the pet), then feel free to choose that tier instead.

If you think it's still a good deal in comparison, then, well, you have nothing to complain about.