Here here. A pretty thorough look at these issues. It irks me when people complain about bioware watching their bottom line. They have to. They have to have the income coming un to cover the costs of development. In a perfect world artists would work for free. So would everyone. But you have to male money off what you create to continue to create. Passion, art, profit aren't mutually exclusive
An Analysis of Bioware & General Game Mechanics
Débuté par
CosmicBuffalo
, mars 15 2013 03:53
Retour en haut
#52
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 09:20
millahnna
-
- Members
- 1 732 messages
protognosis wrote...
jamesbrown3 wrote...
Maybe we should all buy like 10 bucks in psp's so that the super amazing and, dare i say, handsome broJo can get a bonus and assures us that the ME3 MP can stay alive for 13 more years?
I wonder if we could Kickstarter a tribute to BroJo's handsomeness?
Is he really super handsome? Meh, who cares? Give the man a bonus, regardless.
On topic; must say this thread got waaaaaay more interesting while I was having the best silver pug ever (yeah I know, silverscrublol). Thanks very much for the psychological insights there, folks.
Modifié par millahnna, 15 mars 2013 - 09:20 .
#53
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 09:26
Lyria
-
- Members
- 738 messages
millahnna wrote...
protognosis wrote...
jamesbrown3 wrote...
Maybe we should all buy like 10 bucks in psp's so that the super amazing and, dare i say, handsome broJo can get a bonus and assures us that the ME3 MP can stay alive for 13 more years?
I wonder if we could Kickstarter a tribute to BroJo's handsomeness?
Is he really super handsome? Meh, who cares? Give the man a bonus, regardless.
On topic; must say this thread got waaaaaay more interesting while I was having the best silver pug ever (yeah I know, silverscrublol). Thanks very much for the psychological insights there, folks.
Maybe we could give him the tribute as a bonus. Or make a statue in his honor.
I hate how random the store is, but I understand they have to keep interest.
#54
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 10:33
neurovore
-
- Members
- 130 messages
Oh look, the mechanics discussion isn't dead.
Okay, the main problem with the microtransaction system is that it's random. There's very little sense in spending money, unless you're willing to spend TONS of it. It's like buying lottery tickets. You're dreaming of becoming rich, but you're not planning your life around it. IRL, lottery tickets give you the value you're expecting, in this game, I know that it wouldn't since the expected value is different.
More than that, consumables simply don't work the way they should. People who like playing with only one weapon get shafted, because they run out of barrels. Of course, power oriented classes don't even need them. Then again, power classes only need to be unlocked once, and don't scale at all afterwards, while weapon classes scale as they keep unlocking weapons or new ranks of weapons. And the Gear slot is a needlessly complicated mess, offering stuff that doesn't support less common styles of play, such as Shotgun/Biotics, Sniper/Biotics, Pistol/Tech. Why can't there just be a Power/Weapon combo Gear? (I know someone will yell "OP!" or "Everyone will just use it and nothing else!" and I say "No.")
On a more general level, I think the game is fundamentally flawed on so many levels, but the bubble gum fixes make it playable. It starts with the numbers game; difficulty is increased by increasing the health, damage, speed and number of enemies. It just makes enemies stupidly powerful. Especially the damage becomes so high that aside from the most durable kits, no one will be able to survive the damage. The devs realized that it's a problem and invented Shield and Health Gates to prevent instagibbing. But still they've increased the damage. And those gates don't protect against stupidly powerful rapid fire weapons, which are even more dangerous than the slowly-floating projectiles (apart from Geth rockets and pulses from Primes.) So it's still instagib city, and the short immunity frame offered by a revive/medigel doesn't guarantee survival, or even allow you to switch to a rocket launcher and fire it before going down again. Who in their right mind thinks that revive roulette is a sane gaming concept?
And what about those sync-kills? There are plenty of other ways to make the game harder. You don't need to yoink the control of a character from the player. Usually you can't even help your fellow player, since the there's no time for a bystander to initiate a detonation or even switch to a rocket launcher and fire it. But what evs, most of the sync-kill enemies have some kind of power immunity anyways. Which is another stupid thing that favors weapon classes.
