Ruler said:
Yeah but the difference is that Fireemblem and Uncharted 4 have a big singleplayer campaign and enough content on its own, not that it would excuse microtransactions but brings things into perspective. Its beyond me how people can say that Blizzard is doing microtransactions right but now all of the sudden EA or Warner Brothers arent? If you add 2+2 together Overtwach is the worse package for a 60$ game. From what i know the Gold is giving you much less value what you paid if you transfor a duplicate into gold. And i still fail to see your argument how randomized lootboxes are supposed to give you free DLC, but traditional microtransactions arent? If you can buy whatever you want with Gold in overwatch why not giving only Gold instead of 4 random items? Wouldnt that be easier to unlock everything, kinda like microtransactions used to work before overwatch? |
Sounds like someone is moving goal posts... Also if the implementation of EA/WB is the same as overwatch, then I have no issues. Keyword is "same."
Gold does give you much less for duplicate but I fail to see how that is relevant. I never said traditional Micro-transactions can't give you free dlc but from my experience, traditional micro-transactions lock items and etc behind a paywall with no way to unlock them via in-game currency or the ability to unlock them requires an unreasonable amount of time.
It would be easier but less profitable for blizzard most likely since people would just buy the skins they want and then not spend a cent more. Plus the "whales" won't spend as much as they potentially could. I never said there isn't greed involved with microtransactions and the way it is implemented in overwatch but what I am saying is between the way overwatch has implemented it's micro-transactions vs the general pay for dlc method, I'd rather have overwatch's implementation.
There are obviously better "for the gamers" way to do post game content. I think splatoon's way is the most consumer friendly method where you get a single player campaign and free dlc for a year with tons of updates and zero microtransactions and many more things but it's clear the companies don't want to adopt that method since it doesn't make enough money for them. So if the future has to be between paid dlc, traditional micro-transactions with locked content behind them without any way to unlock them with in-game currency/unlocking them with an unreasonable amount of time or overwatch's lootbox implementation with free dlc that affects the gameplay and cosmetics that can be unlocked within a reasonable time. I'd rather choose overwatch's implementation than the other two.
PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850