-
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.
Monetization of our time is evil. Gamers regroup !
- Thread starter Solal
- Start date
Clockwork5
Member
Is that not the truth?
TheSadRanger
Banned
On one hand I'm fine it with it some forms, Killer Instinct with only allowing Jago as a playable character when it's free. Also Mass Effect 3 wasn't bad having it included in it's mp since they gave out free dlc in the form of maps and different characters for it. ME3 had a ton of support for it as well as it had about four free dlc packs.
Forza, Crimson Dragon and Ryse to a lesser extent seem to be the huge offenders in taking this to far recently. Who knows about GT6, we know they'll allow you to spend real money to buy credits to purchase cars and parts but it's hard to judge when we don't know how much you will earn completing races to compare it to.
Forza, Crimson Dragon and Ryse to a lesser extent seem to be the huge offenders in taking this to far recently. Who knows about GT6, we know they'll allow you to spend real money to buy credits to purchase cars and parts but it's hard to judge when we don't know how much you will earn completing races to compare it to.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
Someone hasn't been to general FPS threads in the last 4 years...
Which perfectly can with out micro transactions. GTA 5, the last of us even an of beat game like heavy rain makes money.
Please read some earning reports from ea, blizzard and ubi and ask your self what problem. The biggest problem is that people don't buy shity games that look and play the same as the once they already have so yeah sometimes developers go broke but that is normal in every business
The problem with that is when is it becoming a grind? Most people are okay with having a few hours of grind; I'm not even okay with ten minutes. So I'm not going to trust the reviewers on this one. And then there's the attenuation effect, as more and more games are incorporating grind, we will start seeing people getting okay with it, and the artificial grind extended over time. Heck just look at the amount of players of MOBAs, Warcraft and all the F2P schlock on Facebook and phones.
No thank you, I'm a priori damning everything that has challenge/gameplay microtransactions. AND voting with my wallet. If you're a dev on one of those games, too bad for you.
This, I think. A lot of people here are approaching it as if owning the game is a given, and then you're 'forced' into either microtransactions or putting up with a lengthened progression path. If a game *is* unbalanced without the microtransactions, don't blame the microtransactions, just treat it as an unbalanced game and don't purchase it. However, also, don't assume that the balance is off. Read around, do research, get impressions.
Well, it's a small point of order, but:
I'd argue that it's an extremely similar philosophy.
I've got a few possible reasons for this:
* The reviewers viewing it negatively haven't explored the full range of means to garner credits
* The reviewers viewing it positively are naturally comfortable with the idea of a grind in driving games. I'm like this with RPGs - I have a naturally slow, methodical, grindy way of play, and as such games which others can find to be grindy, I find to be perfectly acceptable.
* The reviewers viewing it negatively are playing with the intent of progressing towards a specific top-range car from the outset, while a player with a different approach to the game would spread their attention round, and by the time they're actually pursuing specific cars, they have ample credits.
* Only one group - and it's hard to tell which from this information alone - is making direct comparisons to previous games. If it's the positive group, that suggests that the negative group are unfamiliar with the conventions of the format and are viewing something that's generally accepted as unpleasant. If it's the negative, the prgoression chain *has* been negatively impacted by these changes, and the positive people have no frame of reference for that so don't appreciate the problems.
* It's actually entirely a YMMV thing.
* When a game has a large scope, it's not unknown for reviewers to be furnished with cheat codes, or late-game saves - so they can sample the full extent of the game, rather than just the early stages. In this instance, they may have been furnished with a version with the unlock DLC included, which would hide impressions of the progression rate unless they actively sought it out. It's easy to paint this as MS hiding an unpleasant truth - and there may be some truth to that - but there is a genuine issue about how do you present the 'whole game' when you're dealing with something that could have thousands of hours of content.
There's always going to be breakaway hits. The problem is that not every game can be a breakaway hit, and adopting a philosophy that's dependent on being one is asking for trouble.
Instead I'd like to read some earning reports from Platinum, from Bizarre Creations, from THQ.
The philosophy you're espousing would ultimately lead to a segregation with a few megapublishers at the top who can guarantee a big audience and a large number of indies at the bottom who don't need a big audience. There's a gap in between that's currently extremely volatile, and I don't think that volatility's healthy.
