CD Projekt Red Responds to Loot Box Controversy

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
In an interview with PC Gamer, CD Projekt Red CEO Adam Kiciński gave his two cents on loot boxes: he isn’t a fan and thinks that the recent backlash is good for the industry. Kiciński advises that full-priced games should reflect their charge and include many hours of gameplay and content at the onset. The Witcher 3 is given as an example, which features at least 50-60+ hours of material.

Iwiński emphasizes the need for transparency from developers, and that information about their games should be readily available to players. Players can then make well-informed decisions with their money, and if they buy a full-priced game, says Iwiński, they should get "numerous hours of gameplay and a significant amount of content" for their cash.
 
You know who's getting nearly as many down votes as upvotes and believes games should cost more than $60? These assholes. Maybe someone should tell them that even CD Projekt Red doesn't agree with them. This is why they believe micro-transactions and loot boxes exist. And then they made two more videos to justify their beliefs.





 
um... you guys are aware that Wither 3 had DLC expansion packs so in fact are no better than anyone else. They just don't agree with loot boxes but are still for all the other ways to not make a full game day one but instead add more stuff later for an additional price.
 
Exavior said:
um... you guys are aware that Wither 3 had DLC expansion packs so in fact are no better than anyone else. They just don't agree with loot boxes but are still for all the other ways to not make a full game day one but instead add more stuff later for an additional price.
Click to expand...

CDPR doesn't require the dlc, unlike many. They have gone out of their way to love their customers and it shows. I saw the developers at pax and I was not disappointed. CDPR puts more love and care into their initial game then most put into with all the dlc.

*edit*

I wish they did sell the shirt at the pax event, i would have bought a few. but they gave it away.
 
Last edited:
Exavior said:
um... you guys are aware that Wither 3 had DLC expansion packs so in fact are no better than anyone else. They just don't agree with loot boxes but are still for all the other ways to not make a full game day one but instead add more stuff later for an additional price.
Click to expand...
You jest, right? New content on top of (not filling in gaps for) the base game, who believes mini expansion packs like that are bad? That and free DLCs? You're just trolling for sport, right?
 
DLC use to be called expansion packs. If they come out 6 months or a year after the game is released, I'm fine with that. If they ship side-by-side or come out a few weeks later it's obviously they are just held back to dip back into your wallet. I don't buy the "separate budget" argument by publishers.

CDPR is one of the most gamer friendly developers there is.
 
Exavior said:
um... you guys are aware that Wither 3 had DLC expansion packs so in fact are no better than anyone else. They just don't agree with loot boxes but are still for all the other ways to not make a full game day one but instead add more stuff later for an additional price.
Click to expand...


... So like an expansion pack?

There's a difference between adding a ton of content and then expanding on that universe after a bit. It's been done for years (expansion packs before DLC became a thing) as it's a good way for studios to make additional revenue as it's just content creation (cheaper than new features/etc.).

The annoying DLC is the stuff you see that is in the game, but you can't touch it because you didn't pay for it. Or when the title clearly has content stripped out to be in a DLC, so the main game itself is slim.
 
Love those independent companies that just doesn't work towards better pay.
If they are in business with a game that should suffice, if it's a money pit I understand.

EA and ubisoft doesn't seem to understand it and only speak in profit versus dev cost.

I'm no big pubg fan, fortnite, BF, cod and most mainstream games but there are some, I often play the likes of witcher, deus ex, factorio, civ, total war, starcraft 2 and the likes and funny enough they pretty much don't have any sales records to speak of.

As for witcher 3 it kinda contains all the aspects of the previous games and is a another witcher game where they increased immersion, graphics and story and at no point does it look like they made anything for the money.
The DLC's are absolutely massive and beat many singleplayer games alone in playtime so, it's an expansion and not a DLC...

If a game "needs" loot box then the gameplay would be destroyed, that goes for all of the games listed so it's good to see some not believing in it.
The loot boxes require a game mechanism that I absolutely hate, there is always someone there to throw money around and then you have to play with them and loose or loose content.
 
