Imagine that if a player lost a game in LOL, that hero would be dead for them, and they would have to pay, in either in game currency or real money, to ever play that hero again.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
EA's on a roll!: New PvZ 2 update
- Thread starter Rodney McKay
- Start date
ScreenSplitter
Member
Thing is, Garden Warfare actually looks really fun, but because of PvZ2 and EA's fuckery, I'll likely never buy it (not to mention holding splitscreen to next-gen ransom)
Vanilla PvZ was indeed a travesty and a case example of how free to play can destroy a great game concept. The first major patch however, was a massive improvement. They basically removed pretty much every roadblock and made it so that you could go through levels in a linear fashion and get world keys at the end of each world, enabling you to move on to new worlds easily.
Whilst I still find the game overall worse than the original PvZ, it is now a decent sequel that deserves another shot if you were disappointed by the original release... or it was until this lawnmower update.
There was an update around christmas time that fixed a number of things. They removed the star grind for advancing levels...they removed the key grind for new plants and upgrades...and they added a new Zombie type.
Game still lacks any replayability though. All I can do now is run at the three Endless zones and wait for the Pinata party.
ScreenSplitter
Member
Might buy the Vita version of PVZ just to wash the taste out of my mouth!
Tanks for the explanation.
Post-release additions/aggravations of micro-transactions are something I certainly don't want to continue. It's already bad enough that games have the increasing feel of being a shop with a salesman instead of a fun and "innocent" distraction. To know that games can slip new micro-transactions after you already invested into them is beyond shady. Just image the same thing happening in a payed game like Forza 5...
Rodney McKay
Member
It really does sadden me that there are people that take this attitude, it really really does.
Pure apathy I can handle (doesn't effect me, so whatever), but then dismissing ohers by throwing around insults because there are people who DON'T like these"Prevailing Trends?" Prevailing Trends that are actively making games worse for the people who play them? Being completely accepting of updates that alter game features to benefit the company at the expense of yourself? That attitude is truly depressing to see.
Can't believe this. I was actually thinking of playing this again as it's been left in a folder for ages. Looks like I won't be playing and I'll delete it.
I would have considered paying up to £5 for a non microtranslation social media linked game just like the first PvZ. Surely giving people the opportunity would do no harm?
I would have considered paying up to £5 for a non microtranslation social media linked game just like the first PvZ. Surely giving people the opportunity would do no harm?
IsntChrisL
Member
You know what? I don't even want this game on Steam anymore. It sounds like the whole thing would need to be completely remade to avoid being the complete fuckup of a sequel it is on phones.
Great job at fucking up a new IP that a lot of people actually liked, EA.
Great job at fucking up a new IP that a lot of people actually liked, EA.
Completely different game, completely different genre, completely different design goals. Absolutely pointless comparison.
A more apt comparison would be paying for a continue in a rogue/like, and even that's taking it much further.
Where am I wrong? "Throwing around insults"--because I'm the only one doing so in this thread, yeah?
I'm just calling it like it is. This is normal monetization strategy in mobile gaming. The reaction here is very specific TO the IP and the publisher involved. It's funny that EA is getting this blame when PopCap was heading in this trend long before they were purchased.
ScreenSplitter
Member
It's basically that sort of attitude that allows this sort of broken, horrible shit to exist, and thrive.
Rodney McKay
Member
I'm sure the bean counters have calculated that offering the game for free and having $20-30 of downloadable content (or infinite $ if you buy coins forever) is more profitable than just offering a full, complete game for $10-20.
No, it's players who purchase the microtransactions that do.
I don't. I just understand the logic behind them because I don't have rash reactions to sensible business decisions.
Art Teitlebaum
Member
Greedy business suits destroying the fun in gaming. Carry on, EA. You won't be missed.
RumblingRosco
Member
This is what is so sad to me. I loved PvZ 1. I enjoyed the bit of PvZ 2 that I've played, but between balancing issues and patches that seem to just want to push me towards spending real money... it's annoying. I just want to throw $20 at them and enjoy the game, not have to pay in small increments with no clear end in sight.
ScreenSplitter
Member
Apathy, acceptance, whatever you want to call it. A world where this sort of thing is seen as "ok" by the majority, whether they're engaging in the micro-transactions or not, is pretty despicable. And it may be a sensible decision on EA's part for the now, for today, but it won't always be like that.
Yeah you're most likely right otherwise this f2p business wouldn't have taken off.
I had to work on a game plagued with locked elements and several different priced subscriptions to unlock further "items". I told my boss and coworkers that I don't think it was a good idea especially since the target audience was young girls. However since I've left the internship, the game seems to have been shelved.
FreddieQuell
Member
Everyone understands the damn logic. That doesn't make it any less shitty.
Oh I didn't know you could only complain under certain circumstances, that's new for me. I also didn't know "me too" approaches to shoddy/questionable/abusive practices are justified because "someone did it before"
Rodney McKay
Member
Where am I wrong? "Throwing around insults"--because I'm the only one doing so in this thread, yeah?
I'm just calling it like it is. This is normal monetization strategy in mobile gaming. The reaction here is very specific TO the IP and the publisher involved. It's funny that EA is getting this blame when PopCap was heading in this trend long before they were purchased.
I never said you were wrong, I said your attitude toward these "normal monitization strategies" is sad and disheartening as a fan of gaming in general.
These strategies make games worse, beyond a doubt in my mind. "Because other people are doing it" has never and will never be an acceptable excuse to me for shitty behavior.
With the original release of PvZ 2, the release of the incredible awful Dungeon Keeper (due to the normal monitization as you call it), and now with this update to PvZ 2 that makes the game worse overall, it is perfectly acceptable to start calling out EA for their continued and terrible implementation of this monitization strategy. Every company that makes a good game and makes it worse by using these strategies should be called out.