Of course, an organized group doesn't really have to worry about getting flanked, since they can outplay the game on a meta-level, because the AI is pretty stupid.
Most of the challenge in this game is artificial.
And P2P is an abominable mode of play. I wish that was the end of it, but despite the P2P nature of the game, the servers still screw us over daily. How the fact that game files can be hacked to bypass gameplay, and microtransactions, eluded the devs is beyond me...
All that said, the devs have done a decent job of turning a very flawed single player framework into a decently enjoyable multiplayer horde mode. I just wish they had done a bit more research or, hell, used more common sense rather than resort to lazy solutions. It could have been something truly great. Perhaps even worth paying for.
Okay, the main problem with the microtransaction system is that it's random. There's very little sense in spending money, unless you're willing to spend TONS of it. It's like buying lottery tickets. You're dreaming of becoming rich, but you're not planning your life around it. IRL, lottery tickets give you the value you're expecting, in this game, I know that it wouldn't since the expected value is different.
More than that, consumables simply don't work the way they should. People who like playing with only one weapon get shafted, because they run out of barrels. Of course, power oriented classes don't even need them. Then again, power classes only need to be unlocked once, and don't scale at all afterwards, while weapon classes scale as they keep unlocking weapons or new ranks of weapons. And the Gear slot is a needlessly complicated mess, offering stuff that doesn't support less common styles of play, such as Shotgun/Biotics, Sniper/Biotics, Pistol/Tech. Why can't there just be a Power/Weapon combo Gear? (I know someone will yell "OP!" or "Everyone will just use it and nothing else!" and I say "No.")
On a more general level, I think the game is fundamentally flawed on so many levels, but the bubble gum fixes make it playable. It starts with the numbers game; difficulty is increased by increasing the health, damage, speed and number of enemies. It just makes enemies stupidly powerful. Especially the damage becomes so high that aside from the most durable kits, no one will be able to survive the damage. The devs realized that it's a problem and invented Shield and Health Gates to prevent instagibbing. But still they've increased the damage. And those gates don't protect against stupidly powerful rapid fire weapons, which are even more dangerous than the slowly-floating projectiles (apart from Geth rockets and pulses from Primes.) So it's still instagib city, and the short immunity frame offered by a revive/medigel doesn't guarantee survival, or even allow you to switch to a rocket launcher and fire it before going down again. Who in their right mind thinks that revive roulette is a sane gaming concept?
And what about those sync-kills? There are plenty of other ways to make the game harder. You don't need to yoink the control of a character from the player. Usually you can't even help your fellow player, since the there's no time for a bystander to initiate a detonation or even switch to a rocket launcher and fire it. But what evs, most of the sync-kill enemies have some kind of power immunity anyways. Which is another stupid thing that favors weapon classes.
Of course, an organized group doesn't really have to worry about getting flanked, since they can outplay the game on a meta-level, because the AI is pretty stupid.
Most of the challenge in this game is artificial.
And P2P is an abominable mode of play. I wish that was the end of it, but despite the P2P nature of the game, the servers still screw us over daily. How the fact that game files can be hacked to bypass gameplay, and microtransactions, eluded the devs is beyond me...
All that said, the devs have done a decent job of turning a very flawed single player framework into a decently enjoyable multiplayer horde mode. I just wish they had done a bit more research or, hell, used more common sense rather than resort to lazy solutions. It could have been something truly great. Perhaps even worth paying for.
#55
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 10:47
Volkai7
-
- Members
- 809 messages
Pretty good piece.
I think you overestimate the impact the used game market has on the profitability of a newly released title a bit, though, as the available pool of used games is never larger than the number of used games sold. Furthermore you appear to discount entirely the profit factor of DLC content...
Although, if your focus was solely on multiplayer's profitability, and not that of the title as a whole, your bypassing DLC as a factor is more understandable.
In any event, a good read.
I think you overestimate the impact the used game market has on the profitability of a newly released title a bit, though, as the available pool of used games is never larger than the number of used games sold. Furthermore you appear to discount entirely the profit factor of DLC content...
