Support NeoGAF

[Otakumegane]

Lol good thing WiiU is current gen. (I kid)

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

I'm pretty sure you just took two completely unrelated concepts and decided to tie Nintendo into both of them. You basically created this narrative for yourself.

Well:

You realize that AAA budgets for games have gotten out of control to be able to compete against each other right? I doubt he likes the idea of getting witty comments like this in every review for all his future games because he cannot afford to give people the experiences they want without finding alternative revenue streams.

As much as shitty publishers are to blame for these models, a lot of the blame also goes to the consumers. I'm reading a bunch of comments in this thread about Nintendo not giving you the experiences you want. Well the experiences you want cost over $150mil to make now. So unless you want to buy four or five copies get used to enduring this kind of crap.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. It sucks but developers have to make some kind of profit or they'll all be poorer than us.

What the hell you wanted to imply with this?

 

[Alebrije]

Hope Nintendo as the only veideogame focus company does keep with current "status". WiiU is a great console btw.

 

[SummitAve]

I'm good at not buying those games. This is just another developer to avoid.



Perhaps they should make more realistic budgets then. Gamers aren't asking for this crap.

Gamers are directly asking for this in that base expectations and standards for the quality of a game has gotten so high. They are not the majority, but look at the people dedicating any amount of time in the next gen resolution/frames debate. Bummed that your game is 900p and not 1080p well too fucking bad because there was more money (with time included) than you could fathom that was saved or moved elsewhere in that decision.

 

[Chindogg]

Some of the best games I played in the last 12 months were 20 dollars or less.

Indy games will continue to shine, its the AAA titles that'll continue to die off.

Basically, unless its CoD, FIFA, Madden, or GTA, all bets are off for these other AAA titles to continue to survive. The ones I listed with the exception of GTA (as far as I know) also milk the shit out of microtransactions.

 

[Forsaken82]

No, just no. Also, hell no.

While initially the model wasn't overtly offensive, it bloated out to where the boosters or using real cash to keep up becomes a real consideration and that was by design. Then, when combined with the failure to introduce good and balanced mechancis that stemmed from free formed setup and use while splaying machine guns, machine guns everywhere and needing to rebuy/learn them for every new kit is dumb and insulting, never mind balance altering. This is before getting into Disc launcher A is better than disc launcher B (because reasons related to when it was released and what kit it was attached to), but both are worse than disc launcher C (since it was released later than A&B). I mean come on, really?

It is on the Developers to figure out the balance. The concept however can work. You can't sit here and say "No, Hell no, I wan't nothing to do with this" when spending 60 dollars gets you everything you could possibly need (and likely 75% of shit you won't ever use), and then turn around and say "But CoD: Ghosts is worth it because its a full game!"

What I am proposing is no different than a full priced retail game. I can't fault the concept because developers are yet to figure out how to appropriately balance the free aspect of it. My point is nothing should be locked out of that 60 dollar price cap. But if I only want to use 5 out of lets say 15 available builds, I don't want to spend 60 dollars. I only want to spend 30 dollars. So what if a booster got a player to a certain gun faster than me deciding I finally wanted to spend real money. It is all about the balance.

 

[Burbeting]

Then I don't want to be part of next gen .

I'm fine with microtransactions etc. if they are completely optional. Taht means that they don't affect core gameplay at all, and let me enjoy the game to the fullest without them. But in most of times it makes the game boring grindfest without paying the publishers some more cash, and that I detest.

Subscription-models can work, like in Telltale-games.

 

[Savitar]

I already decided if a game comes out that you pay regular price for has a ton of micro transactions as if it was a F2P title I won't touch it.

In the eternal words of so many who have gone before me.....fuck that shit.

 

[crozier]

Gamers are directly asking for this in that base expectations and standards for the quality of a game has gotten so high. They are not the majority, but look at the people dedicating any amount of time in the next gen resolution/frames debate. Bummed that your game is 900p and not 1080p well too fucking bad there was more money (with time included) than you could fathom that was saved or moved elsewhere in that decision.

It must be maddening as a developer to read threads calling you "lazy" like you worked 6 hour days and took an extra lunch rather than taking a minimal amount of time to bump your game up to 1080p 60fps.

 

[Chindogg]

What the hell you wanted to imply with this?

Read the thread. A bunch of people are happy they're playing on their Wii Us with the smaller, more cost effective games. The refute was those games weren't the experiences they wanted. I stated that if you want those experiences, you're gonna get stuck with microtransaction hell.

Reading comprehension FTW.

