At least its not P2W since theres no multiplayer?
Unless you have trouble progressing without buying...design that this kind of encouraged.
-
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.
Middle-Earth: Shadow of War will have premium currency/loot boxes
- Thread starter DrBo42
- Start date
Unless you have trouble progressing without buying...design that this kind of encouraged.
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
Hope it's not too grindy.
Petrae
Member
Indeed. GAF is a bubble and doesn't really represent the average video game consumer-- a group that has overwhelmingly voted with their wallets in support of paid subscriptions for console online play, the advancement of preorders, and the sale of DLC.
Publishers (yes, including Nintendo) will keep testing limits when it comes to post-purchase avenues of revenue, and it could get even worse. The name of the game is profits, driven at least in part by consumers buying game content after the initial sale. Whether that's loot boxes, DLC, or amiibo to unlock walled-off content, this train isn't stopping for anyone-- not even GAF.
piccio_ssl
Member
Then how would they enforce locally hacking your save files to get loot boxes?
Edit: And here is the official confirmation
https://community.wbgames.com/t5/General/The-Market-Thread/m-p/1611280#M10912
imo this deserves its own thread
Not on my watch, WB.
I'll just use a trainer or cheat engine to dump enough currency into my inventory to buy all the in-game purchases like I did with MGS V.
No multiplayer = no guilt for me.
See the post above yours
InquisitorAles
Member
Ahahahahah, what a fucking lunatics. I'm sorry for devs who spent time on this game, but i hope it'll bomb hard because this shit is ridiculous. Loot boxes AND always online? Fuck off WB, what a garbage publisher.Then how would they enforce locally hacking your save files to get loot boxes?
Edit: And here is the official confirmation
https://community.wbgames.com/t5/General/The-Market-Thread/m-p/1611280#M10912
We'll see. I don't day 1 buy games anyways and I didn't like the first game at all but what I've seen of this new one looks promising.
If the trainers indicate it's possible, it'll be less of an incentive (than it already is) to wait for a $20 GOTY/sale.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
I would say I want this to completely bomb, but I have a feeling the people that are actually making the game didn't much of say in this design decision. I hope it does poorly enough to send a message though.
You can use a trainer with an always online game?
You can use a trainer with an always online game?
Then how would they enforce locally hacking your save files to get loot boxes?
Edit: And here is the official confirmation
https://community.wbgames.com/t5/General/The-Market-Thread/m-p/1611280#M10912
Unbelieveable.... WB Games sunk into a new low....
The lootboxes I could at least try to deal with it. But having to be connected online at all times just to play the single player campaign is a huge set back....
I feel sorry for Monolith as they are really talented people, but WB Games is a publisher that makes the most fucked up business decisions I have ever seen in my life.
Lashley
Why does he wear the mask!?
In some you can
great job WB what a way to kill the hype with Always Online :-D
I'd rather have a game that is fair in its difficulty, instead of one that forces me to cheat, just because the devs/publisher fucked with the in-game-economy only to make the "premium shop" more appealing.
I have a feeling that finding/dominating legendary orcs will be incredibly hard and/or time-consuming.
I'd rather have a game that is fair in its difficulty, instead of one that forces me to cheat, just because the devs/publisher fucked with the in-game-economy only to make the "premium shop" more appealing.
I have a feeling that finding/dominating legendary orcs will be incredibly hard and/or time-consuming.
Hamster Plugin
Member
I'm not sure how to interpret that. Do you need an internet connection to play the whole game, or just use the market? You'll obviously need internet to go to PSN store or Xbox store or Steam to actually buy the microtransactions.
If they just confirmed always online DRM, that's threadworthy but I don't know if they confirmed it.
If they just confirmed always online DRM, that's threadworthy but I don't know if they confirmed it.
Then how would they enforce locally hacking your save files to get loot boxes?
Edit: And here is the official confirmation
https://community.wbgames.com/t5/General/The-Market-Thread/m-p/1611280#M10912
I wonder how long before we get the headline "video game publisher bans users from full price single player game for cheating".
Jawmuncher
Member
Don't really care about the loot boxes. So long as the game isn't made obvious that they basically become a necessity rather than a extra.
The current Online Only shit needs to go though.
I honestly half expect the delay wasn't for the game itself but for the incorporation of these features.
The current Online Only shit needs to go though.
I honestly half expect the delay wasn't for the game itself but for the incorporation of these features.
This kind of has to happen right? Even their online connection won't stop cheat engine and certain trainers. It's completely fucked.