Although, if your focus was solely on multiplayer's profitability, and not that of the title as a whole, your bypassing DLC as a factor is more understandable.
In any event, a good read.
#56
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 10:51
Volkai7
-
- Members
- 809 messages
By the way... I wonder if anyone has done a comparative analysis of the way the RNG store works with the way WotC/Hasbro sells Magic cards in randomly assorted Booster Packs? I suspect they operate on similar grounds.
#57
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 10:52
Dokteur Kill
-
- Members
- 1 286 messages
There's one huge difference though: You can trade collectible cards.Volkai7 wrote...
By the way... I wonder if anyone has done a comparative analysis of the way the RNG store works with the way WotC/Hasbro sells Magic cards in randomly assorted Booster Packs? I suspect they operate on similar grounds.
#59
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 11:13
_sigge_
-
- Members
- 266 messages
I like to know what I'm buying. Simple as that. It's fun playing the lottery sometimes, but not all the time.
#60
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 11:15
mybudgee
-
- Members
- 23 037 messages
Oh... if only we could trade weapon cards
#61
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 11:20
Chemical_Jordan
-
- Members
- 127 messages
I don't think the complaints about the store stem from people feeling they need a certain weapon/character to make it, it comes from not being able to experience the unique content until they're (semi-)randomly given it.weaselshep wrote...
The way I see it. I bought ME3 for the SP game. I had very little intent on playing the MP portion at all.
One
year later I am still playing it. They gave two options for getting
better gear. Play in game earn credits, buy. Or pay out and buy. No one
is forced to pay for any of the gear. One does not need a harrier to
make it. There isn't any valid complaint about the store.
Example: You don't NEED a Collector Adept, but if you'd like to experience and try out the Dark Sphere and Seeker Swarm powers you'll have to unlock it, this is where to store can "block" you.
You've written a nice post and I think anyone who is a regular reader of these forums will mostly agree or at least be understanding of the points you made, but I don't think you read this thread. Despite the title this thread isn't really about the game mechanics as your post was.neurovore wrote...
Oh look, the mechanics discussion isn't dead.
-snip-
#62
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 11:27
khannoir
-
- Members
- 584 messages
HolyAvenger wrote...
This much logic and sense has no place on BSN.
Well done, OP.
What sorcery is this?
Cognitive thought?
That doesnt leave me feeling insulted?
on BSN?
#63
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 11:28
Chobbly
-
- Members
- 187 messages
mybudgee wrote...
Oh... if only we could trade weapon cards
Agree totally. As an aside, I've often wondered what if that the packs had followed the CCG model. Resurgence, Retaliation, Earth etc would have had their own 'pack' or booster,
The Rebellion one would have had the Vorcha Soldier and Sentinel, Quarian Male Engineer and Male Infiltrator, plus the Project Phoenix Vanguard and Adept as possible characters. Potential weapons would have been Cerberus Harrier, Reegar Carbine and Krysae Sniper Rifle. This could possibly have been better for new players to at least aim for what they want - I feel sorry for new players as the 'pool' is more diluted now with many different weapons, gear and characters.
On another note, great post OP.
#64
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 11:33
Guanxii
-
- Members
- 1 646 messages
To be quite honest from a lay perspective i don't think BioWare's current MP microtransaction model really works for them all that much and especially the player. Sure they might be making a decent diminishing return at the moment but I think there are much more effective ways they could ensure longevity and generate higher player revenue streams.
All the current system ensures is that people simply play the game longer or simply give up rather than put down real money on a consistant basis.
When I give money to the store personally I see it as a donation an act of charity on receipt of a free multiplayer expansion but under no circumstances would I otherwise put down real money for these packs. It's about the worst investment you could make.
If players could simply buy what they wanted from the store and the pricing structure reflected the scarcity and value of each weapon and character i'm sure an analysis would demonstrate consistently higher revenue in a given period. Sure this would result in a ton balance issues... over prevalence of certain weapons and characters as if it could get any worst. Would you rather people pay for this content or grind for this content?
