Drew Bergmark of Original-Gamer.com: Yesterday, the managing director of PikPok Games Mario Wynands spoke with NowGamer about topic that has been spreading like slime in Ghostbusters 2: micro-transactions. The more anger about it, the more the topic grows. What's all the fuss for games that use micro-transactions? It's not that publishers like EA are pointing a gun at you saying you have to buy these micro-transactions but still consumers are voicing their opinion. How will micro-transactions effect the industry at large: in a good way or in a bad way?
Soul Covenant feels like a game from the early 2000s, with its repetitive gameplay loop, waggle controls, and nonsensical story.
Indie developer Carlos Alfonso is working on Cold VR, a game where standing still isn't an option. The complete opposite to SUPERHOT VR.
Tomb Raider 1-3 Remastered players are ticked off by the game’s most recent patch, which censors in-game pin-up posters of Lara Croft.
This is why gaming is screwed. When people change things to fit someone’s agenda, it’s a slippery slope downhill.
Even if that agenda is of the developer? Way to remove developer rights.
***One player called it a “huge problem with modern games,” saying they can now be “ruined AFTER people buy them”.***
The level of drama. Yes, I recall sitting there for more hours than I did anything else in the game. These two pinups are the core of the game, after all!
rlow1's cringe catastrophizing aside, I do think developers *ought* to strive to maintain an original work to the best of their ability. The language of a "remaster" tacitly implies that - for good or ill - what's being resold is what fans remember but better.
Games can be ruined after purchasing them yeah we know this not from this but from GTA IV which had half it's radio content patched out due to licensing expirations and to me that was a huge deal.
This pin up poster is a bit of nonsense but the whole argument of modern games can be ruined post launch is Absol true.
It's not their work to censor. They are incharge of restoration & remastering the work, not overwriting it.
It's not the agenda of the developer though, they're pandering and trying to increase their ESG score.
Way to support censorship...
It’s not the end of the world for sure, but I understand the hate towards this kind of change. I believe it’s also a matter of principle.
Imagine a Picasso painting being restored & the restorer deciding there aren’t enough strokes, or some lines aren’t straight enough or curved enough…not sure it would/should sit well with people.
Have all original devs signed off on this change? Even if it’s the case, are we saying older gamers are better mentally equipped to process what was there than current gamers, hence the change?
Enough time ago the case was made that games are an art form. We’re supposed to have won that case.
So which is it? Are games art or not?
Hasn't this been happened for over a decade since remasters? I can't see that it's any worse now. Maybe if Sweet Baby starts getting their hands on remasters we will definitely have a problem.
tbh I dont see something like this as censorship. Does anyone else not find it strange for someone to stick pin ups of themsleves in a locker room?
Now of it was a pin up of some half naked firefighters it might make sense as Lara might like that, and if they removed that I would cry censorship. But removing pin ups of the main character, yeah I get it.
It's a game, and they were placed there for the audience. It's not real life. If it was, she wouldn't have fought a T-Rex now would she?
Yes, it's censorship but it's a bit less in your face. If they were in the original game, then they should have been in the remasters. It's bad enough that they have that ridiculous unnecessary warning at the start, but then they start removing things post launch. I don't care how small the change, they shouldn't be doing it. It's nothing but ESG pandering but in a subtle way.
Look bro, if you have pictures of yourself naked on a bear skin rug up in your house let me tell you, its not normal.
By the year 2030, this remaster collection will totally be changed and censored. Probably will remove Lara as a playable character. It's ridiculous. Glad that my family didn't buy this.
I still have Tomb Raider 2 PS1 as a memory.
It’s mentioned in the article, and it’s a point i 100% agree with, it’s the fact that they can censor a game after you buy it. That’s total bullshit.
Whilst it's an overreaction to say this has "ruined" the game, it's still problematic that this has happened post launch and for many, post-purchase.
I don't want someone to change a product for the worse after I've bought it. The same goes for implementing micro transactions after reviews.
I wonder why they did this? Nobody was kicking up a fuss as far as I'm aware.
they're irrelevant because you can acquire the same items through natural progression.
so, really... people shouldn't be getting their panties all up in a bunch over this.
The only way they'd be bad is if you have to buy them to finish the game. I have no problem with DLC to let you play more levels as long as they aren't taken out of the actual game. Go ahead and let people buy little things like outfits or weapons. That's no big deal. If you don't like it just don't buy them.
Look, if you pay $60 or full price for a game, you should get the complete package. Micro-transactions were intended as a means of monetizing the free-to-play model. It meant the player could pay for only what they wanted, or not pay at all. When you pay full price for a game, you should get the FULL game and everything that comes with that.
Now I know: EA didn't remove items from DS3 and go on to sell them as microtransactions. Except... yes, they did. Weapon specific ammo was replaced by generic ammo to support microtransactions. A staple of horror games was removed for the sake of expansion in microtransactions. Still think it doesn't affect you if you don't buy them?
More to that, these used to be cheat codes, unlockables and other nice extras that were included in the full price of the game. Now you still pay full price and are expected to pay for these too, as if full price only covers the bare minimum game. Not ok.
Once again, this has been bastardized by old business men who can't stand to compete against a new business model, who then twist and distort it to fit their old business model. It is something of a fad, because it looks good on spreadsheets. Comparatively, microtransactions will obviously have far more growth than retail sales or any other transaction right now because they are only now expanding into it. This guy can point to the nice upward slant on a graph and impress the investors and the board, and can then pretend to be doing a great job. This is why they say "gamers obviously want them" and that they're selling well. Growth in this area dwarfs that of any other.
These are not good for the industry when applied to full price games. Do not try to defend this.
if it's doesn't unbalance the game MP wise or if content isn't purposely with held to sell it for extra I could not careless.
If they are gimping games & unbalancing MP matches over MT's than yes I have a problem with it.
So it all boils down to how the MT's are implemented in the game.