Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sonic

More Comments from EA_CIRE on the New Command & Conquer

Recommended Posts

The C&C Community manager, EA_CIRE, has made a follow-up post on the Official C&C Forums to explain a few things about the new Command & Conquer. Many fans are upset at this new direction for the franchise, but it's clear that there are many who are either still confused or simply don't know what's going on. EA_CIRE's latest post is an attempt to fix all that.

 

Ql5JY.png

 

I took the time to read your feedback carefully. Actually it wasn't a surprise for me to see the two major complaints being lack of Single Player and Pay2Win. But there also is some misunderstanding out there that I want to resolve.

 

First of all, the new Command & Conquer will be a full client Frostbite 2 experience, bringing you the same visual DX11 experience you expected from Generals 2. I read quite a few comments of people spreading the news like it has been transformed into a browser game, which is obviously not true.

 

Next, Singleplayer - Your voices definitely have been heard. What the exact result will be down the road is not up to me. But you should consider that this platform is an ongoing service with continuous support and addition of content that the players want. Because that's a main success criteria for a Free to Play game - You need to make and support a game, that people want to play.

 

And last but not least, something that makes me a little bit upset is how people are actually talking about the Free to Play monetization. Most people automatically set F2P equal to pay2win. JVC said in a recent interview with PCGamer, that we're looking into bringing the competitive scene back to Command & Conquer. There are very successful Free to Play games out there, that also focus on eSports. And those are far away from being a pay2win game.

 

All those points are something to consider when moving forward with your argumentation on why everything is bad around the new direction!

 

EA_CIRE

 

Click here for the original post. And to clarify things even further, Alex06, who is on our staff here at CNCNZ.com, has mentioned that the new C&C is a service, and "Generals 2" is a universe that will be offered within this actual service, which is the actual game.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

People automatically assume F2P means P2W because going on past experiences.... It does.

 

Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer is an insidious example. The entire experience is made to frustrate the end user, by "RANDOMLY" giving out loot by the way of packs which you buy with either credit earned in game, or real money. Its not pay to win, per-say, its more like pay to gamble to win. Which in my opinion is much worse, at least in Battlefield 3 you can just buy all the weapons and perks in one go.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, while not everyone might agree that pay to win is a very likely end scenario, I'd have to say anyone who doesn't understand why many people have formed that opinion are a bit naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Stevie_K

Not exactly a kind tone, but then again that can't be said about the user/fan posts either. Not very professional in my opinion but that's just me.

I don't see this delivering clarification on the subjects, but more like an attempt to defend against the hatemachine.

Share this post


Link to post

People automatically assume F2P means P2W because going on past experiences.... It does.

 

Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer is an insidious example. The entire experience is made to frustrate the end user, by "RANDOMLY" giving out loot by the way of packs which you buy with either credit earned in game, or real money. Its not pay to win, per-say, its more like pay to gamble to win. Which in my opinion is much worse, at least in Battlefield 3 you can just buy all the weapons and perks in one go.

 

ME3 is pure PvE!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

ME3 is pure PvE!

 

I don't see how that is relevant, people still waste their money.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

People automatically assume F2P means P2W because going on past experiences.... It does.

There's also some examples that don't. League of Legends and Team Fortress 2 being the biggest ones that come to mind right now.

 

This really depends how EA wants to approach this and nurture this. Going off past EA business decisions, I am not holding my breath, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

There's also some examples that don't.

True, but those examples are the minority.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't see how that is relevant, people still waste their money.

 

It is relevant, because "pay2win" is not unbalacing a PvE game - Waste their money? People decide based on their free will if they want to pay real money for convenience to buy more packs and get their stuff faster or not. Don't get it why that is wrong to be honest!

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

You might as well just cut to the chase and have people pay to be winners all the time, since that's the inevitable conclusion of the path your company is taking.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

True, but those examples are the minority.

Also true, but that does not exclude this game from possibly joining in with the minority.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

It is relevant, because "pay2win" is not unbalacing a PvE game

 

I would say there is something unbalanced about someone who just buys all the goodies versus someone who grinds for a hundred hours. It kills any sense of achievement that gamers have after putting in the hard yards. But yes I suppose it doesn't strictly unbalance the game.

 

 

Waste their money? People decide based on their free will if they want to pay real money for convenience to buy more packs and get their stuff faster or not. Don't get it why that is wrong to be honest![

 

Its wrong because of the way the system is set up, its essentially gambling. You buy a pack and IF you're lucky you get something nice. Most times though, you're just going to get junk. So people buy more and more packs, wasting more and more money all in the hope they get something awesome.

 

What does $100 buy you in ME3?

