127 réponses à ce sujet

[cjones91]

As far as I know, BioWare is doing well.

TOR, which many people wrote off as a failure, is one of EA's backbones. The ME series did well. DA II turned a profit. They have ShadowRealm and ??? in development, both of which are new IPs.

It's not like I have access to their books, but BioWare seems to be a healthy studio. EA giving them an extra year of development and them expanding to make different IPs are both good signs.


That problem exists on an industry level though, and doesn't have an easy solution.

There are a few things that may alleviate the problem though,like cutting back on the marketing budget and having realistic sales expectations.

 

All this bloat is self harming the industry.

[Shadowson]

So this has deviated quite far off topic...  I figured that they were not going bankrupt and that it was just a random statement thrown out there just for the sake of being thrown out there.

 

But back to the topic of the thread. yea i personally think that the microtransactions in DAI will be a good thing as they will help pay for future MP DLC and they are not a pay to win system.

[Maria Caliban]

Multiplayer can have serious price gouging. Simply because you can get everything from playing, doesn't mean that the game is fair for those who want to avoid MTX.

Even EA, evil puppy-dog killers that they are, have come to understand that people willing to pour 100-500 hours into a multiplayer game but not pay are still a source of income; they generate content for people who will pay.

There are people who will drop $1,000 on multiplayer... but they're not going to do so if they have to wait 15 minutes for a game to start.

[cjones91]

Multiplayer can have serious price gouging. Simply because you can get everything from playing, doesn't mean that the game is fair for those who want to avoid MTX.

Even EA, evil puppy-dog kills that they are, have come to understand that people willing to pour 100-500 hours into a multiplayer game but not pay are still a source of income; they generate content for people who will pay.

There are people who will drop $1,000 on multiplayer... but they're not going to do so if they have to wait 15 minutes for a game to start.

Are you serious?1000$ on multiplayer???

 

Do these people have no concept of self control or money management?Jesus.....

[Sanunes]

Are you serious?1000$ on multiplayer???

 

Do these people have no concept of self control or money management?Jesus.....

 

There are people that can afford that and labeling them without having "self-control" or "money management skills" is a bit rash. Otherwise you can say the same thing about a lot of people that buy expensive luxury items such as gaming consoles or computers.

[Shadowson]

Nope, its part of the entitlement mentality that is a become a big thing in the last few years. 

I have witnessed some people i know in an MMO drops hundreds of dollars a day just to get ahead and then drop the game after a few months. It seems to give them a feeling of superiority.

[cjones91]

There are people that can afford that and labeling them without having "self-control" or "money management skills" is a bit rash. Otherwise you can say the same thing about a lot of people that buy expensive luxury items such as gaming consoles or computers.

It might be rash but still.....spending that kind of cash on multiplayer is way different than paying for gaming consoles or computers.It just seems wasteful.

[phoenix fang55]

Honestly, the way they handle microtransactions is just fine, they did well in ME3, I even admit to using some of my extra points to buy a pack or two, but its not like a F2P game where you hit a pay wall, where the only way to be good is to pay. No, paying here will just give you a few more chances quickly at the RNG.

[Maria Caliban]

Are you serious?1000$ on multiplayer???
 
Do these people have no concept of self control or money management?Jesus.....

Some people have lots of disposable income.

Also, they probably aren't going to do this all at once. Perhaps they spend $100 when they start multiplayer and $200 when a new DLC hits so they unlock everything.

[Nayawk]

It might be rash but still.....spending that kind of cash on multiplayer is way different than paying for gaming consoles or computers.It just seems wasteful.

 

People spend money on their hobbies, it is hardly wasteful if that time is enjoyed.  

 

The same could be said for going to see a movie, going to the zoo, an amusement park, lazer tag, the list goes on...... you don't own anything afterwards, you have bought no physical thing but it was worth it for fun and the experience.

[Sasie]

People spend money on their hobbies, it is hardly wasteful if that time is enjoyed.  

 

The same could be said for going to see a movie, going to the zoo, an amusement park, lazer tag, the list goes on...... you don't own anything afterwards, you have bought no physical thing but it was worth it for fun and the experience.

I have no problem with people having disposable income or spending it on their hobbies. I waste money as well. The problem though if anything is the message it sends to the companies or if they start to expect to get those micro transactions. I might be willing to pay extra for games I truly love but there are way too many games out there so if they all start to want the extra money we do have a problem.

