-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
So, we've accepted DLC, microtransactions, always online, etc in games, what's next?
- Thread starter texhnolyze
- Start date
Because nobody bought NFS and those who did quickly realized always online was the least of its problems.
Exploratory
Banned
You talk like DLC is bad.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
As long as enough gamers like the game, we'll accept anything. Don't see why it would change now.
MasterMenace
Member
Yup. Overwatch is that example...disgusting game. And console version is $20 more expensive lmfao. Blizzard knows how to rip off anyone.
Moon_frogger
Member
All of those things are good if done correctly. There's no point in holding bAck progress. I await the day a major ip releases on console as a digital download only. The uproar will be insane but it's the nature of technology. What we should be fighting against is bad business practices in general. I think pre order and hype culture is a much worse problem than microtransactions and always online functionality.
People buy it so they do it. Vote with your wallet and all of that.
If something has value to me I'll spend money on it. If those elements make the game bad then I won't buy it. If the game is still enjoyable I don't care.
Also, always online is only a problem to me if their servers crap out. My internet is stable so I don't care.
If something has value to me I'll spend money on it. If those elements make the game bad then I won't buy it. If the game is still enjoyable I don't care.
Also, always online is only a problem to me if their servers crap out. My internet is stable so I don't care.
Moon_frogger
Member
I don't think cosmetic microtransactions is as big a deal as people make it out to be. For one you can earn all this stuff (mostly) by playing the game. Even lvl boosters wouldn't be a problem in my eyes for overwatch since levels only grant cosmetics anyway.
Netherscourge
Banned
Pay-Per-Stream is already here.
Blizzard does that with Blizzcon.
Blizzard does that with Blizzcon.
supernormal
Member
I talked to a friend about this the other day while discussing the increasing cost of the game development vs the price of games. We arrived at this. In order to keep games at 60$ with with double, triple, or even 10x the fidelity in the future we're gonna have these shorter episodic experiences (still sold at 40-60) where each release will help fund the next.
Real_Madrid
Member
People should realise that 60 dollar back in the day isn't the same as 60 dollar now. If you would adjust gaming to the inflation, new AAA releases would probably need to cost 85 dollar. (I just checked, 60 dollar in 2000 would be adjusted to 84 dollar in 2015).
So it's not that weird if companies are selling season passes and DLC. You cannot blame them if people buy it. EA said that they almost made no money out of online passes, so they (and every other publisher) removed it.
I hate loot crates in 60 dollar games, but if people are buying them like crazy in games like Overwatch, it's not that weird if they put it in.
And I find this thread a little bit too cynical, gaming is cheaper and better than ever. AAA games isn't for everyone. DLC can be good or bad, I really wanted SP DLC for games like MGS V, GTA V or even Super Mario 3D World.
So it's not that weird if companies are selling season passes and DLC. You cannot blame them if people buy it. EA said that they almost made no money out of online passes, so they (and every other publisher) removed it.
I hate loot crates in 60 dollar games, but if people are buying them like crazy in games like Overwatch, it's not that weird if they put it in.
And I find this thread a little bit too cynical, gaming is cheaper and better than ever. AAA games isn't for everyone. DLC can be good or bad, I really wanted SP DLC for games like MGS V, GTA V or even Super Mario 3D World.
The Hermit
Member
The only company who had implemented in a non bulshit way those things so far is Nintendo.
The rest I just wait a while for a price drop and a bundle, like Dark Souls for pc (I payed like 5 Bucks)
The rest I just wait a while for a price drop and a bundle, like Dark Souls for pc (I payed like 5 Bucks)
The way Squeenix have been talking about FF7 Remake it sounds like it will be positioned much like a standard AAA title and not episodic, just the first of a trilogy.
Remember they said it would be expanded compared to the original.
I think Hitman is more a proper example of a AAA episodic game.
I'm so saddened by everything in the OP, most people just don't give a shit about actually owning their games
(and yes I know you just buy a permission to buy games technically).All I've seen are games getting cheaper and cheaper faster and faster. Other than fear mongering I don't see how one can really expect this.
I don't know why there are some who like to pretend we're in some dark ages of gaming and it's going downhill because of varieties and options.
The Hermit
Member
Good games that only last for five hours. In the future, big corporations will troll us by making awesome games will a catch, they only last for the maximum of five hours. Get ready for Persona 6 that only last for 2 hours.
I want that future. Getting tired of 100+ hours games
That's been part of AAA PR for a long time now lol.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
Netherscourge
Banned
What about "Pay to Log In"?
Instead of a monthly sub or even a box/digital purchase fee, all you have to do to play an online game is pay $1 every time you log into the game to play it.
$1 gets you a single unlimited session; however, there is an AFK timer (and bot protection to make sure you are not automating anti-AFK activity) and if you accumulate 30 minutes of uninterrupted inactivity, you are logged out and have to pay another $1 to log back in.
Instead of a monthly sub or even a box/digital purchase fee, all you have to do to play an online game is pay $1 every time you log into the game to play it.
$1 gets you a single unlimited session; however, there is an AFK timer (and bot protection to make sure you are not automating anti-AFK activity) and if you accumulate 30 minutes of uninterrupted inactivity, you are logged out and have to pay another $1 to log back in.
