Support NeoGAF

[turnbuckle]

that's fucking terrifying.

It's a really simple problem though. Stop spending money IN games. Buy all the fucking games you want, but stop spending extra money in them. They do this shit because people will pay.

Yup.

From the article - although the F2P Super Mario Bros. 3 is just a joke, the model used by the game developer in the article was shown. It's basic and it's all it needs to be to work. He said that although his primary job is game development, he spends about 20% of his time as a "game monetization consultant".

The loops and emotions are easy enough to identify in most games. Any game where part of the hook is unlocking things, the loop is the implicit grind to do this. The existence of a grind isn't necessarily the problem - that's something many games have had, even if only to be an artificial way to increase the time it takes to complete the game. The problem, as everyone is saying, is that this formula is being manipulated in a way to encourage players to spend money.

Generic example would be making it take 100 experience points to level up in a game. Then, without changing anything else to the mechanics, making future games require 200 experience points to gain that same level while offering a "double XP pack".

Telling gamers to simply not pay is getting closer and closer to telling them to not bother playing. It's harder and harder to find games that don't have these elements contained within.

Awesome phrasing. I was trying to think of why the exp and money dlc ruined Shin Megami Tensei IV for me to the point that I never finished. And what you wrote was why. Once that was brought into the game, something was ruined for me. ymmv yadda.

Yup. Same with Fire Emblem. Bought both games thinking I'd be cool with not having access to the DLC; it was merely optional. Well, yeah, it is optional, but then so is almost everything in a game. After awhile, the mere existence of those optional things I wasn't taking advantage of soured me on the experience. Like the game was artificially harder or more limited unless you decided to pay. I never finished either game and wouldn't have purchased them in the first place if I realized just how much paid stuff there was.

I love the advance wars series, but afraid that if they make a new one it'll have staples of the series like the War Room behind a pay gate.

 

[Mesoian]

Telling gamers to simply not pay is getting closer and closer to telling them to not bother playing. It's harder and harder to find games that don't have these elements contained within.

EXACTLY!

If this is such a problem, doesn't it make sense to simply not play the games that do this rather than asking them to remove it all together?

If it makes the game worse, don't play that game.

 

[patapuf]

At some point though, if i like playing a game, i play it a lot and unlock everything anyway. Why would i pay to skip that?

If i think a game sucks i won't unlock everything in the first place and therefore don't care about unlocks or whatever i didn't get.

If a game is so bad you can't have fun without paying for DLC, i simply won't buy it.

 

[Shosai]

People referring to $60 games as "Free to Play" is making my brain hurt. They're games with DLC. Don't buy things that aren't worth your money and the market will correct itself.

Our hobby has not gotten more expensive over time. If anything it's gotten cheaper. Take a look, and remember to add $10 to everything for inflation:

Compare that to modern-day prices for games:

http://www.reddit.com/r/GameDeals/wiki/amazon/sale

 

[NullPointer]

Slippery slope. Also, why not be, I don't know, an informed consumer and avoid the games that do that?

Very slippery. Just look at how many games have XP, crafting and unlock systems. Its infecting a lot of games that could be just fine if not better without them, and its exactly these kinds of "RPG elements" and progression systems being shoehorned into games for monetization potential. Similar to how everything had to be multiplayer with map packs, and now everything has to be always-online, err, I mean a connected experience, blurring the lines between single player and multiplayer.

In isolation and even moderation all of these things can be OK when properly utilized. But history doesn't paint a pretty picture here.

Our hobby has not gotten more expensive over time. If anything it's gotten cheaper.

Lets do a thought experiment. What if every game with DLC and/or microtransactions had a Special Collector's Edition that included ALL of the game's content. No additional unlocks, no additional nothing, no upsells at all. You got EVERYTHING there was for the game. How much do you think those CEs would cost with any of these games?

Seriously, give it a spin.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

To the OP: the topic is obviously to complicated for a nice movement to happen like with the simple issue of used games. I do appreciate your efforts though.

...was that an insult?

