Support NeoGAF

[scytherage]

Cant believe Rev3 didnt even mentions the micro transactions in their 5/5 review.

The Rev3 review was pretty bizarre, honestly. Adam Sessler was essentially saying that getting credits for racing over and over was an exciting concept. Uh, yeah, it's in every racing game all the way back since the PS1 era, or possibly earlier. It's a very traditional practice in most racing games. I don't know why he was so 'blown away' by the concept. He just used really big words to sell that point across, and I have to admit, he did that well.

I dunno, that review was just highly suspicious to me. And this is from a guy who normally likes Adam's reviews. It was just, some of the claims he were giving about Forza 5 in relation to its features were really overamplifying the hype.

 

[Zalman]

I never support these kind of games. Microtransactions are one of the worst things to happen to gaming.

 

[Marauder Shields]

I never support these kind of games. Microtransactions are one of the worst things to happen to gaming.

I dunno, imo it's pretty good when done well i.e. Dota 2.

 

[Izayoi]

Car token system is not taken to a whole new level. If all the cars are more expensive or if you make far less money now, sure, but I haven't seen any evidence of that.

This isn't taking it to a new level?

For 2,334 Tokens you can buy either a McLaren P1 or Ferrari Enzo. A Token pack costing £15.99 will cover either of those cars (you can buy packs of Tokens at the following prices: 100 is £0.79, 575 is £3.99, 1250 is £7.99, 2700 is £15.99, 8000 is £39.99 and 20,000 is £64.99), so with the 2700 Token pack that's one vehicle for £13.82. But there's much more expensive cars in Forza Motorsport 5, but the more Tokens you buy, the cheaper they are. If you bought the 20,000 pack (costing £64.99) the McLaren would cost just £7.58.

From the same pricing, a Veyron Super Sport will set you back £13.00, and the most expensive car in the game, the Lotus E21 will cost an incredible £32.50. The smaller the pack of Tokens, the more expensive they are, so the worst possible way of picking up the game's most expensive car would be to buy 100 of the 100 Token packs, bagging you the exclusive 10,000 Token Lotus E21 for a cool £79.

From here. £32.50 for one car. That's $52.25 USD! What the in the unholy fuck?

 

[GoofsterStud]

Anyone else get the feeling that the reviewer copy was a different game. Like a non-microtransaction version with appropriate xp gains?

 

[Seanspeed]

Now the goal is no longer greatness, it's being good enough that people will pay the money to unlock the greatness.

That can happen, but it doesn't mean its always like that. Forza isn't a F2P game. Microtransactions are not their sole source of income on this.

And there are hundreds of cars, a variety meant to appeal to a wide number of car/racing fans. What is 'great' to certain people is going to be different. Lots of people spend the vast majority of their time racing the lower class cars, which are on the whole, very cheap, for example. What's great to them is not the same as somebody interested in racing GT cars.

Gran Turismo has its share of super-expensive cars that you need to spend a lot of time playing to unlock as well. The reason this is being ignored is because most people here don't seem to be fans of these types of games and don't realize this is how its been. There are cars that take a long time to unlock, to reward players who spend a lot of time playing. For those who don't, there are hundreds of other cars available to purchase that will get you through the game and allow you to have a fun and fulfilling time.

I've spent hundreds of hours playing Forza and I honestly haven't bought more than 2 or 3 of these super expensive cars. They cars aren't any 'better' than the more affordable ones whatsoever.

This isn't taking it to a new level?

From here. £32.50 for one car. That's $52.25 USD! What the in the unholy fuck?

Ok yea, that's bad. I dont know who would do that.

But again, this wont affect people who dont have interest in that.

 

[Hrothgar]

It sounds like World of Tanks but with a 60 euro price tag upfront.

 

[Krilekk]

I don't see the problem. They are basically cheats for real money. If you don't have enough time to invest 40 hours into a game why not give you the ability to streamline your experience? It's not like you have to do it.

Maybe I'm just playing it wrong. I get my Forza Limited Edition for 69 € with enough content to play through the game. Why? They give you the cars from the day one pack for free in your garage, the Limited Edition cars and the VIP cars. Plus I get four more cars gifted thanks to Forza Rewards. The Limited Edition also comes with 1000+ tokens for real money purchases, which will buy me the Lotus F1 car. And I get a x2 multiplier for XP and money.