Maybe that's how they get away with it? Include it alongside so many other problems that it slips under the radar and when people speak up about it with another game, they can point to the older one going "but it was in this one too, see? You didn't complain loud enough".
Happy Home Designer
Removing or retiring certain characters/items in games. I think this is done in League of Legends (? Right?) but I believe it would be something new to console gamers.
I'm thinking of the Overwatch thread the other day, and I do not like that aspect of retiring a hero. Sure, it would probably be a long tie before they went down that road, but even that line of thinking seems troublesome. As some people pointed out yesterday, it seems like it might be a way to just force a balance for your game.
I'm thinking of the Overwatch thread the other day, and I do not like that aspect of retiring a hero. Sure, it would probably be a long tie before they went down that road, but even that line of thinking seems troublesome. As some people pointed out yesterday, it seems like it might be a way to just force a balance for your game.
lyrick
Member
Now take that idea and roll it back to coin-op arcade style pricing/game design.
AtomicShroom
Member
If Kinect didn't get killed so soon, they could have pushed it to its ultimate endgoal: Being able to recognize who is playing a game and charge per-user in the same household!
Imagine the possibilities:
Your brother buys the latest COD and plays a while. Then you decide to start a game of your own and: "Different user detected, please purchase an additional license. That'll be $69,99. Thankyouverymuch."
Imagine the possibilities:
Your brother buys the latest COD and plays a while. Then you decide to start a game of your own and: "Different user detected, please purchase an additional license. That'll be $69,99. Thankyouverymuch."
You act as if it hasn't been going on for years.
AstroNut325
Member
This is the root of the problem.
Lets do some basic math:
The current average salary of a videogame development staff member is about $90K USD. In 1995, the equivalent amount would've been around $57K USD.
For a team of 12, we're looking at a development time of 12-18 months. So total development cost is:
$57K x 12 x 1 year= $648,000 USD.
Assuming a net value if a $25 going to the developer for every $50 game sale, we're looking at a break even point just to cover development costs of 27,360 units. If we add marketing, finance and general administrative expenses, about 50,000 units.
In the modern day, a team of 50 is considered small. And the average development period is now 24-36 months. Doing the math:
$90K x 50 employees x 2 years = $9,000,000 USD.
NOW, just to break even the game needs to sell 333,333 units for a 2 year development period. Or 500,000 units for a 3 year development period. And this doesn't account for marketing, finance, and administrative costs. You need to easily double the unit figures to get to break even. And thus is for a SMALL team.
Most games need teams upwards of 100 people. Maybe even 200-300 people. And while this is happening, game prices lag inflation by a lot. A $50 game I'm 1995 should be $80 today.
I think the issue that people have with all of these ideas and services is two-fold: first, that there are so many examples of each of these ideas going badly in nothing more than the name of corporate greed that takes advantage of consumer loyalty that the wells are poisoned, and two, the widespread adoption of these practices in tandem with one another has allowed games to develop towards a direction where they are a service you must constantly pay for to enjoy at an optimal level versus standalone products that you purchase once, all without any guarantee of either quality control for the base product or a game whose design will not be in any way susceptible to psychologically inducing you to purchase these services and extras at the expense of pure enjoyment. It's about the broader scope of what the success of these things means for the industry and not whether any individual has had a good experience or doesn't buy into them.
It's a very disconcerting and off-putting direction for me as someone whose biggest passion is film. I know it's a bit taboo to compare the mediums, but I know when I buy a movie, I'm not going to: be told I can put down money on purchasing a film's physical release months in advance without being able to research whether that film is worth it due to reviews and plot synopses already being available, thus entering a psychological financial contract without even being sure the film is even good before it's out, be subject to an interrupting advertisement in the middle of the film itself, be constantly reminded in the film that the Blu-Ray 3D exists and that just for a little bit of more money I can enjoy the glorious benefits of a 3D experience, be faced with the possibility that a movie won't work at all solely because I don't have a service or device that connects me to the creators' servers which will inevitably die as a result of technological advancement, leaving the movie on the Blu-Ray permanently unwatchable through legal avenues, and ultimately I know I won't really be subject to any kind of suggestions while watching a film that's going to make me want to always buy something.
When I buy a film, I'm buying the film, not a service through which Disney or Warner Bros. or Universal or anyone else sees me as a perpetual money machine. And it's good. There's a modicum of respect there between me and the filmmaker that I don't feel is there anymore with me and the game developer anymore. It may be due to medium incompatibility, old habits, better faith in the art itself, them simply not having wised up, or whatever, but there is a difference that makes me more likely to not bother with a lot of the industry anymore. I even have a problem with advertisements popping up on my Wii U Gamepad.
