MicroTransactions and Loot Boxes
#1 Posted 02 November 2017 - 05:45 PM
What's your take on Microtranactions and Loot Boxes?
This post has been edited by DustFalcon85: 02 November 2017 - 06:02 PM
#2 Posted 02 November 2017 - 05:58 PM
Never have I bought a full price game with microtransactions and loot boxes and I never will.
As for Gearbox implementing them, I anticipate Gearbox forcing them into Borderlands 3 so you have to pay for those skeleton keys for that golden chest, then Randy will spin that "you deliver a 7 and it's a 5" bullshit again in some hilariously bad attempt to get out of it.
#3 Posted 02 November 2017 - 06:30 PM
#4 Posted 02 November 2017 - 06:54 PM
This post has been edited by Maisth: 02 November 2017 - 06:54 PM
#5 Posted 02 November 2017 - 06:55 PM
This post has been edited by Grand Admiral Thrawn: 02 November 2017 - 06:56 PM
#6 Posted 02 November 2017 - 10:46 PM
I didn't really mind them in Deus Ex Mankind Divided since I didn't pay any attention to them and played the game normally. However the concern is that publishers simply want us to get comfortable with the idea of having them in games, and use that as a stepping stone to making them a more integrated gameplay component.
As others have said, if it's a purely cosmetic thing then that's not a big deal to me as it doesn't directly influence the enjoyment of the game. I'd happily pay for Siri on my iPhone to sound like the computer from Star Trek TNG, which is apparently entirely possible if they wanted to do that.
#7 Posted 03 November 2017 - 02:36 AM
Microtransactions are one of the best way to make money nowdays. And unlike season passes with DLCs, making microtransactions is dirt cheap plus there is quite strong demographics for it which consist from people who have real issues, a demographics I'm not sure if interested in overpriced AAA games since the biggest bait for whales are F2P games (or rather not F2P games themselves but insane playerbase which those games attract, whales need average people in front of whom they can show how big their dick is). Capcom tried to make SFV look like a F2P game with $60 price tag on launch (now its $40 or so) and failed horribly, to the point that they decided to go with aggressive DLC policy in their another even bigger failure which is MvC:I. Already mentioned Deus Ex Mankind Divided also flopped so bad that it pretty much killed DX franchise and I'm pretty sure there were other games where microtransactions didn't really help their success at all. Meanwhile F2P games like LoL or majority of mobile F2P games are doing incredibly fine.
Either way, look forward for it to become a norm, because
This post has been edited by Sledgehammer: 03 November 2017 - 02:41 AM
#8 Posted 03 November 2017 - 06:50 AM
Sledgehammer, on 03 November 2017 - 02:36 AM, said:
This is the core of the problem. The more cinematic the game has to be, the bigger the budget. Since there are now motion captured actors, celebrity voice actors and extremely detailed environments and props that take an enormous amount of work to make, not to mention the planning and synchronization of the whole dev team, who all need to eat too. Then they scrap ideas that took a lot of time and work to make... it's self-explanatory.
Not to mention the fact that unless the dev team writes their own engine from scratch, they have to pay fees to use Unreal or Cryengine, to name the more popular ones.
So the payment model from the golden days simply doesn't work anymore. Once game development conventions are established, it's a can of worms that can't be closed. Unless, of course, we're talking about indie developers.
And this explains the love aspect of my love/hate relationship to indie-games. You avoid the bullshit. It allows developers who are really passionate about games to make exactly the game they want. Of course, you have peer-pressure and political tendencies once you get into the marxist/SJW sphere. But those games tend to not do very well after all, and I'd categorize them together with the asset-flip scam games at Steam. There has been so much outrage against such developers and practices, that people tend to smell the bullshit the moment a kickstarter is announced.
I think Battlefield 4 did it well with the Battlepacks. Those could be earned by progressing normally, or you could buy them. Out of principle, I do not condone DLC, but the Battlefield DLCs had a lot of content, and the quality was to a high standard.
#9 Posted 03 November 2017 - 07:33 AM
follow the dollar.
#10 Posted 03 November 2017 - 09:40 AM
And the thing is they're NOT just cosmetic. They are game-changing implementations that split the community down the middle. And they shove it in your face at every opportunity. It's a slippery slope and it's only going to get steeper and greasier (both senses of the word).
This post has been edited by MusicallyInspired: 03 November 2017 - 09:43 AM
#11 Posted 03 November 2017 - 09:51 AM
Eventually people will get tired of the paywall, or dumping money into game features with little reward. Greed will devolve it into the hustle and hassle that it truly is.