 

[Palette Swap]

Depends on if they take the full game option away or not. I guess its just easier to hope for the best and expect the worst.

Oh, definitely. So far, their biggest F2P experiments have been strictly F2P: you get a base game and you can buy (or rent) additional content. That worked with Street Pass and Wii Sports Club goes in the same direction.
They haven't remotely touched the worst parts of F2P like paid tokens and counters obviously and I'm certain they will look for family friendly business models but their reluctance to go in this direction so far has more to do with how slowly and conservatively they approach these subjects than with a clear design to not touch them.

Digital rentals aren't microtransactions.

If $2 potentially recurrent payments aren't microtransactions, I don't know what is.

 

[Tripon]

Well, I'm out then. Guys, enjoy your next gen gaming. I'm going to stick with retro games and games that feel 'retro' AKA, GAMES THAT I PAID FULL RETAIL PRICE FOR AND YET DOESN'T HAVE FUCKING MICROTRANSACTIONS.

 

[Shalashaska161]

I'd rather the price of games go up than be nickel and dimed for half the content. The effect of free to play practices upon game design is awful, and I have no intention of supporting that in games that I paid full price for.

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

Read the thread. A bunch of people are happy they're playing on their Wii Us with the smaller, more cost effective games. The refute was those games weren't the experiences they wanted. I stated that if you want those experiences, you're gonna get stuck with microtransaction hell.

Reading comprehension FTW.

I posted this:

>Shut Up, is your fault for expecting much and not buying Nintendo. They need to make money...

That is pretty much what you said... but you responded with this:

I'm pretty sure you just took two completely unrelated concepts and decided to tie Nintendo into both of them. You basically created this narrative for yourself.

You are the one making the comparasions.

 

[Gherid__lacksGPS]

Cool I'll keep not buying those games.

This.

Pretty simple. We should all still dick slap any company in the face who pushes this garbage. Keep voicing, bitching and ultimately not buying this horseshit. It's our industry, not theirs.

 

[RM8]

I'd rather the price of games go up than be nickel and dimed for half the content. The effect of free to play practices upon game design is awful, and I have no intention of supporting that in games that I paid full price for.

Please no. Not everyone lives in a country where games are $60

 

[Chindogg]

I'd rather the price of games go up than be nickel and dimed for half the content. The effect of free to play practices upon game design is awful, and I have no intention of supporting that in games that I paid full price for.

I'm honestly surprised that games haven't increased to $80 out the door. Then again, microtransactions are awesome for adding backdoor costs.

I posted this:

That is pretty much what you said... but you responded with this:

So you didn't read and are doubling down on misreading what was said? Ok just making sure.

 

[nelsonroyale]

Nope

 

[LuchaShaq]

Didn't like only getting 60$ from me for just cause 2? Fuck off and enjoy nothing for the sequel I guess.

 

[equippedwithtowel]

If $2 potentially recurrent payments aren't microtransactions, I don't know what is.

Was blockbuster a microstransaction?

By a loose definition you are correct but this is miles apart from an XP pack.

 

[Jinko]

It's been on the cards for a while now, DLC proved to devs just how much disposable income people have and are willing to fritter away.

All you people who bought DLC have yourselves to blame

Of course I play WoW so I am partly to blame also.

 

[Vicetrailia]

I'll just be ridiculously selective about my games then to avoid the shitty anti-player game design decisions that will occur from this. Genuine devs come out to play please .

I can easily foresee the game industry killing the gamer inside of me due to business policies though. It happening.

 

[Chao]

do you want to know how next gen of games is gonna be like?

just like that, it's that simple!

 

[crozier]

You know what needs to make a comeback? Shareware.

Think about it:

Demos give you a taste of the game, but not a big enough taste where you're invested in the product. With shareware you're given the first third or so for free. If you like that first third of the game, chances are you're invested in seeing the game through to completion and you're that much more likely to want to buy the full game.

It's like watching a movie trailer vs. sitting through a third of a movie and stopping abruptly. If I like the movie, I'm going to pay to see it through.

 

[Gherid__lacksGPS]

You know what needs to make a comeback? Shareware.

Think about it:

Demos give you a taste of the game, but not a big enough taste where you're invested in the product. With shareware you're given the first third or so for free. If you like that first third of the game, chances are you're invested in seeing the game through to completion and you're that much more likely to want to buy the full game.

It's like watching a movie trailer vs. sitting through a third of a movie and stopping abruptly. If I like the movie, I'm going to pay to see it through.

+ fucking 1

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

So you didn't read and are doubling down on misreading what was said? Ok just making sure.