Well, it's a small point of order, but:
I'd argue that it's an extremely similar philosophy.
Woah, very good point.
Maybe I've not thought this completely through yet, but goodness, much of my gaming growing up was in arcades. I don't know how many quarters I put into games that I seriously wanted to play, in order to keep on playing. Tons of money. Games like Turtles in time, N.A.R.C., Xmen, etc were pretty much impossible to beat without putting in more money to continue.
There were no evil motives behind the arcade model. Just a matter of survival.
I don't think there were evil motives behind every arcade title, but I have no doubt that many games were designed to be quarter munchers rather than good games.
I don't think they were evil as well. They didn't have vast amounts of player data, psychological consultants, and now biometric feedback upon which to draw.
Not really, modern F2P design is about boring the player to death with progression systems and giving the player a easy out if they open their wallets.
Arcades on the other hand are quite the opposite, short games of skill if you fail you have the option putting in another credit (the early arcade games didn't have this option), or don't as many Japanese and modern players do and try to beat the game with 1 credit.
One tests the players patience while the latter skill. Besides Arcade games were quite pure, in that I mean the was nothing before them, not like now where designers are looking to shoehorn F2P into any traditional game they possibly can.
nelsonroyale
Member
Its bad and I don't want it. I am in.
you certainly are cant think straight.
what can they do?!!? what about not blowing off their whole money to PR and marketing? expanding their team to hundreds and even around thousands of people who are involved in their game!?!?!
platinum games manages to deliver wonderful games with only a few people who make thos games.
have a look at nintendo! mk7 was only developed by less then 20 people.
edit: i forgot my mainpoint, i think, the only way is to try out every price model. unluckily we experienced that most gamers are dumber than expected or just think, that they rather squeeze some money into a game to get a little bit of fast forward rather than spending more time with the game.
BUYING CHEATS with REAL MONEY.(XX Amount of Money, All cars, all race tracks n stuff were quite the thing as a cheat in the 90ies)
DrROBschiz
Member
I had a conversation with a friend who is a business analyst. basically his job is analysing the buying and pricing strategies for companies, and sometimes take the lead on buying projects (he represents the company in a negociation)
I asked him how he would decide the DLC price if he was in charge of GT6 (or any other game... I chose this one because he likes it)
Here is his answer:
"I would decide to make 50% more profits on GT6 than GT5.
I know I cant' sell GT6 more than GT5 or my clients won't bite.
So I take away some content ... around 30% of cars/tracks that I know gamers will want.
Now the calculation is quite simple: my revenues must raise of 30 to 40% max.
I know how many cars and tracks I have kept as DLC...
I know how that each player will buy X cars (thanks to market research). And I also know how much they are ready to pay (market research again)."
I ended up telling him that GT6 would actually have monetization. He asked: "But the game is free now?" When I said "no" his said: "The bastards..." ;-)
I have to say that my friend has never worked for gaming companies... but he's been around and he has seen these logics everyday since 10 years now.
What strikes me (in his hypothesis) is that devs first decide how much they want to earn... and then force it into our throught.
And they can do that because.... they know we are ready to pay!
This gives more weight to our concerns: we have to make them undesrtand that we are not ready to pay anymore for stuff we already payed.
I asked him how he would decide the DLC price if he was in charge of GT6 (or any other game... I chose this one because he likes it)
Here is his answer:
"I would decide to make 50% more profits on GT6 than GT5.
I know I cant' sell GT6 more than GT5 or my clients won't bite.
So I take away some content ... around 30% of cars/tracks that I know gamers will want.
Now the calculation is quite simple: my revenues must raise of 30 to 40% max.
I know how many cars and tracks I have kept as DLC...
I know how that each player will buy X cars (thanks to market research). And I also know how much they are ready to pay (market research again)."
I ended up telling him that GT6 would actually have monetization. He asked: "But the game is free now?" When I said "no" his said: "The bastards..." ;-)
I have to say that my friend has never worked for gaming companies... but he's been around and he has seen these logics everyday since 10 years now.
What strikes me (in his hypothesis) is that devs first decide how much they want to earn... and then force it into our throught.
And they can do that because.... they know we are ready to pay!
This gives more weight to our concerns: we have to make them undesrtand that we are not ready to pay anymore for stuff we already payed.