Additionally money earning is now normalized. You get more than in any Forza game ever. And you earn money by other people racing against your Drivatar. You should get more than enough money to buy the fifty out of 200 cars that you want. If you want everything, well, nothing has changed. To get all the cars in Forza 4 you'd need to race for approximately 300 hours. Mostly R3 on Nurburgring. Or some oval. Or online as a host.

I do have a problem with microtransactions when they're intrusive. When it's pay to win or otherwise grind the same level until you gain enough XP/strength to beat the next one.

 

[AppleMIX]

I feel like this is just a giant fuck you to consumers for the whole DRM fiasco.

 

[phrizek]

As long as players keep paying for these things, developers will keep including them in their games. It's not a direction I'd like to see games go in, but there seems to be a market for such purchases. Things will change when people's value judgments of microtransactions dwindle. Such is life.

 

[jimi_dini]

Shit, this was the BASIS for game design in arcades. All those 80's and 90's arcade machines were created to take your quarters/nickels.

This is classic gaming! Pay2Win is retro!

Except you are now paying for everything on top of the quarters, that are tricked out of you.
Did you buy the arcade cabinet back then as well, so that you could play those games?
Did you have to pay for electricity?
Did you have to pay $60 in advance on top ("entrance fee"), so that you were even allowed to play the game?

I could accept this bullcrap for free-to-play games. I just wouldn't play them, because I know that they are specifically designed to get to your wallet, which means endless grinding and so on. But this here is way worse.

 

[hawk2025]

$60 game, $50 season pass, and microtransactions.


Nope. Nope, nope, nope.

 

[Izayoi]

I don't see the problem. They are basically cheats for real money.

Remember when cheats were free for everyone? All you had to do was go to Cheat Code Central and punch that shit in at the title screen. Now we have to pay for something that takes literally zero effort from a developer standpoint?

When did we start moving the goalposts? Why are we letting developers and publishers violate us like this?

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Better off to just wait for the GOTY editions of titles these days.

 

[Seanspeed]

I just wouldn't play them, because I know that they are specifically designed to get to your wallet, which means endless grinding and so on. But this here is way worse.

Except that Forza isn't designed for 'endless grinding'. Its really nowhere near as bad as people are thinking.

Better off to just wait for the GOTY editions of titles these days.

GOTY edition will not change anything. You will still have to buy the cars in the game will in-game currency.

For the hundredth time, people just dont quite know what they're saying because they're not familiar with Forza(and probably with GT, either).

 

[kadotsu]

I feel like this is just a giant fuck you to consumers for the whole DRM fiasco.

Nah, real money consumables on top of payed DLC on top of subscriptions on top of advertisements on top of the actual product purchase is the DNA of Live.

 

[Izayoi]

But again, this wont affect people who dont have interest in that.

That's where you're wrong. This is setting precedent, and it's getting worse every iteration. Did you miss the part about half the cars and tracks being the game? How you're paying 60% more for cars with a car pack now? All this does is start us down a slippery slope, one that's only going to get worse if folks like you continue to justify it for the developers and sit around complacently while they take more and more.

Man, I fucking loved Forza, too. This is so goddamn depressing. I gotta get some sleep or something.

 

[Fortinbras]

How much do those monstrosities cost you?

Prices haven't been announced yet. I think it's realistic to assume that the expansion pass is going to cost 50 dollars like the car pass. (or 20 dollars for each of the three expansions if you buy them separately).

The Porsche "expansion" for FM4 was 20 dollars, the rally add-on for Horizon was 20 dollars too.

I expect the Ring to be sold for 20 dollars, with additional events to somewhat justify the price.

The other expansions could be two tracks each. One new (Monza or Long Beach from the geometrics leaks) and one classic track.

I could be totally off though.

$60 game, $50 season pass, and microtransactions.


Nope. Nope, nope, nope.

Again. It's not just one season pass. There are at least two (according to the smart glass app leaks)

The Limited Edition also comes with 1000+ tokens for real money purchases, which will buy me the Lotus F1 car.+

1000 tokens won't be enough for the E21.

