Zoramon089
Banned
I'm confused. That isn't actually Cliffy is it?
-
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.
Cliffy B says things about microtransactions
- Thread starter Wario64
- Start date
Do any of you fuckers still actually play games, or do you just hang out here all day long and play digital fantasy football with the industry?
Mhhh, sounds like a kickass game idea to me. Imagine Football Manager meets Game Dev Story and have online leaderboards.
Seriously, since I am singleish I try to game when I am not working, eating, tinkering with computers/phone, socializing, and courting.
Gaming is still my main love and thank you for being involved. I still <3 Jazz Jackrabbit, the Unreal Series (please Epic port UC 1/2 to live Arcade) and OMF (even though Epic published it). Whenever you return to making games, please create some for personal computers.
As for OP, EA is up to something but I long for the pre Xbox world of game development and marketing even though I do not feel guilty with owning a 360 with subscribing to Gold.
Femmeworth
Banned
Quoted for the damn truth, so tired of seeing people say, "Businesses exist to make money."
Blog said:
Take an economics course, please.
Heavy's Sandvich
Member
Who remembers when Cliffy made good games?
Me neither
Please don't ban me I'm making a rubbish joke.
Me neither
Do agree with his sentiment about VALVe seeming to get away with some unsavoury microtransaction stuff
Please don't ban me I'm making a rubbish joke.
There are a lot of people on here that will say they aren't buying another COD and then you see them pop in the thread to say they bought it only because it was on sale or for whatever reason.
I think it's bullshit in addition to that. Maybe I'm reading all the wrong threads but the majority of those who make up "gaming GAF", that is those who actually post, didn't buy horse armour and I'm not sure what you're comparing to if GAF buys CoD games disproportionately much. The people who complain about CoD games can't be held responsible for those who buy CoD games unless they're the same people. Same for DLC.
Does this actually happen?
NullPointer
Member
Sales can change minds.
But really, the problem with COD isn't that it exists, its that so many shooters seek to copy it blindly, chasing after that cash at the expense of unique gameplay elements.
Sure those exists. It's just that COD is not as big a deal on this board as its marketshare would justify.
On the same token we can't even get a FIFA league going for more than 5 league days because not enough people sign up or they lose interest and that's a game that sells over 15 million units every year.
Meanwhile a game like Demon's Souls or Dark Souls is still discussed. That was basically my point.
Also: I would buy a new COD if it turned out to be good and not one more of the same.
(I think the main COD entries give very good value for the people that enjoy it so I don't have extremely bad things to say about it.)
What because you don't like what he has to say? I enjoy insight like this from someone who has dedicated his life to gaming. From the responses in this thread I'm betting the average age of people posting in this thread is 12.
What the fuck is a video game?
*Goes back to bitching about interactive digital media*
TaroYamada
Member
Nope, I bitched and moaned about DLC day one. 7 years later I've purchased 0 pieces of DLC unless they happened to come with the game in a Game of the Year edition. I will continue this policy. Also I think newer CODs are mediocre and have never purchased a game in the franchise, only borrowed from friends and I stopped borrowing after Modern Warfare.
Well, when you pay the FULL price for it, you can have it.
(As I've mentioned before, I'd prefer budgets to reduce so it's possible to make reasonable profits without these sorts of practices, but if you accept budgets the way they are, this kinda has to follow suit.)
I dunno. I agree with almost all of his points. Doesn't mean stuff feels good, but that's how things work. It's awesome if a company of makes something can make a profit and make you feel all warm and fuzzy with their product, but I think that's rare and not a realistic expectation with any product. I believe a creator/artist/whatever can do whatever they want with their product before it's on the shelf to sell, and if we don't like it, tough. It's their right to yank out stuff and sell it separately as long as it's done before the product is out. It would be great if this never happened, but we're not owed everything created, only what we were promised in exchange for buying the product. We shouldn't buy the end product if it makes us feel bad or if it feels incomplete. The key being as long as they are honest about what we are getting for what we pay for. That's important. If that condition is met, I think people are just complaining because they simply want as much content as possible and can't get it, so they get disgruntled.
Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
awww they changed your tag
EA, is that you?!
He already did as a playable character in Cliffy's new game
wtf
yeah but besides that it won't happen again.
Do any of you fuckers still actually play games, or do you just hang out here all day long and play digital fantasy football with the industry?
That actually sounds a fun sim game, kind of like HSX.
People do love to waste a lot of energy bitching about microtransactions. I'm not a fan of them, but the one aberration for me was Rock Band. Damn, did I spend a lot of money on DLC. But outside of that, a few songs on Theatrhythm FF and the Sega Saturn shirt for my 360 avatar.