Good point.
This may have be pointed before, but I would add that the payment system ("external" coins VS 99.9% automated payment through credit card) makes a big difference with in-game integration. Because payments are now fully integrated within games and only a few validations screens away from it, there becomes to be blatant and painful DLC advertising directly inside the game menus or the actual game, more harmful to the immersion. Example : Dragon Age 1, GOW 3 ...
Btw, some arcade games reset the score to 0 when you add a credit, and many make that score recognizable (for instance, by not using the last figure and adding 1 to the score for every credit), so you are better rewarded by the game for playing good than for credit feeding.
The comparison really has its limits, though, for instance arcade games and grindish pay-to-win games are very different and they handle time the opposite one from another (arcade games try to not let you play long with 1 credit, grindish pay-to-win want you to pay to increase the pace of the game and play less)...
We need to make some noise now.
POST THE OT EVERYWHERE. (You can change/correct it as you wish... as long as the substance stays).
Everyone should post this thread on the videogames forums they belong to.
Let's put it on game websites comments sections of games that have microtransactions in (no spamming though: once is enough).
Let's put it on Sony, MS, EA, Acti... official forums.
Let's try to make it viral in the gaming community.
Let's bring more people on board.
I ll do it on Eurogamer.
Can someone do it on IGN, Kotaku, Polygon, Gametrailers, Gameblog, etc....?
And then come back here to tell us which ones are already done and which ones are not.
POST THE OT EVERYWHERE. (You can change/correct it as you wish... as long as the substance stays).
Everyone should post this thread on the videogames forums they belong to.
Let's put it on game websites comments sections of games that have microtransactions in (no spamming though: once is enough).
Let's put it on Sony, MS, EA, Acti... official forums.
Let's try to make it viral in the gaming community.
Let's bring more people on board.
I ll do it on Eurogamer.
Can someone do it on IGN, Kotaku, Polygon, Gametrailers, Gameblog, etc....?
And then come back here to tell us which ones are already done and which ones are not.
Tx Michealx.
For the hashtag, you are right. We need one.
Till now:
#StopTheRipOff
#WillBuyUsed
#Free2NotPay
#GameOver
#NotBuyingTwice
#FullPrice4FullGame
#FuckthisIAPnoise
#RageAgainstTheInApps
#ConsolesAreNotATMs
#GamersOpposedToNicklesAndDimes
#GamersAgainstFreemiumDesign
#Fullgamesforfullprice
#Cutpriceforcutgames
#NoRetailF2P
#WeAlreadyPayed
#FreeGamers
#AbusedGamers
#NoPAymium
#NoF2P60$games
#mytime!=yourmoney
#WarAgainstGamers
#Mo'MoneyMo'Problem
My favorite ones are:
#WillBuyUsed
#StopTheRipOff
#WeAlreadyPayed
#Mo'MoneyMo'Problem
Let's choose one now and for all as we don't get that many suggestions.
For the hashtag, you are right. We need one.
Till now:
#StopTheRipOff
#WillBuyUsed
#Free2NotPay
#GameOver
#NotBuyingTwice
#FullPrice4FullGame
#FuckthisIAPnoise
#RageAgainstTheInApps
#ConsolesAreNotATMs
#GamersOpposedToNicklesAndDimes
#GamersAgainstFreemiumDesign
#Fullgamesforfullprice
#Cutpriceforcutgames
#NoRetailF2P
#WeAlreadyPayed
#FreeGamers
#AbusedGamers
#NoPAymium
#NoF2P60$games
#mytime!=yourmoney
#WarAgainstGamers
#Mo'MoneyMo'Problem
My favorite ones are:
#WillBuyUsed
#StopTheRipOff
#WeAlreadyPayed
#Mo'MoneyMo'Problem
Let's choose one now and for all as we don't get that many suggestions.
I'd go with #StopTheRipOff, it's universal, but if sent to right persons, they'll know.
#We already paid is also good.
I'd skip #WillBuyUsed as it isn't as much menacing. I think the best course of action is to simply skip these games.
And I think we should also focus on games and devs that supported it, such as PD and GT6. Tweet to them and post this OT to their youtube videos, showing our discontent with such practice (also dislike them).
#We already paid is also good.