 

[jimi_dini]

Except that Forza isn't designed for 'endless grinding'. Its really nowhere near as bad as people are thinking.

A series will, on average, net the player in excess of 110,000 credits for just under an hour's effort - but with some of the premium racecars costing well over a million, it's a somewhat brutal grind.

Sounds like an awful grind to me.

 

[AppleMIX]

As long as players keep paying for these things, developers will keep including them in their games. It's not a direction I'd like to see games go in, but there seems to be a market for such purchases. Things will change when people's value judgments of microtransactions dwindle. Such is life.

I honestly don't see any of these games selling well.

Dead Space 3 sold below expectations and no doubt Ryse will bomb.

The money gained though microtransactions doesn't seem to outweigh the cost of loss sales.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

Cant believe Rev3 didnt even mentions the micro transactions in their 5/5 review.

He did bring it up in the Ryse review (which also has microtransactions), and it came down to he was having enough fun with the gameplay and wanting to continue racing that it didn't feel like a grind. This was opposed to Ryse, where the gameplay (or lack of) was boring, and that the upgrades were unnecessary in any case.

Keep in mind though, the racing genre is probably not a primary genre for him, which I believe he states in his review. With that and having to get to other content for the channel, he may not have made the effort to try and unlock all that he could to identify where that line between fun and grind lay. That's why it's important to know how the reviewer approached the game.

I guess Sessler had some micro-transactions with microsoft.

Let's not start with that again.

 

[Luthos]

edit: removed silly rant

 

[Seanspeed]

That's where you're wrong. This is setting precedent, and it's getting worse every iteration. Did you miss the part about half the cars and tracks being the game? How you're paying 60% more for cars with a car pack now? All this does is start us down a slippery slope, one that's only going to get worse if folks like you continue to justify it for the developers and sit around complacently while they take more and more.

I think you're confused here. There isn't half the game locked away somewhere. The reduced car and track count is because they were on a short development cycle and were likely pushed very hard to get this out for launch. They've redone all the tracks and most of the cars, so they were largely 'starting over', content-wise for this new generation. But they dont have years and years and years like Gran Turismo does. They had TWO. That's the normal development cycle between 360 Forza's and that was with tons of reused assets with the same hardware.

I would bet $1000 that Forza 6 will come out with a good bit more content, because they will have had time to have gotten more done.

Anyways, you still didn't quite understand my comment there. I was talking about the car-token stuff.

 

[ZeroAlpha]

Now this may have been said but I could buy credits with real money in Forza 4 that and had to buy a car to 'unlock' it with the ingame money.. wasn't required to use real cash and they gave a lot of free cars during the campaign I don't really see how this is different?

Not saying it's good or that I like it just didn't get in the way I more wish the car packs where cheaper.

 

[Seanspeed]

Sounds like an awful grind to me.

That's no different than past Forza's or Gran Turismo. No different at all.

Its not like you have to sit there and just do crap over and over to get money. You can, but you can also earn money by doing lots of different races and going online and generally just playing as you would normally. You can also design liveries and tune cars to earn cash.

 

[ChiliManiac]

If this gets out of hand, at least will have Nintendo...

 

[Krilekk]

Remember when cheats were free for everyone? All you had to do was go to Cheat Code Central and punch that shit in at the title screen. Now we have to pay for something that takes literally zero effort from a developer standpoint?

When did we start moving the goalposts? Why are we letting developers and publishers violate us like this?

Because I also remember that game prices have stayed the same for the past decade. It's either finding new ways to monetize a game or increasing the price for everybody. And I'm not ok with games costing 100 € or more. Despite knowing that common sense dictates that's what they should cost (inflation, rising budgets, overall userbase staying pretty flat comparing PS2, Xbox, GC to PS3/360 (we all know Wii owners didn't buy a lot of games, just the 30 million Nintendo fans)). So yeah, they sell you cheats and the games in pieces but the alternative is far worse.

 

[Billy Big Bollocks]

Anyone else get the feeling that the reviewer copy was a different game. Like a non-microtransaction version with appropriate xp gains?

No, I think if you listed the average games journalist priorities "how their readers/viewers spend their money" is quite low down. Below more important things like "making a name for themselves on the internet" and "getting to play games for a living".