He's right, though... don't like it? Don't buy it. Who are you to say who should and shouldn't buy this stuff? If you buy something and don't find that it was worth your money, then complain, and perhaps constructively complaining to the publisher/developer will make them rethink things next time to make the next wave better.
He's right, though... don't like it? Don't buy it. Who are you to say who should and shouldn't buy this stuff? If you buy something and don't find that it was worth your money, then complain, and perhaps constructively complaining to the publisher/developer will make them rethink things next time to make the next wave better.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
Nealand Liquor
Member
Until the next game released.
CountAntonius
Member
RoninChaos
Member
Exactly. He's also dismissing that forced micro transactions will fundamentally alter how the game works. A ring in Team Fortress 2 doesn't change how the game plays. If you have to grind 15 hours extra because you don't want to give EA 5 bucks to get past some leveling hurdle, it doesn't mean you're cheap; it means that EA fucking sucks.
That's the part that seems to keep getting lost here. Sorry, Cliffy, but we don't think EA has anyone's best interests in mind. If you make a good product, people will buy it. Period.
ANd yes, people don't have to buy shit if they don't want to. Epic pulled a team fortress with all the gun skins, but that didn't fundamentally fuck with how the game plays. Microtransactions, if Dead Space 3 is ANY indication, will get worse and worse and worse.
RobotMafia
Banned
CliffyB bitching about how developers have it so rough is like when Latrell Sprewell turned down a $20 million dollar contract because he needed to need his family.
EmCeeGramr
Member
People do love to waste a lot of energy bitching about microtransactions. I'm not a fan of them, but the one aberration for me was Rock Band. Damn, did I spend a lot of money on DLC. But outside of that, a few songs on Theatrhythm FF and the Sega Saturn shirt for my 360 avatar.
He's right, though... don't like it? Don't buy it. Who are you to say who should and shouldn't buy this stuff? If you buy something and don't find that it was worth your money, then complain, and perhaps constructively complaining to the publisher/developer will make them rethink things next time to make the next wave better.
So people waste a lot of time complaining, but they should complain.
Lol, a thread is created about a blog post of his and somehow that translates to him wanting attention. Did he will this thread into existence?
Don't see much wrong with his outlook on this whole thing. His point wasn't that all companies are 100% only out to make as much money as possible no matter what, but that public companies owned by shareholders have a responsibility to grow and be as successful as they reasonably can be. Clearly the microtransaction model is working in that regard, and the best thing any of us here can do if we want to change that is not buy games that make use of it and spend money on those that don't.
Do any of you fuckers still actually play games, or do you just hang out here all day long and play digital fantasy football with the industry?
ugh_the_boot
Banned
That was a good read CliffyB.
I think videogames and the industry are fine as they are right now. For me the highlight is actually the online component. Since the original Xbox Live the social aspect has really grown for me in gaming. I remember connecting Doom 2 with a mate via 14.4kbps modem and it was very cumbersome back in the day. Now you can get add ons for your games and interact with like minded people from all over the world. It's all very easy and very robust and I personally love it. Remember not all games came with additional costumes, weapons, nor the ability to fix problems etc back in the day. If developers want to give you free costumes in their games, they can still do so - that's how it's always been.
The only downer for me in all of gaming has been the shift towards motion controls and one of my favourite companies basing a whole console on it (Wii). Nintendo are back on track with the Wii U however and it will always be optional on Xbox and PS. Such a shame about the latest Panzer Dragoon game though, damn I wish it comes out with an option for traditional controls.
I think videogames and the industry are fine as they are right now. For me the highlight is actually the online component. Since the original Xbox Live the social aspect has really grown for me in gaming. I remember connecting Doom 2 with a mate via 14.4kbps modem and it was very cumbersome back in the day. Now you can get add ons for your games and interact with like minded people from all over the world. It's all very easy and very robust and I personally love it. Remember not all games came with additional costumes, weapons, nor the ability to fix problems etc back in the day. If developers want to give you free costumes in their games, they can still do so - that's how it's always been.
The only downer for me in all of gaming has been the shift towards motion controls and one of my favourite companies basing a whole console on it (Wii). Nintendo are back on track with the Wii U however and it will always be optional on Xbox and PS. Such a shame about the latest Panzer Dragoon game though, damn I wish it comes out with an option for traditional controls.
TouchMyBox
Member
I know when microtranactions are done right in a game when I feel the desire to give the developers money not because I am required to in order to continue enjoying the game I'm playing or because my enjoyment would be greatly increased by paying money, but because I've been having so much fun with said game that I feel obligated to pay something.