Who Put The CCG In Mass Effect 3?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

ME3 is pure PvE!

 

What about C&C's "PvE" (skirmish - comp stomp)?

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly, I think you are all over reacting and jumping to absurd conclusions. Really, the ME3 argument is mute because it's a PvE only multiplayer. Which means it cannot be a "pay to win." Pay to win implies that it gives you an unfair advantage against your opponent, which is usually used for when your opponent is a player. And, hell, even if you want to say ME3 is a "pay to win" game, it's still TONS of fun for those playing who don't pay because since it's all PvE the people who pay don't inconvenience those who don't.

 

now in the case of C&C gen 2, we have NO idea what kind of payment plan they will be using, so until they announce that/show that I wish everyone would quit whining... :\

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

being a PvP only with ingame payment system will end up to be P2W regardless how u want to prevent that !!! it is simply the market nature .u cant just sell retextured units or new weak units that dont differ from the free stuff and expect that many people will buy them ,u'll have to sell some sort of advantage like new stronger units , upgrade or power ups ....etc which will turn with game to be P2W, new factions sounds like a good option but realy how many extra factions r u planing to do ? another 16 or 20 factions may be? then what? stopping the game support to make a new game or u r planning to end the series with this game? most likely it will end with selling few units every week or two :S and this has nothing to do with the game being built with a super engine or not because we r talking about the game play not the graphics which are awesome for sure !!

 

another perspective that i would like to highlight is that not all paying players are willing to pay online just like me because the family think that the accounts can be hacked that way beside banks at some regions are not supported like here in egypt most banks mastercards by many companies and even paypal and FB dont support them too :/ so players like me will be limited to the free stuff only :(

anyway since middle east region is based mainly on piracy and cracked games i dont think the EA care for then :|

Share this post


Link to post

I would say there is something unbalanced about someone who just buys all the goodies versus someone who grinds for a hundred hours. It kills any sense of achievement that gamers have after putting in the hard yards. But yes I suppose it doesn't strictly unbalance the game.

I don't see anything wrong with a P2W singleplayer. If you want to be a stupid asshole and skip a part of the progression curve (which is half of the fun, mind you), then by all means, buy that extra "advantage". I sure as **** will not be using something like that, but I welcome anyone that does, because the game needs to be paid for, after all.

Edited by Inferno

Share this post


Link to post

i am sorry but this is pointless, those "official" posts not only they DONT help but also they are not answer any critical questions, they don't make any clarifications at all, and they jsut asks as to have Faith in the EA "manager" that they know what they are doing???!!!!!

 

yeah right.....i will not be surprised if the next "official post" will be also in DLC mode and ask from us to pay the really good answers!

 

situetions like those are that makes you love even more Piracy or turn to other game companies.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Woe there, let's back up for a moment.

 

Not exactly a kind tone, but then again that can't be said about the user/fan posts either. Not very professional in my opinion but that's just me.

 

How is the tone not kind? What are you talking about?

 

Well, no one said it was PvP.

 

I think he was simply talking about the Multiplayer (cooperative) DLC.

 

EDIT: I did the google for you: http://masseffect.wi...t_3_Multiplayer

I do believe that Eric knows what the ME3 multiplayer is.

And, as he said, it is PVE.

It's not PVP.

Buying your Levels in PVP = VERY VERY Bad.

Buying your Levels in PVE = Meh, who cares....

 

Maybe, if the PVE is a competition, then that matters. But not as much as you'd think. Or, rather, not in the direction you think.

 

You might as well just cut to the chase and have people pay to be winners all the time, since that's the inevitable conclusion of the path your company is taking.

How is that the inevitable conclusion exactly?

 

I would say there is something unbalanced about someone who just buys all the goodies versus someone who grinds for a hundred hours. It kills any sense of achievement that gamers have after putting in the hard yards. But yes I suppose it doesn't strictly unbalance the game.

Actually, it doesn't.

Psychology 101 (well, maybe 102) - the harder you work to get something, the more worthwhile it is for you. It's how self convincing works. Cognitive Dissonance and all that.

Come to think of it, that works kinda against the goal of the business making money - cause by that, those who spend more money will play less, while those who spend more "working hours" will play more.

Huh, kind of a catch 22 here.

Oh well....

 

Its wrong because of the way the system is set up, its essentially gambling. You buy a pack and IF you're lucky you get something nice. Most times though, you're just going to get junk. So people buy more and more packs, wasting more and more money all in the hope they get something awesome.

That has nothing to do with C&C or, hell, the discussion itself.

