Completely agree. It's a really bad move and instead of giving a good impression, will make people think the developers care more about money rather than of its players.
Absolutly.
This is why I still hope about the "content library" (that could satisfy both the players and the shareholders).
Something like :
---- Community Content (everything is free in this category)
- Community Shared Content (like buildings, rides, blueprints, maps, scenarios, etc...)
- Community Created Content (like 3D models or "packs", animated objects, textures, music and sound, etc...)
---- Official Content
- Official Small DLC = Free
- Official Medium DLC = X,99 €
- Official Medium DLC = X,99 €
- Official Expansion Pack = XX,99 €
- Official "Bundle" Pack = Depending the pack
With this system, everyone is happy.
And ... strategically, they do not really have a choice if they do not want to attract the wrath of the community.
Because if : 1) they sell the game, AND 2) they use an intern library with ONLY paying "official stuff" (which is, when we think about it, exactly like the "free-to-play store system" which exists because the initial game is free, and they have to find a source of income), then they will have very (very) bad comments.
But, if they are smart enough, they can use the two business models (the "free-to-play" model + the "classic" model) if they allow players to make and share free content.
This could change how people perceive, what is, in reality, "a shop" by transforming it, in the public eye into a "content sharing library, with some paying official stuff inside too" (and if, in addition, they provide tools making "import" and "configuration" simpler, users can be completely fooled)
But this is just my opinon [rolleyes]