Support NeoGAF

[Trogdor1123]

Guys, its ok to buy the games with microtransaction. Its not ok to use the microtransactions though.

 

[Duster]

Fullgamesforfullprice
Cutpriceforcutgames

 

[EsotericManiac]

Fullgamesforfullprice
Cutpriceforcutgames

Shouldn't she be raising her left arm?

lol

 

[Deleted member 126221]

like character customizations and things of that nature. i'll never purchase them but I can see others getting into it. it's something extra that will allow them to get more enjoyment out of their game

The problem is not about adding extras. It's about adding burdens and "fun pain" in $60 games and then asking the player to pay more to remove them.

 

[EsotericManiac]

The problem is not about adding extras. It's about adding burdens and "fun pain" in $60 games and then asking the player to pay more to remove them.

The games at that link are quite bad. They are free to play, but you are extremely limited to the amount you can play unless you spend money. I agree those are bad, but I generally think they are terrible and not really like real games so abstaining from them is ridiculously easy

 

[Seanspeed]

this is a ridiculously bold statement. what would ever make you think that?

A lot of people are completely overreacting.

 

[Shengar]

i don't have a problem with game publishers trying to "sell more stuff"

like character customizations and things of that nature. i'll never purchase them but I can see others getting into it. it's something extra that will allow them to get more enjoyment out of their game

The keyword is "enjoyment". Of course publisher can sell anything their user will buy, but the thing is this crap is very explotative in nature. There isn't any regulatory that keep it control. This is why whales in F2P games are still there.

this is a ridiculously bold statement. what would ever make you think that?

Crash is hyperbole, split will be the right word. SE pushed their games as service is a proof that trend.

Not all games with microtransactions are like that, though. That's what you're not getting.

Yes not all microtransactions are like that. But without regulatory boards shit will go out of control

People get freaked out and paranoid that the game is being balanced towards encouraging people to pay more money instead of being able to play normally and unlock content/progress that way.

A valid concern, but a lot of people just make this assumption that it basically automatically hurts a game when it doesn't have to.

Why is it doesn't have to? It doesn't hurt the game maybe but for what certain it damages video gaming as a whole. My concern is that in long way if people keep accepting this exploitative practice. Microtransaction become the norm that they effectively become blinded by the slight change that pushed for even more revenue. When this shits appeared in a game like Dead Space 3 or Ryse, I absolutely know that shit have gone wrong.

 

[Clockwork5]

How can you be that naive? The hourse of tedious grind are (in many cases) artificially built into these games to make you pay for skipping them. The fact that people are actually falling for this is making me lose faith in human intelligence.

I don't play those games. Or if they look too good to pass up ill pay (these games usually suck anyway so that almost never happens.)

My example: SMT4 had a dlc that made xp grinding much faster, but the game itself had a typical amount of grinding for an rpg. I did buy the dlc so I could beat the game in 30 hrs instead of 40 hours. Is that so wrong?

Edit: how about you just not buy shitty games, regardless of business model? Problem solved.

 

[WarMacheen]

So right now: here are the options:

#mytime!=yourmoney
#NoF2P60$games
#noconsoleF2P (but i think it's not good as the problem is not F2P, it's F2P we paid 60 bucks)
#NoRetailF2P
#NoPAymium

Come on men. Give me more.

#FuckthisIAPnoise
#RageAgainstTheInApps
#ConsolesAreNotATMs
#GamersOpposedToNicklesAndDimes (GONAD) =P
#GamersAgainstFreemiumDesign

 

[Alienous]

Fullgamesforfullprice
Cutpriceforcutgames

#It'sagamenotafuckingsandwichIwantallofthetoppings

 

[cooljeanius]

Should have bought the Wii U, dumbasses.

Good to see that the first post in GAF threads continues to be thread-ending.

 

[Shengar]

I.....Just....Can't...

OP, put Regulationary Board in first post. You should try to push that whenever possible. I'll be out of this thread for a while.

