• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

News Cyberpunk 2077 Dev Talks Microtransactions in Multiplayer -- "We Won't Be Aggressive"

LOLCats

Member
Sep 5, 2013
4,655
3,125
780
I'm going to tell you right now if this game was third person and they sold sexy costumes they would rake in the fucking dough.

but they're not down for that, they're not square enix
 
Last edited:

Same ol G

Member
Apr 24, 2017
217
406
500
Netherlands
Cyberpunk 2077 Dev Talks Microtransactions -- "We Won't Be Aggressive"

 

quest

Not Banned from OT
Jul 17, 2004
6,212
3,214
1,695
It's the year of the lord 2020 and people still complain about MTX in multiplayer games? What the hell.
Slow news day the angry mob is bored and needed something to be outraged about. This is a nothing burger. The single player game I'm buying this fall is microtransaction free end of story.
 

MagiusNecros

Gilgamesh Fan Annoyance
Mar 18, 2012
15,526
1,218
985
If it was up to me cosmetics if that's all it's going to be should be earned through either playing through the game, buying said thing through player earned ingame currency or by way of accomplishing ingame challenges that rewards players for succeeding at a certain task or group of tasks.
 

A.Romero

Member
Feb 23, 2009
3,733
2,531
1,250
Mexico
www.lavejota.com
If it was up to me cosmetics if that's all it's going to be should be earned through either playing through the game, buying said thing through player earned ingame currency or by way of accomplishing ingame challenges that rewards players for succeeding at a certain task or group of tasks.

Why not both? Why block people that want to spend money to get costumes and colors or whatever and support the game that way?

I'm going to name a few games with MTX which have never seen a penny from me but never felt I was missing something:

BFV: MTX is a huge component in this game. You can get full characters, skins for the weapons, etc. I have unlocked a few things through playing but never truly cared. I notice a few people playing with those skins but they get 0 advantage playing. However, we did get maps and game modes and weapons and vehicles after release. I rather have that kind of support for everyone and them getting money through selling skins than going back to the old model where you had to pay for the expansions.

SFV: MTX is also a huge component. I waited for a version with most of the characters (not sure if they are still releasing them) and that's it. There are many costumes for sale and some of them are really cool but I'm not interested so I don't spend any extra. I'm happy for the ones that want to and can do it. You can earn in-game currency and get the stuff. I don't care enough to find out. I only know that is a very good fighting game.

Overwatch: I recently got in the game and was the first one I played from Blizzard with a heavy loot box component (not a big fan of their games). I have enjoyed it greatly because all the characters are available for everyone. They sell costumes, custom weapons, sprays and other stuff. You can also get them through playing (I have gotten a few that route). I don't care if someone is spending $1000 a month in costumes because it has 0 impact in my enjoyment of the game. If MTX weren't available the only ones suffering would be the ones that want to have those items without investing the time (I don't earn anything through that route).

An exception:

DBZ Fighterz: The game came out over two years and a half ago. They have been selling characters since then and still haven't released all. You can get all the characters or just one. I have gotten 2 or 3 because they look interesting fun to play. I don't care about the existence of the rest. I always have the chance to change my mind if something interesting comes along.


So my point is that games can have an MTX component and make people that can't/won't invest the time to get the items have an option. What they need to be careful with is when paying money gives you an advantage (for example GTAV).

I rather have that than needing to pay $40 extra for a multiplayer component or $20 for an expansion if I want to be able to play with the rest of the community.
 

THEAP99

reposts tweets from kids about console wars
Mar 16, 2020
4,298
11,508
710
Yeah they're shoehorning in a multiplayer mode with microtransactions for extra money. And they'll get a pass for it too despite claiming to take the high ground in the past. Gamers will defend it because Cyberpunk CD Red r cool & hip these days because of how gamer "relatably edgy" their Twitter account is.

Let's hope this doesn't turn into GTA V ONLINE. I'VE heard that the mobile game by them called gwent is very grindy & p2w. So they're no stranger to greed.

All the yellow chaired influencers are out in full defense mode.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: junguler and EDMIX

Kiya's Guard

Member
Jun 27, 2018
172
116
280
If I’m reading this correctly, they are talking about mtx for the online mode (rumored to be a sepparated product, which will release as soon as 2022),not about cp77 (the singleplayer releasing this november).

