344 réponses à ce sujet

[Maytrows]

CFO Blake Jorgensen says microtransactions will be built into more and more of publisher's games moving forward. 

http://www.gamespot....actions-6404525

This is NOT what I want in my games. So if you do not want DA3 to have them let them know, respond here.
If we let our feelings about this be heard now there will be no excuses for EA/Bioware if they have this in the game.

Is this going to be a game or something else diguised as a game?
This is a dealbreaker for me, if I see this ingame, im out.
Im here to follow a story, interact with characters and have fun NOT seeing offers to buy content for MORE money.
Don't mistake this for DLC or expansions. 

[killswitch423]

I'm going to just say it....


I don't mind microtransactions, and sometimes I find them enjoyable. Especially superficial things like costumes. In single player games it's not like 'pay-to-win' is a problem, as the weapons and spells and such in the vanilla game are perfectly adequate to beat the game.

I understand the reluctance to accept it, but a thread on the forums complaining isn't going to stop if from happening anyway. It's an industry-wide trend that had been proven to work and believe it or not they actually do need money from us to meet the demands we all love to make for our games.

[Fast Jimmy]

I am mistaking this for DLC and expansions. Well, DLC at least. This is the road gaming has been going down for a long time. People who have been supporting DLC of games have been building the bridge to this exact thing happening. You can point at the publishers and call them greedy for doing it, but they are just following the path of money gamers have been leaving for them.

DLC is story-based microtransactions. They are just on a different scale and value level.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 27 février 2013 - 02:11 .

[Emzamination]

There is already a thread on microtransactions.

[Fast Jimmy]

^

This is a thread about the recent statement by an EA executive, to be fair.

[LinksOcarina]

This is only bad news if the microtransactions enforce poor behavior based on design.

So far, EA has done good design work regarding microtransactions, which is why they have been successful with it. And this is a lot better than say, Zynga's approach to nickel/diming every aspect of the game for you, which is atrocious and results in poor returns.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 27 février 2013 - 02:31 .

[AshenShug4r]

Regarding Riccitiello's Battlefield 3 example, if games start catering to these micro transactions, in that they make ammo scarce to bait you into buying some, then there's going to be a serious issue.

[Medhia Nox]

If Bioware made a new game modeled after the DM Client/Player Client/Toolset model - and had microtransactions for toolset materials like tilesets, placeables, monsters etc. / functionality for the DM Client / or more classes, items and graphics for Players...

I'd spend money - gods in the heavens - I'd spend so much money.

[imbs]

N7_killswitch wrote...

I'm going to just say it....


I don't mind microtransactions, and sometimes I find them enjoyable. Especially superficial things like costumes. In single player games it's not like 'pay-to-win' is a problem, as the weapons and spells and such in the vanilla game are perfectly adequate to beat the game.

I understand the reluctance to accept it, but a thread on the forums complaining isn't going to stop if from happening anyway. It's an industry-wide trend that had been proven to work and believe it or not they actually do need money from us to meet the demands we all love to make for our games.

..... please tell me you are not implying that microtransactions make more sense in single player games than in MP games....... Tell me I am reading this wrong I implore you.


I hate this forum.

[Brodoteau]

As long as you can ignore them, that's fine. As long as they don't become necessary to beat the game then fine. Until we know about these things, then this statement is not something to get excited about.

Look there are a lot of people in these forums who want different armors or robes or swords. Let them pay for them if they want. It's not a great way to do things, but I understand why EA wants to do it.

EA's FIFA has had these sorts of things for awhile. They cater to people that want instant results or instant status. If you play FIFA and really want Messi, you can buy him and that gives you a slight advantage. If that's important to you, then maybe you should have to pay. But there are a lot more people who prefer to slowly build a team without spending any money. Microtransactions don't have to be an all or nothing idea.

I do think that the model for this is coming from cellphone games and ipad games. While most of them are free to play, they require money to upgrade or skip ads etc. and this has been pretty lucrative for those companies.

[Sanunes]

I agree with the opinion as long as they aren't necessary to complete the game I am fine with them. I haven't bought anything in either Mass Effect 3 (except the one time to use my left over BioWare points) or Dead Space 3. At no time did I believe I needed to purchase any of those items for I can invest time into getting the same item. Getting upset and making them change their opinion on micro transactions might introduce something we can't consider optional.

[andrew252]

i dont mind if there costumes or silly things but if its another op armor set (blood dragon for origins) thats bad mkay

[HiroVoid]

Want to breeze through the game like 'story mode' in ME3? Buy levels and equipment.

[MoMan313]

to me they already kinda had it in DA2 with the item pack..

which I was sold because it had anomen's mask form the Legend of Korra xD

[imbs]

Jayne126 wrote...

