212 réponses à ce sujet

[M A F I A]

As long as they let me grab pack with credits instead of dollars, I don't really care if they make profit out of it. EA ain't a no-profit organization, and that is quite okay AS LONG AS they make proper games.

Modifié par M A F I A, 01 avril 2012 - 09:48 .

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

I spend $30 on a hamburger twice a month. Once a paycheck. This month, I skipped a burger and bough an ass load of Spectre Packs. Fun times!

[Malanek]

For people who have a relatively limited amount of time to spend on the game but want to unlock particular things, spending real money on it is the only way to do it. It isn't a lot of money so all power to them, they are helping to fund future development.

[robertm2]

Arkley wrote...

I've seen this more times than I care to count on this forums and others. While I, like most of you, am not inclined to spend real money on video game guns, the mockery - and by extension, discouragement - of those who do needs to stop for the following simple reasons:

The more money that is spent on equipment packs, the more viable ME3's multiplayer seems as a money-making device, and thus, the more likely it is to be supported with content-rick expansions. It is the people who spend money on ME3's MP that are encouraging - and to a lesser extent, funding - the development of future content.

More importantly, those people increase the likelyhood that future content will be free. If ME3's multiplayer can create sustainable income without the necessity of charging for additional content, Bioware/EA is less likely to risk segregating the playerbase by introducing content only accessible to paying users. After all, those paying users need people to play with, and the number of people playing will begin dwindle if some cannot access new content.

Now, I'm by no means imploring you to spend any money on ME3's multiplayer if you're not so inclined. I have personally only used MSP leftover from XBLA purchases to buy a couple of Spectre packs here and there. I'm just asking you not to deride the people who do; it is they who are potentially brightening the future of ME3's multiplayer for the rest of us.

free content? from ea? come on now i get what your saying but ea wouldnt give out free content EVER! bioware has to "reach out" to them just to make patches to the game. i would love to see some multi dlc but it will never be free if ea has anything to say about it.

[Devowra]

real money and rng is really no different to playing poker machines

i could buy 10000 spectre packs and not get the item i want and feel compelled to keep buying spectre packs.

i didnt notice anywhere stating what the chances of getting a specific item is?

i've spent money on virtual items before, but i'd never spend money when there are rng elements involved.

[Twisted and Mean]

I know people who have spend literally dozens of thousands of dollars on browser game content. I doubt anyone got even remotely close to that number with buying Specter packs.

[Eyeless17]

The unlock system is a greedy, gambling induced scam in my opinion. Bioware gets to determine all of the rules, and the rule is that you're unlikely to get anything good unless you open several "booster packs." It is designed to convince the player to spend money rather than work towards the goal. Luckily you can buy packs with credits, but it takes a really long time to get respectable levels of items. CoD4 didn't have some ridiculous pokemon card system to unlock items, as well as tons of other games like counter-strike or battlefield. The bottom line is that money is more important than a moral unlock system. My idea of morality here is one that is certainly more rewarding than a virtual slot machine.

[Barneyk]

Arkley wrote...

The more money that is spent on equipment packs, the more viable ME3's multiplayer seems as a money-making device, and thus, the more likely it is to be supported with content-rich expansions. It is the people who spend money on ME3's MP that are encouraging - and to a lesser extent, funding - the development of future content.

That is why I gladly bought some bioware points to spend on spectre packs!
And I will do so again as soon as there is something for me to buy.
I just bought 15 spectre packs from credits I have gathered over the last week and I didn't really get anything all that interesting. So, for now I won't spend more money on it than I already have.
But if more stuff comes out, I will open my wallet and support the continued development of ME3, both single player and multiplayer...

[Verhalthur]

See, the thing people don't get is that other people advancing a bit faster is a good thing in a coop game.

This is a coop game, by the way.

If your teammates have better guns and equipment because they spent money on packs, that means they can better help you and they will get more exp for everyone. 

Exp is shared, remember.

I just don't understand why people would force others to not use a feature just because they themselves don't feel like using a feature, especially when it's a positive for everyone.