So if I did read this properly, they aren't technically lying
 

B-universe

Banned
Mar 23, 2020
1,511
3,317
480
Yeah they're shoehorning in a multiplayer mode with microtransactions for extra money.

The shock! The horror!
And it's about the money!
Disgusting.
It should be about climate change.

The multiplayer campaign is a separate game, coming at a later time, 2022, more than a year after the single-player has launched, and is being developed by a different team.

And they'll get a pass for it too despite claiming to take the high ground in the past.

If only you were able to precisely articulate the moral abjuration involved in having microtransactions in a multiplayer title. You could start by describing in great detail the problem with charging for cosmetics players voluntarily purchase, as in, of their own volition.

Go ahead.

This has been know for a long while.
And it's entirely consistent with their professed stance.

Gamers will defend it because Cyberpunk CD Red r cool & hip these days because of how gamer "relatably edgy" their Twitter account is.

Yes, gamers are zombies who lack the capacity to think and act rationally. Fear not, here comes caped THEAP99 THEAP99 to save the day.

Let's hope this doesn't turn into GTA V ONLINE. I'VE heard that the mobile game by them called gwent is very grindy & p2w. So they're no stranger to greed.

Yes, Gwent, card game you can play for free is the epitome of greed.

I think CD Projekt RED should in fact pay players, to prove once and for all this isn't about the money, The Root of All Evil, God forbid, no, but about climate change.
 
Last edited:

#Phonepunk#

Banned
Sep 4, 2018
18,541
36,216
885
40
did Witcher 3 have any? i don't recall any at all in that game. i don't see this being a big deal. something to keep our eyes on for sure, but if it's just DLC, i have a hard time getting upset w that. a full price experience still delivers hundreds of hours i'm sure.
 

A.Romero

Member
Feb 23, 2009
3,733
2,531
1,250
Mexico
www.lavejota.com
did Witcher 3 have any? i don't recall any at all in that game. i don't see this being a big deal. something to keep our eyes on for sure, but if it's just DLC, i have a hard time getting upset w that. a full price experience still delivers hundreds of hours i'm sure.

Just a couple of award winning expansions.

It didn't have an online component, though.
 

Punished Miku

Gold Member
Jan 13, 2018
10,007
21,296
1,010
Just make it fair, fun, and a a huge value. Nintendo has put out some of my favorite DLC where I was just grateful it was out. MK8 extra tracks on Wii U, or Smash fighters with exciting trailers packed in with stages and music for a good price. If you want people to spend money and be happy, that's the type of thing you need to do. It's possible, but I'm skeptical until I see it.
 
Jan 10, 2018
142
149
380
I actually cancelled my pre-order due to the horrible gameplay video they released. This game doesn't look great, or at least good enough to be more than a bargain bin purchase. Now, microtransactions? Against what they promised? Great.
Every single person who's played the game has said a lot of great things about it, bargain bin purchase is such an exaggeration.
 
Jan 10, 2018
142
149
380
As long as it doesn't effect single player I don't care. I trust they won't go crazy with it, probably just cosmetics. I understand it's a business. Realistically I won't be playing the multiplayer anyway, this isn't the type of game where combat and shooting mechanics are gonna be interesting enough to play competitively
 

Stuart360

Member
Sep 9, 2018
10,417
25,555
770
Although its only for multiplayer, which i dont care about, a little bit of me died inside seeing CDPR go down this road.
Everyone goes to the dark side in the end.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: junguler

ZZZZ

Member
Jun 7, 2020
1,254
2,604
440
This thread, yikes.
They are not charging for next generation upgrade, we will get single player dlcs for free just like The Witcher 3, the next gen games won't be 70 dollars, the DLC when charged will be full expansions like blood and wine that could be separate games with 90+ ratings at a 15-20 dollar price.
The game will come with a multiplayer down the line, that they probably want to keep expanding for years. At least give them a chance, they are saying they won't be aggressive, and so far they haven't disappointed.
 
Last edited:

iHaunter

Member
Sep 6, 2015
3,360
3,991
625
This is CDPR - they say one thing, and do another. Their p.r. bullshit needs to stop.

