Halo 5 arena? Works fine as a cosmetic only system.I'd take lootboxes in multiplayer games, only for cosmetics to get FREE updates, i'm good with that, like Halo 5 and Overwatch.
, other fan favourites like Overwatch have been getting a pass for these things.
Having lootboxes + DLC + Day one DLC + Season Pass in a single player game at 70 is bullshit, Shadow of War is bullshit for that shit.
That thinking doesnt work for games like Rainbow Six Seige, its had free maps and characters to play with quality since release. I dont want to move to to something else or buy a sequel and start again.
Yeah I guess Im coming to it from more a multiplayer focused point of view but Im really enjoying these new platform or Games as a service policys 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 its constant work, development and improvement and loot boxes seem to be the way they are paying for it.
And now we're arguing over the lesser of two evils.
Fast Forward 10 more years, what will the gaming industry be like.....
I shudder to think of the possibility.
So don't have have loot boxes and don't split the user base. How is it weird?
The money to support after launch content with new maps needs to come from somewhere.
Game sales have also increased significantly. Most games don't come with these scam mechanics and seem to do just fine financially.I get what youre saying, and I wish I could agree, but game prices havent raised ($50->$60) in ~12 years while the average AAA game budget has increased by a significant amount.
DLC, microtransactions, and lootboxes are there to cover the extra cost needed for development, I would think.
It just matters if a game does it right.
Overwatch does Loot Boxes perfect with cosmetics only.
Witcher 3 or The Last of Us does DLC perfect with their expansions.
But microtransactions... keep those for F2P games please.
The beta thread of Battlefront is weird also. People saying they are not gonna buy it because of crates. But when it has a season pass they are not gonna buy it because of split userbase,
I didn't know it I was forced to choose one. Is too much to ask for a game to have none of those? I mean, MP games used to be able to have post-launch support before without any of those
So basically instead you want them to raise the price to 100$ for the standard edition and keep making the same content?
paying for pieces
free content for everyone
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.
Wait what? HOTS had practically no rewards for players who didn't spend money. All you could do was earn in-game gold used to buy new heroes and a small selection of mastery skins and mounts. Most of the cool stuff was behind a paywall.Blizzard also fucked up with HoTs in 2.0 update when they added lootboxes as a reward. I don't mind getting them as a reward, but they also sell them and they REMOVED the option to buy some skins directly which I was able to do earlier (and I did). You can only buy rotating featured skins directly, which is ofcourse also done to encourage impulse buys. "Get it while you can!". It sucks.
This.I'd take lootboxes in multiplayer games, only for cosmetics to get FREE updates, i'm good with that, like Halo 5 and Overwatch.
Having lootboxes + DLC + Day one DLC + Season Pass in a single player game at 70 is bullshit, Shadow of War is bullshit for that shit.
My thoughts exactly. Id take well thought out DLC any day over loot boxes. Even though it splits the user base, I still think paying for expansions is a fair exchange for the developer working to provide extra content. And its not a guarantee that the developer wont charge for DLC if they have loot boxes. A lot of games choose to charge for both.Wait - you'd rather have loot crates than substantial DLC that adds meaty content to the game for a reasonable price?
Where is this either/or presumption coming from? More likely this will be addition to other things.
I'd take lootboxes in multiplayer games, only for cosmetics to get FREE updates, i'm good with that, like Halo 5 and Overwatch.
Having lootboxes + DLC + Day one DLC + Season Pass in a single player game at 70 is bullshit, Shadow of War is bullshit for that shit.