#12 Posted 08 November 2017 - 03:54 PM
Quote
As reported by Gamasutra, Zelnick outlines Take-Two's desire to enforce microtransactions—"recurrent consumer spending opportunities," as he refers to them—in every game going forward.
"The business, once upon a time, was a big chunky opportunity to engage for tens of hours, or perhaps a hundred hours. That has turned into ongoing engagement," says Zelnick. "Day after day, week after week. You fall in love with these titles, and they become part of your daily life.
"We've said that we aim to have recurrent consumer spending opportunities for every title that we put out at this company. It may not always be an online model, it probably won't always be a virtual currency model, but there will be some ability to engage in an ongoing basis with our titles after release across the board."
Zelnick continues, pointing to a "sea of change" in the business of Take-Two that saw recurrent consumer spending make up 42 percent of its "net bookings" in the last financial quarter.
Zelnick adds: "One of the things we've learned is if we create a robust opportunity, and a robust world, in which people can play delightfully in a bigger and bigger way, that they will keep coming back. They will engage. And there is an opportunity to monetize that engagement. There's a lot of room for growth. This is just the beginning."
This post has been edited by Sledgehammer: 08 November 2017 - 03:57 PM
#13 Posted 08 November 2017 - 04:17 PM
Newest article I could find is from 2015: http://www.pcgamer.c...-citizen-ships/
There is some sort of mental disorder behind this kind of behavior, or a fetish(whatever they get out of that!), because we see the same kind of financially masochistic behavior in other avenues as well: http://metro.co.uk/2...ay-pig-6896283/
The funny thing about Star Citizen is that next to the insanely priced ships, it says "in stock". I'm sure they'll blame it on "immersion" instead of trying to explain how digital goods could go out of stock.
Although Star Citizen outwardly appears the most extreme in this regard, also keep in mind how Blizzard has milked WoW for 10 years. You'd think they would have gone free to play by now... Not only that, but they also released expansion packs on top of the subscription.
#14 Posted 08 November 2017 - 05:28 PM
Has WOW not gone F2P? I thought they had semi-recently. But even if they did, it took them long enough.
#15 Posted 08 November 2017 - 07:14 PM
MusicallyInspired, on 08 November 2017 - 05:28 PM, said:
Has WOW not gone F2P? I thought they had semi-recently. But even if they did, it took them long enough.
I'm not sure, but I think they've been free to play until your character reaches a certain level or something like that for several years now.
#16 Posted 10 November 2017 - 06:16 AM
MusicallyInspired, on 08 November 2017 - 05:28 PM, said:
cosmonautcowboy, on 08 November 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:
As an active player of World of Warcraft, no... it's not F2P, just "free play for starter" only(called Starter Edition, every account of WoW/Battle.net will default on this state if not subscribe yet or lapsed subscription), after the character is on level 20 and will not be able to get any XP, you still needed to buy the game, expansions and pay subscription fee to continue playing. Of course Blizzard did gave some methods for leveling fast or instant to the level cap of pre-current expansion for get into the current expansion early if you're newbie or were stopped play WoW long time ago, but that means pay more $$.
Unless you counts those microtransactions for decorations, pets, mounts and leveling potions in WoW as F2P but I don't count, because they just make your character(s) look cool/stupid(?) or get you fast to the level cap but still you have to get your loots by playing game contents.
This post has been edited by Player Lin: 10 November 2017 - 06:26 AM
#17 Posted 13 November 2017 - 08:12 PM
The most hated post on reddit. Ever.
at the time I'm writing this it has -575,000 points.
the next closest is -24,333
https://www.reddit.c...locked/dppum98/
EA Community Manager Mat Everett's response? People are "arm-chair" developers.
saved for posterity:
funny. this game will still sell millions of copies and make mass $$$ - even with the condescending money grubbing attitude.
This post has been edited by Forge: 13 November 2017 - 08:17 PM
#18 Posted 14 November 2017 - 12:48 AM
What I love is that the excuse for using loot boxes and microtransactions in general is always "game development is expensive and hey, we've kept game prices at 60 bucks for the longest time now, aren't we publishers just awesome?" The problem with this excuse: it's simply not true. Overwatch made a ton of money anyway and from the looks of it (it's a multiplayer shooter) the development really did not cost that much when it comes to AAA titles and Blizz could have sold the game for 60 bucks easily anyway... but nope, instead they released it at 40 or 45 bucks and opted to use the psychological cancer of gambling to make a ridiculous amount of money.
Shadow of War? The base game is 60 bucks alright but of course there's a season pass, there is content for the Silver and Gold editions of the game too etc. so the actual price of the full experience is somewhere around 120 bucks... nope, doesn't sound like 60 to me because these days the 60 dollar base title is nothing more than a skeleton game that gets expanded later down the line through DLC even when it comes to single player focused games.