 

[KyanMehwulfe]

I don't mind micro-transactions and in some cases they work quite good. Obviously, as a gamer I always dislike it, but I respect it from the business side, and it's quite common in Asia. Most every app or game costs money to play. Cards game on QQ or with Tencent, puzzle games like Candy Crush, or basically every Asian RPG in existence (I know a few wealthy 'second generation rich' that have spent over $100,000 USD on MMO items, I shit you not). It's very normal. Almost every guy I went to business university with from China spent at least thousands on game microtransactions (but they're all relatively wealthy by North American standards, so it's not a directly fair comparison to average US consumer). But this is acceptable behavior by most every gamer or even non-gamer in age 20-35 age group, really. It's just how apps and games work there. Point is, this type of game design is increasingly becoming a normal way to market content.

The key difference is almost every single example is 100% free to only download but even play under certain limitations. This is where the Forza 5 situation feels a little tasteless because it's effectively charging you a far higher price than $60 USD for a launch game and its full pre-launch content.

Though I do have a somewhat unrelated question about the slow grind in Forza: is it the case that the $-per-hour average quoted may be inaccurate in the way that if you took an average in Gran Turismo over the first few days, it would likewise take forever to buy nice cars, yet we all know that later in the game the cash is earned at a far faster rate -- this would result in a less grind-y game and make paying for the DLC much more optional and not forced. As long as people can reasonably earn these cars as they would expect in a previous Forza or GT, and its not blatantly discouraging this and encouraging payment of content, then maybe it's not so tasteless. But again, this could be very dependent on how fast you can grind later in F5 and if that average is genuinely accurate over the lifetime of the game. Or, of course, if any notable portion of that content cannot be earned outside of micro-transactions (just in case I misunderstand because I haven't followed Forza).

 

[hawk2025]

Again. It's not just one season pass. There are at least two (according to the smart glass app leaks)


.

...what?

I don't even...

I think you're confused here. There isn't half the game locked away somewhere. The reduced car and track count is because they were on a short development cycle and were likely pushed very hard to get this out for launch. They've redone all the tracks and most of the cars, so they were largely 'starting over', content-wise for this new generation. But they dont have years and years and years like Gran Turismo does. They had TWO. That's the normal development cycle between 360 Forza's and that was with tons of reused assets with the same hardware.

I would bet $1000 that Forza 6 will come out with a good bit more content, because they will have had time to have gotten more done.

Anyways, you still didn't quite understand my comment there. I was talking about the car-token stuff.

Wait, so you are saying that they ran out of time, and therefore they will charge for the additional content that should have been there?
And that's better, because...?

 

[jimi_dini]

That's no different than past Forza's or Gran Turismo. No different at all.

Article in the OP says otherwise

Unlike previous outings, cars don't unlock upon levelling up

There are also just a few cars over 10 million credits in GT5.
We can probably say that those 10 million credit cars are somewhat like the ones mentioned in the article.

Ferrari F1 Indy road course at 770pp gives around 3.2 million per win. Which takes around 12 minutes. Which means those extremly expensive cars would take 40 minutes in GT5.

Even if we take the most expensive cars in GT5. And there are 5 of those. And each cost 20 million credits. That's around 1 1/2 hour then.

The article on the other hand specifies 100.000 credits for just under an hour. Which means those premium cars take around 10 hours each.

Its not like you have to sit there and just do crap over and over to get money. You can, but you can also earn money by doing lots of different races and going online and generally just playing as you would normally.

If it was just exactly the same as previous Forzas, there wouldn't really be a reason to create a topic like this. And the article also wouldn't make sense.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

No, I think if you listed the average games journalist priorities "how their readers/viewers spend their money" is quite low down. Below more important things like "making a name for themselves on the internet" and "getting to play games for a living".

What does cost have to do with anything if not buying the microtransactions? The only thing I can see being a major issue for some people is if they want to get everything in the game for an achievement or before they trade it in. Both don't seem to be about enjoying the game. If you're really enjoying the game and plan to stick with it until the next one comes along (as people do with Halo, COD, sports titles), it shouldn't be that bad of an issue.

