158 réponses à ce sujet

[MissOuJ]

Furluge wrote...

Guys I know it sounds bad but he's picking something like that to explain a point. If you listen to him it's obvious that what he's talking about is moving away from the current model of getting a game for X amount of dollars and instead moving more toward a F2P model.

I can't fault him for looking around at new price schemes. Everyone's doing that now with free to play games, episodic games, etc. The current method of paying $60 up front for a game is an incredibly huge gamble for a developer.

Thanks for explaining this a bit! I was about to pick my jaw from the floor and wonder aloud how he thought this kind of business practice wouldn't lose them a **** of a lot of customers, but as a F2P model it kind of makes sense.

[Fulgrim88]

Storenumber9 wrote...

Honestly, the guy is talking about the viability in the Free to play model. His analogy was terrible, but I see his point.

People are more likely to invest money in a product they've tried. Especially when they're given free reign over the product up to a point.

I have yet to see a F2P game that doesn't end up being far more expensive than a regular fee, or better yet, a single payment up front.

Let's face it, F2P simply utilizes the psychological weakness, that we are far more inclined to pay a lot of small amounts over a long term, than a single big investment at once.
We believe that it's ultimately cheaper, and gives us greater control over what we pay for, but it's really just a false heuristic.

[lucidfox]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

I would completely stop gaming if gaming companies did this.

^

[Nurane]

VAIOMANIAC wrote...

Apperantly he wants us to pay one dollar everytime we need to reload in game I am not kidding folks this is how  he sees the gaming future.

www.youtube.com/watch

A friend of mine once said that "the music industry would be happier if you paid them a dollar each time you play their songs", and this appears very similar. I'm not at all suprised that this is the way the gaming industry is going, and have very little doubt that it will continue to go in this direction unless there is a public and generalized uproar.

I also expect that 'indie' games will contine to make inroads for this very reason.

[Murkman4683]

And this is why the gaming industry is going belly up, microtransactions are for the weak minded, resist the urge.

Modifié par Murkman4683, 19 mars 2012 - 12:54 .

[Militarized]

Relwyn wrote...

And they say that Capitalism rocks. :|

Brainwashed people say that. Which, admittedly, is quite a few. 

[knightnblu]

He can try it, but it will never fly. If he ever implements that policy I am done with EA games and I don't care who makes them and I won't be returning when he repeals it either because EA is going down the tubes. Bank of America tried that crap and looked what happened to them.

[Kajan451]

Reached wrote...

and people like this is why we will have to pay for real endings to games from now on : /

Your wrong, we don't. You can choose to pay, but ultimately its your decision.

Same story about games selling you skins for your characters for 2 dollars, or some fancy visor.. or some weapons.

There will be always people buying it. And believe it or not... even though a game would ultimately fail if it would charge you per Weapon Reload as he suggested...

there will be enough fanboys playing the game and doing these investments. They will spend a dollar or two for the reloads, while the mainstream will most likely move on and thus the Multiplayer dying, but companies like EA don't think about brand loyality.

They don't want you to play Videogames from 2 years ago. They want you to do the same thing the guys with CoD do... to release a new game every year, thats basically the same engine and the same game, but ideally you want everyone to buy the new one. And if you can sell every jackass a DLC in the first 2 month... or have them pay 80 Bioware Points for a random generated Item pack, even better.

It doesn't matter if the Multiplayer will be dead after a couple weeks. They have made their profits already.

[GoblinSapper]

"Pay to reload"

*clears throat. points at "supply packs" in the mulitplayer*

Usable item. Refills ammo.

Can be bought with money.

[Moondoggie]

Lol i like how people can hear and excerpt of something and take it completely the wrong way out of context. It's pretty funny.

[Titan_HQ]

GorrilaKing wrote...

That's exactly the attitude that made the world what it is today....a shame, really.
Isn't EA making enough money already? Nooo...they've got to take it all...

EA doesn't want lots of money, it wants all the money. XD

[Zulufoxtrot]

GorrilaKing wrote...

That's exactly the attitude that made the world what it is today....a shame, really.
Isn't EA making enough money already? Nooo...they've got to take it all...

I'm okay with this. If your not going to try to make every dollar possible why bother? It's when they go about in such a way that's stupid, outdated, and will lose them more than they can ever hope to gain that gets me. 

[LolaLei]

How about he pays us $1 to kick him in the quads everytime he comes up with a stupid ****ing idea like that one!

[SCJ90]

What is this world coming to? Serisoly ban me if you want but what *********************** thinks like that? You can really think that it's a "good" ide? Do the gaming companies really suffer so much that they need to charge 1 dollar every time you ******* reloade?????? First they want to scrap the "used game" market and now this?! **** you!

[Fulgrim88]

LolaLei wrote...

How about he pays us $1 to kick him in the quads everytime he comes up with a stupid ****ing idea like that one!

For that, I'd pay.

Every damn time

[MikeRoz]

Militarized wrote...

Relwyn wrote...

And they say that Capitalism rocks. :|

Brainwashed people say that. Which, admittedly, is quite a few. 

Of course Capitalism rocks. Because it works. If you don't want games that do this, don't buy them. They will either quickly disappear or find a more palatable way to make money.

[JasonDaPsycho]

Te future is the past. For every step forward, we move two steps back.

It's hard for me to go for anything not made by Rockstar or 2k.

[77boy84]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

I would completely stop gaming if gaming companies did this.

They're already doing this with ME3 multiplayer.

It's not as bad as charging to reload your gun, but it's pretty close.

[Quiron-br]

I need to give the guy a point after reading this forum and seeing how many guys are offering to pay for everything coming from EA/Bioware, even a patch. He is just thinking about the next step using what he can see around here.

[Midarc2nd]

My god...
This guy, and all the others out there. (read this, if you have time :- http://insertcredit....-a-ghost-story/)
It's almost like a coalition of executives are actually trying to cause another game crash.

I think I need to start wearing a tin foil gaming hat.
EA branded, of course.
Extra conspiracy crumple zones and patented 'alertinium' layer.
Only 59.95

Modifié par Midarc2nd, 19 mars 2012 - 01:35 .

[Xenite]

EA is where creative companies go to die.... sad but true.

A publicly owned game company is the worst thing for gamers. They have only one person to answer to and that is the stockholders, who only want to know one thing, what are you doing to increase revenue?

[Jnight]

I blame activision with MW3 Elite thing. Over a million idoits are subscribed to it so now companies think its ok.

[shinobi602]

HOLY....****..........

[Esoretal]

****, please.

[Abram730]

EA is talking about adding things "free to play" games add to make money into $60-$80 games.

I'd call it
"Pay to pay gaming"

Want to reload? that will cost $1.. need a nad? $1.. missle? $1 after you are "invested" in the game.. That's the man in charge on EA and thus Bioware.

----> Haven't seen the $1 resupplies in ME3 multi?