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.
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
-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.
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.
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.
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 real...in 60 dollar SINGLE PLAYER games, not free to play multiplayer games. This industry is run by legit a_______.
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.
@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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
I love micro transactions and I've never purchased any in my life.
I'll repeat it every month. Without these extra money makers, the base price of games would be $70 or $80. They are the reason why games have stayed at $60 for several generations.
So I thank the rich people who blow money on this crap to keep the prices down for the rest of us.
No, no it wouldn't go up. If that was the case, 100% of all games released would have microtransactions. It's just developers/publishers trying to get a quick cash grab on gullible customers.
It is not and never will be a mandatory practice to enforce microtransaction/loot crates on $60 games. They make tons of money from sales even if it's not the full $60. Hell, movie tickets only cost $9-13 so they make way less on each sale, but you don't see movie studios adding bullcrap additions to bump the cost on a regular movie ticket.
Not all games cost the same amount of money. Big titles cost more now. Big titles back in the day used to cost more as well and they had higher base prices.
Not sure what your movie studio thing has to do with this. Ticket prices have been going up. They aren't stuck at the prices they were 15 years ago. Studios do have ways to nickel and dime you anyway. Multiple releases of movies. Merchandise is bigger than ever. Things like that.
How did The Witcher 3, Horizon, Doom, Wolfenstein etc. launch at $60 without microtransactions and profit? Oh right, it's because the claim that games would need a price increase a myth. $60 is a profitable price for games and then they have DLC to bring in even more money.
"And if Witcher 3 added an option to let you buy materials with money.... you wouldn't be hurt and the game would have been the exact same for you."
Not true. Collecting materials for free would be made slower most likely to make microtransactions more enticing.
"Shadow of War MT don't affect your experience."
Yes they do.
"Complain about Battlefront 2 for pay to win."
I do.
"Or NBA 2K18"
I did.
"But Shadow of War is different. There's no grind."
People have already stated that Shadow Wars is grindy without loot boxes. You're also ignoring the ranked mode where orcs permanently die, that means loot boxes offer a pay to win advantage in that mode.
I hope you ask publishers to take you to dinner first before they screw you.
You are naive, aren't you! Publishers always play the poverty card saying how expensive it is to develop games. The base price has been $60, the industry just set it at that and it seemed it was the highest acceptable rate consumers were going to tolerate for a long time. Yet the same publishers who have MRSP of $60 for their base games at retail charge even more on console digital markets where it is cheaper to release on as there are less overhead costs such still overcharge at vastly inflated prices on those digital stores.
Whales don't keep the prices of a game at $60, they make publishers just fatter and richer. The same publishers who will keep telling it's all optional whilst locking the content behind loot boxes and progression systems bring games to a grinding MMO experience.
Gamers seem to ignore the reason why MTs are becoming increasingly common in games. Some gamers, like to buy MTs, and I assume some buy them compulsively, much like how some people purchase lotto and scratch tickets. Publishers, will stop adding MTs to games once gamers stop buying them.
Sucks for those that would otherwise buy the game. I’m not that petty personally. I’m not a fan of MT but hat doesn’t matter unfortunately. The “vote with your wallet” shtick doesn’t work when massive amounts of people are purchasing the MTs . It’s not “anti consumer” when consumers have adopted the practice. If it wasn’t profitable they wouldn’t do it, it’s as simple as that.
I don’t entirely disagree with some of what it are saying. It might not make any difference, but I am voting with my wallet. I won’t give companies a penny when they deliver a product that is not to my liking. It doesn’t bother you, and I respect that. I personally just can’t get on board with that.
I can respect you taking the pass for your principles, even if it’s for naught. I’m going to vote with my wallet in a sense by not buying any MTs. I’m going to get shit the old fashioned way lol
Even buying single player games like this that abuse microtransactions is voting for them to be included in more games. Even if you don't pay for a single microtransactions, the fact that you paid for a single player game that includes them at all sends a message to the publishers that you're okay with them existing in more and more single player games.
Let's look at online passes. Why did they die off? They existed for like not even 2 years last gen. It's because people did a "soft-boycott" of games with season passes and either didn't buy the games or bought them used. Not buying or buying used is the only way to send the message that we don't want this invading every game which is why I am not getting Shadow of War.
They didn’t die off they restructured. Almost every game supports a standard, mid-tier and deluxe package. This has survived because people like the options.
I support the game. I don’t support microtransactions. I don’t buy into your “support by association” theory. Me buying the game has no impact on MT whatsoever.
Buying used literally did NOTHING to bypass the online pass craze with devs when you remember they were one time use codes. I.E. when you bought a game that had them used, you still had to pay for that online pass.
@spenok, yes it did because if you bought the game used and then did not pay for the online pass, that publisher literally got $0 from you as a consumer
Good deal, I hope you enjoy the game. I know that me skipping the game isn’t going to change anything in the industry, but it makes me feel better. Haha
I hope so too. No hard feelings, I have skipped plenty of games for one reason or another. If you were looking forward to this and changed your mind because of loot boxes then it’s unfortunate. That’s all I’m saying, I don’t see how it’s any different than Diablo or whatever lol.
