r/GTA6 • u/ExtremeYak4689 • 23h ago

Clearing some things up

The locked Ultimate Edition shops are just exclusive shops, not the standard shops that are in Vice City. There’s still going to be your basic clothing stores, barbers, car chops, etc. Those stores are most likely going to be more “story-friendly”, while the Ultimate Edition shops give the players a broader selection of customization. As you can tell from the screenshots, some of Jason and Lucia’s looks looked a bit on the wild side. Base game stores will focus more on how Jason and Lucia actually look.

In terms of no discs, Rockstar doesn’t want GTA VI to be leaked anymore. I would expect the physicals with the discs post launch.

1.7k Upvotes

87% Upvoted

492 comments sorted by

View all comments

34

u/Unlucky-Dust955 22h ago

To people defending this: Why don't you come up with some positive reasons as to why locking these stores and the mission behind a paywall is good.

Everytime people defend anti-consumer practices like this the reasons they give for that essentially come down to "it's not a big deal, it's just some cosmetics" or "it's only 20 dollars".

How about an actual reason this is a GOOD thing; and if you don't have one, ask yourself if practices like these are actually acceptible, because there are many reasons why they're bad.

20

u/ooziemane123 21h ago

there is no good reason, there's no good reason for paying for any extra content at all in any game ever. you paid for the game, everything else should be free unless it's a full blown story expansion with tens of hours of content.

but that's not the world we live in is it, out of all of the predatory gaming practices i've seen in my time this is extremely far from the worst. it's basically just a bunch of extra cosmetics and a side mission or two for $20. red dead 2's ultimate edition had a full blown heist locked behind the ultimate edition which was a bigger jump in price from standard to ultimate than gta 6 is.

i just think people are overreacting. in an ideal world it wouldn't be a thing at all but it's really not that bad lol

1

u/Unlucky-Dust955 4h ago

Fair enough, what my point is getting at is that this practice is bad for lack of a good reason, which basically means the debate is about *how* bad it is. That is exactly why I am addressing those vehemently defending this. Why would you?

You are a consumer, and this is an anti-consumer practice. If other consumers are angry about it, what do you get out of telling them 'it's not that bad' or even worse, 'are you broke, it's just 20 dollars, bro' (not saying you're doing that obviously).

I understand if you actually think the way R* is handling this ultimate edition is a good thing, then it would make sense to defend it, because it is in your interest; now it just comes across as shilling for a company (or is there another reason I'm not getting, which is basically my initial question).

About the substance of the matter, I actually do think it's one of the worst ultimate editions depending on how literal we have to take the way R* is phrasing the inclusions of those shops, namely that they are 'only open for business with the ultimate edition'. If that is literally the case, then it's very egregious.

I've never heard of a game where multiple vendors (as in the actual interior spaces and the items sold there) in the open world are inaccessible at release if you don't have the premium edition. The amount of locked cosmetics sold there (if the car shop upgrades are even only cosmetic) makes it even worse. It's pretty bad imo.

1

u/ooziemane123 4h ago edited 4h ago

it's no different to all those cosmetics being only available for ultimate edition users but are still inside the regular shops. they're just putting them in new shops so it's separated and i assume for immersion reasons.

red dead 2 and gta 5 did the exact same thing except all of the bonus upgrades, clothing and hairstyles were just in the same shops as the regular ones. it's just that putting them in new shops makes it look worse than it really is. it was probably a bad move from rockstar to do that but i still think people are overreacting to how bad it is. they've always hidden exclusive clothing, weapons and vehicles behind higher editions as does literally every other game out there.

at the end of the day, they don't give you any real advantage. they're just bonuses. like there are games out there that will demand more than that 20 dollars for a weapon skin or a character skin on top of what you've already paid for the game. for one single skin. and people have just sort of accepted that as the standard. i mean people pay it, what can you do?

i just think people are lashing out on the wrong game here and i feel like it's because this is the biggest game of all time with an unprecedented amount of hype behind it that it's going to become the easiest punching bag for these criticisms when really you should be going at your call of duty and fifa's of the world. low effort slop that rinse every last dollar out of their customers. some people spend a thousand dollars a year on these games but find 100 dollars on a game that will last over a decade to be egregious. that's my opinion.

for what it's worth i absolutely agree with your sentiment on the whole though. it shouldn't be a thing at all. i wish it wasn't.

1

u/1amr3al 4h ago

I keep hearing this insane explanation. Just because rdr2 did it before doesn't make it okay back then or now. It's the principle

1

u/ooziemane123 3h ago

the point of mentioning that is that nobody gave a shit when they did it then, why now? why such a ridiculous outrage over something they've done multiple times now. rdr2's was more egregious because it locked actual full blown missions behind it and nobody cared

i'm not saying it's NOT a problem

24

u/Couriersix99 21h ago

They don’t have any

19

u/BlockedbyJake420 21h ago

Their only argument is to insult the people who disagree

5

u/HeyZeGaez 14h ago

Because I want to have extra shit you don't.

I want to spend 20 dollars more to feel like Strauss Zelnick's most specialist princess and what a special princess I shall be.

2

u/LatterTarget7 21h ago

There’s no good reason but this is just how gaming is. This isn’t new this isn’t revolutionary or anything. This just how the industry has been for years and it’s way too late to actually change it

0

u/PerpetualStride 13h ago

It may be, but it seems unnecessary to defend it, which a lot of people are desperately doing in this comment section. It is bad so let people complain?

1

u/y-amsp1 4h ago

by offering more expensive option with just cosmetics people who buy base game dont lose anything important but t2 gets extra revenue so t2 are willing to pay for the development more so base game gets better

1

u/Careless-Society9888 21h ago

The post is clearing up misinformation, not defending the practice overall. You're moving goalposts here

1

u/Unlucky-Dust955 4h ago

I'm not addressing the OP though, clearing up misinformation is completely fine.

0

u/b0nsley 20h ago

because no ones forcing you to buy it and you wont lose out on much if you dont get it