It's not complicated. OP doesn't like that what used to be a standard cheat code is now being utilized as an additional revenue stream on top of the game already being payed for.

What people are taking issue with is that there are models out there that don't act in that manner that are benign and are completely optional. That the option is up to the consumer to undertake when there are more options out there than ever before to improve their gaming experience for free.

 

[KillerIsJed]

Micro(transation)soft is more like it, am I right?

But seriously, I think this is going to become a trend and I hate it.

 

[Roto13]

People referring to $60 games as "Free to Play" is making my brain hurt. They're games with DLC. Don't buy things that aren't worth your money and the market will correct itself.

Our hobby has not gotten more expensive over time. If anything it's gotten cheaper. Take a look, and remember to add $10 to everything for inflation:

http://i.imgur.com/hT7L1.jpg[IMG]

Compare that to modern-day prices for games:

[url]http://www.reddit.com/r/GameDeals/wiki/amazon/sale[/url][/QUOTE]

More than $10. $1 in 1994 is like $1.60 today.

So a $60 game in 1994 is about $95 today.

 

[WarMacheen]

People referring to $60 games as "Free to Play" is making my brain hurt. They're games with DLC. Don't buy things that aren't worth your money and the market will correct itself.

Our hobby has not gotten more expensive over time. If anything it's gotten cheaper. Take a look, and remember to add $10 to everything for inflation:

Compare that to modern-day prices for games:

http://www.reddit.com/r/GameDeals/wiki/amazon/sale

I remember all the in app purchases, token pack offers, and pay to unlock or skip content in those games, so glad we've moved on.

 

[Freezie KO]

Very slippery. Just look at how many games have XP, crafting and unlock systems. Its infecting a lot of games that could be just fine if not better without them, and its exactly these kinds of "RPG elements" and progression systems being shoehorned into games for monetization potential. Similar to how everything had to be multiplayer with map packs, and now everything has to be always-online, err, I mean a connected experience, blurring the lines between single player and multiplayer.

In isolation and even moderation all of these things can be OK when properly utilized. But history doesn't paint a pretty picture here.

The unlock systems are especially egregious. They're entirely arbitrary. Nothing tells the developers a player MUST spend X amount of days to unlock content. But they just lock it away to force people to buy it.

 

[IncandescentPrecept]

The publishers will reapond to the market. The blame is to be placed on our fellow gamers who encourage this practice.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

Very slippery. Just look at how many games have XP, crafting and unlock systems. Its infecting a lot of games that could be just fine if not better without them, and its exactly these kinds of "RPG elements" and progression systems being shoehorned into games for monetization potential. Similar to how everything had to be multiplayer with map packs, and now everything has to be always-online, err, I mean a connected experience, blurring the lines between single player and multiplayer.

In isolation and even moderation all of these things can be OK when properly utilized. But history doesn't paint a pretty picture here.

You deal with the issue in a case by case basis. I don't get how difficult to understand that just ignoring the games themselves that aren't affected by the microtransactions doesn't make a case against the model itself.

I'm not defending shit like that FF game on mobile or the way Forza 5s token and unlocks is set up. I'm just saying that instead of going the easy route and throwing a blanket on everything and lighting it on fire, people should make an effort to actually tackle the issue at hand.

 

[Alchemy]

This is what I do:

• I don't buy any games that have microtransactions.
• I don't frequently play free to play games with them, and never actually buy anything.

I also support full priced games that deserve it, games like Puppeteer. I put my money where my mouth is.

 

[mclem]

I don't really understand.
I am answering the argument: it's good for people who don't have enough time to play, or are not good enough.
I say: I have no problem "helping" those people. But not taking money from them. Cheatcodes are just a way, or an easy mode, or a Very easy even (with XP bonus... anything)... i did not want to push for cheatcodes (even if I don't see the problem if someone wants to cheat in the game he payed... not my problem...and it won't affect anyone else)

So: we agree that the most important thing is to produce the best game design, free from all those questions.

So, as I said *right* at the start of the thread, you want to campaign for lower budgets. That's the direction to approach this from.

 

[akachan ningen]

I don't buy games that do shit like this.

