Ditto.
As I mentioned earlier, I think that compulsory patching is a bad idea but it's nothing to do with Bethesda and I guess thinking about it Steam need to deal with a very broad audience who are necessarily overly tech savvy so not having a choice I guess makes it easier/simpler on some level...
...however maybe an opt out would be the way forward.
Doesn't bother me though I just leave it off.

Rubbish, QA issues aside - (and that's a no-win situation at the moment for them anyway, it seems) - Steam's methodology and processes are entirely Steam's are can't possibly be seen to be the responsibility of Bethesda, who are unlikely to have any more control over that aspect of release than you or I do.

Tech savvy has nothing to do with it. Steam supports multi-player games which require clients to be the same version, hence the forced updating. Steam simply applies the same deal to single-player games. You can't tell me that Beth wasn't aware of this.

Fair point.
However I never said that Bethesda weren't aware of this, what I *am* saying is that I don't see that's it their responsibility.

Oh really? Did you check the Bethesda forums in the year that followed the release of Morrowind?

Of course, not all DLC is "bite sized". Yeah, at one end there's the ever famous Horse Armor..... but at the other end, there's Borderlands' The Secret Armory of General Knoxx, a crazy value at just $10.

(Also, the general concept of "your Product A was wildly successful, therefore you should give me any additional expansions to Product A for free" is crazy. On that theory, a 5-million-seller CD should entitle you to more music from the artist. Or The Avengers making a billion $ should just give everyone with a ticket a copy of the DVD. Or, hey - to take an example from RC cars, a hobby I've been dragged back into lately - if that RC car kit is wildly successful, they should just let people have improved "tune-up" parts for free, right? )

These things take resources to make - computers, office expenses, salaries, servers to offer downloads, etc. Unless you buy something with an explicitly-spelled-out (and likely charged for, or accounted for in the original price) post-purchase contract, they don't owe you anything. Perhaps this is contamination from all the people who play MMOs these days? Expecting "free content updates" for things that have no reason to give them? (Ignoring the part where MMOs pay for that "free content" by charging monthly fees or "cash shop" prices for them. So they're not actually free.)


Assuming (as I may have mentioned in other places) that you don't use Steam for anything else. (personally, I've got about 2 dozen games, 90%+ of them Valve games or things gotten super cheap during sales. Some with online components.)

But, yeah.... the fact that turning off "automatic updates" doesn't actually turn them off.......

I think it was worth every penny.

Nope.
But if you're saying that what I said was the situation back then then it's clearly worse now...

Firstly DLC is a product not a service.


Also, nothing is worth its money these days. The houses we live in are over priced and so is the food we eat in our houses.

Tomato's Tomatoes

I call that settling, and getting ripped off, you may called me entitled. and such is life

No, i call it capitalism. And in the context of modern trade, if you enjoyed skyrim then you weren't ripped off.

The price of fuel for your car is a rip off, this is why i choose not to drive.

It is not worse now, it is just as bad. I do not understand how you can be so certain that it would be "clearly worse now" if you answer my question with nope.

Just because the expectation of the previous games and it's expansions + dlc's isn't an issue anymore it is downsized to the same old: Things used to be better before.

Morrowind was fresh, outmatched any game of it's time, yet when the first DLC's came out they were free and bigger then simple Horse armor. The first expansion Mournhold received a lot of criticism! The second (Bloodmoon) expansion made up for it.

Then came Oblivion, released 2006 on consoles as well as PC, where the limitation by the consoles became slightly apparent, after that Shivering isles released in 2007 increased the longevity
About Oblivion and it's first (tiny) DLC's there was also a lot disappointment and criticism but that was not the case with it's expansion Shivering Isles, which received a lot of praise.

We should not forget that now consoles are outdated compared to PC and therefor it limits the game and as a result you see a lot of criticism, but there is not more criticism now on Skyrim then what there was on Oblivion with it's tiny DLC's one had to pay for (unlike with Morrowind DLC).

In light of how you answered my question I do not think you are fit to make an accurate observation of how things got "clearly worse".

I wish this wasn't the reality, but most companies have us pay for the DLC these days. This was an uncommon practice before this console generation. It's very common now, sadly. No one knows how to price their DLC correctly, either. Just look at the multiplayer only DLC and tell me 2 bucks is too much for those?! Look at Bioshock's and ask if those two bucks for DLC is worth it. Look at Bioshock 2's.

I don't care how much inflation is now. Pricing multiplayer DLC for over a dollar is silly in most cases!

LOL
I'm not certain.
You need read what I wrote, better.

Right, because DLCs and expansions are at the same price range...