Uh...what are you talking about? The online passes as in those codes that came with games that you needed to input just to access online features, otherwise you would have to pay for the pass online if you bought it used. Those died off because nobody supported games that included them. Either by not buying the game or continuing to buy used and bam. The online pass disappeared. If you don't make a stand against these publishers then games will only be invaded with more and more anti-consumer crap
You mentioned season passes which obviously aren’t dead. I skipped the online passes because it’s a dumb comparison honestly. Online passes wernt a MT. It was an attempt to battle the used games market. They were forcing you to buy new. Nobody benefitted from this, all it did was piss EVERYONE off.
Sure, MT piss you off but you’re not everyone. Plenty of people benefit from MT. Not you or me but plenty. That’s my point. If you want to take a stand on your opinion then that’s fine bro, just don’t expect the same results of something as awful as online passes which had universal disgust. There is no comparison. Season passes and MT aren’t going anywhere because you’re not the only consumer around.
I bought the $100 gold edition. Feels great to support devs who work very hard on these big great games.
I don't personally buy MT's and I don't care if the casuals do, they spend money to get ahead by a couple days while I just play and enjoy the game. Whatever. MT's help devs and publishers make back their investments into these games since game prices haven't gone up in a very long time but development costs skyrocket.
Well I can't read the damn article because it says spoilers. The game just came out. You want us to read your opinion and decide if it's valid but I can't get to the meat of the conversation because it includes spoilers lmao!
There isn't any actual story spoilers. Just talks about how gaining epic and legendary orcs for the final act is pretty easy and that you don't need to spend money.
The micro transactions are a non factor because everything can be earned for free in game. Not sure where the idea that it's a grindfest came from. Someone has already earned a Platinum for it and I'm already at 87% trophies completed.
That came from being making baseless claims on assumptions. That's how many gamers work these days, and they ruin many things for themselves because of it.
Meh, their loss. The argument that devs make things unbearably grindy is their crappy excuse to the fact MTs are completely optional.
Yep, I heard that excuse so many times only to find out that microtransactions in many cases were completely cosmetic, uneccessary, or had minor affects on the gameplay. Some games do really have terrible implementation of microtransactions though.
Console gamers doesn't need it. It's bad enough that we have to put up with DLC's and other money grabbing gimmicks like season passes and other Bull****.
It's a big issue. This won't be a one time thing. If this game is successful, you can bet your bottom dollar that more and more single player games will start doing the same thing, and structuring their progress around incentivizing loot box purchases. I won't be part of it.
I would rather see this game succeed for the strides it’s making in dynamic narrative. So few studios are even attempting it because somebody actually has to build and write that shit. I would like games with dynamic systems to earn their sustained place on all platforms, not just PC.
"It's a big issue. This won't be a one time thing. If this game is successful"
lol, so UC4 with microtransactions yet sitting at I dont know the latest sells but roughly 9mil sold, contributed nothing to this? - For the record ND didn't start this trend, but the point is so many games have been successful with 'em...and that ship sailed when gamers raged against price increases that haven't gone up in over a decade...name anything else in tech that cost the same as a decade ago.
either you buy them or you don't? I will never understand why this is an issue. If you vote with your wallet by not purchasing MTs they will stop this practice. If there's a market for it they'll continue. Either way you can still play through the whole game without purchasing a single MT... I mean seriously give it a rest, already.
And this is why they'll keep popping up in other SP games. Articles like this by websites and journalists will keep wncouraging to do so until they go against it.
People on here ranting about how they aren’t going to support these games, good for you but there are still people buying these. You need to take your crusade off of this website and talk to more gamers Naturally the majority of people here agree with you, so you all are just blowing around hot air. Leave and bitch about it to people in real life, actually make a difference.
I bought the game today and played four hours straight looking for collectibles, fighting captains and being chased by an orc who didn't appreciate me shooting him in the head (twice). Awesome until now, and I haven't even touched the second story mission.
Such a shame that the snowflakes / Gaming Justice Warriors / Internet manchildren will miss it due to them being too stubborn to accept that their suspicions were wrong, and will cling to a few reviews that could be exaggerating, while ignoring all the reviews that claim that the MTs really are a non-issue.
Have fun scowling and thinking yourselves martyrs. Others we'll have fun fighting (and befriending) orcs, raiding fortresses and exploring a huge game world.
MT Should never affect a game the fact that you have to grind to get the true ending tells me that the developers purposefully did this to get people to use MT. Yes you don't have to but the fact that they designed the game ending like this suggest that they knew full well that some people would not want to grind and give in. What a shameful and blantaly disrespectful way of treating gamers time and effort.
Last gen games did not go up In price because of dlc. Games won't go up this gen because of optional microtransacions. What people can't seem to grasp, is that the cheap bastards who are getting their games from key selling websites and finding new and crreatove ways to be cheap asswipes are the reasons publishes and devs need to do this. It's a business and not a charity. Either pay more upfront, or deal with optional microtransacions.
Games do this because publishers are greedy. The industry now is so much larger than it was 10-15 years ago. So many more people play video games now than last gen and each year, the amount of people gaming will only continue to grow, increasing the potential audiemce. It's all the big already wealthy publishers that use microtransactions and dlc in such egregious ways. Smaller studios, like obscure Japanese devs, are the ones that don't make much money and yet their games as a whole don't have microtransactions. It's about greedy money hungry publishers. That is all.
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.
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 real...in 60 dollar SINGLE PLAYER games, not free to play multiplayer games. This industry is run by legit a_______.
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.
Its a non-issue because I am boycotting the game straight up.