calavera_jo
Neo Member
Oh, I wasn't talking about For Honor, I was just stating that you gain nothing that even gives you a slighter edge in Overwatch
-
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.
Ubisoft on For Honor MT "We never had intention for you to unlock everything."
- Thread starter Rymuth
- Start date
Oh, I wasn't talking about For Honor, I was just stating that you gain nothing that even gives you a slighter edge in Overwatch
¡HarlequinPanic!
Member
some people can't accept not having access to every little piece of content in a game, they have to be the leader of the mage's guild even though they are already the headmaster of the fighter's guild and have 5 points in wizardry. there's no pleasing them while being competitive in business, I understand, so all I'd ask is that games are a bit more transparent of tactics that are clearly designed to get whales to impulse buy expensive MTs.
I mean, I agree with them.
Aggregate the amount of hours it would take to unlock every cosmetic item in an MMO, or a deep RPG. It'll be a prohibitive amount of hours - there is no expectation you will unlock it all, but rather that you'll unlock your most valued subset of those cosmetics.
Now, in accordance with common DLC practices, replace those hours with a proportional amount of money - the cost to unlock everything could easily be prohibitive too.
Aggregate the amount of hours it would take to unlock every cosmetic item in an MMO, or a deep RPG. It'll be a prohibitive amount of hours - there is no expectation you will unlock it all, but rather that you'll unlock your most valued subset of those cosmetics.
Now, in accordance with common DLC practices, replace those hours with a proportional amount of money - the cost to unlock everything could easily be prohibitive too.
AcademicSaucer
Member
Hey, atleast it's not blind boxes like Overwatch
Jeronimo Jones
Member
First, I have not played the game, so I'm not defending all of the shady practices that may be embedded in it.
It does really sound like people are mad because of FOMO on more trinkets to unlock than they have time, interest, or money to spend. This probably particularly bothers the 'I'll wait for the GOTY edition with everything cheaper' type.
I guess I'm too casual to care very much, since I "miss out" on DLC missions, skins, boosts, etc. all the time, usually by not being interested enough to pay for them.
It does really sound like people are mad because of FOMO on more trinkets to unlock than they have time, interest, or money to spend. This probably particularly bothers the 'I'll wait for the GOTY edition with everything cheaper' type.
I guess I'm too casual to care very much, since I "miss out" on DLC missions, skins, boosts, etc. all the time, usually by not being interested enough to pay for them.
afternoon delight
Member
You almost first posted the fuck outta this statement and mentality, very succinct. Yeah we spent all that time creating cool content- but if you don't pay for it a second time, why bother letting you play with it?
PackAPunchedMick
Member
If I'm understanding this correctly ubisoft want me to spend £50 on one of their games but not have access to all the content......And people are defending this practice?
Bahahahahahaha fuck me.
Bahahahahahaha fuck me.
I really don't understand why people were upset about this, or how this statement would make them more upset.
It's not content. It's mostly colors and patterns and emotes and shit. They're not even worth buying. Anything of actual importance is tied to... playing the game.
Sure, you could pay to skip that requirement, but why is the requirement existing suddenly a problem?
It's not content. It's mostly colors and patterns and emotes and shit. They're not even worth buying. Anything of actual importance is tied to... playing the game.
Sure, you could pay to skip that requirement, but why is the requirement existing suddenly a problem?
Steve Youngblood
Member
Well, I don't really want to seem like I'm standing up for big corporations in their pursuit of money at all costs. So, it's not like I want to approach this topic from a vantage point of "this idea is awesome, get over it you crybabies." The approach I take is just acknowledging that this is pretty much the new normal. Games as a Service is the big thing, even with pay games. Overwatch is a prominent example, but there are many, many others where you clearly know going in that paying for the base game will not give you access to all content.
Now, I think there are certainly conversations worth having about where the line in the sand should be. But just in terms of the "I want microtransactions to go away" argument, call me a defeatist but I feel like this matter is settled. The war is over. We lost. The response from Ubisoft hardly seems out of step with the rest of the industry right now.
Interesting situation. As companies push for the whole games as a service angle though I expect more of this to occur.
I think many see this approach as merely changing how you get delivered the same game/content but this isn't going to be the case, possibly for many games.
I'm not automatically against such ideas - to be honest the concept there are 1,000 optional cosmetic items priced according to assumption most will only want maybe 10 of them according to personal taste is one I can understand (when I buy cornflakes I don't buy every other cereal on the shelf) but it's surely going to cut across many who expect games to be designed and delivered as a single complete package.
I think many see this approach as merely changing how you get delivered the same game/content but this isn't going to be the case, possibly for many games.
