162 réponses à ce sujet

[AshenShug4r]

It's just greed. You don't need to try and milk people for every cent to make a profit. I don't have to spend money on microtransactions, but I don't have to like the idea of them either.

[Paul E Dangerously]

The Wolf Man wrote...

Ha. Wow. I read that EA was voted the worst company in America. That means they beat out AT&T which is pretty damn bad.

Polls vote bombed by 4chan's /v/ and Reddit aren't that legitimate.

Modifié par Sopa de Gato, 22 mars 2013 - 02:26 .

[Weskerr]

 You know EA is going to put microtransactions in DA3!

[Maverick827]

Some of you guys need to start putting up signs. I almost fell off one of these Slippery Slopes you keep putting up all over the place.

[Conduit0]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Alexandrine Delassixe wrote...

"assume"? is it possible to be more...certain?

Agreed.

It is not "required" to beat DA:O or DA2 with potions or injury kits. It is not "required" to bring your companions along with you in your party. It is not "required" to give a happy ending away for free. You can play, beat and complete DA:O and DA2 without any of these things. Microtransactions to do any of them would not be all that much different than the type of mindset that would be "not very price sensitive at that time" as talked about by former EA CEO here.

Microtransactions bother me because it is not a matter of IF games will cross the line and make a game unplayable without paying more, but WHEN. Just like advocates of always-online DRM said "there is no way a game company would put DRM into a game and then fail to have the servers ready at launch," people now say "there is no way a game company would put microtransactions in for things like using a health potion in combat, or bringing more than one companion with you in a party-based game." Yeah, it sounds so stupid that no one would do it... until you have multiple companies and games launched with it.

Poor planning, shady marketing and even incomplete testing can result in games coming out with these features that become the "sky is falling" tales that no one believes can happen until it has happened and everyone has egg on their face. People call opponents crazies in tin-foil hats, but always forget that greed, incompetence and/or just plain bad luck by the design team can have a game come out with an abomination of a scheme to separate the player from their wallet and it not be known by many players until they have bought the game and have been screwed hard.

But what the "sky is falling" crowd conviently seem to forget is that if and when someone tries using a pay-to-win microtransaction scheme in a full retail game, there will be massive and unescapable backlash. When Ubisoft tried always on DRM with AC2 they got spanked for it, hard enough in fact that they haven't tried it again, and EA is currently getting spanked for doing the same thing with SimCity, their CEO even announced he was stepping down less than 2 weeks after SimCity launched.(Yes I know theres no proof the two are connected, but I find it hard to believe that the timing is a coincidence)

When a developer gets foolish enough to try that pay-to-win scenerio you're so scared of, the result will make all the rage aimed at Ubisoft and EA look like an angry preschooler calling someone a, "poopy head". The gaming community will burn that developer to the ground(figuratively speaking) and no one will be stupid enough to try again.

[Volus Warlord]

I still think they should microtransaction romances.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Why does it make you uneasy? If you don't like microtransactions, don't use them. I assume that they will not be necessary in order to complete the base game.

Please, everyone knows microtransactions are made attractive so people who are gullible enough to use them, use them, they are a despicable practice that just reeks of greed. They are honestly nothing but a way of conning foolish people out of money.

There will come a day when we will be charged for fake bullets for a fake gun.

[Conduit0]

DinoSteve wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Why does it make you uneasy? If you don't like microtransactions, don't use them. I assume that they will not be necessary in order to complete the base game.

Please, everyone knows microtransactions are made attractive so people who are gullible enough to use them, use them, they are a despicable practice that just reeks of greed. They are honestly nothing but a way of conning foolish people out of money.

There will come a day when we will be charged for fake bullets for a fake gun.

Yes, because everyone knows that games are actually made by magical fairies for free.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Conduit0 wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Why does it make you uneasy? If you don't like microtransactions, don't use them. I assume that they will not be necessary in order to complete the base game.

Please, everyone knows microtransactions are made attractive so people who are gullible enough to use them, use them, they are a despicable practice that just reeks of greed. They are honestly nothing but a way of conning foolish people out of money.

There will come a day when we will be charged for fake bullets for a fake gun.

Yes, because everyone knows that games are actually made by magical fairies for free.

Devs had no problem making games before microtransactions and you know what will happen by this time next year, the new console generation will have come games will be increased by a tenner and we will still have microtransactions.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

AshenShug4r wrote...

It's just greed. You don't need to try and milk people for every cent to make a profit. I don't have to spend money on microtransactions, but I don't have to like the idea of them either.

