Support NeoGAF

[spons]

So something came up in the Starfield thread.

You can play the game early by paying for the full premium edition, or if you have Game Pass, get just the premium upgrade without also paying for the full game itself.
However, when you stop paying for Game Pass, you then own just the upgrade, not the game, so you cannot play it at all even if you shelled out 35 bucks for the premium upgrade.

The same is possible with Forza Horizon 4 and 5, you can download the game from Game Pass, pay for the premium upgrade to unlock all kinds of things, but when you ditch Game Pass, you're left with the add-ons and without the actual game in your library.

Services like Ubisoft+ and EA Play Pro include everything, so every game included is the "Ultimate Edition" with all the add-ons and upgrades.

So here is my question: would you pay more for a Game Pass tier that includes all these premium upgrades and add-ons?

 

[Aguero9320]

Voted yes. As long as it’s an option that doesn’t degrade the quality of the lower tier.

The dream (for me) is a game service like the music services, with everything on there.

 

[NeverYouMind]

No, I use it as a demo and rental service. I like to obtain the complete version of games I intend to come back to.

 

[mrmustard]

No, i don't buy DLCs, addons, cosmetics or whatever anyways.

 

[8BiTw0LF]

In my opinion this is the only way game pass can survive. It's a very bad deal to invest in games you don't own. Devs will soon find out that no one wants to buy DLC if they received the game through game pass.

 

[winjer]

The idea can be good depending on the price.
But there is also the issue that the DLCs for some games are completely useless.
And I put no value on MTX or NFTs. So if that ads to the cost, then it's a big no.

 

[xrnzaaas]

I don't think it's possible with all GP games given how extremely some of them can be monetized and supported post launch (like Ubi or EA games). Even this was only for MS-published games I would probably still say no. If it's a game I like (like the Forza series) I don't mind paying extra for the upgrades or the upgraded version. Other than that I mostly ignore DLC's / season passes etc.

 

[Chukhopops]

Voted no, in most games the DLC is either not worth it or you’re burnt out by the time you reach it.

Starfield is one of the rare exceptions since every Beth game had at least one god tier DLC or expansion.

In my opinion this is the only way game pass can survive. It's a very bad deal to invest in games you don't own. Devs will soon find out that no one wants to buy DLC if they received the game through game pass.

I hope some numbers are published about the early access for Starfield, seems like everyone who’s interested in the game is buying the Premium edition.

 

[acm2000]

Nah, I rarely play additional content down the line, the only reason Ubisoft includes the premium version in ubi+ is because Ubisoft games are shit.

 

[DonJorginho]

No, as the amount of games I'm willing to buy higher tiers of standard are very low.

I'm very happy buying the select few I want like Starfield.

 

[ManaByte]

No. If I want that stuff I’ll buy the full game like I did with Starfield.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

No, I’m not remotely convinced that Gamepass is sustainable long term. Especially at a time when subscribers are canceling their subscriptions to services. The last thing it needs is more tiers.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Voted no, in most games the DLC is either not worth it or you’re burnt out by the time you reach it.

Starfield is one of the rare exceptions since every Beth game had at least one god tier DLC or expansion.



I hope some numbers are published about the early access for Starfield, seems like everyone who’s interested in the game is buying the Premium edition.

If those numbers end up being good, you can bet Bill Gates ass MS will publish them. It’s been god knows how long since they’ve published any meaningful numbers for their Xbox division.

 

[the_master]

Premium editions should not have gameplay differences to begin with.
If they are digital then I do not care about them

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Sure

I usually buy the premium editions of games I love anyhow so why not

 

[TrebleShot]

I voted yes, EA play does this and it’s a nice extra for your money.

It should be standard. Those editions are 80/100 on their own so having as part of a 89 yearly sub is great.

 

[adamsapple]

No, premium upgrades should be optional for those who want it. Don't make it a part of any service.

 

[cormack12]

Current model is fine imo. Reward points can pretty much pay for the additional content packs in addition to the base game.

 

[Magic Carpet]

No don't make it part of the service. If you want a higher tier I would be willing to pay for more games, but not for addons for existing onces.

 

[ReBurn]

Probably not. I usually don't buy the DLC for most of the games I purchase so I don't see the purpose of renting DLC I probably wouldn't play. I'd rather wait for complete editions to release at a discount and just buy my favorites.

 

[AeonGaidenRaiden]

No because I couldnt care less about some stupid extra outfit, more ammo from the start or a special gun from the get go.

 

[mrcroket]

No, premium tier on games is a scam which has been standardized, the original idea of DLCs was to create new content after the release of the game, not to cut content to sell it apart. If a content is not include in the "standard" release of the game (and it's available at launch), I won't pay for it.

 

[DaGwaphics]

No. I'm not that interested in the premium upgrades tbh. And from a business perspective it just seems like bad business, the current GP + the premium/early access options as a separate option make the most sense.