I got Necesse too! It was about 6 bucks. Can't beat that price. Runs on a potato also.

Why would anybody support genocidal imperial propaganda in their home?

I made that mistake years ago with COD. Never again.

Short answer: you wouldn't buy this game, given your valid criticisms.

This type of extortionate pricing policy speaks to the general user base being nobs, die hard try hards and probably a toxic gaming environment. Having a barrier to entry in any activity prevents total idiots from entering. Consoles have made it easier for people who don't understand how to operate a PC to play games but that necessarily means those games will be replete with obnoxious people. The advent of smartphones has done that for the internet.

Why would I buy this?

I can only think of one reason, because it's the game your friends are playing.

You have two choices; buy the shitty game with the understanding that the game itself is not what matters but the time spent playing with your friends. Or, don't buy the game and spend the next few weeks, or months, not playing with your friends and hope they grow bored of the game soon.

I feel like they could have called CoD Points something other than CP. 🤣

• Reviews are mixed: not a great start

Agreed, puts a damper on everything else that follows.

• Requires 3rd-party account: fuck that

Also agreed. If I buy a Steam game, I'd generally much rather it be accessible through Steam and do not appreciate when games are sold on Steam for other platforms.

• 60 euros base game: expensive, especially when the game has mixed reviews

Not the worst price, but yeah I'd definitely expect a much better review score to justify that price. In the absence of a good review score this would be something I'd have to know I'm going to enjoy before I'd consider buying it full price.

• 175 euros DLC's: are you fucking kidding me? On top of 60 euros for the base game, there's another 175 fees for content?

I don't know for certain about this particular game, but I do know people were shitting on Monster Hunter: Rise for the exact same reason: a seemingly exorbitant amount of DLC available from release implying it's a cash grab and just trying to milk more cash out of the player.

That being said, in my opinion MHR wasn't even half as bad as the naysayers would have you believe. MHR on release on Steam had a lot of DLC, sure, but it didn't launch on Steam. It launched on the Switch then later was ported to Steam with all of the same DLC they had worked on since its launch a year prior.

Almost all of the DLC was exclusively cosmetic skins, and almost all of those were part of bundles available for significantly cheaper prices than each one individually. I don't recall the exact prices but I believe it was something like buy 10 skins individually for $2/ea or buy all of them in a bundle for $5. The real price for any sane person for all 10 skins would be $5, but this showed up on Steam as 11 DLC items with a total of $25. Multiply this by the 6-10 ish bundles they had on the title's release on Steam to get a huge quantity of items and a massively inflated price compared to what anyone who wanted everything would realistically pay, assuming they paid attention.

I don't know that CoD is doing a similar thing here, and I certainly wouldn't give them the benefit of the doubt, but I dislike this argument against them because it can be very misleading.

• purchasable CoD points: so pay to win?

Not necessarily P2W, but yeah I'm not a fan of MTX either and again wouldn't give CoD the benefit of the doubt to have a good or fair monetization model.

It's CoD. You're asking why people drink coke if you don't like coke.

Also, steam FPS reviews are full of people on full tilt. Use better review sources.

I played Tekken 3 in PSX when i was a kid. One CD had everything, many modes, many characters, ton of fun.

Ffw to 2 years ago, i think to play with a friend Tekken again, searching in Steam Tekken only to see that it has 24 DLCs, many of them that are fighters (game has 16 unlockable characters, and 14 more being paid DLC)...

Ah it's very simple, you would buy this if you'd made your whole personality about being a GAMER, where you believe that the only real games are FPS PvP War Simulation, and everyone that plays anything else is a poseur.

Reviews are mixed: not a great start

More than not a great start: Only people who have bought the game are allowed to review it, so reviewers are already biased towards liking the game, because only somebody who thinks they would enjoy the game would spend money on it. It's basically impossible to get a strong negative score by just being run of the mill awful. So "mixed" means that about 50% of people who though they would enjoy the game, didn't, which is quite damning.

It's not for you, you are not the target audience. The target audience is the people who buy MADDEN/FIFA every year.

There is plenty of shit on steam that I wouldn't buy, just don't buy it

It's for people with more money than brains.

Take a look at the reviews, and find this insanity on the top:

need to be connected to online services even when you just want to play singleplayer campaign, and keep getting connection errors.

Thanks, I'm out.

When people may get into a competitive game, data shows that they commit to it as their primary game.

It becomes a part of their identity. You see things like Leage of Legends going strong despite a slow down in new players - people just commit to it for better or for worse, likely because most of the skills they’ve gained in it and friends they’ve made will not transfer to other games. Even other FPS games have different nuances that are non trivial once a player becomes serious about winning.

Take Wild Rift vs Mobile Legends Bang Bang. MLBB is objectively a worse rip off of League of Legends and the Chinese game Glory of Kings, but it was first to market on mobile. Now that League has released their mobile version with immense polish and quality, many mobile moba gamers just aren’t interested - they’re already totally invested in their main game, despite it being proved in court that it’s a cheap copy. (Not cheap as in $$$ though)

When you’re a kid, spending time on any competitive game will be fun (if you can handle the baseline toxicity) since you will start bad at most of them. When you get older there is a real cost to switching, you will not have as much fun until you build up the years of muscle memory that would be needed to even approach your skill at the previous game.

Because of the lock in, if a competitive game finds a sizeable enough player base and lasts a good handful of years, the devs essentially get free rein to milk their cow as they see fit.

You don't. You play single player games like me and get to experience cool stories instead of dopamine lacking rage inducing PvP games.

Unsurprising, it's not for anyone but those who spend a lot to be able to frag the other one.

I stopped playing MMOs and online shooters a long time ago. Instead dividing my time between actual cycling and playing single player adventure games.

If you still play CoD nowadays then you are actively supporting the problem.

I'm all for hating on CoD, but the DLC "content" is skins and minor cosmetics, it really doesn't add anything to the game and isn't necessary at all. Also the CoD Points are for cosmetics as well. There's a lot of shitty things you can and should say about Vanguard, but it is not pay to win.

Thats the neat part, just dont.

Bro the CoD ship sailed years ago. They just don’t innovate and release the same shit year after year. Buy something else. I’d recommend Factorio.