TeddyShardik
Banned
The problem is that it's not an either/or scenario any more. I bet we're gonna see games with all of it in the near future.
-
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.
Id take loot crates over dlc, season passes, online passes and split userbases
- Thread starter Gowans
- Start date
Muppet of a Man
Member
There is nothing better than DLC done right. Case in point: Bloodborne, The Old Hunters.
It's like getting a mini sequel relatively shortly after the base game is released.
It's like getting a mini sequel relatively shortly after the base game is released.
ScientificPizza
Banned
How about just not doing any of that shit
I disagree with DLC though, as long as its a substantial add-on like The Witcher 3
I disagree with DLC though, as long as its a substantial add-on like The Witcher 3
CountAntonius
Member
No thats just a bonus. Ive been playing mp only games for a long time and I dont miss map packs, I dont miss content drying up after a few months so the devs can start on a new game cause their old one isnt selling anymore ,or competitve communities dead cause sponsors wont back a game that doesnt push their newest hardware.
For the mp driven games I play cases have been great. Years later and these games have thriving communities because they are still being updated and thats because they bring in a lot of money. The community isnt split cause maps and modes are free and I actually like cosmetics items. I just buy what I want from people. It tends to be really cheap unless you want some absurdly rare item.
I wont defend all practices because the new stuff they are doing on these retail games seems awful but I will say it has made my experience of mp gaming last few years great.
NullPointer
Member
That choice doesn't even exist in these games, so I don't understand why this keeps being brought up.
In a nutshell, this. Its not optional when the game at its core revolves around these systems.
wapplew
Member
Dreamgazer
Member
Oh snap guys, I just had a wonderful idea.
Let's season pass the loot boxes.
Let's season pass the loot boxes.
Phrozenflame500
Member
Yes for multiplayer GAAS titles, lootboxes are better then dlc or season passes there.
No for single-player titles, I'd rather just have DLC.
No for single-player titles, I'd rather just have DLC.
I think Nintendo got it right with Splatoon --
They seem to be doing just fine without psychologically manipulating and nickel-and-diming its customers (at least not nearly to the degree that most other major developers do)
- Single-player campaign
- Free maps that don't split the userbase
- Zero microtransactions
- Zero loot crates
They seem to be doing just fine without psychologically manipulating and nickel-and-diming its customers (at least not nearly to the degree that most other major developers do)
Dont be surprised if many games are going to make more money from all forms of microtransactions than selling the games themselves. People are delusional to think things like lootcrates are going away just because a vocal minority are boycotting them. One person that spends $500 in microtransactions is going to make up 10 people that didnt buy the game at all. I, for one, have already spent $1500+ in microtransactions/lootboxes this year (all in full priced titles; no F2P or mobile games), and would gladly to spend more in more games that I like.
Is Extra like loot boxes and stuff. Because if so, holy damn
Cue, "But amiibos though..." And, in fairness, the first Splatoon did have some real shit amiibo functionality: full levels and minigames locked behind amiibo. The second one is better since it's only costumes and none of them are particularly great or special
Woah...for what? That's a lot.
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
What the fuck is GAAS?
CountAntonius
Member
CosmicQueso
Member
What 4 games were these?
Baraka Obama
Banned
We dont have to deal with the worst versions of either, vote with your wallet and support games that like in this regard. That being said loot boxes are fucking nefarious in that they clearly take advantage of people with gambling addictions, so I guess I agree dont with your point.
The Jazz Cabbage Master
Member
How does blood and wine split the user base of a single player game lmao
NullPointer
Member
Ever stop to think what you would have paid for similar content before microtransactions and lootboxes arrived in those full price games? And do you think its cool for other players to have to expend as much as you to get that much out of the games they already paid full price for?
I understand that you're a-OK with these systems, but you're signaling these companies to twist the knobs further (extended grinds and unlocks and rarities) to get more out of you in particular in next years's games. You're the one they want - the rest of us are just along for the ride.
Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
I'd say the rise to prominence of something like FIFA Ultimate Team says it's probably more than that. Fair bit more.
Checked recent games its more then 4, Cuphead, Observer, Divinity Original Sin 2, BattleChasers Nightwar, Hat In Time.
Yeah I'm not down for rigged algorithm gambling boxes where they have no obligation to show you the odds.
