434 réponses à ce sujet

[Velocithon]

 I thought this was a great read. It just shows how the industry is declining for the fans. Sure, the studios might see this as a very successful move, but as a fan of games this brings nothing but sadness. It's a shame that a great studio like Bioware fell into this trap.

I urge all of you not give into these tactics. Day One DLC is bad. Micro-transactions are bad. They are trademarks of greedy companies, and Bioware really opened my eyes with this given the poor quality of ME3. Personally, in the future, I will refuse to support studios which do this.

I'm interested in what other people here think about this.

www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-13-bioware-on-how-to-monetise-players-day-one-dlc-online-passes-micro-transactions

[Pitznik]

What is so wrong about it?

[TsaiMeLemoni]

I expect the number of top tier games that implement these kind of features will only go up in the future, so good luck on your dearth of games.

If you don't support it, don't buy it. Doesn't mean the core product suffers because of it. And if it happens to one day...return it.

As a final note, please let me know when you find any company anywhere who isn't trying to make money.

[loungeshep]

mneh, it's a crazy business.

[Mazebook]

games are too cheap anyway...it was bound to happen...The pricing of AAA games has not changed in 20 years.

I have it rather this way,
where i can choose if this stuff is worth to me, than being forced to buy everything at a higher price point.

Modifié par maaaze, 13 août 2012 - 10:41 .

[clarkusdarkus]

ME3 was crap, had day 1 dlc, twitter gimmicks, app gimmicks, too many plotholes, was based on lies, ending had to have the EC, 1 hub, weapon dlc, micro-transactions....blah blah blah......im glad if they dont make ME4 as it wont ever be as good as ME1/2.....and its living indenial to think otherwise.....DA2/TOR..and now ME3.....3 strikes and your out..........i stopped giving squaresoft my money with sub-par FF games, i'll do the same to bioware and any other company that does the same.

[hoodaticus]

Quality and Revenue are orthogonal.

Quite frankly, games have been too cheap for a long time. We need games that cost $100 a pop and are super-high-quality, but how can we get that when no one will pay that much for a game?

Answer: micro-transactions and day 1 dlc. As long as they funnel that money into producing a quality core product, then this can only be a good thing.

[Velocithon]

hoodaticus wrote...

As long as they funnel that money into producing a quality core product, then this can only be a good thing.

Problem is, they never release a quality product.

Think about it; when has EA or Activision or any studio released a game with all this nickel and diming that has actually been good? And when I say "good", I'm talking about a game that people play for more than a year. If I'm going to shell out all that money, the game better last me a long time.

$100 a game is incredibly steep. However, look at Halo 3. That game topped the Live charts for nearly three straight years. I would gladly pay money for games like that. However, I have yet to see a product that was that successful which also had Day One DLC, microtransactions, etc.

[Tealjaker94]

Oh no! A business wants to make money? Damn them! Damn them to hell!

[Velocithon]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Oh no! A business wants to make money? Damn them! Damn them to hell!

If you knew the issue, you'd understand it has nothing to do with them making money, rather it's the manner they decide to make it. I suggest you educate yourself fully before making such replies.

[Tealjaker94]

Velocithon wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Oh no! A business wants to make money? Damn them! Damn them to hell!

If you knew the issue, you'd understand it has nothing to do with them making money, rather it's the manner they decide to make it. I suggest you educate yourself fully before making such replies.

They can make money however they want to and the consumer base will respond either negatively or positively. That's how capitalism works. I personally don't see this as a problem.

[Velocithon]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Oh no! A business wants to make money? Damn them! Damn them to hell!

If you knew the issue, you'd understand it has nothing to do with them making money, rather it's the manner they decide to make it. I suggest you educate yourself fully before making such replies.

They can make money however they want to and the consumer base will respond either negatively or positively. That's how capitalism works. I personally don't see this as a problem.

If a consumer base responds negatively, then it becomes a problem for them. This is me responding negatively (somewhat). This is me saying there is a problem and hoping other people realize this and ask for change.

[Tealjaker94]

Velocithon wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Oh no! A business wants to make money? Damn them! Damn them to hell!

If you knew the issue, you'd understand it has nothing to do with them making money, rather it's the manner they decide to make it. I suggest you educate yourself fully before making such replies.

They can make money however they want to and the consumer base will respond either negatively or positively. That's how capitalism works. I personally don't see this as a problem.

If a consumer base responds negatively, then it becomes a problem for them. This is me responding negatively (somewhat). This is me saying there is a problem and hoping other people realize this and ask for change.

And this is me disagreeing with you. 

[Velocithon]

That's fine. You have every right to believe so and to continue spending lots of money for mediocre products.

[o Ventus]

Making money isn't a problem. Literally everybody does it.

It's the underhanded, shifty means by which the money is acquired that's the problem.

[Pitznik]

Velocithon wrote...

If a consumer base responds negatively, then it becomes a problem for them. This is me responding negatively (somewhat). This is me saying there is a problem and hoping other people realize this and ask for change.