With that said though, the microtransaction model shouldn't be so tied in with a retail game, particularly when it can affect multiplayer elements. I'd say they shouldn't be there at all, but I'm starting to be more generous in my opinion that they are ok for single player elements (maybe co-op) if they are a)reasonably achievable in-game and b)do not negatively affect the game.

My advice would be if this is your version of CoD, StarCraft, or other invested multiplayer experience (or single player too if the races are that enjoyable), than you should be ok. But if this is looking to be short term and/or seeking to collect everything, probably may want to pass. In either case, don't buy the microtransactions.

 

[phrizek]

I honestly don't see any of these games selling well.

Dead Space 3 sold below expectations and no doubt Ryse will bomb.

The money gained though microtransactions doesn't seem to outweigh the cost of loss sales.

But if the game bombs, it won't be because of microtransactions. It's because it's a mediocre game. Same with DS3. Companies will keep trying the microtransaction things until it actually becomes a detriment to their bottom line.

 

[Seanspeed]

Though I do have a somewhat unrelated question about the slow grind in Forza: is it the case that the $-per-hour average quoted may be inaccurate in the way that if you took an average in Gran Turismo over the first few days, it would likewise take forever to buy nice cars, yet we all know that later in the game the cash is earned at a far faster rate -- this would result in a less grind-y game and make paying for the DLC much more optional and not forced. As long as people can reasonably earn these cars as they would expect in a previous Forza or GT, and its not blatantly discouraging this and encouraging payment of content, then maybe it's not so tasteless. But again, this could be very dependent on how fast you can grind later in F5 and if that average is genuinely accurate over the lifetime of the game. Or, of course, if any notable portion of that content cannot be earned outside of micro-transactions (just in case I misunderstand because I haven't followed Forza).

Yea, you'll make more money the farther along you get.

People will also find exploits that get them money a lot quicker. This will usually involve actual grinding, though.

Point is, even Gran Turismo has cars that cost $10 million+. They will take you a long time to unlock. This is nothing new to these games. This reviewer singling out Forza for this(and everybody here overreacting to it) is ridiculous.

 

[CouchMaster]

I don't understand why people call it grinding. Isn't the term used for something you hate doing repeatedly in a game? If that's the case then why are you playing sim racers? People call GT5 too grind-y, but as someone who reached lvl 40 in both A and B-spec and did all endurance races in real time, I thoroughly enjoyed putting 800+ hours (not counting online) in it. It's very easy to ignore microtansactions in a sim racing if you actually like playing the game instead of just unlocking stuff.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

Yep. Would be nice if gamers supported them more. They aren't out to screw people like this.

Except not setting account, that you have to pay for all of your digital games if your WiiU broken. It´s the most anti consumer practice out there.

 

[Qvoth]

Shouldn't ryse be in the title too?

 

[Billy Big Bollocks]

What does cost have to do with anything if not buying the microtransactions? The only thing I can see being a major issue for some people is if they want to get everything in the game for an achievement or before they trade it in. Both don't seem to be about enjoying the game. If you're really enjoying the game and plan to stick with it until the next one comes along (as people do with Halo, COD, sports titles), it shouldn't be that bad of an issue.

With that said though, the microtransaction model shouldn't be so tied in with a retail game, particularly when it can affect multiplayer elements. I'd say they shouldn't be there at all, but I'm starting to be more generous in my opinion that they are ok for single player elements (maybe co-op) if they are a)reasonably achievable in-game and b)do not negatively affect the game.

My advice would be if this is your version of CoD, StarCraft, or other invested multiplayer experience (or single player too if the races are that enjoyable), than you should be ok. But if this is looking to be short term and/or seeking to collect everything, probably may want to pass. In either case, don't buy the microtransactions.

I mostly agree with what you are saying. My comment was about how some games journalists have their priorities wrong and that's why some fail to mention microtransactions or provide decent consumer advice (like your last paragraph does) in their reviews.

 

[le.phat]

people that bagatalize the impact of pay-2-win tactics in full retail games need to wake the fuck up. Pay-2-win is designed to fight you every step of the way, and offering monetary relief. These games are built around this model, which means that the most desirable content ( for which you already payed ) is no longer a result of skill, but a carrot on a stick for you to spend more.

 

[Seanspeed]

Wait, so you are saying that they ran out of time, and therefore they will charge for the additional content that should have been there?
And that's better, because...?

