Stevey
Member
So youve played Forza 7 and you feel its worse than the previous 6 games solely because of the inclusion of Loot Boxes?
-
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.
Waypoint: 'Shadow of War' and 'Forza 7' Are Poisoning the Concept of Loot Boxes
- Thread starter Zombie James
- Start date
So youve played Forza 7 and you feel its worse than the previous 6 games solely because of the inclusion of Loot Boxes?
No, because going for the least offensive of the three is what led to this.
Bad example. Titanfall 2 was SUPER DUPER BOMBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA so it didn't matter in the end. Probably scared publishers away from that.
No. I'd be a mark if I bought the game with all this bullshit. I'm going by the opinions of people that I trust who have played the game.
Their opinion is that this is shit.
If you believe that $100 games would mean no lootboxes, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
FallingEdge
Member
what beef do people have with overwatch loot boxes? seems fine to me.
NullPointer
Member
Blame EA's release date for the low release window sales. The game itself is stellar.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
Im glad this article exists and the gaming journalists need to hand together in repeatedly reporting on this type of behaviour. Its unacceptable considering the price of these games.
Game is amazing. EA messed up the date. But I don't think there was any date that year where the game would succeed. Not after Titanfall 1.
I just can't support loot boxes in paid games. Even for cosmetics.
Why can't I just buy the costume I want and not have to deal with paying for a possibility of getting what I want?
We went from the DOA $1000+ cosmetic DLC to OW with paying for an RNG drop.
Both are ridiculous but at least in one of them I can just get what I want guaranteed.
Why can't I just buy the costume I want and not have to deal with paying for a possibility of getting what I want?
We went from the DOA $1000+ cosmetic DLC to OW with paying for an RNG drop.
Both are ridiculous but at least in one of them I can just get what I want guaranteed.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Unfortunately Forza 7 is sitting on an 88 metacritic, Shadow of War is at 86, and Battlefront 2 will absolutely do very well. Reviewers are helping this become normal.
And to be clear, im not knocking the reviewers, if they enjoyed the game and felt like it deserves high scores then they absolutely have the right to give them high scores. I'm just saying that we cant rely on them to fight this fight for us, we have to boycott the games to send a message, thats the only way.
Why is the DOA one ridiculous in any way? It was over the course of many years, you can pick what you want and it helped support the game (which people say is acceptable). You look at it in bulk and you get sticker shock, but you can do that for everything (like say, the total amount you spend on your games. it would be stupid and probably super high for people on this forum).
2blackcats
Member
The monetisation of games will hopefully change at some point. Hope these loot boxes are just a blip that passes.
When technology change slows down a bit maybe we'll get games launching cheaper but holding there value for a long time. Like being able to buy an album 20 years after it came out.
I know this view isn't popular but seeing games for 4 bucks 2 years after they were 70 seems absurd to me. Fuck this race to the bottom with price. People pour years of their lives into making these games. They deserve better.
When technology change slows down a bit maybe we'll get games launching cheaper but holding there value for a long time. Like being able to buy an album 20 years after it came out.
I know this view isn't popular but seeing games for 4 bucks 2 years after they were 70 seems absurd to me. Fuck this race to the bottom with price. People pour years of their lives into making these games. They deserve better.
I was making a point that even though DOA has cosmetic DLC out of the wazoo, ultimately it is still the preferable choice over loot box ridden games.
funkystudent
Member
Western government needs to crack down on this gambling-like bullshit.
Was it China or South korea that had the government finally come in and stamp it out recently?
Was it China or South korea that had the government finally come in and stamp it out recently?
ebullientprism
Member
I am not advocating for any of those three. Like I said, ideally none of them would exist and it would be like TF2.
Or better yet, something like old UT where you bought the game and the devs threw in a bunch of maps after release for free as a thank you.
My point was there is a reason why people are looking upon Overwatch kindly when you compare it to what the situation is now. Its because there are way worse and way more insidious practices in the market now.
I fully expect them to do with activision does with CoD, simply delay it so they can avoid the review cycle that otherwise would have reviewers dock the game points for having that shit in. Its scummy and the games media should light their asses on fire for it.
Weltall Zero
Member
Exactly.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
China, the games have to show the reward that you're paying for, it cant be random.
Hell yeah it is. =P
NOBODY should want our current US Government to start regulating a damn thing about video games. That is fuckin' madness.
China ruled that Gacha have to show the odds, but did nothing else to ban it or regulate it. Showing the odds doesn't stop anyone from hitting that Gacha button who doesn't want to hit that Gacha button. Hell, showing the odds can encourage some to try harder to beat it. Bunch of Han Solos out there.
I am not comfortable with the concept of randomised loot boxes. This is gambling in the worst possible sense. I do not go to the betting shop in real life; why the hell would I want to gamble on getting the item I desire when real money is at stake... in a fucking video game?
If I can't specifically buy the item I'm after, I am keeping my money in my pocket.
Unfortunately, now that this disgusting practice is creeping into single player games, it seems like I will be unable to avoid them for much longer.
To clarify, I can turn a blind eye if it's not thrust in my face constantly, or if the game is properly balanced without microtransactions, but I just don't want this crap in a full priced game. In the case of Shadow of Mordor, it looks like a wait for sale purchase - then I can tolerate their bullshit a little better.
If I can't specifically buy the item I'm after, I am keeping my money in my pocket.
Unfortunately, now that this disgusting practice is creeping into single player games, it seems like I will be unable to avoid them for much longer.