A few have argued that EA knows that they can't expect everyone to give 100-1000 euro's for a game but we are talking about the company who sold cheat codes as micro transactions in Dead Space 3. Just looking at the one free to play game I have from EA in my phone makes me question their motives or if they even know what reasonable pricing means. 

[Sanunes]

I have no problem with people having disposable income or spending it on their hobbies. I waste money as well. The problem though if anything is the message it sends to the companies or if they start to expect to get those micro transactions. I might be willing to pay extra for games I truly love but there are way too many games out there so if they all start to want the extra money we do have a problem.

A few have argued that EA knows that they can't expect everyone to give 100-1000 euro's for a game but we are talking about the company who sold cheat codes as micro transactions in Dead Space 3. Just looking at the one free to play game I have from EA in my phone makes me question their motives or if they even know what reasonable pricing means. 

 

That was Ubisoft with Assassin's Creed.  All Dead Space 3 was is something similar to Mass Effect 3 where you could buy the resources you used from crafting that you scavenged from the world. Which like Mass Effect 3 I never did because there was even less of a need then in Mass Effect 3.

[Maria Caliban]

EA is far less evil than it once was. The board of directors only summons elder horrors from the beyond once a quarter now instead of every month.

Besides, BioWare designed the multiplayer game. EA probably did not have much in the way of input other than having people show up and look at occasional demonstrations just to make sure BioWare was doing its job instead of indulging in Mark Darrah's desire to build the world's largest Nanaimo bar.

[realguile]

EA is far less evil than it once was. The board of directors only summons elder horrors from the beyond once a quarter now instead of every month.
 

 

Damn.

[raging_monkey]

Some people cant spend x amount of time playin mp so a quick way to keep up with other players microtrans help with this

[LinksOcarina]

It is empowerment of your investment to the game.How much you want to spend for your favorite game, how willing are you to spend things. Keeping it low in cost gives it a impulse buy level, but it is high enough to make you think if its worth it.

[cronshaw]

At any rate back to Dragon Age. Personally I would think the full priced cost for the game itself would be enough to make it profitable. If they need more to make one feature worth adding perhaps that feature doesn't belong in the game to begin with.

 

That's silly

That's like saying a sunroof doesn't belong in a car because the car company charges you extra for it. 

(and that's not even the greatest example because you don't have to spend any money on MP)

I'm not sure why people get so hung up about companies making money, it seems very odd to me.

There are some really cynical MT models out there to be sure and I wouldn't/don't support those games

that is my power as a consumer

DA:I's model does not seem to be cynical or overly mercenary, so I will be supporting it; 

but if it seems so to you perhaps you shouldn't support it.

[ElitePinecone]

A reform of their budgets is in order.A studio going bankrupt from spending absurd amounts of money is ridiculus.

 

Okay.

 

So say goodbye to any games like Dragon Age ever again. Cinematic storytelling the way Bioware does it costs money. Heck, writing costs money, and nobody employs as many full-time writers as this studio. It is impossible to make a game the size and quality of Inquisition on a budget of something tiny like Divinity. 

 

Players can't have it both ways. Either studios and publishers make a profit, and they keep making games, or they don't, and everything falls apart. We can't simultaneously demand that games get bigger and better while insisting that they keep costs the same as before. If the size of the market is the same and the price of games is the same, where is the extra money going to come from?

 

If people are prepared to accept mediocre games, then we can talk about "reform of their budgets" - but at the moment, the expectations of players are increasing and that demands more revenue. 

[ElitePinecone]

Just on microtransactions in general, Rob Fahey had a great article on them last year. This is the most relevant section:

 

"Publishers enthralled by the revenue potential of F2P have been all too keen to bolt the same elements into games that actually still cost $50 up front - and few of them have shown any understanding of the radically different relationship that exists between a player and a game they've bought, compared to a player's relationship to a game they downloaded for free.

 

It's not that it's impossible to monetise a paid-for game down the line - but it must be handled with kid gloves, approached with the utmost of generosity and must never lose sight of the fundamental task of making the player feel respected and rewarded. Fail, and you don't just lose out on the possibility of post-sale monetisation - you also lose out on the next $50 the player might have spent on your games."