Last edited:
Exavior said:
um... you guys are aware that Wither 3 had DLC expansion packs so in fact are no better than anyone else. They just don't agree with loot boxes but are still for all the other ways to not make a full game day one but instead add more stuff later for an additional price.
Click to expand...

The did, and they didn't cost a single penny. In fact Blood & Wine was so large that it was basically a new game.
 
SecretStash said:
You jest, right? New content on top of (not filling in gaps for) the base game, who believes mini expansion packs like that are bad? That and free DLCs? You're just trolling for sport, right?
Click to expand...

Not trolling just making a point. Everyone is going on about how they got it right. They create the full game day one and don't go the route of everyone else and add to it later charging you more. Which in fact they did go that route, the only thing they don't have are loot boxes. There is still an expansion pass (normally $25 on sale on steam for $12.50 right now) which gets you two expansions of the main game. Blood and Wine would normally alone run you $20 and Hearts of Stone would run you $10. Both on sale for 50% just like the pass. Those aren't free, those cost money. Which means that in the long scheme they did in fact create additional addon content for the game. Doesn't matter how justified it is, or how well it was done. They did not in fact create a single game and leave it at that, but like others added to the game. Justified or not they still created DLC / expansions for the game meaning that it wasn't a $60 game to get everything for the story arch. It was $85 for those that bought it day one.

Krenum said:
The did, and they didn't cost a single penny. In fact Blood & Wine was so large that it was basically a new game.
Click to expand...

That is correct it didn't cost a single penny. It cost a number of them. The DLC wasn't free. You can get the game of the year version now that includes both but that isn't any different than anyone else. If you purchased the game day one you either had to buy the expansion pass or both DLC separate. ​
 
Exavior said:
um... you guys are aware that Wither 3 had DLC expansion packs so in fact are no better than anyone else. They just don't agree with loot boxes but are still for all the other ways to not make a full game day one but instead add more stuff later for an additional price.
Click to expand...
I can't even, are you trolling?

So by your opinion Dragon Age : Origins wasn't a full game? Because they released an expansion for it. Or I can go further back, Unreal wasn't a full game?
 
DukenukemX said:
You know who's getting nearly as many down votes as upvotes and believes games should cost more than $60? These assholes. Maybe someone should tell them that even CD Projekt Red doesn't agree with them. This is why they believe micro-transactions and loot boxes exist. And then they made two more videos to justify their beliefs.
Click to expand...
Lootboxes exist because there are idiots who buy them. Raising the game prices to 80 or even 150 wouldn't suddenly make lootboxes unprofitable. It'd just shrink the entire market to a point where they'd make less money overall due to reduced sales. Oh and piracy says: Go ahead, punk! Make my day!
 
M76 said:
I can't even, are you trolling?

So by your opinion Dragon Age : Origins wasn't a full game? Because they released an expansion for it. Or I can go further back, Unreal wasn't a full game?
Click to expand...

I am going based on the opinion of most of the people here. That a game should cost you $60 and then be done. Nothing else should be released and that the issue with gaming today is that developers are greedy fucks that don't care about the end user and just want to nickel and dime the fuck you of us. There was a post with videos explaining why expansion packs and stuff like that exist with the statement that the people that believe that are wrong. There are multiple post about how it is great the CDPR doesn't agree with anything that stuff.

Honestly, i don't care that DLC gets released, I don't care that expansion packs get released. I am one of those that buys a game and the season pass day one. I am perfectly fine with the concept of a game being made and then being added to later. It gives us a much larger game play experience within the world of the game. My point is simply that many people where are posting about how CDPR was the only company out there that didn't resort to DLC, or expansion packs or loot boxes and that they released a complete game from day one. I was simply pointing out that wasn't the case. That they do still go the route of some of that stuff, maybe not as much as some companies and maybe in a much better way. But the point is that they still do it. A person breaking into a store and robs $400 worth of stuff. Does what they stole change that they robed a store? Sure you will feel more for the person that stole diapers and baby formula because they couldn't afford stuff to take care of their child vs the person stealing a TV because they wanted to sell it for drug money. But both are still illegal.