 

[NullPointer]

I'm not defending shit like that FF game on mobile or the way Forza 5s token and unlocks is set up. I'm just saying that instead of going the easy route and throwing a blanket on everything and lighting it on fire, people should make an effort to actually tackle the issue at hand.

I think you're seeing exactly that right now. These schemes have been around for a while now, but its reached a tipping point, with games like Diablo 3 and Forza 5 and GTA Online showing it at its ugliest and most brazen.

Now we hear GT6 will have in-game currency purchases, and hell, even Tomb Raider now has XP and crafting systems for no appreciable reason.

There are plenty of individual examples of overreach, its just that they're becoming more obvious and more numerous, while other games lay the groundwork for their own "time savers" down the line.

 

[a916]

Or, you know... be about pro-choice. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

Don't piss all over everyone that is happy to do this.

 

[Shosai]

Lets do a thought experiment. What if every game with DLC and/or microtransactions had a Special Collector's Edition that included ALL of the game's content. No additional unlocks, no additional nothing, no upsells at all. You got EVERYTHING there was for the game. How much do you think those CEs would cost with any of these games?

Seriously, give it a spin.

What would the standard editions consist of?

Nevermind, your hypothetical CE's would cost whatever the distributors charged for them. $30, 60, 120, 250.

 

[Kosma]

Diablo 3 was ruined because of the AH.

Im not buying any more of games with crap like that

 

[michaelx]

There you have it, more M$ games have microtransactions:


Ryse

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-08-23-microsoft-explains-ryse-microtransactions-theres-nothing-sinister-we-promise

This is how microtransactions in Ryse work: multiplayer progression is an armour-based progression system. In the arena, the mode in which multiplayer takes place, players earn experience and gold. The gold is used to purchase equipment in packs, similar to those in Mass Effect and FIFA Ultimate Team. These packs come in tiers, which can be purchased either with in-game currency or real world currency.

Crimson Dragon
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-21-crimson-dragon-review

There's the option to grind, of course, and come back to levels with more firepower at your fingertips. And if you don't want to grind, you're covered by micro-transactions, with Crimson Dragon's economy another facet of Microsoft's bold redefinition of free-to-play gaming.

It went farther than I imagined, OP should put them in the first post so everyone sees.
Actually, we should make a list...

 

[stevil]

so you're okay with GT game with smaller budget and limited amount of cars and tracks?

I can imagine that they do dlc for cars or even tracks but you shouldn't have to pay full price for f2p type stuff. If they feel they can't make enough money just up the sticker price or maybe we shouldn't feel sorry for them it's not like they can't afford to eat if they don't ask for more money.

I will never pay for a crippled game that asks more money to be fixed. It's like going to the movies and unless you pay extra the movie playback speed is slowed down.

 

[mclem]

• I don't buy any games that have microtransactions.
• I don't frequently play free to play games with them, and never actually buy anything.

Out of interest, do you not reward the developers of said free-to-play games at all? I mean, you're not obligated to, but even so... if I like a game, I do try to make sure I reward the devs.

 

[NullPointer]

What would the standard editions consist of?

What they do right now. The base game, with extra content like maps, missions, time-savers, skins, whatever at an additional cost.

Whenever I read about a game that has DLC and microtransactions I immediately look to see if there is a "complete" version of the game I could buy, at a higher price, that would include ALL of the content, with no upsells once I've paid the price. But I haven't seen that yet. I'd imagine the sticker shock would change perspectives pretty quickly.

Say I wanted a complete Gears of War 3. How much would that have cost me? How about a complete Forza 5? What is the sum total of the base game + all DLC when you get down to it? How much do I have to pay to avoid getting upsells or seeing little lock icons in my games?

I wish I knew. Because nowadays you can see Collectors Editions in the several hundred dollar range and still now get all the content. Hell, you're lucky if they include a season pass; And if they do that season pass won't cover all the DLC for the game, just the first few specific packs.

Its not just a matter of game development getting more expensive, its that publishers see no end to the amount of money they can extract from the playerbase, so they never stop digging.

