Support NeoGAF

[creatchee]

Man, some of you kids would have hated gaming in the 8-and 16-Bit Eras. Games were usually $69.99 disregarding inflation (and sometimes more depending on the game/store), and typically had a lot less content/replay factor that today's stuff. Oh yeah - and no online multiplayer to increase the lifespan.

Gaming is cheaper today and has a higher potential for more time per dollar than it has ever been and people STILL whine when publishers and devs try to get even a little bit more money on an optional basis. Every time I read somebody crying about a microtransaction, I think to myself: "now there's someone who never saved 70 bucks to buy what would essentially be considered a minigame by today's standards."

 

[singhr1]

Forza 6: Apex will have them too. So will games that continue to come out.

What do you think part of the point of the always-online push was for? To sell MTs due to a directive to implement MTs into Microsoft published games where possible, and enforce the MT economy.

Another horrible example when Apex is a completely free game with no payment up front.

I'm surprised people are still surprised when a multiplayer game has microtransactions in them. Battlefield, Call of Duty, GTA, etc.
Some don't, like DOOM, but a when a game does it well like Halo and maybe like Gears it's a far better proposition when your playerbase is not fragmented.

Also, MS has been a lot better about MT. They learned from their mistakes in Forza 5 to 6. From Spartan assault to Spartan strike. And implemented a praise worthy system in Halo 5 where the system benefits the player, the developer, and the competitors.

 

[leeh]

I have not played Halo 5.

In the case of Gears they are NOT giving away free maps. They are rotating a free map once per month, and if you like it and want to keep playing it youll have to buy it.

This is not Halo 5 guys.

It doesnt literally affect me in no other way.

If you want to have microtransactions in your 60 dollar game, then fine. Im NOT fine with it and I dont think yall should be either. This is BAD for the industry as a whole.

Sadly some of yall wont take the blinders off and just look at the free map they rotate each month and say hey I dont even mind extra DLC in my 60 dollar basegame.

In the OP Gears is compared to Hearthstone, and how he likes their business model.

Guess what Hearthstone is a free to play game, not a 60 dollar game.

I know it's not Halo 5, but Halo 5's model around this is sublime and its the way it should be done for every game going forward IMO.

I agree around the map rotation, I don't get why they don't keep them there. Maybe because they expect lower MAU's than Halo and less revenue?

I don't care if there's microtransactions, not in the foggiest. Your disregarding the whole thing because you just read microtransactions in a full game and flip your lid over baseless principles.

I'd rather get the maps for free and them be in/out of cycle rather than paying for map packs and fragmenting the community.

I will spend zero money on the microtransactions in Gears 4, if you bought the game, you'd also spend nothing. Although, if there was DLC packs, I would be spending money on Gears 4.

Honestly, I get why people flip their lids regarding microtransactions in full price games, but this is different. Yes, it could be better, like Halo 5, but it's still better than paying for a season pass or map packs.

 

[MMaRsu]

You know I keep asking you to explain and your keep ignoring me. I'd actually like to hear your side of the argument.

Sorry man didnt mean to ignore you.


Itz a really slippery slope. The industry is trying to adopt a f2p DLC practice but incorporate it into a 60 dollar game. Look at GTAV's multiplayer.

Now you may say that those arent just cosmetic items, and thats because R* dont even need that anymore. Theyve jumped ship to straight up to high priced money bundles.

Theyve made more than over half a mil in revenue based on just that alone. That kind of stuff shapes the industry. If you think for one second this doesnt affect me ( I dont even own an xbo ), you are deadwrong. Because in the long run it will affect all games.

And that is my opinion. I dont mind if anyone disagrees that is their right. But I see a very slippery slope and sadly most gamers today think it doesnt affect anything or anyone if its just cosmetics. Well right now it is, but in 5 years it wont be.

Also being against microtransaction dlc, cosmetics or otherwise in a 60 dollar game is not a baseless principle.

 

[pizzacat]

This was coming, halo 5 or not. I just hope that means they can give more characters that spans all games. I need Paduk

 

[Hyun Sai]

If it can avoid season passes and fragmentation of the MP, it's all good and a move that benefits the playerbase.

I wish more MP focused games would do the same.

 

[spannicus]

If it can avoid season passes and fragmentation of the MP, it's all good and a move that benefits the playerbase.

I wish more MP focused games would do the same.

Some aren't seeing it this way.

 

[Khalifa Jayy]

"I feel like that paradigm of cards is really clear to understand for collectibles, like the ability to collect things. We had weapon skins and character skins, so that idea of collecting cards is just easily understood. It felt like it added some engagement in terms of its not the, 'Oh, I like Tiger Stripe. I bought Tiger Stripe. I'm done. I don't need to engage with that system anymore. There's no need for me to hang around.'"