Injustice 2? The base price will be 50 bucks for the PC port WB managed to be 6 months late with compared to the console release. Will that be enough if you want to go online which is a must if you're someone like me who takes fighting games seriously? Nope, you gotta buy the Ultimate Edition for 80 bucks because if you don't then you won't have access to 9 DLC characters and have fun figuring out how to beat them online if you can't play and study them yourself. And btw. the Ultimate Edition is not really that ultimate since you miss out on one character this way too: Darkseid is either a pre-order exclusive or separate DLC for 6 bucks. So if you want to play the full game you have to drop 86 bucks overall and then you have to cope with the loot boxes and the gear system... what a piece of garbage that must be. The best thing: Injustice 2 is a NetherRealm game so yep, loot boxes will be a thing in Mortal Kombat 11 because fuck everyone and their mothers.
Damn, the gaming industry is garbage these days.
#19 Posted 14 November 2017 - 03:29 AM
http://www.pushsquar...r_v_says_capcom
https://www.vg247.co...ess-satisfying/
https://twitter.com/...747952430215169
The whole loot boxes and micro transaction crap is why I'm not really interested in Western gaming anymore(with some exceptions) and mostly focusing on Japanese games, specifically the Yakuza series(which I very highly recommend btw).
Though the fact that Sony's new CEO is looking into Micro transactions shows that even then it won't be entirely safe.
#20 Posted 14 November 2017 - 03:44 AM
xMobilemux, on 14 November 2017 - 03:29 AM, said:
Sony depends on quality exclusives, I don't think they'd risk putting their whole business at risk in the hope of getting some extra money.
#21 Posted 14 November 2017 - 07:38 AM
And besides all this I think I heard there's a max credit reward cap per day. And people are cheering. They're just throwing around big numbers to placate people into not cancelling their preorders (when they're not hiding the refund button, in certain regions!) and coaxing them into the slot machine.
#22 Posted 14 November 2017 - 08:11 AM
xMobilemux, on 14 November 2017 - 03:29 AM, said:
They're "anti" because not even microtransactions saved SFV from failure, that's why they made shitton of overpriced costumes with a few exclusive overpriced arenas and overpriced colors for SFV since their "fight money" bullshit didn't really work in a 60$ game which feels like a F2P game (it started in 2016 around summer if not even earlier, when sales for the game dropped significantly and people didn't buy their shitty fight money). They even came back to disc locked DLC and made their DLC policy even more aggressive with MvC:I. This is obviously typical damage control from their side so they could save their face, I think the same bullshit happened when they failed to make any kind of profit from pachinko.
Capcom is a Western wannabe company and the West is still their main demographics. That's even why they declared arcade market dead when were asked if SFV will see arcade release when the truth is, Japan isn't interested in their games anymore outside of maybe MH which was the only non-Westernized (and thus not ruined) franchise, although I expect MH World change that.
MusicallyInspired, on 14 November 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:
Typical PR scheme. This is exactly why they didn't remove that shitty comment with ton of downvotes in the first place. And in the end, they still made it 15k. I have no pity for the fools who will waste their money on this game.
This post has been edited by Sledgehammer: 14 November 2017 - 08:13 AM
#23 Posted 14 November 2017 - 11:10 AM
This post has been edited by Sledgehammer: 14 November 2017 - 11:12 AM
#24 Posted 14 November 2017 - 01:11 PM
In regards to proper Battlefields, we didn't have one since 4, although I had a bit of fun with Hardline. It was a bold move, I give them that, but the context and confines of Battlefield really didn't work well with an obviously GTA-inspired theme, down to the cartoonish, plasticky graphical aesthetics.
But it was simpler and more arcade-like. More barebones and not some overwhelming thing where you had so many situations to adapt to as can become the situation in the "real" Battlefield games("we wuz kaiser" is not counted here, mind you).
I really enjoyed Hotwire, and the TDM was nice too. CQ didn't work too well, but the limited theme at least made sure the vehicles didn't ridiculously overpower the infantry. I'd still play it if it wasn't for the fact that the playerbase now is pretty much nonexistent and more people play BF3 than that one.
O.T aside...
If DICE gets one thing right, it's DLC. The BF4 DLC maps are absolutely beautiful.
#25 Posted 14 November 2017 - 03:04 PM
This post has been edited by MusicallyInspired: 14 November 2017 - 03:06 PM
#28 Posted 14 November 2017 - 11:44 PM
Zaxx, on 14 November 2017 - 12:48 AM, said:
This is my thinking since more than ten years now.