That's reasonable.

[Vexille]

ahhh EA and micro transactions...

SWTOR highlights how EA will squeeze every nickel out of the customer that they can... Charge real money for options like "hide helmet" and "extra tool bars".

we have every reason to be terrified of EA adding micro-transactions to DA 3.


EA just loves to push the envelope... remember at ME3 launch they set it up so you were FORCED to play multiplayer in order to get the best endings in single player?

I'm not saying its a sure thing they will do something outrageous for DA3, I'm just saying with EA's track record its not unreasonable to be worried

[AlanC9]

Conduit0 wrote...


When a developer gets foolish enough to try that pay-to-win scenerio you're so scared of, the result will make all the rage aimed at Ubisoft and EA look like an angry preschooler calling someone a, "poopy head". The gaming community will burn that developer to the ground(figuratively speaking) and no one will be stupid enough to try again.

Pretty much this.

As for the other horror scenario, if devs will make the games harder to encourage us to buy microtransactioned healing potions or some such, all I can say is bring it on. Bio hasn't made a hard game since the first two levels of BG1.

[Plaintiff]

DinoSteve wrote...

Conduit0 wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Why does it make you uneasy? If you don't like microtransactions, don't use them. I assume that they will not be necessary in order to complete the base game.

Please, everyone knows microtransactions are made attractive so people who are gullible enough to use them, use them, they are a despicable practice that just reeks of greed. They are honestly nothing but a way of conning foolish people out of money.

There will come a day when we will be charged for fake bullets for a fake gun.

Yes, because everyone knows that games are actually made by magical fairies for free.

Devs had no problem making games before microtransactions and you know what will happen by this time next year, the new console generation will have come games will be increased by a tenner and we will still have microtransactions.

Accounting for inflation, videogames are cheaper now than they've ever been, and the cost of developing them is ever-increasing.

[darkway1]

Honestly.....if DA3 is full of petty,mindless micro transactions and day one DLC etc....then I'll just give the whole game a miss.

[Conduit0]

DinoSteve wrote...

Conduit0 wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Why does it make you uneasy? If you don't like microtransactions, don't use them. I assume that they will not be necessary in order to complete the base game.

Please, everyone knows microtransactions are made attractive so people who are gullible enough to use them, use them, they are a despicable practice that just reeks of greed. They are honestly nothing but a way of conning foolish people out of money.

There will come a day when we will be charged for fake bullets for a fake gun.

Yes, because everyone knows that games are actually made by magical fairies for free.

Devs had no problem making games before microtransactions and you know what will happen by this time next year, the new console generation will have come games will be increased by a tenner and we will still have microtransactions.

Development costs increased roughly 10x going from last gen to current gen, games went from costing a couple million dollars, to costing tens of millions of dollars to make in a single generation, and those costs will go up even further with the move to next gen.

Hmm, when did DLC and microtransactions start catching on, oh right, this generation, the same generation that saw a ten fold increase in development costs... nah, you're right, theres no corrolation, clearly its all just corporate greed.

I'm just going to take a shot in the dark here and bet that you're also the type that whines about how Bioware and other developers are pandering to the, "cod crowd" when they try to make games with a broader appeal.
<_<

[Allan Schumacher]

I can raise any issue I please, but thanks.

This actually isn't true. For instance, referring to a year old poll regarding EA's success in the Consumerist poll isn't really relevant to the discussion, which is often how threads go off topic and I become all scowly.


To the topic at hand:

I don't find Microtransactions inherently evil. I think that they can be misused though, and it's entirely up to developers to not misuse them and for gamers to let developers know when they feel they are used inappropriately (note, vehemently complaining about it but still buying it sends very conflicting data!).

I have no real beef with ME3's microtransactions, for instance, because for some people their time is more valuable than their money. It perhaps flirts a line as it can be argued it is "paying to win" but in a cooperative multiplayer, I think that that is less of an issue.

I do think people need to be careful when criticizing microtransactions, however. Specifically in assuming that it's to blame for something bad being in the game.

For example, I often see people express a concern that the presence of microtransactions as an incentive for a designer to pad parts of the game and make it grind, in order to encourage purchasing the microtransactions. This is a fair concern, and it is indeed possible. By the same token, many gamers rate length of game as a primary metric for whether or not a game is worth the money, so on some level there is already an influence to help pad game time through some other means. So a game that has a grind and microtransactions may not actually have that grind because of the MTX, but rather to ensure that the game has appropriate length. (Obviously the ideal solution to game length is never having it be a grind, but that is a separate discussion IMO).