Pretty much how I feel. I had my problems with the first one but I was pretty excited for a more refined version of that and the videos made it seem like they want to focus on the story a bit more, which the first one needed. I'm sure it's not even the dev's fault but I just can't support this practice. Feels bad man.
ThisIsMyDogKyle
Banned
I really enjoyed the first game but this is absolutely garbage, not gonna buy unless they remove this crap. The first was pretty popular on PC, I don't think they're ready for the insane backlash I imagine this will get from that audience.
The features were always supposed to be there though. The very day it was announced it already had the "in-app transactions" in the steam store.
SirMossyBloke
Member
Visual representation of Shadow of War's hype since reveal
I enjoyed the 6 frames in that GIF.
NullPointer
Member
Then how would they enforce locally hacking your save files to get loot boxes?
Edit: And here is the official confirmation
https://community.wbgames.com/t5/General/The-Market-Thread/m-p/1611280#M10912
Papacheeks
Banned
Welp I was day one, now I'm day none.
CRATES in a single player game?
Like WTF?
CRATES in a single player game?
Like WTF?
I can't tell if you're serious or not, but I'll respond as if you're serious because some people actually believe what you're saying.
The entire problem with "it's just an option!" is that it fundamentally alters the game design. You are aware that a developer has complete control over the game they are designing, yes? The answer to a long and boring grind isn't to put in monetised options to skip the long and boring grind, it's for them to make a game that doesn't have a long and boring grind!
Psychoward
Banned
online only just to stop people from circumventing paid loot boxes in a singleplayer $60 game with a season pass and CEs
Agreed. The blatant cashing in on all things LotR tarnishes the series.
Then how would they enforce locally hacking your save files to get loot boxes?
Edit: And here is the official confirmation
https://community.wbgames.com/t5/General/The-Market-Thread/m-p/1611280#M10912
Oh boy. This will not go over well.
*checks Steam forum*
Yep, this is going as expected.
Plague Doctor
Member
Well this magically just got removed from the day one column and into the discount buy column. :/
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Yo WTF??Then how would they enforce locally hacking your save files to get loot boxes?
Edit: And here is the official confirmation
https://community.wbgames.com/t5/General/The-Market-Thread/m-p/1611280#M10912
online only just to stop people from circumventing paid loot boxes in a singleplayer $60 game with a season pass and CEs
Yeah, I'm curious how this will work out. Seems like Warner was surprised by the reception the first one got and now believes they can go all the way.
MadLaughter
Member
Someone needs to make a thread compiling all of the whack shit Warner Bros has done since becoming a major publisher. People need to know that Warner's crooked as hell, and maybe that public pressure will make them change their ways a bit (like it did for EA)
-Terrible PC ports/remasters
-Selling fatalities
-forefront of retailer-specific DLC
-bad content in their WAY overpriced season passes (batman primarily)
-predatory currency scaling in injustice 2 (the level gaining curve goes up like 9000% at a certain point, presumably to get players to buy their currency)
And probably a dozen other things not springing to mind at this second.
-Terrible PC ports/remasters
-Selling fatalities
-forefront of retailer-specific DLC
-bad content in their WAY overpriced season passes (batman primarily)
-predatory currency scaling in injustice 2 (the level gaining curve goes up like 9000% at a certain point, presumably to get players to buy their currency)
And probably a dozen other things not springing to mind at this second.
SmoothRunningGun
Member
Then how would they enforce locally hacking your save files to get loot boxes?
Edit: And here is the official confirmation
https://community.wbgames.com/t5/General/The-Market-Thread/m-p/1611280#M10912
Oh no...instantly wait for sale for me.
Psychoward
Banned
texhnolyze
Banned
Always online and loot boxes in a single player game, I hope more gaming sites cover this story.
It has to bomb.
It has to bomb.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
As per the other thread, it's not an always-online game.
Duchess O'Death
Member
It's not always online and lootboxes in a singleplayer game is a good thing if handled correctly. See Injustice 2.
It's mostly an opportunity cost thing.
Like if you're spending $2 million to make $5 million in revenue, it's... I mean you might as well just have those people start building the foundation for an actual multiplayer microtransaction setup in the next game.
TheVoidDragon
Member
This isn't done for the benefit of players at all, i don't see why anyone would defend this. I can't think of any defense for microtransactions that actually makes sense and seems reasonable, especially not in a full-price singleplayer-only game. Just giving players the option to pay to skip playing the actual game seems outright absurd in the first place, but basing your game around it not being fun for players to try to get more money out of them is just pathetic and should never be defended regardless of it it's "optional purchases!".
