The Shadow of War Microtransaction Controversy is a Non-Issue

Shadow of War microtransactions are a hot topic of the internet rumor mill right now. However, I beat the game and this is how they really are.

Read Full Story >>

The story is too old to be commented.
1994d ago Replies(3)
SCW19821994d ago

Micro transaction and non issue do not belong in the same sentence ever. Stop giving these companies a pass. I don't care if its there so you don't have to grind to get the "real" ending, these practices are anti consumer and bull shit.

Nitrowolf21993d ago

I think a lot of these articles are missing the point, while IGN did a video about them spending money and coming to the conclusion that playing the game would be cheaper and stilll pretty quick, the point is that they're there for a single player game.

Sure you don't have to spend a dime on them but the point is someone over at Warner Brothers did this for greed. There is a certain principle how about this whole thing that is just rotten

4Sh0w1993d ago (Edited 1993d ago )

Why because you say so?

-I don't like microtransactions of ANY kind at all but I'm not gonna go at a dev when they are done in a way that doesn't affect my gameplay= Not a grindfest without them, nothing held back through normal but obviously lengthy gameplay that we are used to traditionally.

-Im just saying, I remember when WE= Gamers cried foul against the idea of game prices increasing prior to this gen, yet we didn't expect the suits were going to look for creative ways to increase profits??? Game development is expensive, it's not charity. Yeah games like GTA have mega sells that make ridiculous profits but that's the extreme not the standard. I'm not a company shill or a rich snob but I understand in business something got to give. I will take the lesser of 3 evils= microtransactions **that have very minor or no impact in the game itself, vs microtransactions that bleed you dry just for proper gameplay/to finish, or vs $80 game.

Either way its not gonna stop because actually like it or not many casuals who dont read game sites= the majority are willing to buy a "skin" or whatever piece of arbitrary content so the only question is which do you prefer? Note: I *almost never buy anything beyond the base game, and I bet I thoroughly enjoy my games more than those who spent alot more, lol and still didn't even finish.

Ashlen1993d ago (Edited 1993d ago )

4show you don't get it. Are you completely unable to see the future? Even if this game isn't "as" manipulative as it could be, what about the next game and the game after that? You can't see how as time goes on this will become more and more manipulative in order to increase profits?

These companies are not your friend, and they aren't making games for the love of the craft. They want your money that's it. They have proved time and time again over the years they will do whatever they think they can get away with to increase profits.

People don't care about how non-intrusive they are in this game, we are trying to say no to the whole thing.

2600Thunder1992d ago (Edited 1992d ago )

Yup. Also this looks like click bait.

People sound like addicts protecting their next fix when they makes excuses for this anti-consumerism. It makes sense because loot box gambling is still gambling including the low win rates and flashy lights and sounds. Thankfully its stigma is gaining a lot more traction and some sites want to help us make purchasing decision like Open Critic.

Games are not more expensive than movies and even if they were publishers were making a fortune through our generosity to pay more than $60 for special editions, season passes, and other monetized gimmicks.

Devs also do not receive royalties after the game is released and the money is either used for marketing campaigns or pocketed by publisher execs. It is a huge myth that the money goes back to the games or devs because DLC is already 90% finished prior to the base game release. They just need to outsource bug fixes and finish up the little left of the DLC.

Currently the gaming industry is a whopping $96 BILLION industry with 3x record breaking profits once MTs hit. Publishers are FISTING us, but games are too expensive to make? All thanks to the mobile gambling infection. Marketing and PR fools the easily fooled.

Time to go back outside.

LordJamar1992d ago

You didnt read the article huh

LordJamar1992d ago

Actully read the article not just the title he talk about you exact kind of ppl

Xerneas1994d ago

Making a true ending behind a grindfest so they can get some players to buy your lootboxes is an issue.

I've said this before the PS4/XB1 were announced, that games with MTs will cheapen the experience somehow in order to make buying MTs preferable to wasting hours grinding for something that wouldn't normally require so much grinding. Lo and behold it's 60 dollar SINGLE PLAYER games, not free to play multiplayer games. This industry is run by legit a_______.

newagenoir1994d ago

I see you didn’t read the article.