Are you actually surprised when there are people who would pay full price for a glorified demo?
When I am on GAF, nothing surprises me. People will still pre-order Battlefield 5
ExFalsoQuodlibet
Member
Stop buying EA games. All of them. On any platform.
nkarafo
Member
On the other hand, its a good thing that there is a company who do these things today and gets all the shit from the game community. They are actually showing to the world just how microtransactions can destroy gaming, before it gradually evolves and becomes a standard before the masses ever notice it. By sacrificing themselves this way, they are actually saving the game industry! They are my heroes!
Velcro Fly
Member
They should just give people the option to buy the game and skip the bullshit or get it for free and be hassled about microtransactions. Why does it have to be one or the other?
I'm already there. I'm only worried about boycotting Mirror's Edge 2.
FreddieQuell
Member
Cause they make more money by only having microtransactions.
poopninjamvc3mk
I sucked six dicks to get this tag.
Sir Blaming
Member
*cough*profit*cough*
I don't think that this is that big of a deal; yeah it sucks that EA made PvZ2 into a microtransaction driven game, but at the end of the day the game is free and you don't have to pay for anything in the game.
I played the game for a couple of hours, got bored of it, then moved on to something else, no big deal. If enough people don't buy into the microtransactions, then EA will change course.
I played the game for a couple of hours, got bored of it, then moved on to something else, no big deal. If enough people don't buy into the microtransactions, then EA will change course.
Microtransactions apparently make more cash over the long run. Why give somebody the opportunity to buy a game for $20 if he would likely buy $60 worth of microtransactions over the course of one year? Apparently, enough people do that. Like with spam, it's hard to imagine that anybody would "fall" for this, but it seems to work well enough to sustain the model.
Quadraphonic
Member
Just as a reminder from 2012:
Here's an article from the CO-FOUNDER of Popcap:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...defends-ea-after-worst-company-in-america-win
Apparently EA's "current balance" is just fucking straight-up combining the two with a $60 microtransaction price point.
Here's an article from the CO-FOUNDER of Popcap:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...defends-ea-after-worst-company-in-america-win
Apparently EA's "current balance" is just fucking straight-up combining the two with a $60 microtransaction price point.
Velcro Fly
Member
I seriously think they underestimate the amount of people who would buy the game and know they won't have to worry. Of course keeping it free means they can fuck with the game as much as they want and no one can complain because hey the game is free!
It's usually true, but lawnmowers disappearing forever literally break the game. I did not play PvZ2, but from these posts about boss battles it really seems like you simply can't continue the game past certain point without purchasing coins. That's ridiculous.
Miles Quaritch
Member
This has to be intentional at this point. EA can't be unintentionally making this many goofs.
They are testing the waters, seeing how much they can get people to go in on it without giving up in disgust.
This is cancerous, and the people that support this with money are cancerous.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Hmm, that does make sense. They were the first to introduce online passes, so I guess it makes sense they'd be the first to push F2P as far as they can possibly can and hope there isn't a backlash or that any backlash is short lived as more and more F2P games start using similar tactics as was the case with online passes....
mcfishstick
Member
This was inevitable I guess. Vanilla PvZ2 was easy without paying a single cent. That first update tried to push you towards paying since it forced you to do hard missions to continue playing.
I imagine this update brings the game in line with EA's expectations for microtransactions.
I can't believe they crushed all of my interest in a game I really looked forward to. It's quite amazing really. I don't see why people insist on buying their games. People looking forward to Mirror's Edge expecting a sequel to the first should reign in expectation, Seriously, every game EA released last year had a problem or major issue, but they carry one because people don't care and continue buying EA's games.
I imagine this update brings the game in line with EA's expectations for microtransactions.
I can't believe they crushed all of my interest in a game I really looked forward to. It's quite amazing really. I don't see why people insist on buying their games. People looking forward to Mirror's Edge expecting a sequel to the first should reign in expectation, Seriously, every game EA released last year had a problem or major issue, but they carry one because people don't care and continue buying EA's games.
bone_and_sinew
breaking down barriers in gratuitous nudity
How many worst company in the world awards will EA win? Not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six, not seven...
Quadraphonic
Member
They milked it in phases. I'm honestly surprised they didn't actually start the game out at $0.99 and then drop it to free.
Each phase, they're targeting a different demo. In the first phase, they went after the early adopters. They could have easily charged 99c and still had IAPs. But anyways, with keys and stars, they wanted to get everyone playing, sharing and reviewing it.
Because it would be mostly core players jumping on early, the difficulty balance for casuals could be corrected with money.
Then once that audience tapered off, they patched out the gates, and made it into a difficult linear adventure that straight up requires cheating, breaking all the balance. They don't give a shit about preserving the previous players. Now they just want to frustrate people who have a few worlds left, and make them give up their cash.
IE: "Dammit, I'm only a few worlds away, I'll spend the $20 on those gems and be done with this."
And now they've seemingly passed that phase and are now just in full "Fuck you, pay me" mode.
TheGreyHulk
Member
You've got to be shitting me. Their previous update was so good in getting the game back on track for me to play again and now they pull this crap. Absolutely disgusting, EA.
xValentine
Member
Aiming for that 3rd year in a row baby.
wapplew
Member
They don't have to make all the decisions, they just need to give developer crazy grossing target without enough funding.
And it doesn't seem to impact EA at all. 2013 is probably their worst year for games, and I doubt that'll harm sales of Titanfall or other popular titles in 2014.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Jesus Christ...
And I assume this is the same roadmap they'll be following with for D.K? Although, my limited reading up on that game suggests they've gone straight to the final phase from the very beginning...
Huh, I didn't know this. What happens if a developer fails to make that target?
Similar threads
- Locked