It's for the ONLINE version of the game. But I do agree, I can't fucking stand this Microtransaction trend. I have not partook in, nor while I.
 
Last edited:

xacto

Member
Mar 6, 2020
1,378
6,717
500
Switzerland
lol CDPR have really backtracked on their adamant stance about not implementing micro transactions into Cyperpunk 2077

So long as they keep it out of the single player version, I don't mind as much.

But... but... they said they wouldn't be aggressive about it 🤣
 
  • LOL
Reactions: EDMIX

B-universe

Banned
Mar 23, 2020
1,511
3,317
480
Isn't it wondaful?

Multiplayer games need servers. So not only do development costs need to be covered up front, say, by having gamers buy the game at launch, someone still has to pay for the hefty server time afterwards.

You can have a model based on paid subscriptions, regular paid expansions or microtransactions, or a combination of the above, to finance your server farms. Each has advantages and disadvantages. Frontloading and charging a steep entry cost doesn't seem to work as well as, say, Gwent's approach, The game is free to play, but offers paid cosmetics and paid expositions that speed up your progress.

Personally, I like shit for free. That's just me. I regularly campaign against microtransactions at McDonalds, when they attempt to charge me for the apple pie and extra fries I consciously order with my Double Mac menus. I find it immoral I don't get them for free. I definitely feel oppressed and marginalized.

All in all, it's great I don't have to sing Psalms to the glory of the free Market when it's convenient for me and then pull a Greta on CD Projekt RED:

"How dare you" charge for stuff?

Please give stuff away for free, CD Projekt, so I don't have to contend with the contradictions in my reluctant self-conscious love for the free market.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: ZZZZ

nemiroff

Gold Member
Feb 19, 2018
2,133
2,905
595
I'm glad to see it's not everyone, but I still expected a bit less out-of-context knee-jerk reactions from this beloved forum.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Piggoro

Compsiox

Banned
Jul 6, 2014
12,972
5,217
955
This game will have like 20 million in sales around launch. The first year or two will probably be like 35 million.

I doubt these microtransactions will be necessary in terms of making a profit :p
 

Kerlurk

Banned
May 1, 2020
1,281
2,722
400
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EDMIX

StonedRider

Member
Jan 9, 2015
406
216
470
Riga, Latvia
I don't have a problem with cosmetic microtransactions , especially in multiplayer. Some people want to "look cool" so badly, they pay real money for it. I couldn't care less about looking cool, my hero can look like a brick, but it's all about efficiency for me.

Also, people who buy cosmetic stuff pays for updates which I get for free.
 

EDMIX

Member
Apr 5, 2018
6,483
6,132
645
33
South Florida aka Outer Haven
Correct they did say no microtransactions


Reddit user summed up pretty good

KingOfTheYetis

Score hidden· 3 hours ago· edited 2 hours ago
Seed balloon - they need to move the fanbase over from expecting no microstransactions like they claimed all last year, to a place where they can eventually say, "we've always said multiplayer will have microtransactions."
Let's remind everyone what CDPR has said in the past:

Also, that screenshot from the trailer:

In May, when in-game purchases showed up on the ESRB descriptor, they said it was required because they sold expansions and reassured there were no microtransactions. (They're not lying about this, by the away. The ESRB wrote the descriptor exactly the way it did to mask microtransactions and loot crate gambling in the ratings and protect the publishers, as per their jobs.)
Then there is this tweet exchange:


Also this twitter exchange:


They've set the expectation that microtransactions are against their company ethos, constantly deriding them and using it to build a reputation in the community. Because of that, they need to start moving the window over to them being acceptable in multiplayer so they can put them in. That starts by raising a kerfuffle now, not after they reveal their multiplayer mode where fans will lash out. That way when the game releases this controversy is behind them and their fanboys can claim "we've always known this" and retcon CDPRs statements to have always been about single-player only somehow, despite nothing above carrying any caveats of the sort.
CDPR is incredibly good at PR. They know exactly what they are doing, and are going to play the community like a fiddle to get out of the corner they boxed themselves into.

Agreed.

