91 réponses à ce sujet

[cap and gown]

I don't understand why upgrades are totally random. Do other games not let you control you character's development? Is this standard? What is the point? It can't be to make you want to play more. What does EA get of people playing more? Nothing as far as I can tell. Or maybe they want people to drop out so they don't have to spend as much on servers and upkeep. I really just don't get it.

[Tokenusername]

To promote longevity and microtransaction sales.

[Salarian Jesus]

One way to keep people playing. "Oh, I didn't get any URs in this pack. Maybe in the next one!"

Modifié par kaxas92, 13 novembre 2013 - 01:28 .

[MajorStupidity]

Dat microtransaction money of course

I like the random drops as long as they come from credits in game, but when people are putting real money down I really wish they would have given them the option to buy specific items/gear/characters.

Modifié par MajorStupidity, 13 novembre 2013 - 01:29 .

[Pearl (rip bioware)]

Microtransactions and a false sense of progression.

[cap and gown]

Tokenusername wrote...

To promote longevity and microtransaction sales.

Wouldn't they generate more sales if you knew what you were buying? They are not promising me that I can retire in the Carribean, just that I can play a game a little better. (Course, I don't play the lottery anyway, so what do I know.)

[NuclearTech76]

Tokenusername wrote...

To promote longevity and microtransaction sales.

 
Pretty much this. We could make it more complicated but it's about increasing the game's life which gets hooks in more gamers the longer it is viable and making some money off the people who use money to purchase packs. Bottomline is it's about money.

[MajorStupidity]

cap and gown wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

To promote longevity and microtransaction sales.

Wouldn't they generate more sales if you knew what you were buying? They are not promising me that I can retire in the Carribean, just that I can play a game a little better. (Course, I don't play the lottery anyway, so what do I know.)

You would be surprised how much money some people will put down on these packs even if they are random...

[cap and gown]

I am still wondering whether this is standard in online gaming.

[Pearl (rip bioware)]

MajorStupidity wrote...

cap and gown wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

To promote longevity and microtransaction sales.

Wouldn't they generate more sales if you knew what you were buying? They are not promising me that I can retire in the Carribean, just that I can play a game a little better. (Course, I don't play the lottery anyway, so what do I know.)

You would be surprised how much money some people will put down on these packs even if they are random...

Very true.

[NuclearTech76]

cap and gown wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

To promote longevity and microtransaction sales.

Wouldn't they generate more sales if you knew what you were buying? They are not promising me that I can retire in the Carribean, just that I can play a game a little better. (Course, I don't play the lottery anyway, so what do I know.)

 
I would think they would but at the same time I'm sure they pay people far more intelligent than me to research that very topic.

[Malanek]

Oddly enough I was discussing this topic on the DAI board earlier. This is what I wrote.

I would just like to point out another advantage of it being random. Balancing. Certain players get really, really annoyed when their favourite over powered weapon or character gets "nerfed" back to a balanced state. If they paid $20 for it, they become irate. It is essential for the overall game to balance things so I actually believe it being mostly random is the way to go.

Can you imagine how some people would have gone off if the level X Krysae they just bought got the treatment it got?

[Tokenusername]

cap and gown wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

To promote longevity and microtransaction sales.

Wouldn't they generate more sales if you knew what you were buying? They are not promising me that I can retire in the Carribean, just that I can play a game a little better. (Course, I don't play the lottery anyway, so what do I know.)

No, because players will always have personal preferences. Why would you ever spend real money to buy the Vindicator? If you can strait up buy the Harrier, you max it out and never buy another pack again. If you can't choose what you buy, every player becomes the market for every item. Allowing players to binge on items also will decrease their interest in the game, and thus lower the longevity of the game. It's just gambling. You buy ten packs because the first nine were all cyro ammo, but the next one could be a Lancer.

[Tokenusername]

cap and gown wrote...

I am still wondering whether this is standard in online gaming.

Welcome to the F2P model.

[Master-Steel]

cap and gown wrote...

I am still wondering whether this is standard in online gaming.

Its pretty standard.  Ever heard of World of Warcraft?  or any other mmo?

[cap and gown]

Tokenusername wrote...

No, because players will always have personal preferences. Why would you ever spend real money to buy the Vindicator? If you can strait up buy the Harrier, you max it out and never buy another pack again. If you can't choose what you buy, every player becomes the market for every item. Allowing players to binge on items also will decrease their interest in the game, and thus lower the longevity of the game. It's just gambling. You buy ten packs because the first nine were all cyro ammo, but the next one could be a Lancer.