How about people just starting the game as N70s at this point? They are at such an enormous disadvantage that I doubt anyone would have the patience at this point to grind to a halfway decent manifest. It would take them several months before they would be ready for gold. If new players had greater access to top tier kits and weapons earlier and payed for them I reckon this would widen the player base which would improve longevity and revenue more effectively than merely artificially extending the lifespan of game by withholding content from veteran players.
All the current system ensures is that people simply play the game longer or simply give up rather than put down real money on a consistant basis.
When I give money to the store personally I see it as a donation an act of charity on receipt of a free multiplayer expansion but under no circumstances would I otherwise put down real money for these packs. It's about the worst investment you could make.
If players could simply buy what they wanted from the store and the pricing structure reflected the scarcity and value of each weapon and character i'm sure an analysis would demonstrate consistently higher revenue in a given period. Sure this would result in a ton balance issues... over prevalence of certain weapons and characters as if it could get any worst. Would you rather people pay for this content or grind for this content?
How about people just starting the game as N70s at this point? They are at such an enormous disadvantage that I doubt anyone would have the patience at this point to grind to a halfway decent manifest. It would take them several months before they would be ready for gold. If new players had greater access to top tier kits and weapons earlier and payed for them I reckon this would widen the player base which would improve longevity and revenue more effectively than merely artificially extending the lifespan of game by withholding content from veteran players.
Modifié par Guanxii, 15 mars 2013 - 11:34 .
#65
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 11:41
Admiral Dreck
-
- Members
- 1 444 messages
I quite agree to/like that conclusion.
#66
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 11:44
GhastonGrey
-
- Members
- 350 messages
Hmmm, logical thought processes *and* good use of statistics. 5* from me for that alone. Nice post.
#67
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 11:57
Chirotera
-
- Members
- 107 messages
What bothers me is that they've already come out and said that there will be no more DLC support for the game, and that seems to include patches. So purchasing packs at this point is doing little else but paying for the employees there (whom would likely still be there whether or not the packs were bought).
If the game is still profitable, it would make sense to continue releasing DLC for as long as a profit was being made on new content being released. And it would also make sense to not change the drop rate. However, with no new DLC on the horizon we can conclude that the game is no longer profitable from a DLC perspective. Thus they have little incentive to maintain the low drop rates of weapons, and we, the consumer, have little incentive to put money towards it.
Now, if they have more DLC planned (which they've said they do not), I'd be more than happy to put a few bucks into buying some packs. I'd also not care if the UR drop rate remained the same. Not only that but increasing the drop rate would reintroduce an incentive to purchase those packs again.
I'm obviously no expert on this, but at this point in the game's life, if there are no new plans for further DLC support and if they are shifting their focus to the ME4 multiplayer, then there also should be little incentive for continuing the model that currently exists.
(Ultimately I really just want more DLC and I wish they would reconsider their stance on not introducing more new kits, more maps, and maybe another unique enemy to face!)
If the game is still profitable, it would make sense to continue releasing DLC for as long as a profit was being made on new content being released. And it would also make sense to not change the drop rate. However, with no new DLC on the horizon we can conclude that the game is no longer profitable from a DLC perspective. Thus they have little incentive to maintain the low drop rates of weapons, and we, the consumer, have little incentive to put money towards it.
Now, if they have more DLC planned (which they've said they do not), I'd be more than happy to put a few bucks into buying some packs. I'd also not care if the UR drop rate remained the same. Not only that but increasing the drop rate would reintroduce an incentive to purchase those packs again.
I'm obviously no expert on this, but at this point in the game's life, if there are no new plans for further DLC support and if they are shifting their focus to the ME4 multiplayer, then there also should be little incentive for continuing the model that currently exists.
(Ultimately I really just want more DLC and I wish they would reconsider their stance on not introducing more new kits, more maps, and maybe another unique enemy to face!)
#68
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 12:02
Clips7
-
- Members
- 1 926 messages
I agree...everything makes complete sense...well said.