That statement is total crap. If I want to luck into something, make that an option. If I want to purchase a specific item or skin or whatever, let me have the option.

 

[LordBaztion]

As long as I can acquire a Dom skin without having to bet on crates, I'm fine.
The Gears micro transaction model is more conservative than Halo, the later has a warzone which is built based on microtransactions. I understand that TC doesn't want to alter the Gears formula that much and won't implement a Warzone like mode at the expense of getting a lesser revenue in microtransaction, so I think its model is fair to limit the access to new maps without dividing community.

 

[pizzacat]

Some aren't seeing it this way.

All of this sounds like mechanics used in other mp games. Combined.

I don't see how they benefit from the map rotation, at least cut down on the monthly base and do it weekly.

 

[Ramirez]

If there wasn't MTX, you'd be paying for a season pass without knowing the contents. Or map packs that 75% of the player base won't buy, leaving you with a very small pool of players.

I support this model over those 2 methods any day. The BF Premium on Xbox One was my biggest purchasing regret ever. The servers were never full, and I will not make that mistake again. Cosmetics paying for free content is absolutely the way to go.

Citing that maps used to be free years ago is meaningless, those maps were no where near as detailed as games today, and probably cost a fraction to make.

I don't agree with rotating maps though, that's dumb.

 

[spannicus]

All of this sounds like mechanics used in other mp games. Combined.

I don't see how they benefit from the map rotation, at least cut down on the monthly base and do it weekly.

Some things may change from now until release depending on feedback.

 

[shoreu]

Sorry man didnt mean to ignore you.


Itz a really slippery slope. The industry is trying to adopt a f2p DLC practice but incorporate it into a 60 dollar game. Look at GTAV's multiplayer.

Now you may say that those arent just cosmetic items, and thats because R* dont even need that anymore. Theyve jumped ship to straight up to high priced money bundles.

Theyve made more than over half a mil in revenue based on just that alone. That kind of stuff shapes the industry. If you think for one second this doesnt affect me ( I dont even own an xbo ), you are deadwrong. Because in the long run it will affect all games.

And that is my opinion. I dont mind if anyone disagrees that is their right. But I see a very slippery slope and sadly most gamers today think it doesnt affect anything or anyone if its just cosmetics. Well right now it is, but in 5 years it wont be.

Also being against microtransaction dlc, cosmetics or otherwise in a 60 dollar game is not a baseless principle.

The way I see it is we either pay 80 bucks for games and possibly dlc too or we adopt a fair cosmetic system that does not promote pay to win mechanics. And at the same time allows those who choose not to pay to effectively earn currency at a reasonable rate.

Devs have to get paid man and as the price of living for them/ and cost of development goes up they have to think of ways to pay them, and not piss us off at the same time.

Now I fully agree that Pay to win mechanics are trash and microtransaction like those in asscreed that still ask for paid content should be fought against but if their well thought out and fair I have no problem .


Yes this is going to change the industry but unfortunately it's unavoidable as shit has to get paid for.


What's your solution for this problem?


Also rotating maps are dumb do it like halo please.

 

[MMaRsu]

Some aren't seeing it this way.

Actually because they have cosmetic crates doesnt inherently mean they couldnt have done free maps and no season pass either.

But thats not what they want you to believe

 

[Weed]

Uhh what is the problem here that constitues a yikes and a wow? Im not allowed to express my opinion about this very important subject?

The condescension in your post merits those responses, try arguing without speaking down to the opposing side in the future.

 

[leeh]

Actually because they have cosmetic crates doesnt inherently mean they couldnt have done free maps and no season pass either.

But thats not what they want you to believe

'Cause skilled artists, designers and engineers are free aren't they.

 

[Whizkid7]

I don't like these systems, but Gears has previously sold weapon skins before, so it's no surprise to see that return in this card format. I was able to ignore it then and I can do so now, but I wish I didn't have to simply "ignore it". I wish it was back to the "earn this achievement for this extra bonus" model.

 

[MMaRsu]

The condescension in your post merits those responses, try arguing without speaking down to the opposing side in the future.

Ill argue however I want, within the rules of the board.

I find it dumb people will accept this new dlc in a 60 dollar game as normal, and a positive for gamers. And you have the right to disagree. But I am entitled to my opinion

 

[MMaRsu]

'Cause skilled artists, designers and engineers are free aren't they.

Yup thats exactly what I said great post man

Ill just leave. I think Ive made my point.

 

[RedSwirl]

I would be down for this if they released horde by itself as a free-to-play game.

 

[TheSpoiler]

Ill argue however I want, within the rules of the board.