This 'should have been there' argument is nonsense. They had a deadline and got what content in they could by that deadline. That's how games are made.

I'm not defending their DLC program in particular, but in general, the more time a game like this has, the more content they can get in obviously. That could go on indefinitely. Push a racing game back a year and it could have even more content.

Article in the OP says otherwise


There are also just a few cars over 10 million credits in GT5.
We can probably say that those 10 million credit cars are somewhat like the ones mentioned in the article.

Ferrari F1 Indy road course at 770pp gives around 3.2 million per win. Which takes around 12 minutes. Which means those extremly expensive cars would take 40 minutes in GT5.

Even if we take the most expensive cars in GT5. And there are 5 of those. And each cost 20 million credits. That's around 1 1/2 hour then.

The article on the other hand specifies 100.000 credits for just under an hour. Which means those premium cars take around 10 hours each.

If it was just exactly the same as previous Forzas, there wouldn't really be a reason to create a topic like this. And the article also wouldn't make sense.

Yes, that's an exploit in GT, one that comes after unlocking the fastest car in the game with the very best money-for-time ratio somebody could find.

No Forza has ever had anything quite that quick, but I'm sure people will find ways of making more than $110,000 in an hour. Even if they dont, people still wont lack for options.

Not having free car unlocks does suck, though. I think that's probably one of the first valid criticisms for the whole 'game is more grindy' argument.

people that bagatalize the impact of pay-2-win tactics in full retail games need to wake the fuck up. Pay-2-win is designed to fight you every step of the way, and offering monetary relief. These games are built around this model, which means that the most desirable content ( for which you already payed ) is no longer a result of skill, but a carrot on a stick for you to spend more.

Its not pay-to-win, for the last time.

Its nothing like that.

Its laughable to suggest its anything like that. Stop it. You dont know what you're saying. I can regularly beat people that drive $10,000,000 cars with a $75,000 souped up BMW 3-series. Buying these expensive cars does not grant you a competitive edge. They are not more expensive because they are 'better'.

EDIT: Actually, there are some $20,000 cars that will beat a $10,000,000 car in FM4.

 

[FrunkQ]

Is the addition of F2P style micro-transactions to avoid "grind" becoming mandatory on Microsoft published games?

So far we have seen:
Forza

...such tricks appear a little unsavoury, and in Forza 5, mechanics greedily smuggled from free-to-play games trample over the elegant RPG elements the series once embraced so effectively.

EG Review

Crimson Dragon

There's the option to grind, of course, and come back to levels with more firepower at your fingertips. And if you don't want to grind, you're covered by micro-transactions, with Crimson Dragon's economy another facet of Microsoft's bold redefinition of free-to-play gaming.

EG review

Ryse

Ryse includes Booster Packs similar to those in FIFA Ultimate Team. You can buy these packs, which include armour items for use in multiplayer, with in-game currency and real world currency

. EG Article

Killer Instinct suddenly does not look so crap now because at least you don't have to pay for the base game... and the one character everyone else has.

On the Sony side it looks like it is less prevalent with Killzone Shadowfall having standard season passes & DLC type stuff. Even them all the multi-player maps will be free to all, to avoid splitting online communities.

Seems like Sony are almost apologetic when asking for you to "pay to play online" for their games. But MS just seem to be taking it up a gear and gouging the customer on every occasion.

This is an insidious precedent.

 

[TaroYamada]

I'm glad this shit is finally attracting attention, what's happened to Company of Heroes 2 is nothing short of disgusting. Full $60 at release $180 in DLC so far and they aren't finished adding DLC.

I've always been opposed to DLC and in fact have never purchased any outside GotY/complete packs. This new thing of a F2P model grafted onto full price retail games, though? Fuck that.

 

[Green Yoshi]

What happened to cheat codes? I don't want to pay 70$ for a Formula 1 car in Forza 5 that is already on the disc.

 

[Billy Big Bollocks]

Microsoft really are taking the piss now. I wouldn't be surprised if the next Dance Central has you literally grinding to unlock the next song.
Pay £20 or spend 2 hours rubbing your arse up against the furniture if you want to unlock Rihanna's new hit!