 

[maniac-kun]

Iam not buying a grind heavy game with micro transactions. Fuck that and everyone who thought its a good idea.

 

[EsotericManiac]

Microtransactions were something companies tested the waters with and it came back extremely lucrative for them. Of course they will become more creative with how they are implemented. I assume they'd try anything they can get away with. The real question is how will you respond?

If a game is littered with micros that are ridiculous and no one buys them, the game won't be very successful. The community would decide for itself if it's necessary. We will basically put our own limits on our games and we'll respond with our dollar.

Diablo III had a real auction house. People could just buy top merch and be top tier without going through the grind. That didn't make the game any less enjoyable for people.

Sure there super-magical-mace-of-destructionary-powers-deally wasn't as cool to brag about, but it wasn't a problem


edit : A regulatory board sounds infinitely worse than the micros you are condemning

 

[jred2k]

So right now: here are the options:

#mytime!=yourmoney
#NoF2P60$games
#noconsoleF2P (but i think it's not good as the problem is not F2P, it's F2P we paid 60 bucks)
#NoRetailF2P
#NoPAymium

Come on men. Give me more.

Using an exclamation mark or a money sign kills a hashtag.

 

[Flo_Evans]

I am lacking time (kids coming home) and would appreciate some help completing the OT.
We need to name all the biggest games that use F2P model.
Please describe what kind of monetization we are talking about for each.

Can someone do that? And then I ll add it to the OP?

Give me $5 and I will complete your OP for you.

I really question the sanity of even buying a game if you "don't want to grind to unlock stuff"

Is the game not fun?

I like driving cars in GT. As I drive I get credits. Actually the 1st part of GT when you have a crappy car and really get to know it, slowly improving it by adding parts is my favorite part. I've intentionally started GT games over. I never take the roll over credits from a previous save.

Now you get bad ass cars for pre-ordering, can buy in game credits, can you buy licenses too?

IDK its kinda bullshit but there are tons of idiots that complain about the game progression of GT, that I love. Now they could either change the game to accommodate impatient ADD generation of gamers or offer $$$ options for fools to skip the "game" part of it.

Personally as long as they do not fuck with the regular experience I don't care. As long as some idiot can't but the IA gold license prize car that took actual skill and not just time to get I think it is OK.

If a game is nothing but a time sink and grind with no skill rewards than it is just a junk game and should be ignored. monetization or not.

 

[jimi_dini]

this is a ridiculously bold statement. what would ever make you think that?

At some point more and more gamers will get fed up by this crap (or may also just be unable to afford all this crap anymore). Maybe they will also notice that games aren't really fun anymore, but either a money grab, a grind-fest or both. And then it will go boom. Never think that it will stop at some point. If this here gets through, the next one will get even worse. Just look at the season-pass-crap, the DLC-crap and the overall game quality from last gen.

Or well maybe I think too highly of most gamers. Maybe most gamers will really accept any crap possible for getting allowed to play the latest shiny shooty shooty game.

 

[Clockwork5]

#StopDevelopersRightToDesignGamesAsTheyWish
#InternationalRegulatoryBoardOfVideogameMicrotransactions

Am I doing it right?

How about this, this one is for you guys.
#DontBuyShitYouDontWant

 

[EsotericManiac]

I can give you a perfect example where "skipping" makes sense for some people

Let's say person A has a lot of free time. Loves the game and has no problem plugging a ton of hours into the game to reach a certain echelon. Person A talks so much about his character to person B that person B now wants to purchase the game.

Unfortunately for person B, he doesn't have all the disposable time to grind about at the game to reach that echelon A has, but they want to play together

It's nice to have an option for person B to pay X amount of dollars to "catch up" to A and they can now grind together from that point.

Person A didn't have any less fun because person B skipped all that initial grinding. Person B actually had more enjoyment because he could never have afforded himself the time to catch up to his buddy and now they can play together.

