95 réponses à ce sujet

[Arcian]

This double sucks.

Seriously, did people forget it's EA we're dealing with here?

[ZipZap2000]

I'll take your word for it. I don't follow those games enough to to know what works and what doesn't. Sucks to be a cheap MP player, I guess.

I don't suppose there's good data available to us on what percentage of players buy the maps, is there?

Percentages won't mean much when you're doing numbers like COD or GTA a small percentage is a big number. My guess is it varies but the overall numbers must be big. This is capitalism after all, they wouldn't waste time on it if it didn't work.

Which sucks if you don't think paying the extra is really worth the price tag.

[SKAR]

No wonder why so many people hate EA. And can you blame them? Hell no.

[Sartoz]

Who cares? Look I hate micro transactions as much as anyone - I think they're intrusive nightmares that actively undermine a setting and game. And I dislike MP/SP integration and have no interest in MP.

But who cares about pointless cosmetic decorations?

                                                                                       <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

Remember the saying "there's a fool born every minute"? I played one of those free MMOs and the game company offered fantastic looking armour that made you look like a peacock... not better than mine, but certainly fine looking.... for a price. Yow know what?.... there were many players wearing them! The game was also a grind... very much so. For a price you can minimize the tedium.

[AlanC9]

Percentages won't mean much when you're doing numbers like COD or GTA a small percentage is a big number. My guess is it varies but the overall numbers must be big. This is capitalism after all, they wouldn't waste time on it if it didn't work.

Which sucks if you don't think paying the extra is really worth the price tag.

That doesn't actually make sense. Percentages matter just the same with a bigger product, since now the down side is bigger when you really do drive people away. Though there's a lower bound where doing a paid DLC for a fraction of the player base doesn't make sense because it won't earn out, I don't think any of the games we're talking about are anywhere near that.

I still don't see how a company making something that you don't want to buy sucks. Unless you mean that you'll end up with MP that you might like, but you won't like the paid maps that you'll need to keep playing? In effect, the other MP players will be rejecting your approach to the game. But again, the bigger the game, the more likely that you'll still be able to find a match without buying stuff.

[AlanC9]

<<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>
 
Remember the saying "there's a fool born every minute"? I played one of those free MMOs and the game company offered fantastic looking armour that made you look like a peacock... not better than mine, but certainly fine looking.... for a price. Yow know what?.... there were many players wearing them! The game was also a grind... very much so. For a price you can minimize the tedium.

How do you know they're not getting fair value for their time and money? I mean, they're buying, they're playing.. are they fools, or do they just have different preferences from you?

[Sartoz]

How do you know they're not getting fair value for their time and money? I mean, they're buying, they're playing.. are they fools, or do they just have different preferences from you?

                                                                                      <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

Hm... Perhaps I come from a world where the word "value" has some other meaning than spending $79US then another $50US + on fluffery/grinding avoidance. It can easily get out of hand, such as:

 

1.- Spending $2.5K in game purchases: http://kotaku.com/59...e-to-play-games

2.- 10 worst games: http://www.pcgamer.c...rotransactions/

 

3.- Here is a 2013 link on EA's micro transaction decision: http://www.eurogamer...l-of-our-games

 

Looks like EA read the market and pounced on it successfully.

 

[Iakus]

You can't hold players blameless. These strategies only work if people buy the stuff. Bio getting more aggressive won't work if there's no market.

 

"I'm just filling a demand" isn't exactly the best excuse to use...

[straykat]

How do you know they're not getting fair value for their time and money? I mean, they're buying, they're playing.. are they fools, or do they just have different preferences from you?

 

I think people (who don't like MT) just want games. Nothing more, nothing less. This is an entirely different design philosophy shaping the medium. Not mere preference.

[ZipZap2000]

That doesn't actually make sense. Percentages matter just the same with a bigger product, since now the down side is bigger when you really do drive people away. Though there's a lower bound where doing a paid DLC for a fraction of the player base doesn't make sense because it won't earn out, I don't think any of the games we're talking about are anywhere near that.

I still don't see how a company making something that you don't want to buy sucks. Unless you mean that you'll end up with MP that you might like, but you won't like the paid maps that you'll need to keep playing? In effect, the other MP players will be rejecting your approach to the game. But again, the bigger the game, the more likely that you'll still be able to find a match without buying stuff.

Percentages don't mean jack squat if the overall number is massive. For example 1% of the Chinese population is not equal to 1% of the population of Tonga. So as I say it will vary with each franchise what matters is whether or not the number of people willing to pay X for DLC is big enough. To go back to my example if only 1% of the Chinese population were willing to give me a dollar I'd be doing well. If 1% of Tongans gave me a dollar I could probably buy a box of meat pies.

[AlanC9]

"I'm just filling a demand" isn't exactly the best excuse to use...

Why not? And what's being excused?

[AlanC9]

<<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

I've been meaning to ask... what is this thing above you keep posting?

 

Hm... Perhaps I come from a world where the word "value" has some other meaning than spending $79US then another $50US + on fluffery/grinding avoidance. It can easily get out of hand, such as:
 
1.- Spending $2.5K in game purchases: http://kotaku.com/59...e-to-play-games
2.- 10 worst games: http://www.pcgamer.c...rotransactions/
 
3.- Here is a 2013 link on EA's micro transaction decision: http://www.eurogamer...l-of-our-games
 
Looks like EA read the market and pounced on it successfully.

Yes. They did.