What is the point of longevity? They have to pay to keep those servers running.

[Evil]

Tokenusername wrote...

cap and gown wrote...

I am still wondering whether this is standard in online gaming.

Welcome to the F2P model.

At least you didn't have to pay for any of the MP DLC cap and gown.

And this method avoids fragmenting the playerbase into have(DLC)'s and have(DLC)not's, so it's still quite easy to find a game, considering how old the game is.

The idea needs work for ME4MP though, lots of work.

Modifié par Evil Mastered, 13 novembre 2013 - 01:47 .

[cap and gown]

Master-Steel wrote...

cap and gown wrote...

I am still wondering whether this is standard in online gaming.

Its pretty standard.  Ever heard of World of Warcraft?  or any other mmo?

Heard of them, never played them. (I did watch South Park's Make Love not Warcraft episode.)

[bondiboy]

There would be no point in having a large choice of weapons and characters.
Players would just save credits or spend money to get the Harrier, Hurricane etc and just unlock the kits that put out the most damage .
I am not saying this is right or wrong or justifies the RNG but the current scheme has given some variety and longevity to the game as players work their way through unlocks and upgrades.

Modifié par stricko, 13 novembre 2013 - 01:48 .

[Tokenusername]

cap and gown wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

No, because players will always have personal preferences. Why would you ever spend real money to buy the Vindicator? If you can strait up buy the Harrier, you max it out and never buy another pack again. If you can't choose what you buy, every player becomes the market for every item. Allowing players to binge on items also will decrease their interest in the game, and thus lower the longevity of the game. It's just gambling. You buy ten packs because the first nine were all cyro ammo, but the next one could be a Lancer.

What is the point of longevity? They have to pay to keep those servers running.

The longer you play, the more invested you become in the series, and the more you trust the quality of the developer. In turn you're more likely to purchase more content for the game (such as DLCs and in-game items), buy the next game in the series, and buy other games by the same developer. There is also the possibility of word of mouth making more people buy the game to play with their friends. Maintaining a constant interest in a product is basic economics.

[mybudgee]

Gambling addicts

[cap and gown]

Tokenusername wrote...

The longer you play, the more invested you become in the series, and the more you trust the quality of the developer. In turn you're more likely to purchase more content for the game (such as DLCs and in-game items), buy the next game in the series, and buy other games by the same developer. There is also the possibility of word of mouth making more people buy the game to play with their friends. Maintaining a constant interest in a product is basic economics.

Does this really apply to ME? MP is a pretty late addition to the series. People fell in love with the single player version long before MP came along. I bought most of the DLC well before I started MP.

[Malanek]

cap and gown wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

The longer you play, the more invested you become in the series, and the more you trust the quality of the developer. In turn you're more likely to purchase more content for the game (such as DLCs and in-game items), buy the next game in the series, and buy other games by the same developer. There is also the possibility of word of mouth making more people buy the game to play with their friends. Maintaining a constant interest in a product is basic economics.

Does this really apply to ME? MP is a pretty late addition to the series. People fell in love with the single player version long before MP came along. I bought most of the DLC well before I started MP.

I think it illustrates it well. If you spent 10-20 hours on a single ME3 playthrough, would you have even tried the MPer?

[Tokenusername]

cap and gown wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

The longer you play, the more invested you become in the series, and the more you trust the quality of the developer. In turn you're more likely to purchase more content for the game (such as DLCs and in-game items), buy the next game in the series, and buy other games by the same developer. There is also the possibility of word of mouth making more people buy the game to play with their friends. Maintaining a constant interest in a product is basic economics.

Does this really apply to ME? MP is a pretty late addition to the series. People fell in love with the single player version long before MP came along. I bought most of the DLC well before I started MP.

You're right. I have no idea what i'm talking about and MP was a total flop.

[cap and gown]

Malanek999 wrote...

I think it illustrates it well. If you spent 10-20 hours on a single ME3 playthrough, would you have even tried the MPer?

Not sure I understand. BW already has my money from all the DLC I bought. They got nothing from me deciding to try out MP since I already had all the DLC (almost all, I don't have one weapon pack, or any of the alternate apearance packs.)

Added: Another point is the SP and MP versions seem somewhat divorced from each other. Same cast of character, but absolutely no story behind the MP version, just fighting for the sake of fighting.

Modifié par cap and gown, 13 novembre 2013 - 02:12 .