 

I think, for the most part, that microtransactions like in ME3 are successfully balancing the interests of players and the need to make money. It was one of the best ways to approach the issue I've seen in the industry, and if it's had success with that game no wonder EA seems to be doing something similar with Plants vs Zombies and DA:I.

 

More to the point, I don't hear *anyone* complaining about being ripped off or cheated from ME3's system, but it clearly made enough money to fund itself and five more DLCs. Isn't that pretty good evidence that this MXT model works well?

[LinksOcarina]

Just on microtransactions in general, Rob Fahey had a great article on them last year. This is the most relevant section:

 

"Publishers enthralled by the revenue potential of F2P have been all too keen to bolt the same elements into games that actually still cost $50 up front - and few of them have shown any understanding of the radically different relationship that exists between a player and a game they've bought, compared to a player's relationship to a game they downloaded for free.

 

It's not that it's impossible to monetise a paid-for game down the line - but it must be handled with kid gloves, approached with the utmost of generosity and must never lose sight of the fundamental task of making the player feel respected and rewarded. Fail, and you don't just lose out on the possibility of post-sale monetisation - you also lose out on the next $50 the player might have spent on your games."

 

I think, for the most part, that microtransactions like in ME3 are successfully balancing the interests of players and the need to make money. It was one of the best ways to approach the issue I've seen in the industry, and if it's had success with that game no wonder EA seems to be doing something similar with Plants vs Zombies and DA:I.

 

More to the point, I don't hear *anyone* complaining about being ripped off or cheated from ME3's system, but it clearly made enough money to fund itself and five more DLCs. Isn't that pretty good evidence that this MXT model works well?

 

i won't say its clear evidence, but I will say it is a step in the right direction for sure. As far as EA using microtransactions as a viable monetary scheme, Id say they have been fair more times than foul, unlike other companies who have been very ham-handed in dealing with this.

 

I guess the real question is to see what happens when Inquisition is released,although no one complained about Garden Warfare either from that what ive seen. 

[Sidney]

I'm not sure in a non-competitive situation for sure why anyone cares how someone else spends money. The odd thing in ME3 was that you spent money to avoid playing the game you just spent money on.  Even in a competitive scenario, the old saying is time is money so why reward the jobless slacker or 13 year old on summer vacation who can play game X all day everyday while those with actual jobs and families can't compete with their ability to spend time (as opposed to money).

 

Everyone has resources they can allocate to a hobby and why privilege on resource over another?

[Innsmouth Dweller]

I'm not sure in a non-competitive situation for sure why anyone cares how someone else spends money. The odd thing in ME3 was that you spent money to avoid playing the game you just spent money on.  Even in a competitive scenario, the old saying is time is money so why reward the jobless slacker or 13 year old on summer vacation who can play game X all day everyday while those with actual jobs and families can't compete with their ability to spend time (as opposed to money).

 

Everyone has resources they can allocate to a hobby and why privilege on resource over another?

those who have jobs, families and can spend both time and money on games might feel annoyed. after all that noob who cannot play has the best gear evah cuz he spend money and i'm still grinding in this assboring dungeon

[Fiery Phoenix]

That's why you're getting 'free' DLC for MP; if it weren't for the existence of microtransactions, none of the MP DLC would be free.

 

Give and take.

[eternalshiva]

???

 

It's not a Pay to Win trope here, it's optional. All it will do is give you access to "money" in MP to purchase more chests that are available to everyone already, they'll just get it faster than the people who grind, JUST like in ME3MP.

 

You'll get ALL the same stuff, at a different SPEED level. The one that's totally maxed out on the first week but only has 3 hours of play time on MP, you KNOW he bought all of his things but the things they got aren't special snowflake items since it's the exact same gear / weapons you'll have access to.

 

The person that has 500+ hours and is maxed out, they grinded the in-game currency to purchase the gear / weapons - the difference is you're probably better at tactics than the 3 hour joe that blew 500 bucks to get maxed out on the first day.

 

What's the problem? ME3MP never gave you "special" weapons for using real money, you got the same stuff the other players got at a faster pace and you were not guaranteed to get the item you were looking for anyways. It was all on a RNG basis and although I have close to 650 hours in ME3MP, I still don't have my weapons maxed because the damned 99,000 credit packs won't drop my N7 weapons D:<

[LinksOcarina]

And if were lucky, maxed out gear will do nothing but drive up some slight bonuses if tactics are involved of course. That depends on the design of the multiplayer and the difficulty though.