I'm not automatically against such ideas - to be honest the concept there are 1,000 optional cosmetic items priced according to assumption most will only want maybe 10 of them according to personal taste is one I can understand (when I buy cornflakes I don't buy every other cereal on the shelf) but it's surely going to cut across many who expect games to be designed and delivered as a single complete package.
jonscrambler
Member
what multiplayer games now don't have skins you can spend money on to unlock? from Uncharted 4, TLOU, Gears 4 to Battlefield to Overwatch, I don't understand why people seem to single out this game.
I mean, less than 2 and a half years or a valuation of $700+ in real money would also be more acceptable? Who wants to unlock everything in just a couple hours?
I could be wrong if I think it's the quantity of options: in that the cost if you chose to buy everything would be huge.
GankzyMcfly
Member
How long does it take to unlock everything in Overwatch?
They make better games than EA
jonscrambler
Member
so people would be happier if there's LESS skins you can unlock in this game?
Welcome to every popular multiplayer game, looks like this is your first one you've ever read about Bahahahahahaha
To be fair, the differences aren't huge. I'd definitely be happier if each character only had one alt costume with a bunch of different colors, but the alts were really different, like in Street Fighter.
Not only happier, but actually inclined to get something for my main characters. As it is right now, I don't think I'll ever want to spend real money in the game. Which ends up being a good thing for me, but I don't think that's what they're trying to achieve.
I think it's cumulative cost really - so not really more as a side effect.
To put it another way I think people are looking at games where your true total cost might be $100 to $200 hundred dollars including cosmetics and going "I'm okay with that" then looking at For Honor which apparently has a true cost in excess of $1,000 dollars and going "I'm not ok with that".
In some ways I think this is more about what's an acceptable ceiling for whales (those who want to buy everything) to accept.
In assuming those customers would accept a game where they're not expected to buy everything Ubi may have misunderstood the market or at least how that demographic would respond.
In truth I'm sure none of these companies really know the sweet spot for games as a service hence we're seeing different models and different reactions from the market.
For sure though sometimes they're going to get it wrong: in terms of market acceptance.
Also, how many man hours went into creating 1000's of optional microtransactional content items that tend to only be sold to whales?
What sort of impact does that have on the core game? Future DLC? Sequils if the game underperforms?
Personally I just don't like the bussiness model, and try to stay away from supporting games and publishers that push the most gregarious implementations.
I want games to target thing I like, not to chase after whales with so much money they don't care what they spend it on, or people with addiction like issues spending money they can't on digital goods that are worthless besides a dopamine drip.
Moose Biscuits
It would be extreamly painful...
I'm mentioning this in this thread as well, but this isn't the most egregious example of this.
Steep, Ubisoft's open world ski em up, has a limited amount of credits that can be earned by doing activities in game. The maximum amount of credits you can earn off the base content is less than half the total cost of all the cosmetic items in the base game.
Credits can also be purchased with real money.
Steep, Ubisoft's open world ski em up, has a limited amount of credits that can be earned by doing activities in game. The maximum amount of credits you can earn off the base content is less than half the total cost of all the cosmetic items in the base game.
Credits can also be purchased with real money.
CopperPuppy
Member
This is from Polygon so, grain of salt, but they did a rough calculation of $600 to $700 or 1,000 to 1,200 hours of play.
Look, I agree that microtransaction policies in general are problematic, but my sense is that this is only being treated as an earth-shattering controversy because there is a lot of "LOL Ubisoft" sentiment on GAF.
The sad reality is that MTs in For Honor, and the sentiment expressed by the quote in the OP, are not out of the ordinary for most all of the biggest multiplayer titles out there. If you guys actually want to push back on this, there has to be a consistency to the opposition. It's not enough to get outraged when Ubisoft does it but then mum's the word when it's Blizzard, Valve, or hell, even Naughty Dog (though admittedly to a lesser but still problematic extent).
Very good questions! I have no idea but I'm also interested how these models play out and to see how it affects the industry.
Personally I'm not a fan of this model either. I prefer to buy my game as a whole and play it or at least feel I'm purchasing the bulk of the game content with some optional extras I can take or leave - say core skins with a reasonable number of optional skins I can take it leave.
I suppose the other element here is the time to earn if you don't buy. I guess that's what's also caused some of the fuss: how long it would take to earn vs buy all the content.
But different strokes and all that.
Just when I thought internet gamer outrage couldn't possibly get more frivolous and bizarre. How dare Ubisoft sell purely cosmetic items at the value they believe to be most profitable, don't they know someone has a gun to my head forcing me to buy every bit of data this game ever releases forever? I'm going to end up rotting in debtor's prison unable to feed my children now.
BumblebeeCody
Member
How does this benefit you by them doing this?