I find it dumb people will accept this new dlc in a 60 dollar game as normal, and a positive for gamers. And you have the right to disagree. But I am entitled to my opinion

You aren't posting anything that stands as an alternative. If production costs are high, and developers are looking for more ways to operate like a business without pissing off the customer, why are cosmetic MTs that are earnable in game terrible?

Edit: And this stems from a disconnect between the costs of game development and gamers. We simply have no clue how much it takes to produce these titles. That doesn't excuse shitty MTs, but getting angry at the thought of a business model that possibly won't cost you a dime if done right seems odd to me.

Games have always been a business. Even the fabled greatest arcade games were there to eat your quarters, systems in place to keep sucking away at your wallet. And there's nothing wrong with that, so long as whatever systems are in play are fair.

 

[leeh]

Yup thats exactly what I said great post man

Ill just leave. I think Ive made my point.

You said they can do maps for free. People who make maps don't work for free.

AAA is risky as it is, as you can tell with the studio closures. You want developer teams to work with no prospect of any return?

 

[Netprints]

If it keeps maps free and the community from fragmenting.

I will take it. Even tho I dislike random loot creates, packs, etc.

 

[RoyalLaFlame]

Ill argue however I want, within the rules of the board.

I find it dumb people will accept this new dlc in a 60 dollar game as normal, and a positive for gamers. And you have the right to disagree. But I am entitled to my opinion

I think people just prefer having the option of free maps instead of paid ones. If having free maps means microtransactions so be it.

 

[Weed]

Ill argue however I want, within the rules of the board.

I find it dumb people will accept this new dlc in a 60 dollar game as normal, and a positive for gamers. And you have the right to disagree. But I am entitled to my opinion

You act like it's not an optional purchase. But whatever man keep your fight alive.

 

[justgames7604]

I dont mind microtransactions we pay the same amount for games as 30 years ago despite inflation and skyrocketing production costs every passing gen.

 

[LostDonkey]

Man, some of you kids would have hated gaming in the 8-and 16-Bit Eras. Games were usually $69.99 disregarding inflation (and sometimes more depending on the game/store), and typically had a lot less content/replay factor that today's stuff. Oh yeah - and no online multiplayer to increase the lifespan.

Gaming is cheaper today and has a higher potential for more time per dollar than it has ever been and people STILL whine when publishers and devs try to get even a little bit more money on an optional basis. Every time I read somebody crying about a microtransaction, I think to myself: "now there's someone who never saved 70 bucks to buy what would essentially be considered a minigame by today's standards."

Yeah, but at least you got the full game back then and not half of it for full price, then the other half for the price of a season pass.

Gaming is in no way cheaper now than it was back then because we aren't being sold full games anymore.

 

[shoreu]

Yup thats exactly what I said great post man

Ill just leave. I think Ive made my point.

We honestly just want to hear your counterargument. Just saying "that's what they want you to think" doesn't help anyone.

 

[MMaRsu]

We honestly just want to hear your counterargument. Just saying "that's what they want you to think" doesn't help anyone.

Ive sent you the pm ( same response as on here tho ) .

 

[IXI FalcoN]

I'm fine with cosmetic microtransactions if the payoff is free maps. Like others have said, let the whales buy the bullshit and fund the real content for the rest of us.

What's pissing me off is the delivery method. Why have this rotational gimmick? The maps are already made, it doesn't cost additional money to leave them in a playlist permanently or allow access to them in custom matches.

This rotational system is greed tax and the real problem, not the MTs.

And those wondering "what changed" between a decade ago and now as far as expanded content, the cost of AAA development is what has changed. We're far beyond the point of studios crapping out a $60 game and calling it a day. Unless you want to pay $80 or whatever upfront for said game (which many have done via season passes).

 

[m23]

Just keep all the maps in the playlists and I'm cool with it. No need need to remove maps from rotation, the only part that makes no sense to me.

 

[TheSpoiler]

Yeah, but at least you got the full game back then and not half of it for full price, then the other half for the price of a season pass.

Gaming is in now way cheaper now than it was back then because we aren't being sold full gamed anymore.

That's running under the assumption the DLC was removed from development to screw you over. Often times, the game is finished a few months before release, so instead of sitting on their asses and doing nothing, developers will create more content.

 

[shoreu]

Ive sent you the pm ( same response as on here tho ) .

I didn't get it: (

 

[ViolentP]

I feel like Microsoft has forgotten everything that made the 360 successful.

 

[InsaneTiger]

That seems fair I guess. Cosmetic is the best route. Weapon skins and things like that. Let the folks spend their cash to subsidize the rest of us.

This is how it starts...

 

[Saucycarpdog]

I clearly stopped playing Black Ops before they got to this point. What happened?

Weapons were added to supply drops.

 

[RedFox85]

I'm only ok with this crap if it keeps map updates free, if that's not the case then they can F right the hell off with this bs.