 

[EsotericManiac]

At some point more and more gamers will get fed up by this crap (or may also just be unable to afford all this crap anymore). Maybe they will also notice that games aren't really fun anymore, but either a money grab, a grind-fest or both. And then it will go boom. Never think that it will stop at some point. If this here gets through, the next one will get even worse. Just look at the season-pass-crap, the DLC-crap and the overall game quality from last gen.

Or well maybe I think too highly of most gamers. Maybe most gamers will really accept any crap possible for getting allowed to play the latest shiny shooty shooty game.

It will eventually reach a saturation point that the community will decide is "too much" and it will learn it's own limits.

You talk about it likes its a power struggle and if they reach a certain point there's no turning back. The system will be corrupted with no possibility of designing/creating another.

Overall game quality of last-gen? What exactly are you comparing here? It seems like your statements are all over the place so I'm having a problem deciphering what you point actually is. Sorry

 

[Clockwork5]

I am actually getting annoyed at this. A lot of people LIKE the f2p model. Why are you trying to take this away from them? Lay off the fucking Twitter campaigns, you sound like a bunch of spoiled kids.

If you don't want, don't buy.
Answer me this, why are you trying to take this away from people who like this model?

 

[Deleted member 126221]

I am actually getting annoyed at this. A lot of people LIKE the f2p model. Why are you trying to take this away from them? Lay off the fucking Twitter campaigns, you sound like a bunch of spoiled kids.

If you don't want, don't buy.
Answer me this, why are you trying to take this away from people who like this model?

Because it changes the way games are designed/played for people who do NOT like the model. And it's not FREE to play when the base game is $60, so it's a pretty big difference here.

 

[Arcteryx]

I am actually getting annoyed at this. A lot of people LIKE the f2p model. Why are you trying to take this away from them? Lay off the fucking Twitter campaigns, you sound like a bunch of spoiled kids.

If you don't want, don't buy.
Answer me this, why are you trying to take this away from people who like this model?

Because it's not only seeping into games that do NOT work well with it, but it's also taking away the traditional model from people(aka: we aren't taking it away, you are forcing it on us).

Anyways, it works both ways. I don't mind the gem store in GW2, but I do mind the direction taken with GT6/FM5. If the gem store in GW2 suddenly started allowing players to purchase a level 80 scroll, a world completion scroll, ascended weapons, etc. then yea, I'd have a pretty big fucking issue with it, just like I do with GT6/FM5 and their "unlocks" to skip time-gated content. When a dev decides to tweak the base game to encourage monetization, as with GT6/FM5 with potentially reduced payouts/more grind, then yea, I'd say we are pretty justified in our reactions.

Again, I don't think the OP/people in here are pissed at F2P games, but more the traditional formatted games that INCLUDE F2P/B2P elements which unlock/skip traditional content.

 

[EsotericManiac]

F2P games are inherently different than your $60 with micros.

GW2 adding micros to get uber weapons really doesn't affect your experience except your bragging rights will have diminished slightly

 

[michaelx]

Because it changes the way games are designed/played for people who do NOT like the model. And it's not FREE to play when the base game is $60, so it's a pretty big difference here.

he sounds like a spoiled brat to me. why are they (he and his like-minded fellows) trying to force something upon a game we love?

 

[pompidu]

Because it changes the way games are designed/played for people who do NOT like the model. And it's not FREE to play when the base game is $60, so it's a pretty big difference here.

This right here. Games are now going to be designed around microtransactions. there will be a paywall for all aspects of the game if this model continues. If your gonna have a pay to unlock model, why do people bother to play if your just gonna pay your way to the finish line.

 

[Tabris]

I don't think anyone minds giving the option to buy upgrades, money, etc in-game for those that want to.

The disgusting practice is increasing the grind for the sole purpose of increasing sales of the micro transactions.

It's a shady business practice.

 

[EsotericManiac]

The disgusting practice is increasing the grind for the sole purpose of increasing sales of the micro transactions.

this seems like a legitimate argument, but I have yet to see examples that really illustrate this

 

[WarMacheen]

I am actually getting annoyed at this. A lot of people LIKE the f2p model. Why are you trying to take this away from them? Lay off the fucking Twitter campaigns, you sound like a bunch of spoiled kids.