It's a very disconcerting and off-putting direction for me as someone whose biggest passion is film. I know it's a bit taboo to compare the mediums, but I know when I buy a movie, I'm not going to: be told I can put down money on purchasing a film's physical release months in advance without being able to research whether that film is worth it due to reviews and plot synopses already being available, thus entering a psychological financial contract without even being sure the film is even good before it's out, be subject to an interrupting advertisement in the middle of the film itself, be constantly reminded in the film that the Blu-Ray 3D exists and that just for a little bit of more money I can enjoy the glorious benefits of a 3D experience, be faced with the possibility that a movie won't work at all solely because I don't have a service or device that connects me to the creators' servers which will inevitably die as a result of technological advancement, leaving the movie on the Blu-Ray permanently unwatchable through legal avenues, and ultimately I know I won't really be subject to any kind of suggestions while watching a film that's going to make me want to always buy something.
When I buy a film, I'm buying the film, not a service through which Disney or Warner Bros. or Universal or anyone else sees me as a perpetual money machine. And it's good. There's a modicum of respect there between me and the filmmaker that I don't feel is there anymore with me and the game developer anymore. It may be due to medium incompatibility, old habits, better faith in the art itself, them simply not having wised up, or whatever, but there is a difference that makes me more likely to not bother with a lot of the industry anymore. I even have a problem with advertisements popping up on my Wii U Gamepad.
$10 an episode and you get all the new maps for $60. You just miss out on a bonus episode that's $10 unless you pay upfront. This doesn't bother me at all considering it'll also be physical when it's finished so you can get it cheap and it'll probably be on sale digitally for cheap.
Not the best example of it being it a bad future or precedent.
Pankratous
Member
People had a problem with DLC?
DLC in general is fucking fantastic. DLC that is completely developed / planned before the main base is released is the true enemy.
DLC in general is fucking fantastic. DLC that is completely developed / planned before the main base is released is the true enemy.
What was wrong with it? It basically gave you three full games for $80 total.
AtomicShroom
Member
How do you feel about the sometimes unskippable barrage of trailers that play before you can play the movie on your DVD/Blu-Ray?
Gamezone
Gold Member
And worthless semi always online.
I think destiny is probably the model going forward. Simply building on existing IP and trying to keep player engagement. micro transactions are here to stay and will become more prominent. Eventually streaming will be the norm with a paid subscription like Netflix, maybe with different packages to suit your interests.
UltimaPooh
Member
No more used games.
Microsoft failed at this, this gen... But don't think the big three have stopped trying to get this done somewhere down the line.
Microsoft failed at this, this gen... But don't think the big three have stopped trying to get this done somewhere down the line.
Never paid for DLC. Never done a microtransaction. Never buy always online games (that I'm aware of anyway).
I usually just wait for Deluxe/Definitive Editions of games before buying them. I waited over a year before finally buying Mortal Kombat XL. I still haven't bought the latest Naruto game or Arkham Knight because I'm waiting for definitive editions. If they don't come out, I'll likely never play those games. There's a good chance I'll never buy Street Fighter V. I didn't get any of the Smash Bros. DLC even though some of it looked quite interesting to me. I dropped over $100 by double dipping on both versions. I'm not spending $120-150 on a single video game just to get some extra characters.
I'm a big fan all these franchises, but I have not accepted that shit at all and I don't plan on starting any time soon.
The DLC for nearly every AAA game released in the last 5 years has been planned well in advance of its release.
I usually just wait for Deluxe/Definitive Editions of games before buying them. I waited over a year before finally buying Mortal Kombat XL. I still haven't bought the latest Naruto game or Arkham Knight because I'm waiting for definitive editions. If they don't come out, I'll likely never play those games. There's a good chance I'll never buy Street Fighter V. I didn't get any of the Smash Bros. DLC even though some of it looked quite interesting to me. I dropped over $100 by double dipping on both versions. I'm not spending $120-150 on a single video game just to get some extra characters.
I'm a big fan all these franchises, but I have not accepted that shit at all and I don't plan on starting any time soon.
The DLC for nearly every AAA game released in the last 5 years has been planned well in advance of its release.
Gamezone
Gold Member
Isn`t this about to happen naturally?
I remember Daggerfall though...
UltimaPooh
Member
Mass_Pincup
Banned
Not really.
Same assets, same cast, same gameplay, same universe. It's 2 alternate stories of the same game with a expansion on top of that.
Gamezone
Gold Member
Won`t happen for a while. I guess the both of the upcoming Neo and Scorpio will keep their drives.
Digital only, no physical media.
Then next thing that will happen is removal of purchased items from digital libraries. It's happened on Itunes already, eventually it will be everywhere. They lose the rights? Sorry, it's gone.
Then eventually we'll just stream from the creator (business, not the person) directly. No hacked/leaked/pirated/modded games unless approved.
Then next thing that will happen is removal of purchased items from digital libraries. It's happened on Itunes already, eventually it will be everywhere. They lose the rights? Sorry, it's gone.
Then eventually we'll just stream from the creator (business, not the person) directly. No hacked/leaked/pirated/modded games unless approved.
UltimaPooh
Member
Didn't say it's overnight but its the next big thing were gonna have to pony up for.
Chinese Cartoons
Banned
A lot of the things said here are already a thing.
Chezzymann
Member
Streaming game services take off as the primary way to play games. You never get to fully own the game and don't have access to the actual files on your computer. The ultimate end to piracy. And consumer freedom.