this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2025
130 points (98.5% liked)
Games
17015 readers
820 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, but suggesting they are somehow morally obligated to offer it is nonsensical. They didn't need to make the game free, they chose to in order to increase its reach. That choice doesn't hurt anyone who paid, it just benefits others going forward.
I really don't understand where you're coming from with this. If you bought it in the last two weeks (or more, Steam is pretty generous), request a refund through Steam. If not, nothing changes for you because you bought at a price you thought was a good deal.
I could understand if they broke some form of promise, like they stopped developing during early access, they promised to fix some things and didn't, or they disable multiplayer servers, but none of that seems to be the case here. In what way are existing owned harmed by them making the game free going forward?