If you don't want, don't buy.
Answer me this, why are you trying to take this away from people who like this model?

Answer me this, why are you trying to to take away the old model from people who like it. I guess you like gated content, unnecessary grinds and less content but more IAP's. I suppose you like game design being changed to incorporate microtransactions. Not buying is fine, but this issues needs awareness.

I will use your logic. If you don't like this issue, don't participate.

The main issue is about offering content that has traditionally been reasonable and changing it to be more of a grind in order to generate more revenue.

 

[jimi_dini]

Overall game quality of last-gen? What exactly are you comparing here?y

I mean the software quality gets worse and worse. On PS2 it was extremly rare to get a crash/hang. On PS3 however it's extremly rare to not get a crash/hang in games - despite the ability to patch games. And it seems this generation it will be extremly rare to get a game, that won't also try to nickel and dime you, although you paid full price for it. Which means not only will games get more dumbed down than ever. But they will also get designed in a way, so that players will be "motivated" to pay for crap.

 

[Bedlam]

Microtransactions were something companies tested the waters with and it came back extremely lucrative for them. Of course they will become more creative with how they are implemented. I assume they'd try anything they can get away with. The real question is how will you respond?

If a game is littered with micros that are ridiculous and no one buys them, the game won't be very successful. The community would decide for itself if it's necessary. We will basically put our own limits on our games and we'll respond with our dollar.

I honestly think it's a learning cycle. Scamming people the first time, maybe even the first few times, is easy but eventually many of these people realize that they've thrown way too much money at something so trivial. Zynga and facebook games in general are already seeing the backlash of consumers who've woken up.

I imagine that people who realized that they've spent 300-400 dollars on Forza 4 are not likely to do it again in Forza 5 or 6. Especially when it's for the same stuff that they already bought in the last game.

Diablo III had a real auction house. People could just buy top merch and be top tier without going through the grind. That didn't make the game any less enjoyable for people.

Uhm, yes it did, because the game design was negatively influenced by the auction house.

 

[Arcteryx]

F2P games are inherently different than your $60 with micros.

GW2 adding micros to get uber weapons really doesn't affect your experience except your bragging rights will have diminished slightly

Not sure I agree with that. Allowing for Legendaries to purchased off the gemstore would completely ruin the economy(mats, pres, legendaries, etc would all be fucked). Not only that, but If you include Ascended in that too, then yea, it kinda does ruin the experience because people could skip the time-gated parts of crafting and get a leg up(we can debate until the cows go home how much Ascended stat bonuses give you, but they do have an impact).

Allowing for strictly visuals(weapons/armor), which they already do, is perfectly fine. Allowing for any kind of stats boost isn't, as that is pretty clearly pay2win.

 

[Tabris]

this seems like a legitimate argument, but I have yet to see examples that really illustrate this

Forza 5 has an increased grind over previous versions of Forza.

Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer? Do you think the challenge of getting credits would be so high if it wasn't for micro transactions?

These are 2 examples where the game design has been changed strictly for the purpose of increasing micro transaction sales.

 

[MR BLACKMAGIK]

What's the hashtag? I'm down. Don't use != not everyone codes. Use something short and simple. I completely against the freemium model. Though it's hard to completely stop playing them due to how many utilize this greedy strategy now. The NBA 2K series recently introduced this crap, and I seriously think it hurt the last game.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

I don't think anyone minds giving the option to buy upgrades, money, etc in-game for those that want to.

The disgusting practice is increasing the grind for the sole purpose of increasing sales of the micro transactions.

That's the thing. Of course, you can be naive and imagine that the fact that these features are implemented didn't influence the balancing/game flow/etc., but for that you have to trust that EA, MS, and co. have good will and give total liberty to their creative teams. But then, why ask for these monetization features in the 1st place if you didn't want to really make sure there would be a use for them? Good for you if you believe these features are only designed to give more flexibility to some users!

