• 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.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

I’d take loot crates over dlc, season passes, online passes and split userbases

Gowans

Member
Sep 28, 2006
21,039
0
0
South Shields, UK
twitter.com
As the Gaming business evolves monitisatuon methods change.

It was once DLC, online passes, then season passes and now it’s moving to loot boxes.

Honestly I would take loot boxes all day over the past monitisatuon experiments.
Calving a game up and paying for pieces seems to becoming a relic as games are becoming platforms we longer tails, free content for everyone to extend the game and playerbases kept together.

Loot boxes / crates News seems to becoming click bait outrage at the moment but honestly games like Smite, Halo 5, Rainbow Six Seige, Overwatch, Rocket League, Warframe, Dota 2 etc. have kept me playing longer and longer due to the playerbase supporting the platform and free content extending there lives.
 

DJwest

Member
Oct 17, 2012
3,366
1
405
These loot boxes threads are on a roll. There's nothing inherently wrong with DLCs or season passes when they're done right, OP. Case in point, the Witcher 3.
 

purseowner

Member
May 31, 2015
6,310
4
0
Wait - you'd rather have loot crates than substantial DLC that adds meaty content to the game for a reasonable price?
 

sirap

Member
Mar 1, 2013
6,110
0
0
Malaysia
I've got no problems with loot crates if the games are free or released at significantly lower price-points.

Full price though? Nah, miss me with that shit
 

Biscotti

Neo Member
Jan 11, 2016
79
0
0
I would rather game sell cosmetics for a flat price instead of making you gamble for them... I hate you gears of war 4.
 

ArkhamFantasy

Member
Oct 13, 2013
9,880
0
0
You would rather have a mental health care professional exploit gambling addictions than have an expansion like Blood and Wine?

Also why does it have to be a lootbox? Why cant the game just let you buy the thing you want and use that money to fund extra maps like Titanfall 2 does? Why does it have to be random, why does gambling have to be involved??
 

TheBowen

Sat alone in a boggy marsh
Apr 25, 2014
2,600
0
0
I get what you mean, and I would rather have free dlc and expansions at the cost of certain aesthetic content being in loot boxes

Only slight problem I have is that now dlc is free, the quality of dlc has gone down and has slowed down for certain games.

It seems as if great and unique dlc single player expansions are declining, and multiplayer add one are coming out slowly as they seem to only release them in order to get people to continue playing to buy more loot boxes, not because they want people to play the game.

Raycevick had a good video on it recently
 

Toe-Knee

Member
Jan 10, 2017
1,470
365
320
Uk
I'd rather just buy a game that is a full game at launch play it then move onto something else without having to pay more for content that either should have been in the game already or doesn't really add anything substantial.
 

Wanyal

Neo Member
Jul 27, 2013
37
0
0
This is good in theory but we do not live in a world where game developers/publishers are opting for one over the other ala Overwatch. Publishers are seeing the money and picking all of them, See Destiny, Shadow of War.

However, even Overwatch has abused this idea. That game has so much temporary content now, its ridiculous. I want to be able to play the horde modes all the time, not when Blizzard decides to allow me access to them, but because they want to incentivise paying for the lootboxes to get the related skins, I can't.

I appreciate that not all developers can get away with this, but I was a big fan of when Valve would just add content for free, and pay for it by putting their game on sale.
 

Theorry

Member
Dec 4, 2014
15,857
3
0
The beta thread of Battlefront is weird also. People saying they are not gonna buy it because of crates. But when it has a season pass they are not gonna buy it because of split userbase,
 

_Aaron_

Member
Mar 20, 2016
429
1
0
They don't belong in a single-player game. No problem with them being integrated into the multiplayer component if it's done right.
 

Mohasus

Member
Jul 23, 2012
5,120
1
420
I don't play online, so the only thing that affects me is... Loot boxes.

Single player dlc is still paid even with them added.
 

Rmagnus

Banned
Jan 31, 2017
1,027
0
0
The beta thread of Battlefront is weird also. People saying they are not gonna buy it because of crates. But when it has a season pass they are not gonna buy it because of split userbase,
So don't have have loot boxes and don't split the user base. How is it weird?
 

roytheone

Member
Feb 3, 2014
5,919
0
385
The Netherlands
I don't mind cosmetic only loot boxes like in overwatch at all and agree with you there. Add gameplay relevant stuff like in battlefront though and it becomes a different story.
 

Gowans

Member
Sep 28, 2006
21,039
0
0
South Shields, UK
twitter.com
I'd rather just buy a game that is a full game at launch play it then move onto something else without having to pay more for content that either should have been in the game already or doesn't really add anything substantial.
That thinking doesn’t work for games like Rainbow Six Seige, it’s had free maps and characters to play with quality since release. I don’t want to move to to something else or buy a sequel and start again.

Yeah I guess I’m coming to it from more a multiplayer focused point of view but I’m really enjoying these new platform or Games as a service policy’s to play with friends and to all get the benefits of new stuff for us to keep playing together. Rocket League with its new maps and modes is any other great example.

In the past games have just been left now it’s constant work, development and improvement and loot boxes seem to be the way they are paying for it.
 

CaviarMeths

Member
Mar 20, 2015
7,428
1
0
I'd rather publishers stop their cinematic/graphics/open world arms races that ludicrously inflate game budgets and necessitate all of these hyper-aggressive monetization strategies. AAA gaming is getting so cancerous.
 

Renekton

Member
Feb 21, 2014
17,726
3
0
Kuala Lumpur
Which one has bigger effect to gameplay?

Lootbox - dev may design droprates and gameplay grind around these

DLC - content may be missing, playerbase fragmentation
 

SgtCobra

Member
Mar 11, 2011
7,965
0
0
what I want to know is what game or recent announcement made GAF go crazy with thread about loot boxes.

can somebody please help those of us who don't know where these threads are coming from?
Star Wars Battlefornt 2 and Middle Earth Shadow of War I think?
 