#69
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 12:04
spettro_sannita
-
- Members
- 38 messages
I agree with everything except the calculations. I'm pretty sure you cannot calculate the chance to get a UR dry streak like you did, because every sigle opening of a pack is an isolated event, with no correlation with the previous and the next event. The statistics you've calculated would be right in the case the packs were all opened in the same time, not consecutively
#70
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 12:17
Fortack
-
- Members
- 2 609 messages
Yeah, it makes complete sense that people who pay 50+ bucks for a game only get access to 1% of its content. Sounds pretty fair to me ... When they want the other 99% they only have to invest hundreds of additional bucks to buy lottery tickets and hope for the best. Anyone who believes that is total BS must be mad.
New content you say? Yeah, it's beyond stupidity to allow the community to develop its own content. I mean what are those brain death pyjaks thinking? They will ruin the game completely, just look at Bethesda games for example - completely wasted by all those horrible mods.
New content you say? Yeah, it's beyond stupidity to allow the community to develop its own content. I mean what are those brain death pyjaks thinking? They will ruin the game completely, just look at Bethesda games for example - completely wasted by all those horrible mods.
#71
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 12:34
Bleachrude
-
- Members
- 3 154 messages
Fortackj, keep in mind that the Bethseda model ALSO means no free DLC.
You would automatically shrink the playerbase and this tends to have a downward spiral...The big dog, Call of Duty, can afford to have DLCs that split the playerbase since they have so many players but other games though? Hell, even games known primarily for their MP (Battlefield, Left 4 dead) lose revenue because of this..It's why the season-pass is now the accepted model...
For games though, like ME or Bioshock, known primarily for their SP?
Ask on uncharted or assassin's creed boards what paid DLCs did to their MP playerbases...
You would automatically shrink the playerbase and this tends to have a downward spiral...The big dog, Call of Duty, can afford to have DLCs that split the playerbase since they have so many players but other games though? Hell, even games known primarily for their MP (Battlefield, Left 4 dead) lose revenue because of this..It's why the season-pass is now the accepted model...
For games though, like ME or Bioshock, known primarily for their SP?
Ask on uncharted or assassin's creed boards what paid DLCs did to their MP playerbases...
#72
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 12:36
alpenhornblazer
-
- Members
- 182 messages
BjornDaDwarf wrote...
Came for mechanics, found a business plan.
You seem to be justifying BW/EA's store model though. While it is one viable business model for microtransactions, that doesn't mean that it is the only viable way. Microtransaction games are proving that they can be sustained by a robust number of variations, including ones that are less ethically dubious than depending on the slot machine gambling effect.
I wholeheartedly support BW/EA's ability to generate consistent revenue for things like ME3: MP, particularly when a year's worth of content has been released for it. But there are other, and I suspect better, ways to monetize that have more respect for customers.
Your suspicions might prove wrong. When thinking it through a randomized Algorithm that handles a game-economy is actually one of the better ways to ensure its longevity.
#73
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 12:50
N7 Whiskey
-
- Members
- 1 967 messages
While I agree with CosmicBuffalo on a general level, and as such have had no issue supporting BioWare with real money spent on packs, I must say that I am dissapointed in BioWae for using the gambling aspect to the packs knowing full well a certain percentage of the playerbase would be uncontrollably addicted to purchasing those packs. I find that to be poor business ethics for a software company, but I suppose they DID sign up with the Mob (EA) so I'm not sure what else could be expected.
Overall I love the franchise, and from my limited contact with the guys on the BW team, I like them as people first and developers second. I do wish them the best of luck in the future, but I suppose that is selfish because I want what they can make
Overall I love the franchise, and from my limited contact with the guys on the BW team, I like them as people first and developers second. I do wish them the best of luck in the future, but I suppose that is selfish because I want what they can make
#74
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 12:53
Deerber
-
- Members
- 16 836 messages
CosmicBuffalo wrote...
Mass Effect 3 is a superb game, one I will remember (and play) forever, along with Goldeneye and MarioKart GP.
This made me smile from the depth of my heart. So true
#75
Posté 15 mars 2013 - 01:13
Sudis
-
- Members
- 1 messages
I wonder if there are other ways they could monetize the multiplayer to pay for additional support. Would there be a lot of backlash to some tastefully placed advertisement on the loading screens or something?