 

[EsotericManiac]

I honestly think it's a learning cycle. Scamming people the first time, maybe even the first few times, is easy but eventually many of these people realize that they've thrown way too much money at something so trivial. Zynga and facebook games in general already see the backlash of consumers who've woken up.

this is exactly what I'm talking about

I imagine that people who realized that they've spent 300-400 dollars on Forza 4 are not likely to do it again in Forza 5 or 6.

and another example of the saturation point i touched upon

Uhm, yes it did, because the game design was negatively influenced by the auction house.

how did this affect game design? previous iterations had an auction house, but didnt use real money. people selling items had to use a third party trader site to turn this into cash for the same transaction. blizzard just wanted their cut, really

 

[WarMacheen]

Microtransactions were something companies tested the waters with and it came back extremely lucrative for them. Of course they will become more creative with how they are implemented. I assume they'd try anything they can get away with. The real question is how will you respond?

If a game is littered with micros that are ridiculous and no one buys them, the game won't be very successful. The community would decide for itself if it's necessary. We will basically put our own limits on our games and we'll respond with our dollar.

Diablo III had a real auction house. People could just buy top merch and be top tier without going through the grind. That didn't make the game any less enjoyable for people.

Sure there super-magical-mace-of-destructionary-powers-deally wasn't as cool to brag about, but it wasn't a problem


edit : A regulatory board sounds infinitely worse than the micros you are condemning

You are factually wrong, as the Auction House directly influenced drop rates. Drop rates were lowered in order to push people to the Auction House

 

[turnbuckle]

I wanna agree with you here, but eh, my time is more valuable than my money. I bought the $10 "DLC" to skip having to grind out all the upgrades in NFS Rivals. It's not like it gave me some competitive advantage, just saved me from having to perform the exact same actions over and over and over again to max out every single vehicle.For me, that's worth $10.

that's exactly the point. there is no reason the grind has to be so stretched out other than to push gamers into spending money to ease the burden. it's a f2p mechanic and it sucks. it's getting worse.

 

[Bedlam]

That's the thing. Of course, you can be naive and imagine that the fact that these features are implemented didn't influence the balancing/game flow/etc., but for that you have to trust that EA, MS, and co. have good will and give total liberty to their creative teams. But then, why ask for these monetization features in the 1st place if you didn't want to really make sure there would be a use for them? Good for you if you believe these features are only designed to give more flexibility to some users!

Speaking of EA I just remembered Dead Space 3. Also an example of how microtransations clearly influenced the game design.

 

[Arcteryx]

this is exactly what I'm talking about



and another example of the saturation point i touched upon




how did this affect game design? previous iterations had an auction house, but didnt use real money. people selling items had to use a third party trader site to turn this into cash for the same transaction. blizzard just wanted their cut, really

Ease of use honestly. It legitimized the act and made it easy/reasonably safe for people to do it.

 

[EsotericManiac]

You are factually wrong, as the Auction House directly influenced drop rates.

wouldn't the price of the item be inversely proportional to the drop rate of that particular item?

how did the auction house do what you suggest?

Ease of use honestly. It legitimized the act and made it easy/reasonably safe for people to do it.

idk, that seems like a good thing to me. they know people are going to do it. let's just accept it and move on

 

[Flame Lord]

I was just thinking about this shit yesterday. It's really been pissing me off. I don't like micro transactions in F2P games, so it really pisses me off that most games I seem to buy these days are pretty much made to force you to buy in game shit to not waste your time. GTAV being the biggest example I can think of recently.

 

[WarMacheen]

wouldn't the price of the item be inversely proportional to the drop rate of that particular item?

how did the auction house do what you suggest?



idk, that seems like a good thing to me. they know people are going to do it. let's just accept it and move on

Drop rates were lowered to push people to the RMAH. Remove the RMAH increase drop rates with Loot 2.0

See the correlation?