You can get these things from playing the game, but despite that they're likely to have some effect on the game design. Even if they aren't going to, then being included in the first place does not have good implications about how they view players and the level of 'respect' they have towards them. Sure, you don't have to buy them, but that doesn't change that there will probably be prompts everywhere to give them more money.
The whole idea of "pay to skip gameplay" with "spend your time doing things you could just throw money at to skip instead" is in mind is in no way a good thing regardless of if the microtransactions it'll directly impact someone or not. It shows absolutely no respect to the player or their time.
I'm not entirely sure how Injustice 2 does things, can you explain?
You can get these things from playing the game, but despite that they're likely to have some effect on the game design. Even if they aren't going to, then being included in the first place does not have good implications about how they view players and the level of 'respect' they have towards them. Sure, you don't have to buy them, but that doesn't change that there will probably be prompts everywhere to give them more money.
The whole idea of "pay to skip gameplay" with "spend your time doing things you could just throw money at to skip instead" is in mind is in no way a good thing regardless of if the microtransactions it'll directly impact someone or not. It shows absolutely no respect to the player or their time.
I'm not entirely sure how Injustice 2 does things, can you explain?
KaoteK
Member
I'm an old git. I remember when the option for those who wanted to bypass certain aspects of the game was to enter a cheat code. Now you have to pay for the (random) privilege. Disgraceful, what little interest I had in the game is gone.
Ubi, Activision and EA rightly get lambasted for their shady shit, but WB is amongst the worst offenders.
There's an argument in this thread game prices should go up, but do we honestly believe that these shitty practices would stop if a game was 80 instead of 60?
Ubi, Activision and EA rightly get lambasted for their shady shit, but WB is amongst the worst offenders.
There's an argument in this thread game prices should go up, but do we honestly believe that these shitty practices would stop if a game was 80 instead of 60?
JesseEwiak
Member
And guess what, if companies could've made you pay for cheat codes back then, they would've. Hell, with things like the various cheat code magazines and the like, they didn't directly, but I'm sure plenty of companies did make money off of it.
AAA Gaming is a luxury non-essential product. It's not a surprise that companies are finding ways to extract more money.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
It's definitely not for the benefit of players, but all DLC strategies exist as efforts to increase the price of games without increasing the sticker price. Games have been sitting at $50-60 since the PS1 era (or even gone down if you compare to some cartridge based ones), while the value of a dollar deprecates slowly over time and budgets are steadily climbing, with player expectations along with them. From a fiscal perspective, this means that to produce a top-tier game in 2017 you need either more sales or people spending more money per unit. The market is no-longer experiencing significant growth, so the burden increasingly falls on the latter. Now, the Call of Duties of the world will still be comfortably generating profits like a motherfucker with or without micro-transactions, map packs or expansions. For franchises that aren't quite juggernauts, though, they're operating closer to the margin. I think most people would prefer horse armor DLC and multiplayer microtransactions to there being a smaller number of games made every year, but I don't want to present this as something that the poor penniless publishers are doing only because they can't make ends meet - greed is absolutely a prime motivator and companies pioneered this stuff on games that were already highly profitable.
Loot boxes specifically are something I revile because it's basically the worst form of it. It's everything bad about regular micro-transactions but with the certainty taken out and variable rate reinforcement scheduling put in. You're outsourcing the cost of new map packs and updates to the people prone to developing gambling habits.
KaoteK
Member
Personally I can live with MTs of the cosmetic variety and DLC. Loot boxes are a fucking plague though.
It's interesting to note that the worst offenders are also the biggest earners in the industry. COD, Battlefield etc make incredible amounts of money yet are filled to the brim with this bullshit. I guess massive piles of cash isn't all the cash, so got to keep milking.
Shifty1897
Member
LOL. Pay to win microtransactions in any mode, whether single player or multiplayer, are a deal breaker. No buy.
NoHeDidn't
Member
I'm sick of this "but sold items can be earned with ingame currency" cop out.Yea they technically might be but its a fucking grind fest that aint worth it especially when you finally can afford that loot box it gives you shitty items.
When your game is priced at $60 nothing but cosmetic items should be sold as microtransactions especially in single player games.
When your game is priced at $60 nothing but cosmetic items should be sold as microtransactions especially in single player games.