 

[Shosai]

I can imagine that they do dlc for cars or even tracks but you shouldn't have to pay full price for f2p type stuff. If they feel they can't make enough money just up the sticker price or maybe we shouldn't feel sorry for them it's not like they can't afford to eat if they don't ask for more money.

So you'd rather these games cost $90 upfront for everyone, instead of making available cheaper versions for people who want to pay for less content?

 

[MJLord]

People referring to $60 games as "Free to Play" is making my brain hurt. They're games with DLC. Don't buy things that aren't worth your money and the market will correct itself.

Our hobby has not gotten more expensive over time. If anything it's gotten cheaper. Take a look, and remember to add $10 to everything for inflation:

Compare that to modern-day prices for games:

http://www.reddit.com/r/GameDeals/wiki/amazon/sale

Another way to look at that is how much do you think it cost to make a game 10-20 years ago compared to today?

 

[NullPointer]

So you'd rather these games cost $90 upfront for everyone, instead of making available cheaper versions for people who want to pay for less content?

How about offering a separate, complete version at a higher price point?

 

[Shosai]

What they do right now. The base game, with DLC afor extra content like maps, missions, time-savers, skins, whatever at an additional cost.

Whenever I read about a game that has DLC and microtransactions I immediately look to see if there is a "complete" version of the game I could buy, at a higher price, that would include ALL of the content, with no upsells once I've paid the price. But I haven't seen that yet. I'd imagine the sticker shock would change perspectives pretty quickly.

Say I wanted a complete Gears of War 3. How much would that have cost me? How about a complete Forza 5? What is the sum total of the base game + all DLC when you get down to it? How much do I have to pay to avoid getting upsells or seeing little lock icons in my games?

I wish I knew. Because nowadays you can see Collectors Editions in the several hundred dollar range and still now get all the content. Hell, you're lucky if they include a season pass; And if they do that season pass won't cover all the DLC for the game, just the first few specific packs.

Its not just a matter of game development getting more expensive, its that Publishers see no end to the amount of money they can extract from the playerbase, so they never stop digging.

So if you want to buy all of a game's extra content that badly, then why not just....buy all the extra content? It's really not hard to calculate the total price of any game's DLC

How about offering a separate, complete version at a higher price point?

Because people who want to pay more for all of the additional content can do so anyway? Is it that imperative that it come in separate box that says "COMPLETE EDITION"?

 

[stevil]

So you'd rather these games cost $90 upfront for everyone, instead of making available cheaper versions for people who want to pay for less content?

where is that number coming from? Consumers now a days are so willing to pay. Here have my money otherwise you might not make more money than the year before. These guys are not going to the poor house they just want more of your money

 

[turnbuckle]

People referring to $60 games as "Free to Play" is making my brain hurt. They're games with DLC. Don't buy things that aren't worth your money and the market will correct itself.

Our hobby has not gotten more expensive over time. If anything it's gotten cheaper. Take a look, and remember to add $10 to everything for inflation:

Compare that to modern-day prices for games:

http://www.reddit.com/r/GameDeals/wiki/amazon/sale

But this is besides the point. It's not about the hobby being more expensive or less expensive; it's about implementing gameplay mechanics that hamper the experience unless a player spends more money. Even if the price to unlock everything in a game was only $.05 per item or "spend a nickel to advance to the next stage" it'd be problematic. It's shitting on the experience of gameplay regardless of whether or not it ends up costing the user more or less in the long run.

If you want to put in shortcuts so players don't have to go through the grind, just throw in the damned konami code. Don't charge us for extra lives.

If you believe you need to make X dollars from the sale of a game, charge X dollars rather than disguising the price with F2P-esque trappings.

This is an industry where this kind of shit happens:

price per token
1€ => 1ct / token
5€ => 1,53 ct / token
10€ => 1,74 ct / token (recommended ! )
20€ => 1,6 ct / token
50€ => 1,85 ct /jtoken (Great Value !!! )
100€ => 1,25 ct /token

Notice how the 2 highlighted items are by far the worst deal. This is an industry that prays on ignorance and complacence. This shit is vile.