 

[UberTag]

Malicious consumable DLC practices will outright DESTROY beloved gaming franchises and talented developers more than anything else this coming generation.

 

[Mt Heart Attack]

this seems like a legitimate argument, but I have yet to see examples that really illustrate this

Jojo's Bizarre Adventure is one such example I just recalled.

http://kotaku.com/the-new-jojo-fighter-is-a-social-game-in-disguise-1281086643

Not sure if that's been addressed by a patch or something. The game's sales plummeted in week 2, so it's fair to say people did not appreciate its model.

Also, even though there might not be evident examples of this for now (I haven't played DS3 myself, but apparently Jim Sterling thought microtransactions did have a strong negative impact on the design, and the game did underperform commercially compared to the others in the series), I don't think it takes a clairvoyant to see how developers might exploit this practice and ruining their games for people not willing to spend further money in the process were this to become commonplace in full priced games.

 

[Bamihap]

Hi I'm a game developer. Please buy my iOS game for $20.


Oh, you don't want to pay that much?


Well then you leave us no choice but to add in app purchases and monetize in other ways.

 

[LiLSnorpSnorp]

I don't care about microtransactions as they are an option I never need to use, and unless game developers make grinding purposefully challenging attempting to force your hand-it's just not an issue.

It boggles my mind how much of a story the micotransactions system in FM5 has become. Hello, it was in previous games, its not something new. It's not something where MS and Turn 10 said lets do this next gen, let's go all microtransactions like some of you make it seem.

If you don't like the microtransactions, ignore them. They dont have any impact on the game that you purchased for $60. It's an argument simply based on the fact that they are there. Until console developers force your hand to use them, which I doubt will happen, then I don't see the issue with their inclusion.

Edit: I'd like to add my argument is based on console games, I know that PC and especially mobile games have a big issue with microtransactions (I.e. mobile Madden).

 

[EsotericManiac]

Jojo's Bizarre Adventure is one such example I just recalled.

http://kotaku.com/the-new-jojo-fighter-is-a-social-game-in-disguise-1281086643

Not sure if that's been addressed by a patch or something. The game's sales plummeted in week 2, so it's fair to say people did not appreciate its model.

Also, even though there might not be evident examples of this for now (I haven't played DS3 myself, but apparently Jim Sterling thought microtransactions did have a strong negative impact on the design, and the game did underperform commercially compared to the others in the series), I don't think it takes a clairvoyant to see how developers might exploit this practice and ruining their games for people not willing to spend further money in the process were this to become commonplace in full priced games.

seems like they patched it so you get a bar every 5 minutes compared to every 20.

but yes, that seems terrible, but it also seems the community responded almost immediately. the devs made a change, but it might have been too late to really save game sales.

it's poetic justice that the community was unified enough to have this type of impact.

 

[Bedlam]

how did this affect game design? previous iterations had an auction house, but didnt use real money. people selling items had to use a third party trader site to turn this into cash for the same transaction. blizzard just wanted their cut, really

Now that Blizzard was actively involved with the auction house, they designed the mechanics in a way that would push players to use the auction house. They did this by over-emphasizing the importance of items compared to character attributes and with the fucked up droprates compared to the previous Diablo games. Even Blizzard themselves have admitted that those changes did hurt the game.

 

[molnizzle]

that's exactly the point. there is no reason the grind has to be so stretched out other than to push gamers into spending money to ease the burden. it's a f2p mechanic and it sucks. it's getting worse.

Have you played the game? Because it doesn't feel any worse. It feels totally normal, not overdone. Racking up points is pretty easy and the upgrade costs are totally reasonable. Honestly, most people will probably find themselves having far more points than they need. I just like having "everything" available so I can freely play around with stuff, figure out what I like and then get out there and race. It's not necessary, just nice to have. That's worth $10 to me, sure. It's wouldn't be worth, say, $20.

The D3 RMAH is a great example of this going too far, however. That game was designed to practically force you to open your wallet of you wanted to progress in Inferno. Fuck that.