As for the idea itself of a game being a full game with them adding expansion packs. As soon as they release an expansion pack that is extending the storyline so without that you don't get the full story of that game world. So no to a small degree that isn't the full game. Because unless you play everything you won't know the full story. I am fine with that, and will continue to pay for expansion packs to games that expand on the world, but I also know that without buying that I am not going to know the full story of the game world. I never got a story in Destiny because I never bought any of the expansions so to this day i have no idea what was going on in that game.
 
Exavior

If game developers follow your reasoning a game would never be released because they would be working so long on the story they would never get it finished.

Witcher 3 had a complete story in the base game. If they had added both expansions to it, it would have taken another year or so to finish the game. There's nothing wrong with expansion packs or DLC when its done right. They should deliver lots of content and enrich the original game for a good price.
 
Last edited:
Exavior said:
I am going based on the opinion of most of the people here. That a game should cost you $60 and then be done. Nothing else should be released and that the issue with gaming today is that developers are greedy fucks that don't care about the end user and just want to nickel and dime the fuck you of us. There was a post with videos explaining why expansion packs and stuff like that exist with the statement that the people that believe that are wrong. There are multiple post about how it is great the CDPR doesn't agree with anything that stuff.

Honestly, i don't care that DLC gets released, I don't care that expansion packs get released. I am one of those that buys a game and the season pass day one. I am perfectly fine with the concept of a game being made and then being added to later. It gives us a much larger game play experience within the world of the game. My point is simply that many people where are posting about how CDPR was the only company out there that didn't resort to DLC, or expansion packs or loot boxes and that they released a complete game from day one. I was simply pointing out that wasn't the case. That they do still go the route of some of that stuff, maybe not as much as some companies and maybe in a much better way. But the point is that they still do it. A person breaking into a store and robs $400 worth of stuff. Does what they stole change that they robed a store? Sure you will feel more for the person that stole diapers and baby formula because they couldn't afford stuff to take care of their child vs the person stealing a TV because they wanted to sell it for drug money. But both are still illegal.

As for the idea itself of a game being a full game with them adding expansion packs. As soon as they release an expansion pack that is extending the storyline so without that you don't get the full story of that game world. So no to a small degree that isn't the full game. Because unless you play everything you won't know the full story. I am fine with that, and will continue to pay for expansion packs to games that expand on the world, but I also know that without buying that I am not going to know the full story of the game world. I never got a story in Destiny because I never bought any of the expansions so to this day i have no idea what was going on in that game.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you have DLC features confused with DLC expansions. Witcher 3 was in fact a great example of excellent expansions which had stories of their own and were bigger than many complete games (I personally spent nearly 300 hours in Witcher 3). You are not required to buy them as no feature was cut from the main game as with most other DLC on day one games. You could have even imported saves from Witcher 2 for added lore and game elements. Not sure what your issue here is but personally I think CDPR did it as right as could possibly be done and rightfully got praised for not being greedy bastards (even though all of these companies are businesses and are the for money). By your logic Witcher fans could have waited for another year for a complete game instead of enjoying the main story and then being able to continue their adventure with expansions. Witcher 3 IMO is one of few games whose developer totally deserves that money.
 
SecretStash said:
You jest, right? New content on top of (not filling in gaps for) the base game, who believes mini expansion packs like that are bad? That and free DLCs? You're just trolling for sport, right?
Click to expand...

This. The conspiracy of "they took out part of the game to sell it later" or that "DLC shouldn't be designed alongside the base game" is just retarded. Loot boxes, dozens of shitty cosmetic DLC (CS:GO, R6S), pay to win stuff, or high prices for crap is annoying. For example I don't mind the extra paid cosmetic DLC in Sleeping Dogs. There must have been 20-30+ shirt variations although you had the option to buy some more (Valve theme, ect.) on their store for $1 or so. Didn't effect the gameplay and there was more than enough customization variety as it was. Most of the paid stuff fit within the theme of the game and as it was SP I didn't have to suffer from other players ruining the art style if some of the clothing did look absurd.
 
If the game doesn't have obvious holes from missing DLC content (like UI features that don't work, or questgivers that are there but when you choose the quest, it just says you need a DLC), then it's OK. The DLC's absence should not leave a hole in the main game. If it does leave holes, then it's part of the game and should be included.
 