The one that is not reading is not me. But, hey! the Party... I mean, Nintendo, is always right.

 

[Chindogg]

Was blockbuster a microstransaction?

By a loose definition you are correct but this is miles apart from an XP pack.

In the strictest sense, Blockbuster was a microtransaction if it was completely online.

He's totally right, online tokens are totally microtransactions. I hope that it doesn't become a trend, but its a completely legitimate concern.

The one that is not reading is not me. But, hey! the Party... I mean, Nintendo, is always right.

Making Communism comparisons. What better way to know that you fucked up reading and are just too stubborn to admit it.

 

[Storm Chamber]

And gamers will continue to eat this shit up.

Spoiler

Prove me wrong.

The sad truth.

 

[Biker19]

And most games will bomb in sales due to practices like these. Guaranteed.

So go right ahead, publishers. Go join Capcom in terms of low profitability.

 

[Red Mage]

Currently, I only purchase used games for developers/series I haven't tried before. I purchase games in series or by developers I know and love as a way to support said group. However, if they start bringing this crap in, I have no qualms of buying those games used if they're filled with microtrash. If they don't want to profit off of me, this is a fine example of how.

 

[megalowho]

It's going to be an era of extremely cynical game design if this is the case. The biggest question facing developers won't be how awesome can we make our product given the new tools available to us - it will be how do we turn this thing we're making into a sufficient revenue stream after the point of purchase?

 

[boingball]

Any hype for Mad Max or Just Cause 3 died just there.
I have no issues with F2P games, they are free after all.
But I doubt that Mad Max or JC3 will be F2P ("Hopefully we can lower the initial price point") and introducing Microtransactions and Pay2Win schemes into $60 games is awful. The whole game becomes about money managing (how to either avoid paying at all or maximizing your money investments) and not so much about the game anymore.

 

[nib95]

Not buying any games that take the piss with micro-transactions and DLC. We need to speak with our wallets and nip this at the bud before it becomes the norm.

 

[Odrion]

I think I'm just going to go ahead and stick with my computer and WiiU then.

You know what needs to make a comeback? Shareware.

Think about it:

Demos give you a taste of the game, but not a big enough taste where you're invested in the product. With shareware you're given the first third or so for free. If you like that first third of the game, chances are you're invested in seeing the game through to completion and you're that much more likely to want to buy the full game.

It's like watching a movie trailer vs. sitting through a third of a movie and stopping abruptly. If I like the movie, I'm going to pay to see it through.

But that means companies need to actually make a good videogame. And they can't be going off and doing THAT.

 

[Chindogg]

And most games will bomb in sales due to practices like these. Guaranteed.

So go right ahead, publishers. Go join Capcom in terms of low profitability.

Sadly, EA's making a fucking killing on FIFA microtransactions.

 

[AlexMogil]

What is an acceptable level of transactions for people?

Pay $X for in game currency to shorten the in-game grind?
Pay $X for a thing that gives you only a cosmetic change (hat, gun skin)?
Pay $X to buy a thing that gives you an online advantage (gun, FIFA/NHL card packs)?
Pay $X to buy a new level?
Pay $X for the video to show you how to solve a level?
Pay $X to have the level cleared in game?

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

Making Communism comparisons. What better way to know that you fucked up reading and are just too stubborn to admit it.

Thats your irony, not mine.

In any case, I really, really hate console transitions... always the same BS.

 

[Phades]

It is on the Developers to figure out the balance. The concept however can work. You can't sit here and say "No, Hell no, I wan't nothing to do with this" when spending 60 dollars gets you everything you could possibly need (and likely 75% of shit you won't ever use), and then turn around and say "But CoD: Ghosts is worth it because its a full game!"

Both battlefield and COD aren't full games, nor do i view then as being "worth it". 75% of the shit i won't use is also part of what i find offensive to say "hell no" to and relates to the core design of the game. If they can't manage that right, how exactly do you expect them to get any of the rest of it right?

My point is nothing should be locked out of that 60 dollar price cap. But if I only want to use 5 out of lets say 15 available builds, I don't want to spend 60 dollars. I only want to spend 30 dollars. So what if a booster got a player to a certain gun faster than me deciding I finally wanted to spend real money. It is all about the balance.

This isn't what is happening though. Even in your situation, if your advancement is dependant on competition, it stiffles the growth potentail over time and just gives incentive into furthering the "pay2win" narrative that isn't always accurate. As a byproduct, players get turned off over time and theoretical revenue is not generated.

