The recent news about the fate of The Outer Worlds franchise has left fans feeling disappointed and frustrated. In a bold statement, one fan declared, "Capitalism was the true villain all along," highlighting the controversial pricing strategy that may have sealed the game's fate.
The Outer Worlds 2, developed by Obsidian, faced an uphill battle from the start. Despite its potential, the game's initial $80 price tag, a move by Microsoft, seemed to be its undoing. Fans argue that this decision, though later reversed, significantly impacted the game's hype and reception.
In a year that saw the release of several notable RPGs, including the beloved Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, The Outer Worlds 2 struggled to stand out. Some fans believe the game's lengthy development period raised expectations too high, while others point to the recent success of other RPGs as tough competition.
"I think it was better than the first in many ways," said CardTrickOTK, "but when you compare it to BG3 and its incredible companion system, it just doesn't measure up. People's standards for RPGs have been raised, and this game, while good, didn't quite reach those heights."
And here's where it gets interesting. The game's story, which revolves around the actions of a megacorporation, seems to mirror its real-life struggle against the forces of capitalism. The irony of the situation wasn't lost on fans, with one quipping, "So capitalism was the true villain all along."
The initial $80 price tag, a bold move by Microsoft, backfired spectacularly. Fans felt it was an outrageous ask, especially in today's economy. Even after the price was reduced to $70, the damage was done, and the game struggled to recover its momentum.
"They asked for $80, and that turned a lot of gamers away," said RUKnight31. "The backtrack to $70 didn't help much. In this day and age, $60-$70 is already a lot for a game. Trying to establish $80 as the new norm was a stretch."
IGN's review of The Outer Worlds 2 gave it an 8/10, praising its smart writing and improved combat. However, the game's weak first act and the controversy surrounding its pricing may have overshadowed its strengths.
So, what do you think? Was the pricing strategy the true villain, or were there other factors at play? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!