I'm glad, I'm not the only one seeing this. No Microtransactions to, "we won't be aggressive,......but yes to Microtransactions". I knew this team couldn't be trusted when they lied about the whole downgrade thing, then proceeds to talk about "free DLC" ignoring that many publishers do this without making a huge deal out of it. Yet surprise surprise they have microtransactions.... So I'm not shocked even in the slightest as these folks talk a bit too much shit for a developer that is selling folks the rest of the game after release.

Several developers released games this generation where the entire of the game's post launch content was completely free, CDPR clearly is not one of those developers, yet behaves as if selling you the rest of the game and then having microtransactions is ok if they just say they won't be "aggressive" and if they yell "free dlc" while quietly shoving in MTs and selling the rest of the game post launch.

So this claim that they won't have micro transactions, file it under the claim that Witcher 3 won't be downgraded, we've heard them lie before and this is no different. This team simply states things people like to hear, while doing something completely different. They feed off of buzzwords, hype and trying to pretend they are not like the other "big corporate guys" while doing pretty much exactly what those other big publishers do.

S Siri "This is CDPR - they say one thing, and do another. Their p.r. bullshit needs to stop" Thank you, I'm glad I'm not the only one that see thru this shit.
GHG GHG "I thought the previously said no microtransactions?" They say a lot of things, they have a history of that.
 
Last edited:

MadYarpen

Member
Nov 12, 2015
1,592
755
620
Warsaw, Poland
Agreed.

I'm glad, I'm not the only one seeing this. No Microtransactions to, "we won't be aggressive,......but yes to Microtransactions". I knew this team couldn't be trusted when they lied about the whole downgrade thing, then proceeds to talk about "free DLC" ignoring that many publishers do this without making a huge deal out of it. Yet surprise surprise they have microtransactions.... So I'm not shocked even in the slightest as these folks talk a bit too much shit for a developer that is selling folks the rest of the game after release.

Several developers released games this generation where the entire of the game's post launch content was completely free, CDPR clearly is not one of those developers, yet behaves as if selling you the rest of the game and then having microtransactions is ok if they just say they won't be "aggressive" and if they yell "free dlc" while quietly shoving in MTs and selling the rest of the game post launch.

So this claim that they won't have micro transactions, file it under the claim that Witcher 3 won't be downgraded, we've heard them lie before and this is no different. This team simply states things people like to hear, while doing something completely different. They feed off of buzzwords, hype and trying to pretend they are not like the other "big corporate guys" while doing pretty much exactly what those other big publishers do.

S Siri "This is CDPR - they say one thing, and do another. Their p.r. bullshit needs to stop" Thank you, I'm glad I'm not the only one that see thru this shit.
GHG GHG "I thought the previously said no microtransactions?" They say a lot of things, they have a history of that.
I don't see everything in that post on my mobile. But I don't see anything suggesting they changed their approach to microtransactions in MP. With regards to SP RPG they are consistent. So it is kinda annoying to read to read all those knee jerk reactions, that they lied etc. Not referring to the quoted messages of course.

As regards those, it is interesting. There is some shift in narration, although I don't think there is any bad faith involved... For example with that mamaias interview, the MP wasn't even announced and I am not sure they had decided about the MTX back then... It is even possible they didn't want them initially in the game and changed their minds. For whatever reasons. Was there any interview regarding the MP in which they said no to MTX? I don't remember one but I could have missed it.

Personally I hate the idea of MTX in a product for which I paid, and if I don't like their mp business model I won't buy it. I don't think CDPR cannot do wrong and are perfect, but on the other hand what is such a big deal here? They are going int MP business and they want to make it sustainable, I guess... I wouldn't attack them for betraying their ethos.
 

Men_in_Boxes

Member
May 31, 2020
6,253
12,292
665
Don't buy any microtransactions if you don't want to. Buy them if you want to.

Everybody wins!
 

EDMIX

Member
Apr 5, 2018
6,483
6,132
645
33
South Florida aka Outer Haven
I don't see everything in that post on my mobile. But I don't see anything suggesting they changed their approach to microtransactions in MP. With regards to SP RPG they are consistent. So it is kinda annoying to read to read all those knee jerk reactions, that they lied etc. Not referring to the quoted messages of course.

As regards those, it is interesting. There is some shift in narration, although I don't think there is any bad faith involved... For example with that mamaias interview, the MP wasn't even announced and I am not sure they had decided about the MTX back then... It is even possible they didn't want them initially in the game and changed their minds. For whatever reasons. Was there any interview regarding the MP in which they said no to MTX? I don't remember one but I could have missed it.