The core of the issue is at odds with its self. If the game is fully fleshed out and "balanced" at the $5 level, there is the argument that there is no "incentive" to spend more than that. Where as the less balanced it is at the $5 level, there is more "incentive" to spend more money and thus netting the company the expected revenue returns over time and they can subsquently schedule their releases accordingly.

This is where the microtransaction model fails conceptually. By contrast it is also where expansion pack model flourishes, since they are more fully realized and not inherently interdependant on each other (never mind barring cross over between those who bought and those who did not buy).

 

[JinjoUnchained]

I miss the days when we used to look forward to, rather then dread, the defining features of the next generation. It used to be "next gen will do arcade level graphics!, next gen will do symphonic soundtracks!, next gen will have motion controls!, next gen will have robust online multiplayer!". All of the new features of next gen sound more like threats than enticements (no used games, AAA games with microtransactions, always online). Could these talking heads at least try to spin these "next gen features" as something that will be beneficial and exciting instead of #dealwithit or some other condescending line?

 

[jonno394]

What is an acceptable level of transactions for people?

Pay $X for in game currency to shorten the in-game grind?
Pay $X for a thing that gives you only a cosmetic change (hat, gun skin)?
Pay $X to buy a thing that gives you an online advantage (gun, FIFA/NHL card packs)?
Pay $X to buy a new level?
Pay $X for the video to show you how to solve a level?
Pay $X to have the level cleared in game?

Pay $X to buy a game and play it without having to pay anything else.

As soon as a game adopts gameplay that is aimed at pushing people towards microtransactions then it should not be a full priced game.

 

[ec0ec0]

simple, NO.

 

[marrec]

What is an acceptable level of transactions for people?

Pay $X for in game currency to shorten the in-game grind?
Pay $X for a thing that gives you only a cosmetic change (hat, gun skin)?
Pay $X to buy a thing that gives you an online advantage (gun, FIFA/NHL card packs)?
Pay $X to buy a new level?
Pay $X for the video to show you how to solve a level?
Pay $X to have the level cleared in game?

Pay X for Hat.

That is all.

And I'll buy the damn Hats too. See that Publishers? GIVE ME YOUR HATS!

 

[vcc]

PS4 pre-order cancelled ... well ... hmmm ... getting incredibly close to cancelling.

The most egregious offender is Microsoft: Forza 5, crimson dragon, Killer Instinct, Ryse: Son of Rome, and dead rising all have elements of F2P game design in full priced games.

 

[Josh7289]

If so, then I'm out. Simple as that.

 

[Shengar]

This is where the microtransaction model fails conceptually. By contrast it is also where expansion pack model flourishes, since they are more fully realized and not inherently interdependant on each other (never mind barring cross over between those who bought and those who did not buy).

People already forget about expansion packs, didn't they?

 

[Cmagus]

I will hate this trend but I honestly bought like 3 pieces of DLC all last gen and didn't bother with much else. That being said map packs and stuff completely killed any interest I had for anything with online multiplayer. I hate knowing that if you buy a popular game that has a large online multiplayer component you'll basically need to buy the dlc if you wanna continue to play it in the long run.

Last game I bought with online multiplayer though was recent BF4 as i had an itch for a shooter and I already regret it. I am so sick of this $49.99 premium shit and the fact that people buying it are getting boosts and I really didn't read into it when I bought it like a moron.

It's also the reason I shelved my Xbox 360 half way through as I hate the fact that I was paying $60.00 for a full game but couldn't access multiplayer because I didn't have Xbox Live Gold (I see no value in paying for it). I'd honestly say the same thing for Sony if PS+ wasn't such a good value.Guess I'll wait and see where things go but if it gets out of hand then I'll be shelving the consoles altogether.

 

[Can Crusher]

"Build the game with the community"... ugh... just fuck off.

 

[crozier]

The most egregious offender is Microsoft: Forza 5, crimson dragon, Killer Instinct, Ryse: Son of Rome, and dead rising all have elements of F2P game design in full priced games.

Yep. I was watching that on Twitch. The dude playing Ryse was dumbfounded that it of all games had a $20 Season Pass, in-game gold purchases to lessen the grind, etc.

Completely turned me off of that system.

 

[ironcreed]

So.... Mad Max with microtransactions? I am disappoint.

Yeah, just imagine being out in the wasteland and all of the sudden, "$9.99 for the survivalist shotgun pack! Better yet, go into the wasteland fully prepared with the fully loaded arsenal pack that includes every weapon unlocked for only $49.99!" (best value)






*ammo sold separately

 

[maverick40]

If this truely is the future of the industry: