I’m confused I was trying to download Blizzard mountain and it seems that I don’t own it, is this for real? So I need to pay $130 to get the whole game?
You would think so however as Sat nite says the ultimate edition has never stated you’d get the expansions and it was discussed on here at the game launch as well that there’d be a need to pay for expansions.
“Ultimate” is just a marketing word, capital “U”, and in the context T10 used it, it refers to the version of the game that includes the most stuff. Not only did none of the advertising imply that everything produced would be included, what would be included was spelled out … and when all these parts are purchased separately, they cost more than in the Ultimate Edition bundle.
I have my gripes about some of the stuff T10 does, or doesn’t do (communication), but having a beef with the Ultimate Edition is a fail in both reading comprehension and logic. It’s just a bundle that offers a savings over buying things separate, with a metal case for the game and a miniature Centenario included. It’s like having a coupon for a large pizza, then complaining that wings aren’t included in the coupon.
“Does it say wings included?”
“No, but it should.”
“Why? Enlighten me.”
“It said Ultimate Pizza Deal.”
“We could have called the deal Steve. Instead, we called it Ultimate Pizza Deal and said what it included. What’s the problem?”
Considering every other game (except Evolve but we don’t talk about that), that has a $100 option includes everything that’s gonna be available with a small discount (hell look at CoD, 2 games and a season pass for $100) most of us at this point have the understanding that if someone offers a $100 option, it means its gonna have everything. Yes I should have read, but I don’t have to read what the “ultimate” edition for any other game will have because every other game is gonna include everything in it. It was a cheap marketing practice and Microsoft/Turn 10 should be ashamed. At least this BS is helping the Microsoft stock (1.39% change for the day, ~2% gain for me) , so I get my money back that way.
And this analogy is just bad
Its more like, I go to BK, McD, and Arbies and get a combo deal and they give me the sandwich, fries, and a drink. Then I go to Microburgersoft and I get the combo for the same price but all I get is the sandwich and some barbecue sauce, and I ask where the combo, they tell me I get a sandwich and sauce with a combo, and the fries and drink are half the price of sandwich each and aren’t included in any combo.
Problem #1: There is no comparable combo elsewhere.
Problem #2: The combo is whatever it is advertised as. It could be a sandwich, a pretzel, and a cup of canola oil if that’s what they want to sell.
Problem #3: Semantics aside, using a fast food analogy, you end up with the same result either way it’s marketed. For example, you say sandwich and sauce in a combo, fries and drink sold separately but discounted. Ok,. Now go to McD’s and a combo includes everything, but, semantics aside, you buy a sandwich and the fries and drink are discounted. If you’ve ever substituted or upgraded fries and/or the drink, you’d know that’s how it works. In the end, you get the same discount either way and the only difference is how it’s broken down on your receipt. No difference except for the marketing.
You could have left the “Yes I should have read” and left everything else out, because everything else is assumption, and that assumption didn’t turn out that well. If you don’t read the contents for other games, you’ve just been lucky up until now. That’s how assumptions work. They’re great when they turn out right. But when you get it wrong, it’s nobody’s fault but yours. Blaming T10 because you didn’t read? Alllllllrighty then.
And just looking at it logically, if you look at how much each piece costs separately, thinking that you were going to get everything for $100 would be in the “too good to be true” category.
“Welcome to Microburgersoft. Can I help you?”
“I want the combo.”
“Do you want the discounted fries and drink with that?”
“They’re not included?”
“That’s what the menu you just ordered from says. They are discounted, though, so the cost is the same in the end.”
“They don’t do it like that at McD’s.”
“Are you at McD’s? Can you get a Forza sandwich at McD’s? Then what does McD’s have to do with anything? They don’t have the same meal combos at IKEA either.”
PS … By the way, if this gets you mad, don’t order the Ultimate Feast at Red Lobster. They don’t bring out one of everything and a barf bucket like in Monty Python’s The Meaning Of Life. It’s just a big plate of food. I worked through lunch today … I’m hungry.
CoD this year had about a $170 value for $100, funny how everyone’s go to game to make fun of is actually being better to its consumers than 99% of the market
COD has a massive sales base across multiple platforms so can afford a lower price per unit.
At the end of the day if you think the expansion is not worth the extra cost then don’t buy it. I know part of your argument is you assumed you were covered by buying the Ultimate Edition but that is where reading the description helps.
I believe I will get way more than $18 enjoyment out of this.
How is the new COD a $170 value? Because you are getting a remastered game that you more than likely already paid full price for MW when it first came out? If you bought the OG version of the game when it came out than you would have paid $60+ already so yeah.
I don’t know how many times I’ve said this but going way back to FM4 if you wanted everything the game had to offer it would cost you $150-200+ so it’s nothing new, However whats interesting is that base games have been in the $60 range going all the way back to the 64 and further so the fact that we’re still paying the same price is amazing. I assume you’ve played a few Turn 10 games by now since you are tier 7 so you should know this already.
Maybe don’t get so wasted next time and you’ll be able to read it instead of assuming.