You deal with the issue in a case by case basis. I don't get how difficult to understand that just ignoring the games themselves that aren't affected by the microtransactions doesn't make a case against the model itself.

I'm not defending shit like that FF game on mobile or the way Forza 5s token and unlocks is set up. I'm just saying that instead of going the easy route and throwing a blanket on everything and lighting it on fire, people should make an effort to actually tackle the issue at hand.

But that is exactly what's happening. There are individual threads on these issues. But we're getting to a point where we'll have to have a thread on most games. I have no illusion that this thread or any like it are going to change the way things are headed, but I think it's better to raise a stink about it than to say nothing. It's turning into an industry-wide plague rather than an every now and then occurrence.

 

[Freshmaker]

So you're quitting gaming?

You say that like they're pervasive.

 

[Sean*O]

I swear, half of this industry is determined to bury itself and take the other half with it. Just don't buy a $60 game if it's got pay to play mechanics built in. I know I'll be skipping the two games cited in the OP, I don't mind at all.

 

[NullPointer]

So if you want to buy all of a game's extra content that badly, then why not just....buy all the extra content? It's really not hard to calculate the total price of any game's DLC

Because people who want to pay more for all of the additional content can do so anyway? Is it that imperative that it come in separate box that says "COMPLETE EDITION"?

I'm saying there is benefit to doing this thought experiment, as far as these conversations go.

How much would an absolutely complete version of Forza 5 go for?

 

[FaintColt388301]

I am dead serious when i say that playtime will be looked at next soon enough. Publishers will seriously look at the time a Call of Duty or FIFA game is played and simply put timers on how long you can play your game, and then lock you out of your game, which was the entire point of the always online debacle.

The argument will be that a movie ticket costs 8-12 dollars and you get 120minutes of entertainment, give or take. Yet there are people who have played Halo, CoD, GTA for 20+ hours and "only" paid 60 dollars + micro transactions + dlc. Meaning that they are outright stealing from the publisher, enjoying too big of a entertainment-to-dollar ratio. And there will be people who defend it, as there was with the horse armor, map packs, online pass, initial Xbox One "vision" and now this.

I am not going to even attempt some sort of rallying cry here, like some Barbarian king standing on the top of a mountain, shouting to high heavens how we have finally had enough, while thunder and lightning are striking behind me. Because its not going to work, this is happening, best you can do is raise your middle fingers and go on with your day, its depressing to even think about what is happening.

I think the tinfoil hats are coming out now. There is no way that FIFA or Halo or any big game will a lot you an amount of time to play and kick you out afterwards. These subsription models don't work for a lot of the mainstream games. The shift is in the opposite direction. Free time with the game to get you hooked and pay for little mundane things

 

[Mesoian]

I'm saying there is benefit to doing this thought experiment, as far as these conversations go.

How much would an absolutely complete version of Forza 5 go for?

With everything unlocked from the getgo? Using their pricing structure, I'd assume $200-$240.

But that would leave you with very little to actually DO in that game, outside of online multiplayer.

 

[ThatChairMan]

Yup. Same with Fire Emblem. Bought both games thinking I'd be cool with not having access to the DLC; it was merely optional. Well, yeah, it is optional, but then so is almost everything in a game. After awhile, the mere existence of those optional things I wasn't taking advantage of soured me on the experience. Like the game was artificially harder or more limited unless you decided to pay. I never finished either game and wouldn't have purchased them in the first place if I realized just how much paid stuff there was.

I really don't understand this logic. Both games are completely beatable without the DLC, and at least for SMT4, I thought the difficulty was on par with SMT3. It just sounds like because the option existed, you forced yourself to think that you needed it to beat the game. Sure, they would have made the game easier if you bought them, but that doesn't mean the games themselves were artificially harder because they expected you to buy it.

 

[NullPointer]

With everything unlocked from the getgo? Using their pricing structure, I'd assume $200-$240.

But that would leave you with very little to actually DO in that game, outside of online multiplayer.