ArkhamFantasy

Member
Oct 13, 2013
9,880
0
0
what I want to know is what game or recent announcement made GAF go crazy with thread about loot boxes.

can somebody please help those of us who don't know where these threads are coming from?
Forza 7, Shadow of War, and Battlefront 2 are all pushing microtransactions harder than we've ever seen in a premium game.
 

Youth Crew

Member
Jul 25, 2017
162
0
0
USA
Me too, in a f2p game. If a game is $60 I expect to receive the full game.
I get what you’re saying, and I wish I could agree, but game prices haven’t raised ($50->$60) in ~12 years while the average AAA game budget has increased by a significant amount.

DLC, microtransactions, and lootboxes are there to cover the extra cost needed for development, I would think.

It just matters if a game does it right.

Overwatch does Loot Boxes perfect with cosmetics only.

Witcher 3 or The Last of Us does DLC perfect with their expansions.

But microtransactions... keep those for F2P games please.
 

FairyEmpire

Member
Aug 30, 2017
316
0
0
what I want to know is what game or recent announcement made GAF go crazy with thread about loot boxes.

can somebody please help those of us who don't know where these threads are coming from?
Despite the fact that the presence of "loot boxes" was known in Mordor and Origins (the second not featuring real money though), people lost their shit when a new thread was made for them. Suddenly we're back to the "WB are cancer" "Ubisoft sucks" circle without even waiting to see how these loot boxes are implemented. Meanwhile, other fan favourites like Overwatch have been getting a pass for these things.
 

correojon

Member
Jul 25, 2014
2,789
1
395
Loot crates won't give you something like the Artoria of the Abyss DLC or MK8's +50% new game expansion. DLC, when done well, can be pretty amazing.
 

NullPointer

Member
May 4, 2006
44,305
2
0
San Francisco
DLC is great. Give me quality DLC and if I like the core game I'm likely to buy in for more. But if the core game feels wanting, or like it needs DLC to feel complete than no deal.

Online passes can make you games literally unplayable (Resistance 3), so no.

Season passes are just really expensive lootbox gambles (what exactly are you going to get for the money, and when?) over many months or more, so no.

Map packs are fine, but they split the community, so they're a different gamble. How are they going to play with the various matchmaking hoppers? Are enough people going to buy them to make those playlists worthwhile? Yeah, its a counter-productive technique.

RNG loot crates for cosmetics I'm mostly OK with, though people who bring up taking advantage of certain compulsions make a good case. At the very least it should be included in the ESRB rating information, and it should be tied with free post-release support for all players.

Non-RNG cosmetics are perfect. No problems here. See what you want, buy it. But I don't think all games can pull this off (Battlefront 2 would suck with every stormtrooper being a circus clown) and I'm not sure how well that stuff is working for Respawn with Titanfall 2.

RNG loot crates with stats and buffs like Battlefront 2 or power item consumables in Halo 5 are garbage. Full stop. Wouldn't be OK with it in a free-to-play game either.

In general, if a game has any of most of these categories I think it should have been a free-to-play game rather than a full priced title, and especially not one with ultimate editions, season passes and premium DLC.
 

Oersted

Member
Mar 14, 2012
32,330
1
0
Despite the fact that the presence of "loot boxes" was known in Mordor and Origins (the second not featuring real money though), people lost their shit when a new thread was made for them. Suddenly we're back to the "WB are cancer" "Ubisoft sucks" circle without even waiting to see how these loot boxes are implemented. Meanwhile, other fan favourites like Overwatch have been getting a pass for these things.
More people pay attention if it is specifically mentioned.

I wish I could be as shocked as you are.
 

jem0208

Member
Jul 17, 2013
11,386
0
395
Same.

Halo 5 for example was fine.

I'd far rather have free DLC and loot boxes than map packs which split the user base.
 

KHlover

Banned
Jun 26, 2013
13,792
0
0
Fuck lootboxes in SP games, I'll take them over season passes in MP games any day of the week though. Better than split userbases.
 

Hjod

Banned
Aug 11, 2014
2,583
1
0
The money to support after launch content with new maps needs to come from somewhere.
Then they can do what Titanfall 2 did. For me the only problem I have with loot boxes (in MP games) is that they are random.

But RNG loot boxes is going to be such a regular thing in MP games and people will get so used to them that we'll go straight back to paying for the DLCs as well.
 

Chairmanchuck

Member
Jun 18, 2011
14,211
0
680
Despite the fact that the presence of "loot boxes" was known in Mordor and Origins (the second not featuring real money though), people lost their shit when a new thread was made for them. Suddenly we're back to the "WB are cancer" "Ubisoft sucks" circle without even waiting to see how these loot boxes are implemented. Meanwhile, other fan favourites like Overwatch have been getting a pass for these things.
There is a difference between cosmetic items in a MP game and items that might reduce a slob grind in a SP game.
 

Phillips455

Member
Feb 24, 2015
447
0
0
Scotland
Loot boxes are only a chance of you getting what you want. Sure you could get it within the first 2 or 3 boxes you open, or you may be stuck opening HUNDREDS.

All these downloadable Microtransactions that would have cost you $2-3 now may take up to $200, $300, $500 or who the hell knows.

I would rather have the option to just buy it out right, rather than have a gambling mechanic that a lot of people, especially naive children will fall in to to.
 

myco666

Member
Sep 26, 2013
6,071
0
0
Fake Europe
Why it has to be either lootboxes or split userbases via paid content? I am playing SFV and it doesn't have either and only content I need to pay for are cosmetics which I can pick and choose instead of having to pay for a chance to get the one I want.