 

being a PvP only with ingame payment system will end up to be P2W regardless how u want to prevent that !!! it is simply the market nature .u cant just sell retextured units or new weak units that dont differ from the free stuff and expect that many people will buy them ,u'll have to sell some sort of advantage like new stronger units , upgrade or power ups ....etc which will turn with game to be P2W, new factions sounds like a good option but realy how many extra factions r u planing to do ? another 16 or 20 factions may be? then what? stopping the game support to make a new game or u r planning to end the series with this game? most likely it will end with selling few units every week or two :S and this has nothing to do with the game being built with a super engine or not because we r talking about the game play not the graphics which are awesome for sure !!

 

I completely disagree here.

Yes, you can make new factions and new sub factions, and if they are balanced, that's perfectly fine.

And yes, the micro transactions of skins, decals and the likes work well in F2P games.

In addition, the end goal is to also have the other C&C universes on the same service - so that's new factions again (Soviets, Allies, Nod, GDI, maybe even LOTR stuff...).

Also, DLCs of maps, missions, campaigns etc' etc'.

 

The possibilities are endless.

 

another perspective that i would like to highlight is that not all paying players are willing to pay online just like me because the family think that the accounts can be hacked that way beside banks at some regions are not supported like here in egypt most banks mastercards by many companies and even paypal and FB dont support them too :/ so players like me will be limited to the free stuff only :(

anyway since middle east region is based mainly on piracy and cracked games i dont think the EA care for then :|

Yeah, cause GLA is entirely not based on the Mid East... :)

 

Also, I'm in the Mid East as well, and there are no problems with paying via PayPal, Credit cards etc'.

Though, admittedly, a different country...

Share this post


Link to post

the harder you work to get something, the more worthwhile it is for you. It's how self convincing works. Cognitive Dissonance and all that.

Come to think of it, that works kinda against the goal of the business making money - cause by that, those who spend more money will play less, while those who spend more "working hours" will play more.

Huh, kind of a catch 22 here.

One of the many reasons why microtransaction-financed games are stupid.

 

Then they have to use manipulation tactics to get people to pay more money than they would otherwise through smaller increments.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Also, DLCs of maps, missions, campaigns etc' etc'.

 

As much as I'm intrigued by the way this Franchise is going. This sentence hit the nail on the head for me.

 

Whilst the free to play element isn't beneficial in the short term. In the long term the money from "DLC" is the key here. It brings returned revenue to developers and publishers alike beyond anything a full price game can possibly hope to achieve.

 

I think it was total biscuit on YouTube that said it best in regards to DLC & Free-to-play...it's all relevant here.

 

 

 

Suffice to say... I'm no fan of EA business practices. And have you noticed, it's always bloody Bioware!

Edited by Saracen

Share this post


Link to post

That's bull.

Sorry, but it is.

 

First of all, they are talking about Paid Games.

The ME2 DLC was well worth the price, IMO - at least the Lair of the Shadow Broker was. Excellent DLC.

 

You pretty much get an expansion pack content, or half that, at a fraction of the price. Don't see anything wrong with that.

As for On Disc DLC - yeah, they suck. But there is a good reason for doing this, in some cases.

Most of these DLCs are made during and after final approval of the main game. After testing.

So, to cut downloads, they tack the various models and resources on the disc - later to be unlocked after full testing with a smaller download. A few libs (which 2MB can contain A LOT of code) to bind all those resources together.

 

So there can be a good reason.

Also, the reason he gives, regarding used sales, is also good.

 

 

And, again, I don't see the problem here.

If you get the MP for free, and then for example say 3 faction campaigns, each as a separate DLC, costing anything between 10-20$ each.

It's basically a perfectly fair trade off. And more than likely it'll cost less than those evening 20$ (evening to 60$).

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Stevie_K

It is relevant, because "pay2win" is not unbalacing a PvE game - Waste their money? People decide based on their free will if they want to pay real money for convenience to buy more packs and get their stuff faster or not. Don't get it why that is wrong to be honest!

 

This "free will" (the will to pay real money) you talk about is mostly pushed by the desire to become better (to win). Pay2win simply enables players to climb the ladder without the effort being put into playing the game. Instead the effort goes from his wallet to yours, and you take away the struggle to get up the ladder. Problem seems to be we have a different approach to whether that "struggle" is a necessary key in the game experience or whether it has to be a fun experience to get through it, or one you would rather pay to avoid.

Share this post


Link to post

No, Jehal, the problems seems to be that you don't understand that in the example of ME3's PvE there's no advantage of climbing faster to anything, except for the sake of the climb (i.e. new unlocks, characters and weapons). There's no end goal, there's no champion.

 

Hence, it's not the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×