Fifaguy360 said:
UltimateUnknown said:
Fifaguy360 said:
UltimateUnknown said:
This is BS. Complete BS. Maybe right now it may not seem so bad with developers claiming that the microtransactions are just optional for those who don't want to grind, but what's going to stop them from slowly and steadily making the grinding process for those who don't want to pay extra money incredibly long and tedious, as seen in Free to Play games. We all know how devs and pubs like to abuse their powers.
I never really understood what the point of buying the ending to your game is. That's like paying money to beat the game, which makes no sense. Why play the game in the first place? For Free to play, the game is free so it can be understandable but for full priced game...no...just no. |
I agree that earning the credits to unlock should not be unreasonably long and tedious.
I disagree that devs and pubs will abuse their powers. The consumer is stronger and we showed it to MS who tried to pull such crap. We are the end-user they have to please. Without us, there is no them and not the other way round.
I also disagree that people are buying the ending. That's quite a hyperbole which is popular on the internet. Microtransactions allow you to quickly access content that the individual may not have the time to play for. Some of us are married, with jobs, with kids etc etc. Those people are willing to put money to get the content quick and that is their individual choice which makes sense for their context. As long as microtransactions do not unbalance online multiplayer, they're fine. Because one player's single player experience doesn't affect the other guy's.
|
This whole argument about someone having a job/married/kids is completely overplayed. If gaming is getting in the way of other priorities in life then you should consider putting aside gaming. We all have things that are more important than gaming (for most people), but we play as a recreation in free time. Playing through a game to unlock things and eventually beating it is the core experience of a game.
That said, personally I don't care either if another guy unlocks stuff quicker with real money. I have no problems with that. What I do have a problem with is how devs will implement MTs into games. From past experience, we know that pubs will do whatever they can to nickle and dime people beyond just getting their 60 dollars......online passes, day one DLC, on disc DLC, DRM.
Microtransactions on retail games is just the next step. Right now it's only tacked on and at an experimental stage, but soon enough it'll become part of the game design philosophy such as how DLCs are nowadays (publishers announce DLC season passes for a game before the game is even released). I fully anticipate them trying to do whatever they can to make paying to unlock more appealing than just playing the game normally such as making the grinding tougher and more unbearable. At that point, my experience with the game is being affected when compared to the case when MTs are not present at all because the game is designed from the ground up with MTs in mind.
|
It's not that gaming is getting in the way of higher priorities. It's the investment of time that's requird to obtain enough game credits to unlock whatever. Also the core experience of a game is what the end-users wants it to be. There's no hard fast rule about it.
Publishers don't get $60 per unit sold so yeah I can see why they're getting creative. It's an expensive industry to sustain. It's a simple calculation. You want more content, you have to pay for it either by time or money. Nothing wrong with day one DLC.. In fact, gamers should embrace day one DLC because it's a much better deal than day 300 DLC i.e. we have to wait 300 days for more content to be available.
I'll reiterate my point that gamers are in control here. No gamer walks around crying that they're paying 50 bucks per 200000 credits cursing at companies because if they're that offended, they simply won't buy. Less buyers = nervous shareholders = 180 of policies.
|