Consumer base will always want better things, opinions are worthless. If you really want to make a difference, just don't buy the next game released that way. I personally can't see any problem with microtransactions, day one DLC are more controversial, but Javik isn't essential to the game, his involvement is completely optional and doesn't affect anything important. If the game would be unusually short, I could feel differently, but it really sin't, compared to previous MEs.

[Velocithon]

o Ventus wrote...

Making money isn't a problem. Literally everybody does it.

It's the underhanded, shifty means by which the money is acquired that's the problem.

Point exactly.

People seem to jump at conclusions, thinking those against these practices are against these companies making money. That's a completely false and uneducated assumption.

Take for instance, the ME3 MP micro transactions. You don't have to buy any at all. But it takes FOREVER to unlock things in MP. Forever. If you really really want to unlock everything and enjoy the MP to it's fullest in a timely manner, you have no choice but to buy packs with cash. So, you don't HAVE to buy anything...but to enjoy the full game, you really do have to. And THAT...is wrong.

[shepdog77]

Pertaining to the MP packs, as long as I can get the same content in-game as the people spending RL money do, then I don't have a problem with it. Now if they were to start putting "better" items in the RL money packs, then we would have a problem.

[legion999]

maaaze wrote...

games are too cheap anyway...it was bound to happen...The pricing of AAA games has not changed in 20 years.

I have it rather this way,
where i can choose if this stuff is worth to me, than being forced to buy everything at a higher price point.

No.

[Eain]

"Gamers are actually happier, as they are able to spend money when they want. People may not want to pay upfront. They may be happier to pay when they are 'in the moment'."

The article may attribute that quote to Fernando Melo, but this is word for word John Riccitiello's line of thinking. The whole point is to provoke players into that moment of gullibility where they open their wallets. The same reason Riccitiello wants Battlefield to have $1 ammo packs.

Modifié par Eain, 13 août 2012 - 11:11 .

[TsaiMeLemoni]

Velocithon wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Making money isn't a problem. Literally everybody does it.

It's the underhanded, shifty means by which the money is acquired that's the problem.

Point exactly.

People seem to jump at conclusions, thinking those against these practices are against these companies making money. That's a completely false and uneducated assumption.

Take for instance, the ME3 MP micro transactions. You don't have to buy any at all. But it takes FOREVER to unlock things in MP. Forever. If you really really want to unlock everything and enjoy the MP to it's fullest in a timely manner, you have no choice but to buy packs with cash. So, you don't HAVE to buy anything...but to enjoy the full game, you really do have to. And THAT...is wrong.

Um...have you actually played ME3 MP? Because it doesn't. Not by a long shot. Add in the packs they give every few weekends for simply participating in an event (usually the squad goal is insanely easy to achieve, like...making it through one match), and you don't have to try very hard to get stuff. I bought one pack just because I wanted to, but everything else I've gotten I've achieved through actual play and awards from events.

[clarkusdarkus]

Look, day 1 dlc doesnt belong in gaming, micro-tansactions dont, and online passes dont either, everyday on ebay, thousands...if not millions of items get sold used on a daily basis...used toasters/cars/sunglasses..etc..etc..., of which none of the money go's to the original creator......and videogames should be no different, they get there legit payment £40/$60 at the beggining when its sold...........the things that guy talks about will be the thing that drives me away from this kind of gaming and i'll go retro. Propostruous to think micro-transactions belong in SP gaming......

[Memnon]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Oh no! A business wants to make money? Damn them! Damn them to hell!

If you knew the issue, you'd understand it has nothing to do with them making money, rather it's the manner they decide to make it. I suggest you educate yourself fully before making such replies.

They can make money however they want to and the consumer base will respond either negatively or positively. That's how capitalism works. I personally don't see this as a problem.

I agree - I don't mind companies changing up their business model, and I don't mind paying for a quality product. Key word on 'quality' though ... what this does mean is that I'll be hesitant to preorder anything, and I'll avoid CEs for a while (I didn't feel the ME3 ending was quality). 

[Velocithon]

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...
Um...have you actually played ME3 MP? Because it doesn't. Not by a long shot. Add in the packs they give every few weekends for simply participating in an event (usually the squad goal is insanely easy to achieve, like...making it through one match), and you don't have to try very hard to get stuff. I bought one pack just because I wanted to, but everything else I've gotten I've achieved through actual play and awards from events.

I'd question that you are actually the one who hasn't played. Before I stopped, I was N7 700+. I'm still missing several Rebellion characters and have a handful or UR's. Missing tons of Gear as well.

Point is, I've put a TON of time into the MP, striving mostly to earn select guns that are popular (BW, Typhoon, Fury, Krysae (before death nerf), etc...). Never got them. The game has been out over 5 months and I've yet to unlock content that was available at release. That is taking forever to unlock and not being able to enjoy the game to its fullest in a timely manner.