That's mostly just a thought experiment that simply because you can logically deduce that MTX may be a cause, may not necessarily be the case. Excessive grind is usually something I consider bad for games, and whatever the reason it exists should be examined and potentially remedied.


As for MTX in games, I'm pretty ambivalent. The likelihood of me buying any of them is exceptionally small. I can't think of any non-F2P game I played that had them that I felt I wanted to purchase, but then I can't think of too many games that had MTX present anyways, so maybe that doesn't mean much.

A game like Portal 2 had MTX that let you deck out your multiplayer bots, but it was too expensive so I didn't really care. ME3 had MTX for the MP, but I enjoyed the MP as it was so I didn't buy any. I did buy a sprite pack for Hearts of Iron III once. Was cool seeing the US and German units running around, but it only existed at close up zoom which wasn't very practical during gameplay, so probably not worth the money.


To the OP, your concern is definitely noted.

[Valcutio]

The problem with Microtransactions are they beg the question, "Why are they there?"

Example 1: You can purchase 100 Rocks for 10 dollars. Why? Are Rocks hard to get without spending money? More importantly, were they difficult to get only after EA decided to put a price tag on them?

Example 2: You can purchase a Double Experience potion for 10 dollars. Why? Is Experience not balanced effectively while playing the normal game? Was is balanced appropriately before EA decided to put a price tag on it?

My issue with Microtransactions, other than the worry of devs breaking off game content to nickle and dime players with, is that it will change and worsen what is otherwise a fair game. Just because something CAN be earned while playing a game doesn't mean it's practical to do so. Spend 10 hours farming Rocks or pay 10 bucks.

And the issue just keeps getting more and more severe.

Modifié par Valcutio, 22 mars 2013 - 06:42 .

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

J. Reezy wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

I still think they should microtransaction romances.

LIsten to this guy.

Yes.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Volus Warlord wrote...

I still think they should microtransaction romances.

Yes, I think that Dragon Age and Mass Effect should move to a P2F business model.

Modifié par CrustyBot, 22 mars 2013 - 07:14 .

[Robhuzz]

Valcutio wrote...

The problem with Microtransactions are they beg the question, "Why are they there?"

Example 1: You can purchase 100 Rocks for 10 dollars. Why? Are Rocks hard to get without spending money? More importantly, were they difficult to get only after EA decided to put a price tag on them?

Example 2: You can purchase a Double Experience potion for 10 dollars. Why? Is Experience not balanced effectively while playing the normal game? Was is balanced appropriately before EA decided to put a price tag on it?

My issue with Microtransactions, other than the worry of devs breaking off game content to nickle and dime players with, is that it will change and worsen what is otherwise a fair game. Just because something CAN be earned while playing a game doesn't mean it's practical to do so. Spend 10 hours farming Rocks or pay 10 bucks.

And the issue just keeps getting more and more severe.

This.

It's not that microtransactions change the game - not yet - but they will one day. It's inevitable that ea will force developers to create a system in which microtransactions become ever more prevalent. Make it grindy and more people will be tempted to use microtransactions, thus game quality suffers for the sake of making more money. There are more possibilities obviously.

Other than that....most microtransactions are essentially small cheats in single player games. We had those before, they just force us to pay for them now. I mean wth.... Disgusting practice IMO. Just like day one dlc that's cut from the game and sold at extra price. And they think gamers are wrong when we call it 'nickle and diming'. I can't call it anything else.

ETA: Sadly this is not in any way Bioware's decision. EA's last CEO seemed to think it was a great idea (who doesn't remember the pay a dollar to reload speech - downright terrifying). Perhaps his departure might make EA reconsider. Though I highly doubt it.

Modifié par Robhuzz, 22 mars 2013 - 07:09 .

[Direwolf0294]

BioWare's not good when it comes to microtransactions. I don't have any problem with BioWare including them in ME3's multiplayer, because some people don't have to time to grind and the stuff you can unlock doesn't offer a huge advantage, nor with TOR's, because F2P. What I do have a problem with is the specific way they've added microtransactions to their games. The randomness of them. They've basically implemented gambling into their games for real money, and I think that's wrong. Let someone straight up buy an item or character for real money, fine, but don't make people pay for the chance of getting the item they want. I really hope that if DA3 does include microtransactions they don't go with the random loot chest angle.