[fixit6]

Game design is now more or less dictated like this: make it tedious, grindy, yet highly addictive, and then offer PAID shortcuts. BF3 change this week is a perfect example. Grind for months on end, or buy it all with a click of a button? Hmmm, time donate that cash to a charity instead...brb.

p.s.You think all these profits are going to future content? Ha, maybe 1%; rest is going to buy 'suits' shiny new cars and bling.

Modifié par fixit6, 01 avril 2012 - 10:14 .

[Malanek]

Verhalthur wrote...
I just don't understand why people would force others to not use a feature just because they themselves don't feel like using a feature, especially when it's a positive for everyone.

Especially when people using the said feature, help fund future content for everyone. I don't understand it either.

[bkthree]

What I want to know is about how much of the money I spend to buy them via micro$oft monies is actually given to Bioware, specifically the ME3 team, and how much of it will actually go to them putting out more content.

Because if M$ gets all of the money from it, #$@*( that #$@%. But if Bioware gets it, I'll gladly start buying some packs occasionally to help support a great series.

[tvih]

Each to their own for how to spend their money, but I just don't see the point of buying packs with money. Why do it? To get gear? What for? You can already play with what you have. Not good enough stuff for higher difficulties? Heck, then that just means there's enough challenge at the lower challenge levels already. Therefore... what's the point?

But, as long as people don't steal my money to buy for their packs, they can of course feel free to knock themselves out.

[vivanto]

Arkley wrote...
On the contrary; my assumptions is based on the fact that EA is a corporate entity focused entirely on producing profits.

That they are. Paying for packs and DLC is not mutually exclusive, in fact, it produces the most income.

Arkley wrote...
Go look at every single free-to-play game ever.

I'm familiar with the microtransaction model, tyvm. Those are MMOs, the term free-to-play does not translate to a single-buy offline game which has MP support. Nevertheless, this does not change the fact that you're still talking about EA, and making assumptions that were never true for them.

GiroX- wrote...
Good point. People forget that their are laws in place so those "greedy money-making" corporations from just taking your money. The rules of the game are to convince the consumer to purchase things, which is best done by being nice to them (free dlc, community events, support  etc.)

What laws exactly, laws that forbid you from making the most profit? They already broke bank with just the release of ME3, anything else is adittional milking. A paid DLC does not detract from the existing income, people would still keep buying since without the DLC (be it free or paid) the income from buying packs would drop anyway. Thus a DLC at the very worst implicitly keeps origin points at level while if its a paid DLC explicitly generates more money.

Besides, ask anyone having one of the numerous issues with the MP here how good their customer support is, or how nice they are. EA is notorious for not caring about this stuff.

[DDK]

Anyone who spends money on digital toys is just silly. Now, let's talk about something important, like what face-codes you used for your non-importable Shepard.

[Felhand]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

I spend $30 on a hamburger twice a month. Once a paycheck. This month, I skipped a burger and bough an ass load of Spectre Packs. Fun times!

Where the hell are you buying a burger for thirty bucks at, hells kitchen??

[CmdrStJean]

In my case, I'll admit I did spend some Microsoft points on a number of Veteran/Recruit packs when ME3 first went live. I did this because, after the demo, everything had been reset to zero and I wanted to give myself a little bit of an initial boost so I wouldn't be starting -literally- from scratch (well outside of the Starter Pack). I had the money to spare and it helped me out in the beginning. I haven't spent any money on packs thereafter, but for the up front convenience, I found it worthwhile.

[wolfstanus]

robertm2 wrote...

Arkley wrote...

I've seen this more times than I care to count on this forums and others. While I, like most of you, am not inclined to spend real money on video game guns, the mockery - and by extension, discouragement - of those who do needs to stop for the following simple reasons:

The more money that is spent on equipment packs, the more viable ME3's multiplayer seems as a money-making device, and thus, the more likely it is to be supported with content-rick expansions. It is the people who spend money on ME3's MP that are encouraging - and to a lesser extent, funding - the development of future content.