I'd skip #WillBuyUsed as it isn't as much menacing. I think the best course of action is to simply skip these games.
And I think we should also focus on games and devs that supported it, such as PD and GT6. Tweet to them and post this OT to their youtube videos, showing our discontent with such practice (also dislike them).
So that is why Gran Turismo 6 only has 1200 cars, compared to GT5s 1000. His hypothesis is completely off-base.
Well... i don't want to focus on GT specically as i have a story with this game.
Let me just say that - IMO -your point proves nothing. GT6 could not have less cars that GT5 for obvious reasons...
Anyway, GT is not the subject of this thread: just an example.
This prob can be remedied. DO NOT BUY THE GAMES. Also if you do want to, GT6 is available at REDBOX on release date to rent. OR buy it used or trade within a site community, Goozex, 99gamers, Glyde, etc. for these games. Don't give the publishers your money. If ppl would go with their brain more than on impulse, by now COD would stop making any money and would stop annualizing!
DrROBschiz
Member
Dude its best to just gravitate to games that show a level of respect to the consumers time and money
I don't think it is a coincidence that we are seeing a rise in Indie/small scale titles around the same time all of this 'Fee 2 Pay" crap came around
In the small scale we can get full featured games for one price mostly because they are made with small and reasonable scaled budgets.
I am absolutely certain the same treatment is possible in the AAA space but the easy money is there for the taking and they can explain this practice away as being neccessary to offset the costs and risks associated with AAA development
I just think the need to be more focused, have better planning, be conservative, and know their audience. But MT are also easy money that can be quickly and easily tacked on to the top of any game. Profits trump Brand Equity everytime it seems... even when these schemes fail horribly
I don't think it is a coincidence that we are seeing a rise in Indie/small scale titles around the same time all of this 'Fee 2 Pay" crap came around
In the small scale we can get full featured games for one price mostly because they are made with small and reasonable scaled budgets.
I am absolutely certain the same treatment is possible in the AAA space but the easy money is there for the taking and they can explain this practice away as being neccessary to offset the costs and risks associated with AAA development
I just think the need to be more focused, have better planning, be conservative, and know their audience. But MT are also easy money that can be quickly and easily tacked on to the top of any game. Profits trump Brand Equity everytime it seems... even when these schemes fail horribly
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-23-whens-a-free-to-play-game-not-free-to-play
Eurogamer is talking about it. They share our concerns.
Eurogamer is talking about it. They share our concerns.
And I'm showing you why your example sucks. You use the point of your friend which focusses on Gran Turismo, but Gran Turismo 6 doesn't actually show the point. He says they would take away content leaving about 70% of the content gamers would want. So gamers want 1600 cars? You could just accept his point doesn't make sense and that Yamauchi is still making the game he wants.
Mt Heart Attack
Member
That's a very good article and I believe a good way to show people asking themselves what the big deal is why we are worried about this trend. Some really grim scenarios open up if this takes hold.
Joni-> 80% of GT6 content is directly taken from GT5.
Only 120 new cars and only 6 new tracks... Do you really think PD did not make more than that in 3 years? (not counting standard cars, they made 200 cars, GT5 prologue, GTPSP and around 30 tracks in 5 years with GT5). How do you explain this?
They plan to release one new track every month (from the US producer IIRC)...one track/month means the tracks are already done. They keep them away from us to monetize them. That is exactly what my friend suggested.
GT6 will have no Formula 1...when GT5 had 2 ferrari F1 (and one GT F1)...and they were considered by many as the most glorious cars in the game... so they took them away from us. Which is exactly what my friend suggested.
So, you might disagree with my friend's point of view, or with mine... But will you agree that the problem might be more complicated than counting how many cars are in ? And you know what makes it more complicated: fucking monetizations? Now we have no choice but wondering if PD just does not try to screw us... (well I have my conviction)
Please, if you want to go on with GT, use PM.
Edit: BTW, you might have misunderstood. my friend suggested to take away around 30% of GT6's content (the content they have produced...not the content of GT5).
Only 120 new cars and only 6 new tracks... Do you really think PD did not make more than that in 3 years? (not counting standard cars, they made 200 cars, GT5 prologue, GTPSP and around 30 tracks in 5 years with GT5). How do you explain this?
