611 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

alhamel94 wrote...

just a short bit here fast jimmy, what you are referencing is the economic concept of price discrimination, meaning everyone pays a different price based on opportunity costs. this happens all the time in the world you can demonize but that doesnt mean it wont exist. other things that involve the same concept are "happy hour", lunch specials, and flea markets

Except in all of those examples, you are getting actual, physical products. As opposed to the digital rights to an electronic piece of media.

Do you know why there are flea markets? Or Happy Hours? Because overhead expenses. It costs money to store goods, so people would rather offload them for cheap rather than keep on paying for storage space for something that won't sell at its original price. It costs money to have waiters or cooks hang around a restaurant, so they want to entice people to come in and cram the place full during peak hours, where slight cuts to revenue are far outpaced by increases to volume. Video game developers don't have any costs associated with storing extra content or having hours where they need higher staff to sell microtransactions or DLC. They will sell at midnight just as easily as they sell at 9 AM.

To get the discussion back on track, I'm not against Bioware, or any developer, getting paid for their work. Nor do I think any gamer is entitled to all content made by a developer, regardless of where in the development cycle it was attempted.

But, that being said... a four hour DLC for $15 when the base game is only $60 is extremely lopsided in the pricing. $10 Gear DLC that is sometimes not even more powerful than gear you can find by the halfway point in the game is not a solid financial proposition. And a microtransaction that let's you play a slot machine for gear you may already own (instead of AT LEAST giving you the item or the type of item you were hoping for) is a pretty high risk proposition.

The reason why all of these models are used is that people will pay money for them. Is it because they love Bioware products so much that they just can't wait to throw money at them as a developer? Maybe. But could it also be the fact that Bioware is preying on certain idiosyncracies of gamers to sell that lopsidedly priced content.

Which is their preogative. 

But when people accuse other franchises of making them feel confortable because of sexually based optional content, but then can't see the moral problem with charging players for optional content that is presented in roughly the same manner, it makes me think that people are only seeing what they want to see.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 07 février 2013 - 07:50 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Just like a drug dealer is not to blame for a drug addict's lack of self control? Well, good thing we don't chase after and try to jail them.

The fact that you're comparing microtransactions in a video game to drugs is very telling. If you want to join the grown up's at the big table, I suggest you start by refuting this...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Why are they so bad? They are optional. You don't have to participate if you don't want to, and everything that's available to buy is attainable by playing the game.

Grown up's table? Please do not be condescending as part of your response. It does nothing to the value of your argument and is an attempt to intimidate, which is part of what many people talk about when they say the BSN is toxic.

I'll use a loose example here. TW1 had collectible cards for the women you sleep with. Many people decry this feature, as it devalues women and forces upon the player a mindset that womanizing and mindless sex is acceptable, as many gamers will want to collect them all. Even though doing so is totally optional.

So why is it considered a valid critique of a video game (one I have seen multiple Bioware devs cite when discussing The Witcher) when it involves collecting sex cards, but the same concept (that players will try to collect everything they can) is the player's fault if they can't resist using their real money to buy equipment, like gear DLC or premium gear content?

I'm still waiting for you to refute what I have said above. Stop dancing around it and give me an answer.

[XX-Pyro]

I don't see what's so bad about microtransactions as they are. Really I don't. To me, the difference between paid DLC and microtransactions is that DLC is new content, so I agree with you Jimmy when you say the pricing can be lopsided (kind of like Awakening was.) Microtransactions add no new content though, so as of now I have no complaints. I never waste my money to boost myself up faster because to me it isn't a smart financial decision (and I'm on a budget as a student,) however saying it's a moral problem charging players who elect to pay for content that they can get through other means in the game is childish in my opinion.

[Fast Jimmy]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Just like a drug dealer is not to blame for a drug addict's lack of self control? Well, good thing we don't chase after and try to jail them.

The fact that you're comparing microtransactions in a video game to drugs is very telling. If you want to join the grown up's at the big table, I suggest you start by refuting this...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Why are they so bad? They are optional. You don't have to participate if you don't want to, and everything that's available to buy is attainable by playing the game.

Grown up's table? Please do not be condescending as part of your response. It does nothing to the value of your argument and is an attempt to intimidate, which is part of what many people talk about when they say the BSN is toxic.

I'll use a loose example here. TW1 had collectible cards for the women you sleep with. Many people decry this feature, as it devalues women and forces upon the player a mindset that womanizing and mindless sex is acceptable, as many gamers will want to collect them all. Even though doing so is totally optional.