If a complete version of the game robs the player of anything to DO, that says quite a bit about the game in the first place. By your description, the grind *is* the game, which is yet another result of these kinds of progression/unlock/reward schemes.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

I think you're seeing exactly that right now. These schemes have been around for a while now, but its reached a tipping point, with games like Diablo 3 and Forza 5 and GTA Online showing it at its ugliest and most brazen.

Now we hear GT6 will have in-game currency purchases, and hell, even Tomb Raider now has XP and crafting systems for no appreciable reason.

There are plenty of individual examples of overreach, its just that they're becoming more obvious and more numerous, while other games lay the groundwork for their own "time savers" down the line.

That's why you tackle those issues and demonstrate why those models are wrong, while demonstrating which ones aren't detrimental.

As I said, people are just going the easy way about it that really isn't going to change a damn thing. You have to show these devs and publishers how they are likely going to make the most money on that model.

 

[Not Spaceghost]

Is this real?! Because the 100 for 1 euro is the best deal period. That's just insane, is this actually legal?

 

[TheSadRanger]

I think the tinfoil hats are coming out now. There is no way that FIFA or Halo or any big game will a lot you an amount of time to play and kick you out afterwards. These subsription models don't work for a lot of the mainstream games. The shift is in the opposite direction. Free time with the game to get you hooked and pay for little mundane things

I dunno, after Killer Instincts pricing model it's not that big of a stretch. While KI really isn't all that vile with it I could imagine a "free download" Halo game with some sort of similar structure as KI.

Would it be fair to say that it seems that Microsoft is pushing this more than Sony? I mean ya GT6 has it right? But it seems that fewer first party Sony titles have it that Microsoft titles.

It seems that a ton of MS first party games have it with Crimson Dragon, Ryse, Forza, KI.

I'm not trying to start a "console war" either guys, I'm on the fence still on which console I want to buy next and I'd like to know who's the lesser of two evils.

 

[JimmyRustler]

I don't bother microtransaction as long as the stuff you can buy doesn't cut the time you need to get whatever you have bought ingame.
So basically I don't mind if you can buy an additonal armor or something for a game online to make your character look different but giving you an option to buy a car that would have otherwise taken you hours to get ingame is a big no-go and should not exist.

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

Wait, wait, wait. They're shoving the pay-2-win model in flagship, $60 console games now? Cause DLC wasn't offensive enough? WTF, people, just stop buying these scam games and they'll drop this bullshit in a heartbeat.

I remember all the in app purchases, token pack offers, and pay to unlock or skip content in those games, so glad we've moved on.

Yeah, I can't believe that guy even attempted to draw a parallel here. Unbelievable.

 

[MaximoffZero]

I realize that it's a free market and this is pure fantasy on my part, but I really wish that the entire gaming industry would decide on a single business model and stick with it. All this "free-to-play", microtransation, DLC, and subscription-based stuff is making the market cluttered and confusing, especially to newcomers and uninformed parents.

 

[Brashnir]

Is this real?! Because the 100 for 1 euro is the best deal period. That's just insane, is this actually legal?

In addition, doing some quick napkin math, the two listed as "Great Value" are the worst deals of the bunch.

What a shady bunch of shit.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

Or, you know... be about pro-choice. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

Don't piss all over everyone that is happy to do this.

I'll stop "pissing" when I find those "happy" about this.

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

I'll stop "pissing" when I find those "happy" about this.

Shills. Shills are happy.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

I'll stop "pissing" when I find those "happy" about this.

I have to say, I doubt there''s anyone out there happy about it. It just comes down to if it's a problem or not to the gameplay itself.

Edit: Well, those making money off it are probably happy, but in the context of gamers, I doubt it.