 

[mclem]

I think the reason why most reviewers don't mention this, or don't make a big deal out of it is because game reviewers are more and more avoiding discussing the cost of gaming in general. And I don't think it's entirely because most of the well known ones are getting their consoles and games for free, I think the cost of gaming is just so high and the audience so diverse that it's not practical to say what is or isn't worth the money. Each person has to decide how much their time and money is with.

Yeah, I think that's fair. I value games very highly - I'm willing to pay a premium for entertainment. Other people are not. I think a review should treat the game without *any* DLC as a product and assess it on those merits. If the game feels grindy to encourage you to purchase timesaving DLC, criticise it for being grindy. If it does *not* feel grindy even though there's the option to purchase timesaving DLC, praise it for not being grindy. Consider the game independently of the DLC, and let the reader judge what sort of price they'd be willing to pay for that product.

But the simple fact of the matter is that the general consumer belief is that $60 buys you the full experience as the developers intended it.

Possibly by virtue of the fact that I've done professional games development, I don't really have that perception. Not least because 'as the developers intended it' gets shredded to pieces as the reality and costs of development come to light.

What they should be able to say is 'Forza 4 gave you X amount of content for $60 dollars. Forza 5 gives you Y amount of content (I think racing games are one of the few unique genres that it is acceptable to quantify how much is in a game.)

If a company is giving us less or worse for the same amount of money we should be upset and protest in whatever way is appropriate. If a company gives us the same amount as the previous game they don't deserve praise, they may deserve our business. They have accomplished what should be considered the bare minimum. If they increase the quality and quantity of content then we should support them.

The problem with this philosophy is that we're also dealing with a generational leap, so each individual asset would have been more expensive to develop; talking purely in terms of discrete quantities doesn't take that into account.

The only assessment I can think of that would have be some reasonal interpretation of what you're asking for would be to compare budgets, and that's still imperfect in several ways.

Bravely Default has micro transactions......fuck

This is a reasonable example of the 'Does it feel grindy independently of whether there's microtransactions' thing, because we have a direct benchmark: It's For The Sequel that has microtransactions, whereas the original Japanese release does not. The burning question, then, is does the flow of FTS feel notably worse than that of the vanilla game? If it does, criticise the game for that. If it does not, the microtransactions really are purely a timesaver and nothing that needs concern the general user.

 

[nowheretorun]

I don't agree with microtransactions whatsoever.

A disease to our Industry and if it's not addressed sooner rather than later (ie. got rid of unless it's done correctly through FREE games in the first place - although something within itself could still be a disease), then we will face some form(s) of gaming crash(es).

GTA Online is another current typical game which is trying to have us over imo. I know a young kid (please no morality arguments here) who is just about to stop playing the game completely because he knows that he can not afford things in the game which will help him continue to enjoy it without paying for cash packs.

This is an important issue as this is a kid who, potentially, could play games for the next 20 years without question. No doubt if he really loves GTA and this is his first experience with this game, how will he react when another is released in the future when in the back of his mind he's thinking 'fuck that'.... Will this have wider implications on other games too? Will this turn him away from this hobby?

Oh and btw, for the record, I really don't get that 'Nintendo knows how to do DLC'. They are in the same boat as everyone else in my mind - NSMBU Luigi & Wii Sports Club, among others, says enough....

 

[Dr. Buni]

I hate it when microtransactions are advertised in-game.

Woah, is this shit serious? If so, fuck you and your game, Square Enix.

 

[Seanspeed]

What happened to cheat codes? I don't want to pay 70$ for a Formula 1 car in Forza 5 that is already on the disc.

Wow.

 

[mclem]

Also it appears that the whales account for 1% or less of gamers out there and the actions of behaviors of this 1% could account for the future game design of us all

Worth bearing in mind that there's a key distinction there; in Free to play, the whales are responsible for the vast majority of revenue, so the game is likely to be tailored to them. In Fee to play, however, the majority of revenue still comes from the individual purchaser, and developers need to take that into account; Fee To Play is more democratic, Free To Play is a plutocracy - although it's entirely down to developers to recognise that fact.

 

[mclem]

Woah, is this shit serious? If so, fuck you and your game, Square Enix.

I'm not going to chastise them for this until I know if the balance has changed for the worse from the original version.