 

[Gestault]

I have not played Halo 5.

In the case of Gears they are NOT giving away free maps. They are rotating a free map once per month, and if you like it and want to keep playing it youll have to buy it.

This is not Halo 5 guys.

It doesnt literally affect me in no other way.

If you want to have microtransactions in your 60 dollar game, then fine. Im NOT fine with it and I dont think yall should be either. This is BAD for the industry as a whole.

Sadly some of yall wont take the blinders off and just look at the free map they rotate each month and say hey I dont even mind extra DLC in my 60 dollar basegame.

In the OP Gears is compared to Hearthstone, and how he likes their business model.

Guess what Hearthstone is a free to play game, not a 60 dollar game.

I think you may not understand what a modern implementation of this looks like, if you haven't played Halo 5 (but are still insisting this is different from Halo 5). Until you said otherwise, I sincerely thought you were joke posting.

How do you think this harms the core experience for players? As I see it, the way it's been implemented recently gives people more distinct personalization that wouldn't otherwise exist, and it helps bankroll new content updates for the general population that in the past would have split online matchmaking.

Ive sent you the pm ( same response as on here tho ) .

If I'm seeing this right, you're putting the point you're trying to make in a PM instead of interacting on the board for it? I don't understand.

 

[JaggedSac]

That statement is total crap. If I want to luck into something, make that an option. If I want to purchase a specific item or skin or whatever, let me have the option.

Yeah, I agree with this. Paying real money for RNG is complete garbage. If I were to buy a gold pack in Halo and get an emblem in it, I'd be super pissed, lol.

 

[creatchee]

Yeah, but at least you got the full game back then and not half of it for full price, then the other half for the price of a season pass.

Gaming is in no way cheaper now than it was back then because we aren't being sold full games anymore.

A full game back then typically had artificial length from obscene difficulty, lack of continues/save function, bad controls etc. Games were much shorter and had less content in general back then, "full game" or not, yet were more expensive.

Also, the idea of "half a game" is bullshit. Remove the DLC and you still have a whole game. People have inflated expectations due to their entitlement.

 

[TheSpoiler]

This is how it starts...

It's started like that for a while. And it's lead to them using MTs for cosmetics instead of things that effect balance.

The only logical and profitable area this is going to go is a focus on making sure people can earn stuff so that they stay with the game longer, but also allowing people to buy things when they want so that they can have extra shit if they don't have the time to grind.

 

[blakep267]

Eh I have no desire to buy a season pass ever, so I'll take MTs any day. If I like the game enough( like Halo 5) then I'll gladly plop down money

 

[spannicus]

This is how it starts...

There is nothing else to sell. No high powered weapons or armor. Nothing can be sold in gears to make it pay to win. Whats wrong with selling skins?

 

[Moofers]

As long as these packs don't include gear such as weapons or equippables, then I'm okay with it. I don't care about charging for visual flair. To me, the gameplay is what is sacred. Halo 5's Warzone doesn't seem to understand that. As long as I can go play Horde and have all the same weapons available every time I play, with no need for stupid random card packs, then I'm happy. Just let me play the fucking game without having to buy any packs and we're good. The day I decide I need a sick pot leaf on my Lancer, then I'll pony up the money for it. That's not hurting anyone.

 

[paragonpro]

Of course there are fucking cards...

 

[spannicus]

As long as these packs don't include gear such as weapons or equippables, then I'm okay with it. I don't care about charging for visual flair. To me, the gameplay is what is sacred. Halo 5's Warzone doesn't seem to understand that. As long as I can go play Horde and have all the same weapons available every time I play, with no need for stupid random card packs, then I'm happy. Just let me play the fucking game without having to buy any packs and we're good. The day I decide I need a sick pot leaf on my Lancer, then I'll pony up the money for it. That's not hurting anyone.

What gear can be given to a player thats not available to all from the start. There has never been any special or secret weapons to unlock in gears and i doubt they will allow for it now. Thats not how it works.

 

[Guerrilla]

so does this means map packs are free? If so I'm all for it, if not the coalition should reconsider....

 

[Moofers]

What gear can be given to a player thats not available to all from the start. There has never been any special or secret weapons to unlock in gears and i doubt they will allow for it now. Thats not how it works.

That's what I'm saying. I think we'll be fine as long as they don't cock that up. Visual flair packs aren't going to ruin the game any more than the weapons skins in Gears 3, which people also bitched about but ultimately it was not to the game's detriment at all.

 

[jesu]

I don't mind this at all but the maps should be totally free then, none of that weird rotation shit that's been mentioned.

 

[Sigmaah]

As long as the online gameplay is good which I doubt, I don't really care for this. You gotta expect these things nowadays...