Nobody has said that DLC itself are bad. Nobody has said that, for example, Throne of bhaal expansion for BG2 was bad. DLC was supposed to be just a online version of those old expansion packs. It is when you cut away parts from the game to sell them later and double dip in your wallet that makes DLC's bad and immoral. You really cannot compare CDProjekt "herp they also have DLC derp" to other companes when the DLC they make is very much like Throne Of Bhaal, proper expansion packs just like DLC's should be, and small things they give away for free. Compare CDProjekts approach to EA who with Mass Effect 3 cut away a very crucial part of the main story to be a Day 1 DLC.
 
Exavior said:
um... you guys are aware that Wither 3 had DLC expansion packs so in fact are no better than anyone else. They just don't agree with loot boxes but are still for all the other ways to not make a full game day one but instead add more stuff later for an additional price.
Click to expand...

WTF?

W3 is a 100+ hour fully complete game.

They then added two separate expansion DLCs that each on their own had more content and playtime than many full priced games. The first one was a 10-20 hrs DLC for a small cost and completely optional. The second was a ~$20 40+ hr expansion that was basically an entirely new game.

Neither are the type of DLC that anyone has ever really complained about. They were substantial expansions to an already long and detailed complete game and both added a large amount of new content and required significant additional developer effort. They weren't cut out of the base game, they were expansions in the classical gaming sense.
 
Exavior said:
I am going based on the opinion of most of the people here. That a game should cost you $60 and then be done. Nothing else should be released and that the issue with gaming today is that developers are greedy fucks that don't care about the end user and just want to nickel and dime the fuck you of us. There was a post with videos explaining why expansion packs and stuff like that exist with the statement that the people that believe that are wrong. There are multiple post about how it is great the CDPR doesn't agree with anything that stuff.
Click to expand...
Not all expansions are made equal. Let's leave it at that because it seems to me that you're being deliberately obtuse about the issue.

Honestly, i don't care that DLC gets released, I don't care that expansion packs get released. I am one of those that buys a game and the season pass day one. I am perfectly fine with the concept of a game being made and then being added to later. It gives us a much larger game play experience within the world of the game. My point is simply that many people where are posting about how CDPR was the only company out there that didn't resort to DLC, or expansion packs or loot boxes and that they released a complete game from day one. I was simply pointing out that wasn't the case. That they do still go the route of some of that stuff, maybe not as much as some companies and maybe in a much better way. But the point is that they still do it. A person breaking into a store and robs $400 worth of stuff. Does what they stole change that they robed a store? Sure you will feel more for the person that stole diapers and baby formula because they couldn't afford stuff to take care of their child vs the person stealing a TV because they wanted to sell it for drug money. But both are still illegal.
Click to expand...
As I've said, not all DLCs are made equal. And selling DLCs is not illegal, so I don't know how your analogy is relevant at all.

A better example would be car extras: Some developers started selling basic stuff as extras, while cdp really offers extras that are wortwhile. Like one company selling openable rear doors as extras, while the other only sells adaptive cruise control as an extra.
As for the idea itself of a game being a full game with them adding expansion packs. As soon as they release an expansion pack that is extending the storyline so without that you don't get the full story of that game world. So no to a small degree that isn't the full game. Because unless you play everything you won't know the full story. I am fine with that, and will continue to pay for expansion packs to games that expand on the world, but I also know that without buying that I am not going to know the full story of the game world. I never got a story in Destiny because I never bought any of the expansions so to this day i have no idea what was going on in that game.
Click to expand...
There are no full stories, you can always add to it. By your definition a movie about ww2 should be 6 years long then, because only then you have the "full" story if every minute is accounted for.
I really have no idea how you came to this ridiculous conclusion that if a game has downloadable expansions then that makes the base game incomplete somehow. If it was never made then it is complete, but if it's made then the same game that was considered complete until then suddenly becomes incomplete?
 
DLC and Loot Boxes, WAY different concepts. Some developers choose to eliminate content and package it later as DLC(BOOOOOOOOOO). CDPR did it right and delivered rather expansive DLC with very different locales. There was no need to purchase but I was glad I did. They without a doubt have produced some of the highest value games(based on time spent playing) of any game I have ever purchased. Fingers crossed for Cyberpunk 2077.
 