Microtransactions are done wrong when I come away with a feeling that the developer/publisher has created some sort of controlled for-pay dopamine-release program which preys on human vulnerabilities in order to weasel them out of their hard-earned cash.
With companies likes EA adopting the latter for their mobile offerings and then telling console and PC players that "all games will have microtransactions in the future", I think gaming enthusiasts have every right to be worried.
Microtransactions are done wrong when I come away with a feeling that the developer/publisher has created some sort of controlled for-pay dopamine-release program which preys on human vulnerabilities in order to weasel them out of their hard-earned cash.
With companies likes EA adopting the latter for their mobile offerings and then telling console and PC players that "all games will have microtransactions in the future", I think gaming enthusiasts have every right to be worried.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
He's got a big mouth.
This is the problem with the iOS platform for me right now and why I'm turned off by it :\
Why do you ask questions you already know the answer to?
The thing that really bothers me about micro-transactions specifically over DLC is that can, if the devs are greedy enough, skew the gameplay balance in favour of the game in an effort to get money out of the player for extra lives etc. We haven't seen this in the console space so far (thank fuck), but Activision or EA (cant remember which) were talking about a hypothetical pay to reload or extra ammo system at some investor meeting. This kinda shit can potentially lead to a situation where the programmers have a bit of code in the game where by they can engineer situations where you just lose or just a couple more mags of ammo will allow you to clear out that last room.
My distaste for micro-transactions is somewhat based on a hypothetical, but if it has been talked about by a publisher which makes it a possibility and I'd rather they don't get their foot in the door.
For the most part DLC doesn't bother me, if it's something amazing i may buy it, but if it's something that was clearly intended to be in the game from the start, i wont buy it out of principle.
My distaste for micro-transactions is somewhat based on a hypothetical, but if it has been talked about by a publisher which makes it a possibility and I'd rather they don't get their foot in the door.
For the most part DLC doesn't bother me, if it's something amazing i may buy it, but if it's something that was clearly intended to be in the game from the start, i wont buy it out of principle.
scytherage
Member
I think if games started asking you to buy something just to get to the next level of a game, then the console industry is going to be in trouble. Maybe with tablet/phone games it's kinda justified (consider most of them are free or 1$ each). If it's just a cosmetic thing or if it's a weapon upgrade that increases your damage a bit but doesn't make you too overpowered, I suppose it's ok. There should be some kind of standard to it so that there isn't abuse to the players.
CliffyB said:
Except Cliffy, honey: I find both of them completely stupid. If you want to pay $100 for a digital engagement ring, okay, more power to you. But I ain't buying that and I feel Valve and EA could/would be better served doing other forms of DLC than charging that much for a cosmetic item.
And you're right: Valve has got a lot of people in line to praise them when other companies don't and Valve pulls some shitty things (maybe not as often but still) as well and they get brushed aside.
Animal
Banned
Your posts in this thread made my day. I love you man (No homo).
Personally I post here while I'm waiting for my textures to pop in.
A few people have made this point already, but I just wanted to echo this. There is no way anyone who has even a passing knowledge of TF2's history could confuse the almost comically endless run of game-reshaping free updates with any of EA's egregious examples of nickel-and-diming.
Beyond that, all you have to do is read a few Valve news threads on neogaf to see they get plenty of criticism, often in situations where you'd think there couldn't possibly be a negative interpretation to the news, and then low and behold, someone on the internet figures out an angle. Recent news offers a shedload of examples, but one thing that comes to mind in the past is the HUGE UPROAR around Valve releasing Left 4 Dead 2 only a year after Left 4 Dead. There was a petition, many people were furious, etc. For releasing a sequel a year later ONCE.
The truth is, every game company gets shit. The less shitty get less shit (usually because they're more meaningfully responsive to customer feedback,) and the world goes on.
Also, why is it that when something is a "business" about "money," consumers should shut their mouths and vote only with their wallets? I'll complain about a bad game and I'll complain about a ripoff offer as much as I want, thank you very much.
It's almost like some people feel that there should be no communication in the market. It's a fucking market. People talk as they exchange value. Otherwise the only consumer knowledge in the market would be what gets fed to people through advertising, which would greatly benefit the companies who have the most money to spend on advertising... ah, now I see where this is going.
It's like the "please only vote with your wallet, not with your voice" crowd is afraid of the power of word of mouth.
So does Peter Molyneux, but at least that's someone who contributes (or used to) to the industry.
I really don't. I get Warren Spector, Molyneux, Jaffe, John Carmack, Gabe, Kaz and even Pachter threads, but this guy? Not that I hate Gears, but is he really that relevant?
Not to mention, well...
Do any of you fuckers still actually play games, or do you just hang out here all day long and play digital fantasy football with the industry?