To clarify, I can turn a blind eye if it's not thrust in my face constantly, or if the game is properly balanced without microtransactions, but I just don't want this crap in a full priced game. In the case of Shadow of Mordor, it looks like a wait for sale purchase - then I can tolerate their bullshit a little better.
You can not give a shit, but it'll continue to happen anyways is the thing. I don't either (except for about $15 around Overwatch launch), but lootboxes continue and get more invasive regardless because people are willing to buy them. And still lootboxes don't seem appropriate for Shadow of Mordor. And Forza 7 sounds too invasive. Also does Forza 7 have free content post launch?
They have their problems, but i'm pretty cool with Overwatch and Siege's system.
Used to be heavily into cod and battlefield "back in the day" and needing to buy all the dlc and map packs was annoying. Not to mention abandoned/ low player counts on maps. It's nice being able to load up a game and just be able to get into new content with the whole population while the devs continue receiving revenue for their work.
SmoothRunningGun
Member
Someone, somewhere is buying these boxes so they will never end.
I was really looking forward to shadow of war and this makes me sad. But since it is a single player game, i'm sure it wouldn't be hard to make a trainer or use cheatengine to speed up the grind. If i do end up buying the game that is probably what i will be doing, rather then shelling out for these stupid micro-transactions on top of the 60$ price.
2blackcats
Member
Who though?
I just don't get it. It's the same when I hear about Counter Strike skins or PUBG cosmetics. Like why would you ever buy them.
I like the old system. Game plus map packs.
People give out about those but I'm never going to buy these non essential MTs so I'm never giving any extra money to the devs who's games I like. Just a bunch of kids and compulsive gamblers I suppose.
Mushroomer25
Member
I mean, people said the exact same thing about season passes, multiplayer map packs, and mobile-style timers in single player games. But they proved to be unprofitable, so they started drying up.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Yup, its depressing.
lastplayed
Member
The concept of handing money over for a specific product. How novel!
This gambling shit needs to go away.
2blackcats
Member
Well map packs are still going to some extent and I remember buying them for Q3 (or UT maybe)
Because they are exploitative simple as that, its not about logic or reason its addicting and prays on people.
CelestialWolfZX
Member
There is legit arguments about the Event Boxes that have limited time cosmetics (Generally 3 weeks) before you had to wait a year to get a chance at them again, espicially in the first one when they could only be obtained from Loot Boxes and couldn't be crafted. Thankfully they made them craftable from the second event onwards, but there is still a fair argument in the time to acquire lootboxes and the cost of crafting being a little too high.
The less duplicates update they rolled out earlier this year and making past year event skins regular price has been beneficial though, there is still more that can be done though like have more double xp weekends to help make getting boxes easier.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
And I still haven't finished Uncharted: TLL, Nier: Automata or FF XII HD. And have yet to buy the new Life is Strange, and now Wolf 2 and TEW2 are coming. Even if SoW didn't pull this, it would be at the bottom of my priorities.
2blackcats
Member
That disconnected is heightened with sports games I think.
Most major AAA games are in the same boat. The best selling game for the first half of the year was a game that most of us did not care for.
MHWilliams
Member
I've reviewed Forza 7 and the addition of the system adds needless complexity, making progression more obtuse, for no benefit to the player. So, sure?
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Titanfall 2 also had a pretty poor DLC rollout when comparing it to stuff like halo or Gears. So you get what you pay for essentially
2blackcats
Member
Yeah, I think expecting publishers to stop at some imaginary acceptable line once they've taken off is a fools game.
I think loot boxes and manipulative economies are antithetical to good game design. You go from designing a game for the players to enjoy, challenge and engage to designing for players to avoid and take shortcuts.
There was a golden period in gaming between the arcade era and the games as a service era where games exploded with defined content for a defined and agreed upon price.
Games with economies controlled by the creators and manipulated based off market feedback are killing games and the press are complicit in this when they accept "Ultimate Editions and special unlocked" versions of games to review. Games can now be changed on the fly by developers.
You don't have to go to each arcade and change out the internals to create a bigger quarter-eating machine. You just update the servers to change the calculations on how often a resource is dropped.
This is all without considering the ethics of using psychologically manipulative mechanisms in an industry still heavily marketed to young children and teenagers. You notice how slow Nintendo is to introduce this stuff into their games. I don't think it's just incompetence or being cheap.
There was a golden period in gaming between the arcade era and the games as a service era where games exploded with defined content for a defined and agreed upon price.
Games with economies controlled by the creators and manipulated based off market feedback are killing games and the press are complicit in this when they accept "Ultimate Editions and special unlocked" versions of games to review. Games can now be changed on the fly by developers.
You don't have to go to each arcade and change out the internals to create a bigger quarter-eating machine. You just update the servers to change the calculations on how often a resource is dropped.
This is all without considering the ethics of using psychologically manipulative mechanisms in an industry still heavily marketed to young children and teenagers. You notice how slow Nintendo is to introduce this stuff into their games. I don't think it's just incompetence or being cheap.
I dont mind microtransactions and dlc. If it's good and its worth it I might on occasion buy it and I'm not against other people buying them.
But I dont understand loot boxes, you pay to have the chance to get something. Its gambling, its horrible it shouldn't really be in a game, especially not one for children.
But I dont understand loot boxes, you pay to have the chance to get something. Its gambling, its horrible it shouldn't really be in a game, especially not one for children.
Bornstellar
Member
IMO, Overwatch popularized the system but isn't the true offender here. Overwatch is keeps all cosmetic stuff in loot boxes which isn't the worst option. Halo 5 and Gears 4 were much more aggressive in keeping coop gameplay elements locked behind loot crates that were often overpriced to skew people towards paying