Personally I hate the idea of MTX in a product for which I paid, and if I don't like their mp business model I won't buy it. I don't think CDPR cannot do wrong and are perfect, but on the other hand what is such a big deal here? They are going int MP business and they want to make it sustainable, I guess... I wouldn't attack them for betraying their ethos.

If they lied the first time with Witcher 3's downgrade, I no longer give them that assumption that they wouldn't do it in "any bad faith". Once they lied the first time, I'm a bit skeptical about anything they say going forward... So I don't buy that they changed their minds, this was always going to be in this game. I think they just stated PR BS before to tell people what they want to hear to play some bait and switch. Say one thing, do another.

So I think maybe they should not have been so eager to talk shit and throw shade about other publishers while clearly having this shit in their game.

 

MadYarpen

Member
Nov 12, 2015
1,592
755
620
Warsaw, Poland
If they lied the first time with Witcher 3's downgrade, I no longer give them that assumption that they wouldn't do it in "any bad faith". Once they lied the first time, I'm a bit skeptical about anything they say going forward... So I don't buy that they changed their minds, this was always going to be in this game. I think they just stated PR BS before to tell people what they want to hear to play some bait and switch. Say one thing, do another.

So I think maybe they should not have been so eager to talk shit and throw shade about other publishers while clearly having this shit in their game.

Yeah I remember the downgrade thing.

But even if they assumed from the beginning to use MTX, the MP is supposed to be a separate game. They may look a little stupid now, because they indeed had been saying hell no to MTX without any caveats etc, so I understand what you mean - I think.

But on the other hand, again, we have two different products here. One is single player rpg and they keep the same approach, and the other is a multiplayer game which hasn't been really discussed in detail yet. So when you look at that this way, the Witcher downgrade story is simply worse than this. Maybe I am to old and not care enough, but I just don't see any reason to be pissed at them or play the downgrade card at the moment.

To be honest, I am much more concerned about the cut gameplay or rpg mechanics we may see in cp2077 SP. Because there were some red flags, even if this can be a normal thing during the development.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EDMIX

EDMIX

Member
Apr 5, 2018
6,483
6,132
645
33
South Florida aka Outer Haven
Yeah I remember the downgrade thing.

But even if they assumed from the beginning to use MTX, the MP is supposed to be a separate game. They may look a little stupid now, because they indeed had been saying hell no to MTX without any caveats etc, so I understand what you mean - I think.

But on the other hand, again, we have two different products here. One is single player rpg and they keep the same approach, and the other is a multiplayer game which hasn't been really discussed in detail yet. So when you look at that this way, the Witcher downgrade story is simply worse than this. Maybe I am to old and not care enough, but I just don't see any reason to be pissed at them or play the downgrade card at the moment.

To be honest, I am much more concerned about the cut gameplay or rpg mechanics we may see in cp2077 SP. Because there were some red flags, even if this can be a normal thing during the development.


Its not simply about the downgrade, its about the team having no issue outright lying to people about stuff like this. It tells me they have no issue doing it and will likely continue that strategically. Say one thing, do another.

No MTX!!!
we will in multiplayer

FREE DLC
also paid dlc

It tells me the team is knowingly, consciously doing this. Its why I'm not shocked at what they are saying now, its why I'm not shocked at the removed features, cut gameplay etc. Those red flags to me happened when they lied about Witcher 3's downgrade only to tell folks days after they bought the game knowing for months it was clearly downgraded while telling gamers it wasn't. If they could do that knowingly, what else? How much are they willing to withhold to sell this game like the did Witcher 3? That attitude is what worried me as I didn't fall for their BS for 1 moment, even being a fan of the Witcher series and buying 3 day 1, shit I'm even buying this game day 1.....it doesn't mean I'm blind to this teams lying, them using this PR BS to try to paint them as this innocent developer and not like everyone else.

They are exactly like everyone else in most areas, but not many developers I can legit tell you lied to their fans about the state of their game, UNTIL the game was already sold to them. They are on that list right next to Hello Games in my eyes. So if they could lie about that, I'm not holding my breath that they are lying about a host of other shit and just slowly announcing stuff being removed, added MTX etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: junguler

nochance

Banned
Jul 27, 2020
85
85
180
Isn't it wondaful?