So why is it considered a valid critique of a video game (one I have seen multiple Bioware devs cite when discussing The Witcher) when it involves collecting sex cards, but the same concept (that players will try to collect everything they can) is the player's fault if they can't resist using their real money to buy equipment, like gear DLC or premium gear content?

I'm still waiting for you to refute what I have said above. Stop dancing around it and give me an answer.

I'm sorry. I thought you said it was a suggestion. I didn't realize you would be making demands of me. I would have written up a formal thesis for review.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I'm sorry. I thought you said it was a suggestion. I didn't realize you would be making demands of me. I would have written up a formal thesis for review.

I stated facts that you have yet to address. You bring up other subjects that don't matter here. If you can't refute the facts that I have presented, you should probably just move on.

[Fast Jimmy]

XX-Pyro wrote...

I don't see what's so bad about microtransactions as they are. Really I don't. To me, the difference between paid DLC and microtransactions is that DLC is new content, so I agree with you Jimmy when you say the pricing can be lopsided (kind of like Awakening was.) Microtransactions add no new content though, so as of now I have no complaints. I never waste my money to boost myself up faster because to me it isn't a smart financial decision (and I'm on a budget as a student,) however saying it's a moral problem charging players who elect to pay for content that they can get through other means in the game is childish in my opinion.

See, I disagree about Awakening. A standard expansion, it was priced around $30. And in the case of Awakening, it wasn't long after it was released that it was then bundled for free with new copies of the Game of the Year Edition. And you got half a dozen new companions, tons of side quests, a main story that could easily run 10-20 hours and loads of new equipment. It was a true Expanion pack and it reflected a good value. It was roughly half a game's worth of content and it was priced around half the price of the normal game. That's a good deal.

And it isn't childish to want more upfront pricing, instead of emotionally geared purchases. 

I wouldn't mind paying $80 or $100 bucks for a game if I knew, from the get-go, all the content was included. It would be a good value proposal. But if I buy a $60 game, spend $10 for D1DLC, another $10 for exlcusive release gear, $10 for a follow up story DLC and $10 in MP microtransactions, I will feel like I have been cheated multiple times.

Its PERCEPTION. Perception is key. If people perceive what you are doing as nickel-and-diming them for content, they will perceive you as unethical. You can't post facts in the face of perception. Its an emotional state. 

Is the fact that Bioware is selling microtransactions to you unethical? No. Is the fact that you are on a really tight budget, but still spending this money unethical? No. But is the fact that the gameplay mechanics are designed to make players WANT to buy these microtransactions in a way that completely disconnects them from the rational mode of thinking most people are engaged in when they make a good financial decision unethical? Yes.

And, epicboot, that's why I compared it to a drug dealer. Both are selling an emotional, impulse driven product for much more of a mark up than it would be worth on paper. And that's not very honest or upfront.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 07 février 2013 - 08:18 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

And, epicboot, that's why I compared it to a drug dealer. Both are selling an emotional, impulse driven product for much more of a mark up than it would be worth on paper. And that's not very honest or upfront.

It IS honest and upfront. They're not trying to deceieve consumers. There's no hidden charges or anything like that. The DLC is there if you want it, but you can choose to play the game and earn everything for free.

[XX-Pyro]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

XX-Pyro wrote...

I don't see what's so bad about microtransactions as they are. Really I don't. To me, the difference between paid DLC and microtransactions is that DLC is new content, so I agree with you Jimmy when you say the pricing can be lopsided (kind of like Awakening was.) Microtransactions add no new content though, so as of now I have no complaints. I never waste my money to boost myself up faster because to me it isn't a smart financial decision (and I'm on a budget as a student,) however saying it's a moral problem charging players who elect to pay for content that they can get through other means in the game is childish in my opinion.

See, I disagree about Awakening. An expansion is usually priced around $30. In the case of Awakening, it wasn't long after it was released that it was then bundled for free with new copies of the Game of the Year Edition. And you got half a dozen new companions, tons of side quests, a main story that could easily run 10-20 hours and loads of new equipment. It was a true Expanion pack and it reflected a good value. It was roughly half a game's worth of content and it was priced around half the price of the normal game. That's a good deal.

And it isn't childish to want more upfront pricing, instead of emotionally geared purchases. 

I wouldn't mind paying $80 or $100 bucks for a game if I knew, from the get-go, all the content was included. It would be a good value proposal. But I buy a $60 game, spend $10 for D1DLC, another $10 for exlcusive release gear, $10 for a follow up story DLC and $10 in MP microtransactions, I will feel like I have been cheated multiple times.