Bow String DLC.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves m8

[Twisted Path]

I never buy anything that isn't story DLC, and eh, don't feel like I'm missing out on anything as long as I can beat the game easily with vanilla equipment. If we do ever get to a point where games are designed to be difficult or annoying unless you pay for extra bells and whistles (like in the scarce ammo if you don't pay real money for more example,) then I guess it will be time to take my ball and go home. If a game is not fun to play without buying extra stuff that I have no intention of buying then what's the point?

I also hate DLC that's done like the Warden's Keep in Origins: were there's an annoying NPC constantly in your face in game asking for your credit card number.

Modifié par Twisted Path, 27 février 2013 - 05:20 .

[Nomadiac]

Bioware knows that its image isn't in the greatest state right now, and I'm sure they also know that microtransactions in a single-player game will ****** off a lot of people. I doubt we'll see them in DA3.

[deuce985]

I've seen models of MTs that's not so bad. What ME3 uses is ok because all the content is still available to me even if I don't spend an extra penny on the game. That same formula doesn't work for BF3 for me because it's a competitive MP game. ME3 isn't, so those MT "shortcuts" are acceptable for a game that isn't competitive.

I've seen some games try to split their game up in two parts. SP and MP. You pay for one or the other. I think Uncharted 3 is currently doing this. It would've been better when it first came out but if it was available day 1, that's a good MT formula. If you never plan to play MP, then I could've bought Uncharted's SP for $30 at launch. That's a good deal, IMO.

It's all on how MTs are used. Most of them are terrible right now though. I believe the publishers will get it right once it's used more. The majority of MT models currently used aren't consumer friendly at all. You can still make a lot of money off MTs and make it consumer friendly. Some companies are already doing it.

If DA3 has MP, it would be awesome if Bioware offered $40 for SP only at launch and just skip the MP. I'd probably still pay $60 but it would be great for people who don't want anything to do with MP...

Modifié par deuce985, 27 février 2013 - 05:35 .

[LinksOcarina]

deuce985 wrote...

I've seen models of MTs that's not so bad. What ME3 uses is ok because all the content is still available to me even if I don't spend an extra penny on the game. That same formula doesn't work for BF3 for me because it's a competitive MP game. ME3 isn't, so those MT "shortcuts" are acceptable for a game that isn't competitive.

I've seen some games try to split their game up in two parts. SP and MP. You pay for one or the other. I think Uncharted 3 is currently doing this. It would've been better when it first came out but if it was available day 1, that's a good MT formula. If you never plan to play MP, then I could've bought Uncharted's SP for $30 at launch. That's a good deal, IMO.

It's all on how MTs are used. Most of them are terrible right now though. I believe the publishers will get it right once it's used more.

The Uncharted 3 multiplayer is slightly more complex. 

The article I posted tried to get a fair breakdown, but the gift of it is simple; you play for free without molestation up to level 15, after that you have to pay for more levels. Supposedly the breakdown to remove the level cap is $20. You can also buy the single player game and co-op levels.

The problem is they also released the GOTY edition, which is $30.00 and includes everything. So effectively, the F2P model for Uncharted is completely irrelevent unless if you want to stay gimped while playing online competitively. 

That is also nothing new, to have microtransactions involved in a multiplayer game. Some games get away with it, Team Fortress 2 for example is completely overt with the fact that the better weapons and the like are worth real money and are rare drops. But the reason it gets a pass is simple; Trade with other players is allowed. If they didn't have that feature, id bet money people would be naysaying about it as much as they rail on Mass Effect 3's multiplayer having microtransactions in it.

Also got to remember there is an economy for it. I recall a poor episode of Extra Credits that tried to argue once that having a $70.00 (real life) or millions of dollars in game currency piece of clothing in a game like Eve online is bad for the industry. The problem though is they missed the point of that piece of clothing, its a social symbol that showcases you are rich enough to purchase it, or dedicated enough to waste money on something superfluous.

Does that make the microtransaction a bad investment? Well...why would people buy it then if not but to invest in something ridiculous as a status symbol online? The mileage for good or bad micotransactions is much more nuanced than people give it credit, because there are a lot of layers to such practices that tend to go unnoticed. 

[AlanC9]

I'm still not sure what the problem is supposed to be.

[andrew252]

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm still not sure what the problem is supposed to be.

lets say you roll a warrior in the next game and bioware releases a dlc that will give you a armor that ahs higher defense then any item in the game and a 2 handed that kills most things in one hit and they have no stat requirmments to use.if that happends you will be in god mode through most of the game

[Plaintiff]

I'm seething with unquenchable indifference.

[Xerxes52]

As long as I can get all the items with in-game currency, then I don't really worry about microtransactions. I wouldn't want another RNG store however, I'd like to pick what I'm spending my in-game money on.

One thing I did like about microtransactions in ME3 though: Free DLC.

[New Display Name]

I don't have a problem with them as long as it doesn't gut the default game.