This all the way. We're all on the same playing ground here. We're all consumers. It's not in your best interest to stick up for a company that is actively fucking you. I've said this a million times, but this DLC Season Pass Pre-order Microtransaction BS is not a benefit or way to enhance your game. You gain nothing but stating, why you find this OK. We argue all the time about getting the most for your money, so why do people constantly think that microtransactions and even cosmetic skins are acceptable on a huge budget game from one of the largest publishers? Have a backbone and some consumer self awareness.
Lumping in all microtransactions and monetary models under one umbrella is frankly just lazy. Multi-player gaming and microtransactions go hand-in-hand. When executed well, the game and players benefit greatly from it. Everything should be looked at in a case-by-case basis. I'd make the argument that multi-player focused games without any form of microtransactions will suffer in the long-term due to no revenue streams that translate into evolution of the game.
$40 for Overwatch gets me a quality, evolving, multi-player game for years going forward without dropping a single cent more. I'll get cool skins along the way, great, its not even the focus of gameplay and never has been. People who spend money on skins are continuing to pour money into further development of the game which makes it more enjoyable for everyone else playing. There's far more value here than your typical $60 console game which gets dated as soon as there's a sequel or support drops or the game just stops evolving.
I don't understand why people are arguing in favor of Ubi on this.
Yeah, it's "just" cosmetic stuff.
But really, I'd prefer them not include the content in the game at all rather than lock it behind a paywall. I want to be able to buy a game and receive all content for that game immediately, or at least have the content available for unlock over a reasonable period of gameplay time.
Now, if they released extra content after a reasonable period of time as an add-on pack, that's fine. But it should be bundled content for a reasonable ($10-$20) price.
I hope stuff like this stops being so accepted soon.
Yeah, it's "just" cosmetic stuff.
But really, I'd prefer them not include the content in the game at all rather than lock it behind a paywall. I want to be able to buy a game and receive all content for that game immediately, or at least have the content available for unlock over a reasonable period of gameplay time.
Now, if they released extra content after a reasonable period of time as an add-on pack, that's fine. But it should be bundled content for a reasonable ($10-$20) price.
I hope stuff like this stops being so accepted soon.
How exactly am I being actively fucked? Ubisoft set a price for some goods, I'm not willing to pay for those goods at that price, so I don't. Ubisoft can charge whatever they want whenever they want for any of their goods and services. If you don't feel that the price is reasonable then don't buy it. If enough people feel that way then Ubisoft will be forced to lower prices or see significant profit loss. This is how the free market economy works. Ranting about it on the internet as though Ubisoft beat you up and took your wallet on the subway is just plain silly.
I love the base of the game, but the DLC and currency system is bullshit. My biggest worry during the alphas was Ubi fucking up the game with extra anti consumer crap like this, seems my worries were founded. Fortunately for me I only give a shit about 1v1, but not everyone should be expected to stick to it only.
I don't like how hard it is to unlock cosmetic options, but I don't really care that much either. It's an annoying trend, but it's extremely commonplace already. I don't blame publishers for embracing it at this point.
I've played a ton of this game and have only really dabbled in three characters out of 12. Am I really supposed to worry about unlocking cosmetic options for characters I don't even touch? How many people flipping out over this even play the game?
I've played a ton of this game and have only really dabbled in three characters out of 12. Am I really supposed to worry about unlocking cosmetic options for characters I don't even touch? How many people flipping out over this even play the game?
I think someone mentioned the game has 12 characters, and it already takes 2 years to unlock everything, imagine if they add 2-4 more characters, they sure are focusing on the wrong thing since most people wont buy that stuff, and if it's supposed to pay for the online structure, why is ps+ required to play a game like this then?
Primethius
Banned
This is like the cherry on top for the current state of the game, which is a mess balancing wise as well.
One of my worst $60 purchases, up there with SFV.
One of my worst $60 purchases, up there with SFV.
AtomicShroom
Member
People with OCD want their OCDness fulfilled.
Because god knows it's a sin to put a game away without having unlocked absolutely 100% of the content within. How could one possibly go on with their lives otherwise?
Which, of course, included under half the characters, a little over a tenth of a complete pay-to-win gear set set, 1-2 skins out of dozens, and $10 worth of currency.
So, I read on here that it's just cosmetics, but you can actually buy gear from the loot boxes, no ?
Is the gear (which modify stats) easy enough to obtain through normal gameplay ?
I dont get the complaints about cosmetics, but I dont get why there isnt more complaints about being able to buy stats-altering items with real money.
Is the gear (which modify stats) easy enough to obtain through normal gameplay ?
I dont get the complaints about cosmetics, but I dont get why there isnt more complaints about being able to buy stats-altering items with real money.