Its PERCEPTION. Perception is key. If people perceive what you are doing as nickel-and-diming them for content, they will perceive you as unethical. You can't post facts in the face of perception. Its an emotional state. 

Is the fact that Bioware is selling microtransactions to you unethical? No. Is the fact that you are on a really tight budget, but still spending this money unethical? No. But is the fact that the gameplay mechanics are designed to make players WANT to buy these microtransactions in a way that completely disconnects them from the rational mode of thinking most people are engaged in when they make a good financial decision unethical? Yes.

And, epicboot, that's why I compared it to a drug dealer. Both are selling an emotional, impulse driven product for much more of a mark up than it would be worth on paper. And that's not very honest or upfront.

If the gameplay mechanics are designed in such a way then I'd say it's borderline unfair, but definitely not unethical. Is it unethical that a shampoo smells nice so you go back and buy another one? I think the price on Awakening was too steep is because it was priced the same as Origins was, for at best 25% content. I still bought and played (and enjoyed) it, but from the start I knew it wouldn't be worth what I spent. Microtransaction content is already in the game, and if we're going to talk about multiplayer then I'd say as long as it isn't pay-to-win I'm fine with it being there. I'll take my time and enjoy the MP if it's good and eventually get the same content without having to load up Paypal or buy a PSN card, as the case may be. If it's in single player, even better, I'll consider buying the next Dragon Age on PC so that I can mod in my own items like I do in Skyrim, and not have to use microtransaction mechanics.

[Fast Jimmy]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

And, epicboot, that's why I compared it to a drug dealer. Both are selling an emotional, impulse driven product for much more of a mark up than it would be worth on paper. And that's not very honest or upfront.

It IS honest and upfront. They're not trying to deceieve consumers. There's no hidden charges or anything like that. The DLC is there if you want it, but you can choose to play the game and earn everything for free.

Paying $1 for the chance to win something you already earned through playing free is honest and upfront? I'm not sure I agree with you.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

And, epicboot, that's why I compared it to a drug dealer. Both are selling an emotional, impulse driven product for much more of a mark up than it would be worth on paper. And that's not very honest or upfront.

It IS honest and upfront. They're not trying to deceieve consumers. There's no hidden charges or anything like that. The DLC is there if you want it, but you can choose to play the game and earn everything for free.

Paying $1 for the chance to win something you already earned through playing free is honest and upfront? I'm not sure I agree with you.

It's one or the other, but not both. You either pay for the upgrades with real money and get them right away, OR you play through the game and unlock them as you go. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this concept.

[Fast Jimmy]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

And, epicboot, that's why I compared it to a drug dealer. Both are selling an emotional, impulse driven product for much more of a mark up than it would be worth on paper. And that's not very honest or upfront.

It IS honest and upfront. They're not trying to deceieve consumers. There's no hidden charges or anything like that. The DLC is there if you want it, but you can choose to play the game and earn everything for free.

Paying $1 for the chance to win something you already earned through playing free is honest and upfront? I'm not sure I agree with you.

It's one or the other, but not both. You either pay for the upgrades with real money and get them right away, OR you play through the game and unlock them as you go. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this concept.

I'm guessing you haven't played Bioware's first foray into MP Microtransactions with ME3, then.

There, you buy packs. You use credits to buy them, credits which are earned in game or through real dollars. The quality of the pack depends of the level (Recruit, Veteran or Spectre), but does not guarantee the item gained.

You could play a (large) number of matches and buy a Spectre pack with your hard earned credits and not get what you want. In frustration, you could then turn around and use real money to buy a Spectre Pack... and then STILL not get what you want. 

That's the Microtransactions we've seen so far. And I don't believe they are a good value proposition at all. At least with real life gambling, there's a decent chance to win what you want (money).

EDIT: To clarify, you can buy a Spectre pack with real dollars and still get a Common item, an item that you could have received within your first hour or so of playing MP, let alone the more advanced parts of the game where you'd have enough in-game credits to buy a Spectre pack.

THAT'S broken. Or working as designed, I suppose. Working to separate people from their money through transactions that are not clear what you are buying at all.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 07 février 2013 - 08:36 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

And, epicboot, that's why I compared it to a drug dealer. Both are selling an emotional, impulse driven product for much more of a mark up than it would be worth on paper. And that's not very honest or upfront.

It IS honest and upfront. They're not trying to deceieve consumers. There's no hidden charges or anything like that. The DLC is there if you want it, but you can choose to play the game and earn everything for free.