Other people are spending a lot of money on stuff we don't think is worth the money. I still don't see the reason to second-guess their own judgments about how valuable stuff is to them. Assuming we're talking about mature adults, of course. Kids can be a different matter, but learning about when to spend money is why you give a kid an allowance.

As for the meaning of value, for luxury goods I typically just go neoclassical and call it a day. So, the value of something is whatever somebody's willing to pay for it.

[Beerfish]

For MEMP I pretty well never paid anything just to get things from the RNG store.  What I did do was often make some sort of payment after releases of the 'free' expansions.  In most cases the extra content in my mind was worth it and kept the game going, no revenue, no support or new content it's as simple as that.  ME3MP had a much better and more long lived experience than DAIMP for this reason.

 

It actually boggles my mind in some of MP forums when a person mentions he has paid money towards content and he or she is met with a host of bleating people killing the person for being a sucker.  All the while the 'non suckers' are playing free content that they would not get without someone paying cash.

 

If you don't want to pay, don't it's as simple as that.  I've played a fair bit of world of tanks which is totally based on this micro economy and have never paid a cent as of yet.  I can understand people not being large fans of this stuff because it does seem to be a squeeze every nickel kind of thing but if the product is well done and fun people will pay.

[Iakus]

Why not? And what's being excused?

Because it's a generic excuse that can be used by anyone from a neighborhood grocery store to a drug kingpin.

 

And you already said what's being excused:  the aggressive pushing of microtransactions.

 

I for one, am not part of a market of paying full price for a bare bones, no frills, but technically "complete" game.  while those who spend far more via microtransactions get the whole game

[goishen]

There's a reason why P2W works.  Because they know that there are some people out there willing to pay. 

 

I don't like P2W model however, and I don't think any of you do either or BioWare for that matter.  EA?  Ehhh, EA hasn't made a game in forever.  Sure they've produced them.  Made?  No.  They've gotta do something to keep the lights on.  Am I surprised?  Not really.  Do I hope that it won't affect me?  Oh, most definitely. 

 

But I will pay for content for this game that I want, whether it's story missions, armor skins, or even maps. 

[AlanC9]

I for one, am not part of a market of paying full price for a bare bones, no frills, but technically "complete" game.  while those who spend far more via microtransactions get the whole game

Has that ever happened ITRW? Or is this one of those horrible hypotheticals that never actually happens?

[Iakus]

Has that ever happened ITRW? Or is this one of those horrible hypotheticals that never actually happens?

You mean besides every mobile game ever made?

[RoboticWater]

Has that ever happened ITRW? Or is this one of those horrible hypotheticals that never actually happens?

To the extent that Iakus has described? Probably, but it wasn't an EA title (not a AAA, non-sports game, I can't vouch for those markets). The most egregious microtransaction model EA had was likely Dead Space 3 (mainly for its presence in singleplayer), but the game was still enjoyable (as much as anyone can enjoy DS3) without paying. Of late, EA have been quite good with their microtransaction models. They're either cosmetic or entirely achievable through a reasonable amount of gameplay.

 

The only recent nickel-and-diming I would chastise EA for is the From Ashes day one DLC and Battlefront's season pass. 

 

You mean besides every mobile game ever made?

A. Hyperbole

B. The mobile market is a different beast. You can't dredge up the worst of the mobile market and use that as evidence against the AAA market. The two aren't comparable.

[AlanC9]

You mean besides every mobile game ever made?

Really? I thought the model there was that the base game was free?

[BSpud]

I remember when DAO added a character at your campsite to sell DLC's.  With a giant exclamation point above his head.  I think his name was Levi Dryden.  That offended me so much that I refused to buy any DLC's.  Had to use a mod which removed the exclamation point so he didn't stick out so much like a sore thumb.  It really soured me on Bioware and Electronic Arts.  I get that corporations are only in it to make money, but they need to learn to make their intent less obvious.  Microtransactions are just another step down this road.

 

Yeah, that was pretty bad.

[RoboticWater]

Really? I thought the model there was that the base game was free?

Not always, though I wouldn't be surprised if mobile games were sold at a loss and then monetized via microtransactions.

[KaiserShep]

I didn't even know there was such a thing. Eww..

 

I played Destiny in beta, but gave up after realizing what it was (I didn't think it'd be a pseudo mmo).

 

 

Activision/Bungie danced around the whole MMO thing, but did people really expect anything different? I figured it was an MMO of some sort straight from the gameplay demo shown before release. 

[Iakus]

Really? I thought the model there was that the base game was free?

Moving the Goalposts

 

But fine, if you want to play it that way, try googling The Sims, Payday 2, Castlevania: Lord of Shadow, EA's own FIFA and other sport games...

[SKAR]

There's a reason why P2W works. Because they know that there are some people out there willing to pay.

I don't like P2W model however, and I don't think any of you do either or BioWare for that matter. EA? Ehhh, EA hasn't made a game in forever. Sure they've produced them. Made? No. They've gotta do something to keep the lights on. Am I surprised? Not really. Do I hope that it won't affect me? Oh, most definitely.

But I will pay for content for this game that I want, whether it's story missions, armor skins, or even maps.

If they expect us to put down money they better make the dlc worth our while and give us a ton of it. I liked mass Effect 2 because there was plenty to do from firewalker to arrival.

[Iakus]

If they expect us to put down money they better make the dlc worth our while and give us a ton of it. I liked mass Effect 2 because there was plenty to do from firewalker to arrival.

Firewalker was also free for anyone who bought the game new....