 

[Into]

I think the tinfoil hats are coming out now. There is no way that FIFA or Halo or any big game will a lot you an amount of time to play and kick you out afterwards. These subsription models don't work for a lot of the mainstream games. The shift is in the opposite direction. Free time with the game to get you hooked and pay for little mundane things

There is no way that any game will have its content cut out and then later sold to us online for a additional price

There is no way that any game will have content hidden on the disc, so they can later unlock it and claim its newly developed content

There is no way that a RPG will sell you horse armor for real money

There is no way that a big game like FIFA or NBA 2k will have in game currency which you can buy more of with real money

There is no way that you will be able to spend real money to improve your boxer in a boxing game like Fight Night Champion

There is no way anyone would ever even contemplate making a console that is always online

There is no way that any company would try to block used games

There is no way that a 60 dollar game will include micro transactions


Oh but they will find a way, they always do, and they will keep building ways to extract as much money as they can out of you, a dollar here, and a dollar there. Thinking this is the "end" of their greedy ways is being naive, they will push it as much as they can.

Every time something like this has come up, there were always people defending it, why? Who knows, it seems like a small thing but that is precisely the point. A dollar or 2 for a piece of armor seems minor, then another transaction, and another, and more of them, and then this one, and then that one, and before you know it, you are spending hundreds of dollars on one game, which is giving you the same amount of content if not even less than it did on your SNES or PSX games.

But of course /tinfoil hat. These companies would never do that to us.

 

[JinjoUnchained]

You really drink the coolaid

If you had said the orange box, or dota2 (which is free free btw) or quake 3 I'd have said sure you get a lot more out of those than out of most games (mods, thousands of hours of gameplay)

But you list some AAA 10 hour drivel, a nintendo singleplayer game and a game that is already nickle and diming it's players with the very microtransactions listed in the OP that made a billion dollars pure profit in launch week just from upfront sales...

I mean, really? Rockstar needsmore than a billion in profits? it's not enough?

Games are already VERY expensive, they don't need to nickle and dime us, inconvenience us, split multiplayer communities or ask even more money on top of that. Again ,they just need to budget, if the current AAA industry can't be sustained then it will shrink, that's how capitalism works.

OK, so if I listed games that you, SneakyStephan, personally like, then my point would be valid? I'll make sure to check with you before my next post so any examples I give line up with your personal tastes. If you want to nitpick, multiple people in this thread have already said that TLOU is worth more than $60, Pikmon 3 is worth more than $60 for people who like Nintendo games and prefer solo campaigns, and I would argue that the base game of GTA V (leaving out the DLC and microtransactions) is worth more than $60. Seriously, breathe and clam down man, this is supposed to be a friendly and constructive discussion; we can have opposing viewpoints without calling each other delusional.

For the record I think that you're right on that game budgets are out of control. My thesis is that these out of control costs coupled with a fixed price point are causing the monetization that this thread is complaining about. I'm like you, I don't want to see game balance destroyed by monetization and some of the nickel and diming you point out, I just think that having variable prices is a better way to do away with these things than a petition. Feel free to disagree, YMMV.

 

[Shosai]

I'm saying there is benefit to doing this thought experiment, as far as these conversations go.

How much would an absolutely complete version of Forza 5 go for?

As I don't have the ability to set prices, it would go for however much they decide to charge for it, as always. I'm not yet seeing where this is going.

 

[FaintColt388301]

I dunno, after Killer Instincts pricing model it's not that big of a stretch. While KI really isn't all that vile with it I could imagine a "free download" Halo game with some sort of similar structure as KI.

Would it be fair to say that it seems that Microsoft is pushing this more than Sony? I mean ya GT6 has it right? But it seems that fewer first party Sony titles have it that Microsoft titles.

It seems that a ton of MS first party games have it with Crimson Dragon, Ryse, Forza, KI.

I'm not trying to start a "console war" either guys, I'm on the fence still on which console I want to buy next and I'd like to know who's the lesser of two evils.

KI's pricing model is way different from the give you a set amount of time to play and then kick you out after that.

Call me crazy but I actually don't have a problem with KI's pricing. If you want the whole game, pay what $40 for it like normal. If you just want to mess around or try it out you can do that all you want at no cost. Imagine if Battlefield or COD was like that. You get one average gun and the most basic equipment and still get to play with everybody else for free. If you want the game, pay for it, if you don't see the value then don't.