Paying $1 for the chance to win something you already earned through playing free is honest and upfront? I'm not sure I agree with you.

It's one or the other, but not both. You either pay for the upgrades with real money and get them right away, OR you play through the game and unlock them as you go. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this concept.

I'm guessing you haven't played Bioware's first foray into MP Microtransactions with ME3, then.

There, you buy packs. You use credits to buy them, credits which are earned in game or through real dollars. The quality of the pack depends of the level (Recruit, Veteran or Spectre), but does not guarantee the item gained.

You could play a (large) number of matches and buy a Spectre pack with your hard earned credits and not get what you want. In frustration, you could then turn around and use real money to buy a Spectre Pack... and then STILL not get what you want. 

That's the Microtransactions we've seen so far. And I don't believe they are a good value proposition at all. At least with real life gambling, there's a decent chance to win what you want (money).

Right. But what is wrong with that? EA is allowing you to purchase points to buy as many packs as you want instead of having to play the game to earn points. It's completely optional and left up to each individual player. If they only allowed you to get exactly what you wanted by paying real money, then there would be a problem. 

As it stands right now, if you don't believe that it's a good value, that's fair. You aren't forced to participate. But don't try to act like you're being ripped off at every turn, or that microtransactions are the devil just because they exist. 

[CronoDragoon]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
As it stands right now, if you don't believe that it's a good value, that's fair. You aren't forced to participate. But don't try to act like you're being ripped off at every turn, or that microtransactions are the devil just because they exist. 

It's hard to unlock stuff, especially characters, in ME3 multiplayer. It's hard primarily because they want you to spend money to unlock stuff faster. So if you want to say it's optional, then I agree, so long as we also say that the option has altered the original product to make it less fun for those who want to do things without microtransacting.

Edit: On the flipside, without microtransactions it's probably unlikely the MP additions would have been free.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 07 février 2013 - 08:52 .

[Fast Jimmy]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Right. But what is wrong with that? EA is allowing you to purchase points to buy as many packs as you want instead of having to play the game to earn points. It's completely optional and left up to each individual player. If they only allowed you to get exactly what you wanted by paying real money, then there would be a problem. 

As it stands right now, if you don't believe that it's a good value, that's fair. You aren't forced to participate. But don't try to act like you're being ripped off at every turn, or that microtransactions are the devil just because they exist. 

If a customer cannot make an informed decision about what their dollars are purchasing, that is not purchasing a product. Its gambling. And its illegal in many places, considered somewhat unethical in nearly all. 

[EpicBoot2daFace]

CronoDragoon wrote...

It's hard to unlock stuff, especially characters, in ME3 multiplayer. It's hard primarily because they want you to spend money to unlock stuff faster. So if you want to say it's optional, then I agree, so long as we also say that the option has altered the original product to make it less fun for those who want to do things without microtransacting.

Edit: On the flipside, without microtransactions it's probably unlikely the MP additions would have been free.

I think it's hard to unlock stuff (like characters) because if it were easy, you would unlock everything quickly and there wouldn't be any cool prizes to look forward to anymore. And all the points you continue to earn would be wasted.

Fast Jimmy wrote...

If a customer cannot make an informed decision about what their dollars are purchasing, that is not purchasing a product. Its gambling. And its illegal in many places, considered somewhat unethical in nearly all. 

The customer is making an informed decision when they choose to buy points in order to buy packs that are filled with random items. There is no deception and it is all made crystal clear to the player.

[Sil]

There are numerous problems with the Micro-transation system, most folk have gone over just how bad they are on our bank accounts because you can pay a fortune to get stuff and because it is all digital it can be very easy to forget that you are even spending money. Once or twice I have been caught out when going to buy normal DLC and realising that I've gone overdrawn.

But there are other problems with DLC, like with the Mass Effect Omega dlc, for instance. People were spending close to 25% of the cost of a full game for a 2-3 hour mission that was exceptionally buggy, a mission that cost £10 that lasts three hours..but the full game takes 20-30 hours and cost me £40 to purchase... for me, the main problem is that DLC's across gaming as a whole seems to be setting absurd prices for it's DLC and for the amount of content we receive. If gaming companies reduced the cost of these 2-3 hour mission packs from £10 to £5, I bet there would be a surge of people wanting to buy it, why? Because if they are anything like me they can only afford to buy a handful of packs a year and with so many games out there offering DLC we have to be really picky with what we spend our money on.. so if the prices were slashed, then we're going to be more willing to spend our money on more DLC packs. Don't waste your time and our money selling new clothes or weapons for a few quid, people want quality over quantity. Not only that, but have you guys considered releasing all the DLC in a physical disk copy at the end of the DLC cycle for a slightly cheaper price? Not everyone trusts digital downloads nor has an internet connection that allows for such large downloads, so it would help secure more people who would buy your content.