That's gonna be a no for me dog.
This has my nomination for the most short-sighted, un-informed original post.
Do i want to pay a dollar for that sexy cosmetic item from a marketplace, or do I want to pay potentially 10's of dollars for the mere possibility of it appearing in a loot box? It's straight up gambling. It's a dirty money making tactic that preys on people.
There used to be a beautiful time where you would buy a game and that was it. Then companies found out that they could get away with charging people for content, after the games been released, and it's been a slippery slope ever since. I'm glad that people are finally turning around and saying enough is enough.
Edit:
Of course the companies don't care. You're the kind of person who keeps coming back to the casino. Their most valued customer. An addict with money to be burn. You can do whatever you want with your money, but there are at least laws when it comes to traditional gambling, that should be applied here.
There used to be a beautiful time where you would buy a game and that was it. Then companies found out that they could get away with charging people for content, after the games been released, and it's been a slippery slope ever since. I'm glad that people are finally turning around and saying enough is enough.
Edit:
Of course the companies don't care. You're the kind of person who keeps coming back to the casino. Their most valued customer. An addict with money to be burn. You can do whatever you want with your money, but there are at least laws when it comes to traditional gambling, that should be applied here.
CountAntonius
Member
Using Rocket League as an example the game is 20 dollars and frequently on sale. Total cost of DLC I think adds up to about 38 dollars. Keep in mind GOTY edition comes with about 12 dollars worth of DLC so that only leave you able to buy like 25 dollars worth of DLC over two years.They still release new cars for 1.99 a piece every three or four months.
So after two years that would be a grand total of 60 dollars you could have spent to get everything in the game. They of course don't get 60 dollars cause of the 30% steam/xbox./sony take. This game has tons of dedicated servers in damn near every region. When they tried putting ads on the ingame billboards to help cover the costs people went ballistic and they decided not to do it.
Cosmetics crates gave them a nearly limitless revenue stream. Because of that revenue they have created a ton of free maps, modes and added a lot of quality of life changes and features pretty much changing the game completely. Some people like me have been playing for over two thousand hours and buy keys every now and then because of the amount of enjoyment the game has given me. I've probably bought about 60 total(I don't open crates by the way I just use them to trade for things I want from people who do). A lot of people spend way way more. Realistically they probably make more in key purchases every time a new crate comes out then with the entirety of the DLC they have offered so far.
So I've bought 60 keys, Have traded tons of crates for more keys than I can count and have amassed around 300+ keys worth of items through trading plus 70 keys in my box. Now I didn't spend 400 on keys but someone did since they traded them to me(different people in small quantities).
It's a shitload more money, It won't go away cause for every body who doesn't spend a dime a whale will spend thousands. It's not a little bit of money it's a ton of money, it's company changing money, It's industry changing money. Unfortunately some companies will be better about it than others as we are beginning to see.
IISANDERII
Member
Yes because all games made in the 90s were all profitable and no dev ever shuttered.
It's supposed to mean Games As A Service but AAA devs seem to take that as "implement lootboxes" because money.
I mean holy fuck, Horizon Zero Dawn made several QOL (Quality of Life) updates over several months without extra monetisation and The Witcher 3 released several free DLC updates leading into their first big expansion and is the gold standard, these 2 single player games bring shame to other games posing as being designed to provide a service since their inception.
Everyone wants to raise the price for their AAA games. It's just that no one wants to be the first to do it. But sooner or later someone will and then everyone else will rush in and do the same.
And if you think that a $100 game wont have any MT, DLC, season passes, character passes, loot boxes, etc, then you're in for a surprise.
Then come up with a more attractive/less predatory solution. It's not our cross to bare. We are the consumers. We determine what is acceptable and what isnt. If They choose to compete in the highest possible fidelity, again, not our cross to bare.
The indie scene proves that your position on costs is worthless.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
I was just about to use Gears as an example.
Iv pretty much given up on trying to unlock anything i want.
Just got my Aspho UIR and said fuck it....ill never unlock anything i want, fuck weapons skins fuck cosmetic shit.
But atleast the Maps are free.
geordiemp
Member
You are right with MP map packs, COD is very connection based and lag / player pool plays a huge part and whether connection based or skill based match making.