Xerneas1994d ago

I did.

It's filled with excuses. There is grinding, and there is monetary options to skip or shorten that. Thats where lootboxes come to play. You don't have to spend money, but you will still spend time. It's like a movie placing a still image somewhere for a lengthy amount of time and doesn't let you skip or FF without paying. Fortunately movies aren't as exploitable as gaming...not even close. Gaming as a medium is so easy to exploit, that's why shit like this is a reality, and that's also why it's getting worse.

andrewsquall1993d ago

@newagenoir Seems you are the only one who has read this article and doesn't have a clue what its about.

Waffles111993d ago

@newagenior I read this article, and must say I am just thrilled that I am a mindless tool that gladly gives my money (or my parent's money that they work hard to get, only to be wasted by my lazy shit ass) to large gaming corporations. They obviously have my best interests in mind, that would never dare exploit its customers further. People need stop complaining and continue to buy this game in hopes that they eventually put in commercials for bank loans and tampons in between loading times as well. Hell I think it would be great to pay a 5 dollar activation fee after paying 60 dollars for the game, just because they are doing us such a favor by allowing us to play it.

yeahright21992d ago

You have eight total comments on this site. before the ones in here, you had one 55 days ago and before that one, the rest are hundreds of days ago.
*sniff sniff* anyone else smell fish?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1992d ago
GamesMaster19821993d ago

Well i bit the bullet and bought it due to the great review scores . Not that bothered really as only paid £34 for it and will not be touching microtransaction crap. Once Ive finished the campaign i will trade it in towards something else.

GamesMaster19821993d ago

Also to everyone who is butthurt about the microtranactions just don't buy the fucking things like me. Why miss out on great games because of bullshit you don't even need or have to buy. Your loss.

4Sh0w1993d ago (Edited 1993d ago )

Exactly, but alot of gamers have a cult mentality...they will rage holy war against the establishment even when there's not much substance to their arguement...if of course the microtransactions don't affect the gameplay, they can be ignored, in other cases, yeah there is a legitimate arguement to be made.

Raging against ALL microtransactions while at the same time refusing to pay more than $60 for over a decade, ironically weakens the arguement over microtransactions if you understand business. Fair consumer practices and pricing is one thing, charity is another.

lol, what's ironic is the casual-microtransaction-buying consumers are actually subsidizing the core gamers hobby, yet some are raging against them doing so, how many of them want to pay more upfront though?

Liqu1d1993d ago

Buying the game still supports this practice, I would rather not support gambling in single player games.

HyperMouse1993d ago

You seem to miss the point most games now include MT's, and they are slowly working their way into being more predominant for a pay to win scenario, they are being included more and its getting worse as far as content, thats the point.

4Sh0w1993d ago (Edited 1993d ago )


No, I'm not missing the point at all.

Question: If the devs/pubs laid out that inflation alone meant the increase cost to make games today with the same avg unit sales was $10, would you rather pay $70 for a full game with NO microtranactions or $60 for a locked version with a potential of over double the price of the game "unlocked" depending on how much "extra" content you are willing to buy, which would you choose?

This is exactly what publishers have done, they knew too many core gamers would rage against $70 or $80 standard increase, but they also knew many casual gamers that love a particular title won't blink at paying more to get "cool stuff" without dedicating the time, either because they are too busy or just dont have the will or skill, yet they'd love to complete the game by buying short-cuts anyway= It's not pay to win for you.

The compromise is to make more off the willing. Ironically this means YOU get everything for just the intial price of admission and patience.

I fully understand not all microtransactions work this way but that's not the case here, shouldn't we not cry wolf and save the attacks for the occasions when the microtransactions truly hurt the gameplay?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1993d ago
andrewsquall1993d ago

Its a non-issue because I am boycotting the game straight up.

Rebel_Scum1993d ago

If you bought the game, it doesn't mean you're supporting microtransactions.

1992d ago