My main problem with the way we get microtransations for everything these days (as a whole in gaming, I'm not singling out Bioware here) is that it takes away one of the things that used to make gaming great... exploration. I am sure many of us remember the times we have ran around games desperately seeking out little secret weapons, costumes, armour pieces, items and places just for the thrill of it, but in my opinion this has disappeared in wake of us spending money to get these instead. That is one of my biggest gripes with the way gaming is going, as it feels like there is nothing special left anymore, we just go down a railroad rather than driving off down a country lane to explore the unknown and seek out rewards. I would not mind if companies merely patched in new bits and pieces for us to use and locate, but very rarely are any new game additions done over patches, as we now pay for it all.

I don't mind the idea of expanding content, in fact I do love Expansions and some DLC has been phenominal (Warcraft 3: The Frozen Throne was an expansion that cost just under the cost of the full game but was almost as long as the original, and it was patched for -years- to add new maps and heroes to use, and Lair of the Shadow Broker was the best DLC mission I've played), but I feel that it has stepped too far from what DLC and Expansions used to represent.. they represented a way of increasing the length of a game and the world of a game by giving us new campaigns and exciting missions to enjoy, now, it feels like all they represent is a way to empty our wallets.

[Fast Jimmy]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

If a customer cannot make an informed decision about what their dollars are purchasing, that is not purchasing a product. Its gambling. And its illegal in many places, considered somewhat unethical in nearly all. 

The customer is making an informed decision when they choose to buy points in order to buy packs that are filled with random items. There is no deception and it is all made crystal clear to the player.

And everything is crystal clear when you go to a gambling establishment as well. You put the money on the table, you knew there was the likelihood of not getting what you want.


To put this argument in perspective, what if, as someone suggested on the last page, a game company sells health potions and mana potions for real dollars? You can beat the game without getting hit, so healing is optional. You don't have to use skills/spells, so mana potions are optional. 

Okay, let's just assume that premise has merit.

What if, then, you need a health potion, so you buy a potion pack. But then you only get mana potions. Well, you knew what could happen when you bought that pack and that it would have assorted potions, some that you did not need. Oh well, good luck in that fight. Oh, you're already dead? Well, please use the Microtransactions Shop again for all your slot machine/survival needs!

That's not even the worst case scenario, honestly.

If this were a Free2Play online game that I was enjoying for free, or had to deal with ads unless I paid, I would be fine with it. Its part of the game, it is understood that's how things work.

But this is a fully purchased and paid for product. To introduce ways to siphon off people's money when everyone who is playing it has already sunk a large chunk of money into the main product is not appealing to many people at all.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 07 février 2013 - 09:21 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

If a customer cannot make an informed decision about what their dollars are purchasing, that is not purchasing a product. Its gambling. And its illegal in many places, considered somewhat unethical in nearly all. 

The customer is making an informed decision when they choose to buy points in order to buy packs that are filled with random items. There is no deception and it is all made crystal clear to the player.

And everything is crystal clear when you go to a gambling establishment as well. You put the money on the table, you knew there was the likelihood of not getting what you want.


To put this argument in perspective, what if, as someone suggested on the last page, a game company sells health potions and mana potions for real dollars? You can beat the game without getting hit, so healing is optional. You don't have to use skills/spells, so mana potions are optional. 

Okay, let's just assume that premise has merit.

What if, then, you need a health potion, so you buy a potion pack. But then you only get mana potions. Well, you knew what could happen when you bought that pack and that it would have assorted potions, some that you did not need. Oh well, good luck in that fight. Oh, you're already dead? Well, please use the Microtransactions Shop again for all your slot machine/survival needs!

That's not even the worst case scenario, honestly.

If this were a Free2Play online game that I was enjoying for free, or had to deal with ads unless I paid, I would be fine with it. Its part of the game, it is understood that's how things work.

But this is a fully purchased and paid for product. To introduce ways to siphon off people's money when everyone who is playing it has already sunk a large chunk of money into the main product is not appealing to many people at all.

I don't deal in hypotheticals. You know where I stand on this issue and I have backed up my argument with facts. If you have something to say other than "I don't like it", please do so.