They plan to release one new track every month (from the US producer IIRC)...one track/month means the tracks are already done. They keep them away from us to monetize them. That is exactly what my friend suggested.
GT6 will have no Formula 1...when GT5 had 2 ferrari F1 (and one GT F1)...and they were considered by many as the most glorious cars in the game... so they took them away from us. Which is exactly what my friend suggested.
So, you might disagree with my friend's point of view, or with mine... But will you agree that the problem might be more complicated than counting how many cars are in ? And you know what makes it more complicated: fucking monetizations? Now we have no choice but wondering if PD just does not try to screw us... (well I have my conviction)
Please, if you want to go on with GT, use PM.
Edit: BTW, you might have misunderstood. my friend suggested to take away around 30% of GT6's content (the content they have produced...not the content of GT5).
Fahrenheit
Banned
I should of did more research on Forza 5 before buying it. Didn't know it had a cash shop. If I known I wouldnt even have bought it. Plus a ton of DLC cars day one is just gross.
DrROBschiz
Member
Exactly
They willfully ignore and deny that it affects the core game and the psyche of the player
But IT DOES and they know it
Its why they do it. Because it works and its easy pure profit endeavor regardless of whether it dilutes the brand or the game
That said, they also ignore when it drives the failure of the title ALA Dead Space 3.
Mt Heart Attack
Member
Yea that would be useful.
These are upcoming/newly released.
Ryse: Son of Rome
Forza Motorsport 5
Gran Turismo 6
Crimson Dragon
Bravely Default: Flying Fairy
Grand Theft Auto V
FIFA
NBA 2k games
Other:
Dead Space 3
Battlefield 3
Mass Effect 3
Diablo 3
Feel free to expand the list!
Kill Your Masters
Member
Games that required almost no grind to "win", will require a bit more grind, so they can justify in-game purchases.
Games that already had grind, will simply have even more grind, to justify in-game purchases.
Everyone who thinks otherwise (as in, the grind will stay the same, they'll just add a new feature to their games) is fooling themselves. And unfortunately reading discussions regarding this issue implies a lot of people do...
Games that already had grind, will simply have even more grind, to justify in-game purchases.
Everyone who thinks otherwise (as in, the grind will stay the same, they'll just add a new feature to their games) is fooling themselves. And unfortunately reading discussions regarding this issue implies a lot of people do...
I d love to have a list of games with that kind of shit... and then a thread ala "DON'T BUY THESE GAMES" (if Mods allow it) but I can't do it by myself. And, to tell you the truth, as much as I feel gamers agree with us, i did not get much help.
English is not my first language so it's quite exhausting to me to anwser and produce arguments here... especially as we have to deal with stubborn people here (hell...HOW ANYONE CAN DEFEND THIS SHIT IS BEYOND ME), smartasses, nipticking every sentence or word that may not be 200% accurate.
So... there is a lot to do. But I can't do it alone. (I don't even know how to post an embed video from youtube here...see ? )
Edit: Btw, tx MichaelX. I feel less lonely. ;-)
English is not my first language so it's quite exhausting to me to anwser and produce arguments here... especially as we have to deal with stubborn people here (hell...HOW ANYONE CAN DEFEND THIS SHIT IS BEYOND ME), smartasses, nipticking every sentence or word that may not be 200% accurate.
So... there is a lot to do. But I can't do it alone. (I don't even know how to post an embed video from youtube here...see ? )
Edit: Btw, tx MichaelX. I feel less lonely. ;-)
BTW I forgot to post this yesterday, Ghostlight are asking PC gamers about what "DLC" they think is acceptable http://www.siliconera.com/2013/11/21/pc-gamers-tell-agarest-generations-wars-publisher-feel-dlc/
I realized yesterday that I could buy (with real money) all the ultimate plan upgrades for my ship in Black Flag instead of finding the the maps and then finding the locations.
What's funny is tha I could just use a FAQ and be done with it, instead of paying.
Anyway, I'll vote with my wallet and they won't be seeing a penny from me.
Buying the game and not buying the "upgrades" sends a stronger message than not buying the game at all.
What's funny is tha I could just use a FAQ and be done with it, instead of paying.
Anyway, I'll vote with my wallet and they won't be seeing a penny from me.
Buying the game and not buying the "upgrades" sends a stronger message than not buying the game at all.