Phatosaurus
Member
If the micro transactions are similar to how they are in R6:Siege then I can fully agree with their statement.
There's a wealth of skins and headgears, etc. In Siege that'll I'll never unlock, yet I'm never short of renown for the ones I really want.
There's a wealth of skins and headgears, etc. In Siege that'll I'll never unlock, yet I'm never short of renown for the ones I really want.
Cheat Code
Member
FOR HONOR ISN'T AN MMO OR MOBA UBISOFT.
IT HAS 12 CHARACTERS AND 7 MAPS.
MMOS ARE FUCKING HUGE AND MOST MOBAS HAVE OVER 40 CHARACTERS.
IT HAS 12 CHARACTERS AND 7 MAPS.
MMOS ARE FUCKING HUGE AND MOST MOBAS HAVE OVER 40 CHARACTERS.
This! 12 heroes and a handful of maps.
Hell no, shit is still ridiculous. I absolutely love Siege but that practice is shit. I bought both season passes even though I had enough renown for all the characters. I did it to show support for a game I enjoy, however their monetization of a full price game with not one but two season passes is fucking shit. A single mask/face is the price of a hero. Some packs of a mask and charm go for 7 fucking 99. Like seriously?! (And you can only buy those with cash). Then you have the elite skin with siege money packs so conveniently placed that you'd have to pay a minimum of 20 bucks to get 1, just 1 elite skin. Shit if the prices are in line with TF2 I'd buy one here or there but for 8-15 dollars they can fuck off. Comparing these games to a MOBA is bull shit. Most MOBA are free and make money on the skins, this is trying to double even triple dip which is just poor practice. It's the reason I will no longer buy any Ubisoft games, I know what to expect now.
1. In many cases 1 cosmetic is the same price as 1 character.
2. Also 2 elite skins are the price of full game/season pass. Every character is presumably getting an elite skin so there will be at least 20+.
I don't have a problem with bought cosmetics but when the content is so disproportionately bad in comparison to cost/value it's a slap in the face. When one skin holds damn near the same value as your season pass you fucked up somewhere.
SentryDown
Member
I love the argument that because it's on the disc, players are supposed to access it right away. Next step is going to be "I want to see the ending of the story right away without spending hours in the campaign and Ubisoft won't letting me although it's on the disc !".
People are only mad because they made it possible to unlock it with money instead of time, they would have had the exact same balancing without micro transaction I guarantee it.
People are only mad because they made it possible to unlock it with money instead of time, they would have had the exact same balancing without micro transaction I guarantee it.
Straw man.
yurinka
Member
Why people complain in this game and not in the gazillion games that also have it?
I thought this was just cosmetic things like skins, optional stuff that doesn't affect your gameplay experience, and that also can be unlocked by playing.
There is a huge chunk of stuff to make sure you always have something to unlock so it adds a lot of replay value.
I thought this was just cosmetic things like skins, optional stuff that doesn't affect your gameplay experience, and that also can be unlocked by playing.
There is a huge chunk of stuff to make sure you always have something to unlock so it adds a lot of replay value.
I never understood why people want to spend extra downloading time and storage size for content that is done before release.
Nobody said For Honor is a MMO or a MOBA. Relax, and if you don't like the DLC just don't buy it. Ignore it.
blue_phazon
Member
lol I remember someone of gaf making a thread about this before. They were complaining that all games should have easy modes so that anyone who buys the game can experience getting to the end
Because this thread is called for honor? Plus people already complained for other games so your argument is invalid
1. That is not nearly the same thing. Why you guys keep acting like it is telling. One wants to enjoy everything the game has to offer and experience it for him/herself whether that be cinematic sections, puzzles, [easier] combat, etc. The other "just wants to watch the ending".
2. That had to be from a Nioh or Souls thread lol.
I think For Honor's unlocks are harder to earn than they should be, and the sense of unique accomplishment for earning them is heavily diminished when anyone can just throw money at the game to unlock it instantly.
I'm much more fond of traditional fighters. Radically different costumes for a few bucks... This game's system requires substantial amounts of money for minor alterations and some visual effects. For a full price game, I think it's absurd.
The gear stat system is wholly shameful, though. Gains are designed to be offset with sacrifices on each item, but the gains are huge and the penalties become non-existent at the hugest item tier (which requires currency).
I'm much more fond of traditional fighters. Radically different costumes for a few bucks... This game's system requires substantial amounts of money for minor alterations and some visual effects. For a full price game, I think it's absurd.
The gear stat system is wholly shameful, though. Gains are designed to be offset with sacrifices on each item, but the gains are huge and the penalties become non-existent at the hugest item tier (which requires currency).
Read the OP, they pretty clearly make that comparison themselves.