[Fast Jimmy]

^

Contrary to my posts, I really don't have a HUGE problem with micro-transactions or D1DLC. I just see it all as being quite unethical. I don't expect every business in the world to match my ethics, I just won't support them.

But when people try and argue that there is NOTHING ethically wrong with such practices at all, that's just silly. If people are going to see a practice and call it as misleading, price-gouging or unfair, then it is perceived as unethical. Perception is the main driving factor in such matters.

EDIT: By the way, you haven't presented any facts. You have stated things as if they are facts, but they are hardly concrete and factual.

For instance, you state that the fact that you can't get what you want in the ME3 MP Microtransactions is crystal clear. Is it? To everyone? Has no one EVER been confused about what happened? Did a message pop up and say in big, bright letters that "PURCHASING A SPECTRE PACK WITH REAL MONEY WILL LIKELY NOT GET WHAT YOU ARE HOPING FOR!" No? Then its not really a fact that it is crystal clear then.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 07 février 2013 - 09:38 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

^

Contrary to my posts, I really don't have a HUGE problem with micro-transactions or D1DLC. I just see it all as being quite unethical. I don't expect every business in the world to match my ethics, I just won't support them.

But when people try and argue that there is NOTHING ethically wrong with such practices at all, that's just silly. If people are going to see a practice and call it as misleading, price-gouging or unfair, then it is perceived as unethical. Perception is the main driving factor in such matters.

Then why do you expect other members of this board to match your ethics?

[Fast Jimmy]

^

Who said I did? I'm not trying to garner a consensus on the forums for this. But if people feel ripped off by a practice, then it is unethical. Someone is feeling cheated. They feel they have been mislead. They feel they were wronged. If someone is feeling that way due to a practice, it is unethical.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

^

Who said I did? I'm not trying to garner a consensus on the forums for this. But if people feel ripped off by a practice, then it is unethical. Someone is feeling cheated. They feel they have been mislead. They feel they were wronged. If someone is feeling that way due to a practice, it is unethical.

These people who claim to have been mislead or deceived are automatically right by default? Publishers and game developers are guilty until proven innocent? Just because someone claims they have been wronged, does not mean they have actually been wronged. In this case, people are claiming that they're being ripped off. I have provided the facts that state otherwise and have yet to see a rebuttal with facts to support it.

[Fast Jimmy]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

These people who claim to have been mislead or deceived are automatically right by default? Publishers and game developers are guilty until proven innocent? Just because someone claims they have been wronged, does not mean they have actually been wronged. In this case, people are claiming that they're being ripped off. I have provided the facts that state otherwise and have yet to see a rebuttal with facts to support it.

According to  Modern Normative Ethics, yes. If someone is injured by an action (whether physical, monetarily, mentally or spiritually), then the offender has behaved unethically. Unless, of course, you are assuming they are lying? That they aren't upset or feeling swindled? I don't know why someone would lie about that, but I'd still say that population in inversely small.

You haven't provided any facts, you have provided a line of reasoning. Your line of reasoning is that the transactions are optional, therefore it is not harming anyone. Anyone who participated in the transaction and did not enjoy it or felt it deceived them or did not offer them what they had expected is stupid, and therefore not the responsibility of the developer.

Ethics don't just concern smart people who pay attention. People who don't read the fine print can still be wronged, even if research or work on their part could have avoided their current unhappiness.

Is it a prosecutable offense? No, I don't believe so. I doubt you'd be able to make the case that the level of "puffery" (actual legal term) involved with games that pimp microtransactions along with a main game are truly misleading anyone to level of whole-hearted lying and deceit.

But that does not mean it is not unethical. 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 07 février 2013 - 10:01 .

[AlanC9]

renjility wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Actually, you kinda do. You can look at any card you've already seen.

Uhm... where? A journal entry appears about the woman or the group of women that person represents, but the picture that goes with it is of the in-game model and NOT the sex card. I have zero naked women in my journal after having slept with all available options (yup, I had a ****ty Geralt).

The women Geralt's slept with have a heart icon added to their journal entries. Click on that and it displays the card.

I think this was an undocumented feature, though.

Modifié par AlanC9, 07 février 2013 - 10:08 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

You haven't provided any facts, you have provided a line of reasoning. Your line of reasoning is that the transactions are optional, therefore it is not harming anyone. Anyone who participated in the transaction and did not enjoy it or felt it deceived them or did not offer them what they had expected is stupid, and therefore not the responsibility of the developer.

lol

I'm done here.