The minute a map pack drops and 25 % of the players have a different roster, it all goes to shit EVERY.SINGLE.YEAR.
Activision try and tie the new MP maps to zombies, and players try to load zombie part only and delete the new map packs if possible. Its terrible.
cormack12
Gold Member
This.
I have no problem with the concept of being able to buy additional cosmetic enhancements or even XP boosts (to an extent) for an MT. As long as I know I'm getting what I want.
This current trend of adding risk 'just because' is what's awful. And why I don't dabble. If there's something I've seen someone else with, I don't want to pay for some undisclosed probability it's in a pack. I want to buy the actual item.
There was a game with MT being discussed the other day, which had a decent workaround for duplicates - might have been Battlefront 2. If one dropped of the same type, it was guaranteed to be more powerful. Instead of the 'Prophet Snow' shite in Desiny 2. Although infusing does help.
Pubs got used to the money from DLC, season passes and now the appetite has gone for them, they're trying to keep hold of that revenue somehow. We've arrived where we are because time and again people have shown they will throw more money into a game. Lots of us are happy to just drop the cash on a game and be content with it, but others want to have the opportunity to either buy advantages or 'distinguish' their experience. And what's worse they are increasing their creep into single player games.
I'm pretty sure the next Elder Scrolls will have some sort of lootbox system for example. Don't want to grind levels for enchanting, buy a crafting lootbox with x amount of recipes and reagents.
geordiemp
Member
Fixed that for you, please god lets not get plastic toys gating content from other game makers, leave that to the Nintendo diehards please.
Next you will be advocating having parties in Destiny on my Iphone and game prices staying high for years with limited volume runs on carts, and forgot to mention overpriced hardware with 20 plastic bits..
Next to Nintendo Monetization and Nintendo like profits loot boxes are a thing a beauty.
Luckily I can only see mainstream adoption of the Nintendo model in Japan...
...
jim2point0
Banned
I'm not going to buy it because the crates are directly tied to the leveling system and can make your character\heroes a LOT more powerful. That just seems like a mechanic I'd never, ever enjoy.
But also, fuck map packs that split the userbase. It was damn near impossible to play BF1 with some of my friends that couldn't accord premium, and had to wait a while to get the newer maps.
I'd take loot boxes if the core game wasn't crippled to push them or if the loot boxes didn't destroy the balance of the gameplay. Games like GTAV, Halo 5, and Mass Effect 3 did it right IMO. Just from my short time with Star Wars Battlefront 2, you can tell the star cards just ruin any chance if balanced gameplay. Shame since the core gameplay itself is a notable improvement over the first game.
Chezzymann
Member
Knowing video game companies they'd just do both eventually
Interfectum
Member
You joke, but this is most likely the future.
Unclebenny
Member
But the consumers are obviously signalling that loot crates are acceptable. Why would they be being used with increasing frequency otherwise. If that EA graph from earlier in the thread is to be believed, they basically double revenues from the original sale of the game.
Don't assume you speak for the larger user base.
No one on this site has to like loot boxes, season passes etc but probably better to get some realistic expectations. They obviously work they will be around for a while longer. So have constructive arguments against them, don't involve yourselves with them and support those devs who sell the "whole experience".
This idea that they will be regulated away is silly. Focus constructive efforts on actually dodgy offenders. People complaining they can't get the digital outfit they like is not going to build to anything because it is inherently shallow.
There are more games now then ever available and yet somehow everyone is riled up by three or four games having loot boxes.
I will agree that in terms of a multiplayer standpoint, loot crates are better in comparison instead of a season pass. In terms of everything else though, it is making me wonder what the hell developers are thinking other than "$_$"
If it is a case though as we are seeing that you can "Buy" your way into a better set up rather than earning it though? That's where the line gets drawn.
If it is a case though as we are seeing that you can "Buy" your way into a better set up rather than earning it though? That's where the line gets drawn.
Would you like shitty option a or shitty option b? How about we get games that are complete, without content being stopped or balancer for fronting boxes. Real expansions and not this two bit DLC that's been stripped from the game to sell either or pay gates with proper or collector edition bullshit.
I want too buy a complete game from the start.
I want too buy a complete game from the start.
paperspace
Member
⁣