It's fine I waa more using your post to show the simple Base Game Cost/Added Content Cost=Number to price match technique works, and is an easy test.

In purely maths and assuming $60 base game
$0.01 = 1/6000th of Base Game Content
$1.00 = 1/60th of Base Game Content
$10 = 1/6th of Base Game Content

The devs are already being heavily Strongmanned, by assuming all added content is added Work, when large parts will use existing base game functions. So there's already a heavy bias in their favour built in, and being a little overpriced is not an issue, if the base game is good (in YOUR opinion), they will deserve that little pricey bonus.

That stops long before we reach microtransaction levels of under $00.01, and literal worthless content.

When I tried the pure maths approach, though the logic is the same, non maths people tend to switch off.
The Number of DLC to Match Base Game Cost approach seems much better at conveying the same basic principle.

The general rule of thumb
All DLC = Worthless Microtransactions
All Expansions = Worth Buying New Content

As with all generalisations rare exceptions may exist, DLC Bundles could raise the value but it takes a lot;.
Follow that general rule, and you wont go wrong.

You can buy microtransactions all you want, but don't try to fool yourself that they are VFM, because they are not that.
Supporting small truly independent dev studios is a valid reason to buy microtransactions, but you are still buying microtransactions even so.

Again: I am not talking about a slight delay. I am talking about MONTHS and you simply don't need MONTHS to beta test a game on Steam before bringing it to GOG ... especially not when you already released several other patches and additions on Steam in the meantime. That is what madmind is doing and if you defend such a behavior you defend bad devs - simple as that. I know quite a few indie devs that I love to supporl. All are successful but they are also aware that they need every customer - including the GOG customers.

GOG is still a part of CDPR and since CP2077 was successful even though it had a bit of a bad start I am quite sure GOG will survive ... so I won't start to cry just now, sorry. Also, to survive GOG could have as many partners as they want and still would not sell a single game WITHOUT CUSTOMERS! There are several reasons why so many left GOG and non updated games is one of them, almost non existing or not working support is another one ... but that's another story.

I don't understand why you are trying to explain things to me which I never complained about? Like I already said, This is not about GOG not getting a certain game released. But IF it is released on GOG I expect to get good support for it as well AFTER I HAVE PAID money for it.

I hate it to quote wiki:
"An indie game, short for independent video game, is a video game typically created by individuals or smaller development teams without the financial and technical support of a large game publisher, in contrast to most "AAA" (triple-A) games. However, the "indie" term may apply to other scenarios where the development of the game has some measure of independence from a publisher even if a publisher helps fund and distribute a game, such as creative freedom."

The indie status mostly is about creative freedom which is one reason why several indie games are trying to do something new in opposite to AAA studios that mostly do the same formula over and over ... if it has been sold before. ONly very few indie devs are even able to get their gae on the market without the help of a publisher.

"Microtransactions, often abbreviated as mtx are a business model where users can purchase virtual goods with micropayments. " - that's the known definition.

That's the known definition probably everybody (with the exception of yourself) knows and refers to when talking about mictrotransations. It does not matter if the words "micro" and "transactions" can be translated on their own getting another meaning.

That's a definition you see. Please give me a source where I can look up that this exists for real.

Most DLCs are too expensive and many DLCs are skins or costumes or weapons only ... but it is still up to each customer to decide if they want to pay or not. DLCs in general are a business model you can hate, or support or sometimes support and sometimes hate. That's the real workld you are trying to teach me about.

Why do the (in your opinion) unnecessary DLCs matter if you buy the base game or not? And why does it matter if they remove it afterwards? Just don't buy them and be done with it. If this would be content you would want to have in the base game I could understand your point but since they are completely worthless (in your eyes) there's no reason to be mad about it.

They are still no mictrotransactions in the definition known today but yes, they are overpriced as so many DLCs ... but you can't objectively say that they can be ignored since this is your subjective opinion only.

No GOG is NOT "Part of CDPR", that's not how this sort of thing works, legally GOG is subsiduary company to CDPR.
GOG can go bust, and CDPR will still exist, it's set up that way for that exact reason.
GOG will never survive CDPR going bust, but CDPR will always survive if GOG goes bust.

Not saying that will happen, just that the corporate structure is set up so it can.

At the beginning of 2021, it was announced that GOG.com was responsible for around 10% of the total PC sales of Cyberpunk 2077.
When even CDPR's biggest game gets only 10% of sales on GOG, this will be far less for any other games here.

Facts are facts, this is capitalism, where wording like "Timely Fashion" have a financial component, and we get treated as a market, not individual customers, when investors get priority over customers every time.

Like it, or not, we are at the bottom of the pile, and the first to lose out, when the bills are due. the end customer is always the first to lose out, when it goes sideways.

The definition of microtransaction known today, is the same it always was, I don't accept industry marketing BS, as a definition.
They also say Loot Boxes aren't gambling, I will always disagree.
Microtransactions will always mean worthless content, (NOT WORTH BUYING), and I will always judge that content against the base game it's made for, and the price that game was at launch..

Of course it's my opinion, but it is based off objective data, and I also presented you with exactly how I determine that objective data, and how it can be applied to each game, and any piece of added content you want

What you do with that objective data is your choice, but nobody can seriously argue that any DLC is good VFM.
Good expansions, is where that VFM argument will hold some merit.

Why does it matter?
I was sold a product with no indications, that one of my red line would ever be crossed.
it matters to ME, because I have made the decision that it matters to ME.

If Fallout 4, and Skyrim SE had had the cash shop when they launched, I would never even play the games.
With those, though technically it wasn't the "Paid Mods v2.0" that I objected to, as much as the fact Bethesda Softworks was trying to cash in on modding in existing games, with an active community, and it objectively made modding those games worse as a result.

I knew how to work around the Cash Shop, which is what most modders chose to do.
I wasn't willing to do that, as it killed my passion for modding all Bethesda Games Studios releases, old, and new.

Notice I say nothing about Fallout 76, because I knew it was multiplayer, and had a cash shop before it was ever sold.
I never bought F76, as a result, That's fine, I just ignore it and move on.
If Starfield launches with a cash shop, I will never play it, and move on.
I no longer can trust that releasing without a cash shop, means it won't be added later.
So will wait until TES6 comes out, or a GOG release.

Same with Anthem, as a BioWare fangirl, I was very disappointed, and moved on
It turned out to be a flop, but my decision wouldn't have changed, if it had been their greatest success, it was not for me.
In contrast I really enjoyed Mass Effect: Andromeda, it was flawed, but every game is flawed.

What matters to me is whether I enjoyed the game, not the opinion of others.
I love some "Objectively" bad games, and hate some "Objectively" good games.
All based on my enjoyment of the game, and nothing else.

I deleted my entire Ubisoft account, when they started adding NFTs to existing games.
I'd already given up buying their games in 2019, but that move, made me ditch the rest.

The backlash to NFTs shows the power we have collectively, alone I can only make my own choices, and I choose.
No Microtransactions, No Excuses Accepted, No Exceptions Allowed.

What you choose, is up to you, not me, and I don't really care which.