Exavior said:
Not trolling just making a point. Everyone is going on about how they got it right. They create the full game day one and don't go the route of everyone else and add to it later charging you more. Which in fact they did go that route, the only thing they don't have are loot boxes. There is still an expansion pass (normally $25 on sale on steam for $12.50 right now) which gets you two expansions of the main game. Blood and Wine would normally alone run you $20 and Hearts of Stone would run you $10. Both on sale for 50% just like the pass. Those aren't free, those cost money. Which means that in the long scheme they did in fact create additional addon content for the game. Doesn't matter how justified it is, or how well it was done. They did not in fact create a single game and leave it at that, but like others added to the game. Justified or not they still created DLC / expansions for the game meaning that it wasn't a $60 game to get everything for the story arch. It was $85 for those that bought it day one.



That is correct it didn't cost a single penny. It cost a number of them. The DLC wasn't free. You can get the game of the year version now that includes both but that isn't any different than anyone else. If you purchased the game day one you either had to buy the expansion pass or both DLC separate. ​
Click to expand...


To quote a famous line from the Shawshank redemption, "How can you be so obtuse?"

If a game is complete when it ships, and you don't have to buy DLC to experience the game fully, that's good.

If you are required to buy DLC to use all the content in a game as it ships, that's bad.


Expansion packs that add content to the original game are in no way, shape or form, the same as nerfing original game content until you buy DLC. what part of that is hard to understand?
 
CDPR is the kind of company where even if you buy their games at full launch price, you still feel like you are robbing them, not the other way around. Witcher 3 + Hearts of Stone + Blood and Wine took me well past the 200-hour mark. One awesome game and then two great expansion packs (Blood and Wine was basically like Witcher 4), I feel like they gave me too much for the money. On top of it all, completely DRM-free. Not to mention all the free DLC and all the patches where they just continued to improve the fuck outta the game... naw, it don't feel right. It feels like they shoulda charged more. I'm damn glad they didn't though (especially for broke-ass foolz like me). All the sales I've seen for W3 and its two expansions in the past 2+ years just seem like CDPR further inviting people to "rob" them through underpayment. As long as CDPR continues to roll this way, they shall continue to get my hard-earned cash. This company understands delivering value for the product. They understand bang-for-the-buck. They don't fucking nickel-and-dime you. They make sure you get your money's worth on DAY ONE, and then it only gets better from there.
 
You will either make a FULL GAME and sell it to me for ONE PRICE at time of purchase, or you won't get my money. PERIOD. No more buying half a game and having to buy the DLC, no more loot boxes, no more "microtransactions". I will accept a full game getting DLC later (Horizons Zero Dawn is a good example)...but I am DONE buying crap games with compromised mechanics and gameplay that incentivise additional purchases. I refuse to grind. I just want to PLAY! Either EA, Activision, and Ubisoft will get this, or they will go out of business!
 
I haven't played 50-60 hours in a game for a while except for Dark Souls 3 in 2016
 
Exavior is rolling a trolling by not addressing the point that not all DLCs are created equally. DLCs that expand with new content on top of a complete game are good (ie expansion packs or mini expansions). Bad DLCs are designed to fill in gaps for an incomplete base game.
 
SecretStash said:
Exavior is rolling a trolling by not addressing the point that not all DLCs are created equally. DLCs that expand with new content on top of a complete game are good (ie expansion packs or mini expansions). Bad DLCs are designed to fill in gaps for an incomplete base game.
Click to expand...

He's also gaslighting you all because he's arguing that DLC are equivalent to loot boxes.

DLC does not equal loot boxes. DLC can be done right or wrong. DLC done right has the requirement that the initial game be complete, and thus the DLC adds something extra and of value (Blood and Wine). IF the DLC is just something stripped out of the game to give the producer something extra to sell, then its done wrong.

Loot boxes can be done with minimal intrusion (costumes) or maximum intrusion (Battlefront 2) but they never add anything of real value to the game, all they do is strip out value and sell it back piece meal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top