Gaming Blend "Four of the biggest games due out in 2014 are actually games you could consider to be always-on titles. They are heavily focused on multiplayer, and even their single-player offerings are still tied to online gameplay. Do you know which games I'm talking about? Well if you do, you have to ask yourself whether or not you're okay with the direction the industry is heading in."
The Outerhaven writes: With the closure of The Crew's online servers, Ubisoft has started removing access to the game from anyone who owns it on Ubisoft Connect.
Wait. I don't get it. I reported on something that I recently noticed. I did mention in my article that I wouldn't have noticed if I hadn't gone to play The Division 2. That said, if this was nearly a week ago, I wouldn't know, as NO ONE REPORTED ON IT! Not IGN. Not Gamespot. Not Kotaku. No one.
You got people here complaining that there are any real gaming journalists and game journalism sucks, but when someone is acting, doing something to make something known to the public about what a company is doing. What do you do? You poke fun at it. What is it that people want? Do you want to complain for the sake of it? Or do you actually want people to do something to make those who aren't in the know aware of the shady stuff that's happening and to sound the alarm?
It's the "oh well" setting in on digital users. They don't care they don't own their stuff for some odd reason. 🤷🏽.
Good for you! People sometimes just feel the need to show how little they actually have to say. Very respectful dressing down, btw, which is another thing we need more of.
I appreciate your article,
- "If this isn’t considered both a “WTF” moment and setting a dangerous precedent, I don’t know what else it would be"
- "it could also signal other publishers that removing games from our accounts would be okay"
- "Maybe those firmly against this digital future have a point after all"
- "This. Is. Fucked. Up."
As someone against an only-digital/streaming future for entertainment content (movies/TV shows/games/books), it feels like talking into a void about the points above on this website, or on Twitter, or with my friends, etc. People don't get it. I'm strongly contemplating whether this will be my last generation of PlayStation & Xbox consoles (I'm confident enough that Nintendo's next system will still support physical media and that their 1st-party games won't have online-required installation or usage restrictions).
He is one of the long running trolls of this site, he never says anything positive. Every single one of his posts are either incorrect or flat out stupid. Pay him no mind.
I'm so done with Ubisoft, removing games one paid for is a new low...
Bye Ubisoft,
You've done f#c*ed it up !
This was me 9 years ago, when I realized all they wanted to make were filler boring games that are packed with micro-trash-actions.
Snooze! Moving on from Ubi-junk!
I see they're trying their best to surpass Activision Blizzard for being the most hated gaming company. Keep at it, Ubisoft, I believe!
Destiny has made over $160 million in MTX revenue, and these numbers only account the data from late 2017 to early 2019.
That's extremely low for microtransactions, especially for a game that's essentially designed around it
This was back when the game wasn't free to play.
The figures are from November 2017 to February 2019 (1 year and 4 months).
Based on that projection, the MTX revenue for Destiny 2 likely would have been closer to ~$240m for 2 years.
Not sure if premium expansions are included in that figure either although ... I'd hope that they are though and that most of the revenue was for actual content like Forsaken.
People spend way too much money on cosmetics.
Seasons($10 and just got bumped to $12) and dungeon keys($10 each, two a year) are through the eververse(micro transaction) store.
So for those two years, in order to play a season, you would pay through micro transactions.
Bungie Marathon will be worse since it's designed around it as well
It makes me sad to agree... but at the same time I am looking forward to giving it a go. Destiny 2 is so far in, I find it difficult to figure out what I am meant to do first.
Let's compare something similar. Apex Legends and its ridiculous $18/$40 skins make EA a billion each year.
For as much as ppl complain how much they hate microtransactions, they sure don’t act like it. No wonder they aren’t going anywhere.
By "people" you're referring to millions and millions of people. Obviously the ones complaining aren't necessarily the same as the ones spending all that money.
Replies(1)
In Episode 1 of Spot On, a new weekly news show, Gamespot talks about the dangers of chasing a trend.
Personally, I couldn't care much less about Always-On DRM. I'm connected to everything 24/7 as it is. The only issue I could see is issues with internet outages in areas where highspeed is less dependable.
I have no Internet so.... not so much actually
There is a difference about having DRM in an always online multiplayer game like MMOs for example..and forcing DRM on a single player game!
I don't want to be refrained from playing my SINGLE PLAYER game just because my internet got cut off.
Any games that are always-online are an automatic boycott from me. I'm not speaking on behalf of anyone but myself, of course.
There's a difference be it slim, between always-on DRM & a game that has a mp continuity that requires Internet to function.
This was always how the industry was going to combat piracy and the used market. Thanks to the consumer deserved backlash....the used market should be spared. (Online passes, bound games to accounts)
So hackers - always the cancer of gaming, ends up being the main reason a always-on connection is fueling the designs of upcoming games.
And these days....I find my gaming coin being limited to best value I can squeeze out of my hobby. That tends to mean if game has no mp I won't buy it. Furthermore, the mp needs to have either an established fanbase (so I have confidence in it) or I see the potential in the ip.
Sp is all but dead. And it's sad.