Multiplayer games need servers. So not only do development costs need to be covered up front, say, by having gamers buy the game at launch, someone still has to pay for the hefty server time afterwards.

You can have a model based on paid subscriptions, regular paid expansions or microtransactions, or a combination of the above, to finance your server farms. Each has advantages and disadvantages. Frontloading and charging a steep entry cost doesn't seem to work as well as, say, Gwent's approach, The game is free to play, but offers paid cosmetics and paid expositions that speed up your progress.

Personally, I like shit for free. That's just me. I regularly campaign against microtransactions at McDonalds, when they attempt to charge me for the apple pie and extra fries I consciously order with my Double Mac menus. I find it immoral I don't get them for free. I definitely feel oppressed and marginalized.

All in all, it's great I don't have to sing Psalms to the glory of the free Market when it's convenient for me and then pull a Greta on CD Projekt RED:

"How dare you" charge for stuff?

Please give stuff away for free, CD Projekt, so I don't have to contend with the contradictions in my reluctant self-conscious love for the free market.
I hope you realize, that they are making millions if not billions of dollars by just selling a full priced game. It's great that you are so worried about their already super elevated profit margins though :messenger_ok:
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: junguler and EDMIX

MadYarpen

Member
Nov 12, 2015
1,592
755
620
Warsaw, Poland
FREE DLC
also paid dlc

Well about that, I don't think that's fair. They made free DLC, but paid DLC? you mean Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine? These were not just DLCs, but something other companies would sell for 60$ as separate games. I got 60 h of 1st class gaming from this. And it was announced as paid expansion, which is a correct description. Unless you mean something else? And now we will get free "next gen" upgrade, again some companies will charge for that. Personally, aside from the good PR, there ARE reasons to give them benefit of doubt and assume they can do the right thing. But sure, there are also reasons to be cautious (as the downgrade story shows)

with regards to "NO MTX" - they have a game built around MTX for some time already (Gwent) so it is not like that CDPR, the greatest, purest developer, suddenly betraid everyone and said yes to MTX (in a free to play game obviously).

And don't get me wrong, I dont want to defend them or anything, I just think you are omitting some perspective.

About CP2077 we will see how it turns out. I think it is best to judge the game as it is released, than look back at the old gameplay trailer and pick what was cut. If the game is great in the state it is released, then maybe it is BECAUSE some things were cut. But if it is shallow due to lack of RPG mechanics or something like that, I will be the first to say that.


Also, fuck MTX in fully priced games, if I haven't said that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EDMIX

EDMIX

Member
Apr 5, 2018
6,483
6,132
645
33
South Florida aka Outer Haven
And it was announced as paid expansion,


its still dlc, you can call it what ever you want, it still dlc....

now we will get free "next gen" upgrade, again some companies will charge for that.

And? Yet many publishers are doing this with games just as old

.

there ARE reasons to give them benefit of doubt


Not for me. They lied before and this game is already starting to have features removed, stripped, cut etc (if they ever were even going to even be in the game in the first place) Thats what happens when you lie to fans. I just don't believe this developer as they've never apologized for that and think them admitting it after taking your money days after release is the apology.....

there are also reasons to be cautious (as the downgrade story shows)

Pretty much sums up how I feel atm. Its why the removal of those features didn't come as a shock to me. They lied before, so to me their previews are them simply claiming what the game "could" be, I'll be hype only for what I factually know I can play vs what they are telling folks. They tell folks lots of things..... some times before release, some times after. Why should I get hype for features they will just tell me are removed or downgraded after they took my money?

with regards to "NO MTX" - they have a game built around MTX for some time already

I agree, but their messaging makes it seem as if everyone else is greedy and a piece of shit and boooo MTX (then proceeds to shove it in their games). Its not about it being in the MP portion, its about their stance and attitude about the subject in general. Oh they will leave the greed to others? OH but not in multiplayer, they need to be greedy and that MTX is perfectly fine and ok now?



I think it is best to judge the game as it is released, than look back at the old gameplay trailer and pick what was cut.

How I feel atm.