Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Luk3us

ALL EA games to include microtransactions

Recommended Posts

Guest Stevie_K

I don't think that is a very accurate comparison

 

I was not aiming for that either. You get the idea and that's essential.

 

 

In this day and age, it's a problem to be against the idea. The idea in itself is fine; it's just the implementation that becomes the problem more than the idea.

 

Unfortunately, it does. If you dislike it for that reason alone, you're basically saying "this isn't good enough. give me what I want or else." It's a little more ham-handed than that usually, but that's really the gist of your argument. If you don't like it, don't spend the money. That is your right. Just quit whining about microtransaction markets existing.

No one is whining here, and we are not talking about disliking wether microtransaction markets exists or not, because they do.

 

I am merely arguing that it is okay for a costumer to dislike microtransactions for the way it works. The implementation is a matter of it's own.

Share this post


Link to post

The way it works isn't the central issue. The primary complaint I'm seeing is that people don't like the implementation of it whether it forces "pay to win" or you're forced to pay for content that should be included in the entire package. I would agree that those ideas are indeed bad but those are primarily based upon how the market is implemented, rather than it just being there. Complaining about even having the microtransaction market is being spoiled and bratty for no reason. Arguing that bad implementation is harmful is fine because I'm entirely on board with that aspect. However, I'm still in favor of simply having the markets available since they're actually a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post

I am against the mircotransaction model for a lot of reasons, I think it is bad for the games and the gamers. This doesn't make me spoiled and bratty anymore than you not liking DRM for a host of reasons makes you spoiled and bratty.

 

There are valid reasons to hate DRM, and this is aside from the obvious point of its existence as an anti-piracy device. There are reasons to hate microtransactions too aside from the obvious point of its existence as a payment model.

 

If you thought this is all about how you pay them money and nothing more, then you would be wrong. I am not going to take the time to explain why microtransactions are bad, as I've said already, it isn't worth the time and effort and I highly doubt you would be swayed anyway since you seem to have already firmly accepted them. However, calling anti-microtransationists spoiled and bratty is hypocritical at best unless you are willing to accept all of the industries modern developments, including DRM.

Share this post


Link to post

DRM harms the consumer and creates an unstable product versus a pirated version that runs better. DRM is extremely harmful to those who legitimately acquire the game so there's a host of reasons why this is bad. However, the same cannot be said for a microtransaction market. It doesn't hurt the consumer to have a microtrans market. It gives free to play a better chance and monetization of certain items or extras is fine for people dedicated to the game. Even if you tried to explain why it's bad, I would refute every point since there's no valid reason why having a microtrans market is bad. It's better for developers, better for consumers and overall, better for the industry itself. A monetization strategy allows people who would otherwise be unable to play more games a chance to experience more. And it gives those people with some extra cash in their pocket to buy some neat extras if they want. However, much of that comes down to implementation rather than the concept of it.

Share this post


Link to post

Even if you tried to explain why it's bad, I would refute every point

Replace refute with deny, and yes, that is exactly why I'm not going to.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think you even have an argument. You just want to blindly be against it because you don't see the power it has for us as consumers and the gaming industry as a whole. Not every game should be a $60 up front purchase and this is where a microtrans market provides a new avenue for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Stevie_K

and this is where a microtrans market provides a new avenue for everyone.

*someone. Especially casual gamers that would likely not pay $60 up front for a game but are easier to persuade to buy little things one at a time.

 

I would argue that many people don't mind paying a relatively high price for a quality game instead of playing free to play microtransaction based games that are designed for making money in the long run.

In my honest opinion, a game should make you focus on playing the game, instead of misleading your attention towards using money.

Share this post


Link to post

No, it opens avenues for everyone. Consumers, developers, publishers, investors, et al. When you provide consistent revenue versus one time revenue, the model works better for all. If you refuse to play games solely because they might have a microtransaction market, you're doing two things: you're holding back the gaming industry from being more than just a plaything and you're arbitrarily stopping yourself from playing some great games. Refusing to move forward and allow things like microtransaction markets to flourish to provide new and better avenues for profit, you're stagnating the industry so we get stuck with Call of Duty year after year. You guys bitch about getting the same **** year after year but when given a chance to change things, you bitch about that too. Do you want games to be a better overall experience full of immersion and something thought provoking or do you want nothing but the same thing year after year? Seriously, that's what fighting change is doing to an industry that we're supposed to enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Stevie_K

They are going to make a new game every year or annother anyway. Believe me.

 

The mass market microtransaction games have a large audience to reach, and needs to feed upon this audience throughout it's life, as opposed to a retail game, which can entertain you without having to feed upon you after you've bought it.

 

 

Do you want games to be a better overall experience full of immersion and something thought provoking or do you want nothing but the same thing year after year?

No. It's not a this or that. You make it sound like retail/digital download and microtransaction games cannot co-exist. They can, they do. I have yet to find a microtransaction game whose overall experience is full of immersion and thought provoking. Sorry but that's the truth. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

Share this post


Link to post

There's a reason why there are franchises that come out year after year. They're a guaranteed to earn a large profit. Call of Duty, Halo and any annual or nearly annual franchise you can list is guaranteed to turn a profit and if you look at the numbers they post, there's no reason why companies should stop producing them. It's all about profits and revenue streams and the more alternatives a company has, the more it can use that money for other things like keeping studios open and producing even better experiences. Yes, they will continue to produce the same titles, which is not always a bad thing either. The games are usually fun even if you want to continually bitch about them. Anyhow, microtransaction markets don't actually feed on people. They offer a different take on a payment system, which is good for them and good for us.

 

 

No. It's not a this or that. You make it sound like retail/digital download and microtransaction games cannot co-exist. They can, they do. I have yet to find a microtransaction game whose overall experience is full of immersion and thought provoking. Sorry but that's the truth. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying people should stop bitching about having microtransaction markets existing and bitching about them doing this thing called "making money." Every business is out to make money and if there are more ways for a company to make money, that's a good thing. This is a positive sign showing that the market is shifting with technology instead of stubbornly standing in the way. There will always be games that are better as retail experiences that don't include a market but there are games that are coming out like World of Tanks then soon World of Warplanes and World of Battleships that are perfect for a microtransaction market based game. Blizzard's Diablo 3 Real Money Marketplace is attempting the same thing in a different way. These are methods that show the game industry is evolving with the times. If you want better, more meaningful games, start supporting the companies that make them with your money. That's the only way the medium will evolve. You might be content with calling games a toy but I'm not. They're so much more than that and we need to take advantage of any opportunity to improve the medium.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Stevie_K

You might be content with calling games a toy but I'm not. They're so much more than that and we need to take advantage of any opportunity to improve the medium.

Definitely not, and I completely agree.

 

It's not that C&C can't be a success as a microtransaction game. I believe it can, but I fear it will follow bad examples, as there are plenty of out there.

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.

×