Jordan from DYEGB writes: "First of all, piss off for assuming that I wouldn’t want Darth Vader in pink. I think that would be fabulous."
Hmm I reckon it will. Maybe for a little while until devs then go back to doing the same shit but in a 'nicer way.
MT's earns them money, it's not going away, they will indeed find ways that people find acceptable... See it like a little kid trying to find out what they can get away with...
It will people aren't stupid to fall for the same crap twice.
You assume people are smart?
You assume buying a video game has to do with either? People are going to buy things they think are fun that has nothing to do with smart or dumb or anything like that. If anything I believe the best way of approaching the situation like this is to relax on the hate speech you guys are going to realize that continuing that type of abusive practice is actually going to have the direct opposite effect, if anything you're simply going to reinforce their ideologies. So the best way of letting people know how bad these practices are in terms of microtransactions and pay to win type crap and games is not to start calling the users that enjoy these video games dumb or start personally attacking them because the second you do this they're not listening to you they're going to dismiss any argument you made and you've lost them completely you need to approach them on biasly and make it clear that this practice is bad for all games and not simply cherry-picking Publishers you don't like. Sooooo that actually means you guys might need to start talking about the dlc content that's being sold with The Witcher 3 and the amiibos with the Zelda and Its season pass and many other games If it's seen as a directed bias opinion you're going to lose them before you even started a real campaign against these practices. Make your plight against the practices not against the consumers. I mean put it this way do you really believe spending years of calling Call of Duty Gamers dumb has resulted in those game series selling less? They're still moving 20 million units every year. If anything I'd argue you've made their bond much more stronger because they now feel there are people that are to be revered...
I tend to assume a lot of people are. However, I'm not so naive to believe that the majority actually care about any of this kind of stuff. More often than not, things that aren't appreciated by the vocal crowd, end up continuing because the majority either don't care, or don't know.
If people were smart enough to vote with their wallets it would, but I yeah, sadly I don't have too much faith.
To be fair, BF2 sales have been pretty far down the drain.
Try not to attack Gamers for playing a game and start focusing that energy towards the removal of microtransactions loot boxes and other practices inside of games. Because the second you start trying to equate smart or dumb to the purchase of a video game you've already lost anyone that would have ever even listen to you regarding a topic like this. So what are you going to do? You going to start telling them a "smart" way they should be spending their money they worked for? Come on now I mean you have to realize you're not going to convince them to listen to you based on the situation with such an attitude.
Of course it will. It sends a message to publishers that gamers won't just accept a f2p model on a $60 game.
Well then i save money not buying their pay to win grind variety of games, i do enjoy BF though that will be a loss if they do a BF2 with the next battlefield
Didn't EA loose billions in stock as a result of this? If that has no impact in itself, than I don't know what will.
Anybody who thinks microtransactions are just going to go away are being unrealistic. There needs to be a middle ground between the consumers and the developers about where microstransactions are appropriate, and where they aren't.
Simple. Loot boxes offering only cosmetic items are fine. Gameplay isn’t effected, but the dev/ publisher can bank on the fairly large population of people that are still dumb enough to spend money on them. Loot boxes offering items directly tied to progression, in a game that already has a $60 price up front (ie not free), are bad.
I think people thinking they're just going to disappear really are delusional, or at least have way too much wishful thinking. They'll stick around, because there's no way the industry as a whole is simply going to give up on a significant amount of revenue. On top of that, there are entire distribution models that rely on MT for the sole revenue source for their games. It's a business model. But in that vein, you are right that the model has to be looked at in a way that is acceptable to the consumers. Something that is fair and equitable, and not something that tries to force this stuff on the entire user base who has not desire to partake, or the more current trend of having them thrown in their face at every oppurtunity. I can think of a lot of games I love that have them, but I never had to hear about them, or feel that I should buy some to make the game more enjoyable. For my part though, if I came across a game that had endless grinding to get stuff, I'd probably just stop playing, because I wouldn't find that fun. I certainly would pay to move ahead, because by the time I'd even be compelled to spend money, I'd be turned off from the game already. Cosmetic seems the least objectionable, although some people still complain about them. I don't find them evil like some people do. But it shows that you can't please everyone, you just have to find a place that won't piss off most.
Then the battle has just begun. People aren't going to like their hobby being infiltrated by companies that are just trying to nickel and dime them or even worse set up pay to win games. If EA had it's way battlefront would have a class system in battlefront 2 where only the people who paid a lot of money could do well.
It will for Microtransactions but knowing EA they will just find another way to steal money from our wallets.
MT’s and loot boxes aren’t a problem; it’s simply how they’re used. Good loot boxes = Overwatch, CoD, and Destiny Bad loot boxes = BF2.
The way I'm seeing this is there's not really a middle ground and I feel it's likely that if you're going to get rid of something like this in gaming it needs to apply to all games and not simply the ones you cherry-pick.
Neither side can say it will or won't affect the market because it just happened. Like seriously in a industry where it takes years to make a game a few weeks after a disaster your going to say it won't affect the market . . . .
Well the thing is, a bunch of pretentious yahoos that said they would not play it/support it, did. If you don't support something, Don't support it. ..."but star wars and the force and stuff!"... derp. Stand by what you say. It really is as simple as that.
I actually don't think that's a problem because I honestly believe the majority of the people who said they were not going to buy this game likely did not I believe the biggest problem is it may not be as much as you might think.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.