More importantly, those people increase the likelyhood that future content will be free. If ME3's multiplayer can create sustainable income without the necessity of charging for additional content, Bioware/EA is less likely to risk segregating the playerbase by introducing content only accessible to paying users. After all, those paying users need people to play with, and the number of people playing will begin dwindle if some cannot access new content.

Now, I'm by no means imploring you to spend any money on ME3's multiplayer if you're not so inclined. I have personally only used MSP leftover from XBLA purchases to buy a couple of Spectre packs here and there. I'm just asking you not to deride the people who do; it is they who are potentially brightening the future of ME3's multiplayer for the rest of us.

free content? from ea? come on now i get what your saying but ea wouldnt give out free content EVER! bioware has to "reach out" to them just to make patches to the game. i would love to see some multi dlc but it will never be free if ea has anything to say about it.

ea is a publisher. Bioware makes the patches they don't ask.
Bioware makes the dlc. Me2 had a lot of fee dlc. Me1 has 2dlc 1 I think is free.

[SoulRebel_1979]

What are the chances that the guys mocking people for spending real cash to buy packs are the same guys who sit in front of their gaming system 10 hours a day?

[Arkley]

vivanto wrote...

Arkley wrote...
On the contrary; my assumptions is based on the fact that EA is a corporate entity focused entirely on producing profits.

That they are. Paying for packs and DLC is not mutually exclusive, in fact, it produces the most income.

Arkley wrote...
Go look at every single free-to-play game ever.

I'm familiar with the microtransaction model, tyvm. Those are MMOs, the term free-to-play does not translate to a single-buy offline game which has MP support. Nevertheless, this does not change the fact that you're still talking about EA, and making assumptions that were never true for them.

You may pay up-front for a game with both single-player and multi-player experiences, but the analogy is accurate. Mass Effect 3's multiplayer is a game that requires ongoing support, can be expanded upon with additional content, and features a microtransaction system. The fact that you paid an up-front fee for it is immaterial to the discussion of further expansion and the costs and funding associated.

Secondly, you may claim that asking players to pay for both microtransactions and DLC is the most profitable course of action, but you have neither presented data nor cited precedent to back up that claim. I have stated the reasons why free content supported by microtransactions is potentially the most profitable long-term action - namely that it extends the life of the game without segregating the playerbase, thereby keeping the game's audience playing and paying for longer - and cited the extremely similar, if not identical use of this system in existing highly successful microtransaction-based games.

Your repeated assertions that EA is profit-focused entity is not a valid argument against my assertions, because my assertion is that free content supported by microtransactions is or may be the most profitable course of long-term action, based on the success of the aforementioned similar/identical business models.

[wolfstanus]

Felhand wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

I spend $30 on a hamburger twice a month. Once a paycheck. This month, I skipped a burger and bough an ass load of Spectre Packs. Fun times!

Where the hell are you buying a burger for thirty bucks at, hells kitchen??

Bison burgers are very expensive. 10-30 per burger not counting fries and a drink. 

[Painis Cupcake]

I love the randomness, it makes me want to unlock more boxes to get the things I want and at the same time gimme some more medigels and rockets.

[wolfstanus]

I like it because everybody has and uses a wide array of weapons. Not like cod etc were there's only 6 guns people use for the life of the game.

[SinerAthin]

Why on earth would you buy an Equipment pack?

The point of the credit you earn is to buy new gear.

You only need equipment in Gold matches, but those are either farmed(removing the need for equipment) or far in between (making your currently existing equipment more than plentiful assuming you don't waste it).

I've never, ever found myself short on equipment when I actually need it o.O

[Arkley]

SinerAthin wrote...

Why on earth would you buy an Equipment pack?

The point of the credit you earn is to buy new gear.

You only need equipment in Gold matches, but those are either farmed(removing the need for equipment) or far in between (making your currently existing equipment more than plentiful assuming you don't waste it).

I've never, ever found myself short on equipment when I actually need it o.O

I mistitled the thread, although you're the first to misunderstand it. The title is meant to refer to all packs, which I attempted to summarize with the word "equipment", since that word is generally used as a catch-all term for weapons, armour, mods and accessories in most RPGs.