Are microtransactions, day one DLC packages and day one patches etc really that 'evil'?

  • Page

    of 2 First / Last

    Previous
  • Syrette 7 Mar 2013 19:05:17 44,211 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Microtransactions in full price titles such as Dead Space 3 - totally avoidable.

    Day one/pre-order DLC - totally avoidable, doesn't not have to mean it's content that has been cut from the title, and most 'exclusive' DLC eventually gets released for all anyway.

    Day one patches/TUs - don't really see the problem.


    I'm not saying I'm all for these things but I'm not sure they're worthy of the furore they create and I certainly wouldn't boycott a company over them.

  • sanctusmortis 7 Mar 2013 19:07:28 9,796 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    YES.

    If I bought the game, I should have everything I need to pay for until you release an expansion. I shouldn't have to change retailer just because that thing I'd like isn't going to be at the shop I use, but another one. A game should be released in perfect working order ready to go out of the box.

    Simple.
  • nickthegun 7 Mar 2013 19:09:12 61,298 posts
    Seen 44 seconds ago
    Registered 9 years ago

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • ecu 7 Mar 2013 19:09:28 77,311 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Annoying and inconvenient more than anything.
  • Syrette 7 Mar 2013 19:11:49 44,211 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    sanctusmortis wrote:
    YES.

    If I bought the game, I should have everything I need to pay for until you release an expansion. I shouldn't have to change retailer just because that thing I'd like isn't going to be at the shop I use, but another one. A game should be released in perfect working order ready to go out of the box.

    Simple.
    You're not wrong really, pre-order exclusives annoy me too even if said DLC eventually becomes available to all.

    But on the other hand as much as I hate to admit it, we are talking about money-making businesses here. So I understand why they exist even if I don't like them.

  • King_Edward 7 Mar 2013 19:12:03 11,471 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Yep. Forcing this shit on developers and customers is shitty.
  • Metalfish 7 Mar 2013 19:21:05 8,874 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    If a game is a piece of art, then yes.
    If a game is a product to be consumed, then maybe
    If you hate this stuff but buy it anyway, you are at least partially condoning it.
  • StarchildHypocrethes 7 Mar 2013 19:22:24 26,593 posts
    Seen 31 seconds ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Preorder stuff is all pointless tat and DLC is all avoidable. Couldn't give a rats cock about it to be honest.
  • RedSparrows 7 Mar 2013 19:28:19 24,189 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Of course they're not evil.

    They're boring.
  • DFawkes 7 Mar 2013 19:35:32 24,047 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I don't like it when the existence of micro-transactions alters the game in noticeable ways for those avoiding them. Thankfully I think that's quite rare.

    Oh for goodness sake, I've caught my scrotum in my zip again - Margaret Thatcher, 1986

  • MatMan562 7 Mar 2013 19:38:56 2,602 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Microtransactions are ok if done right and not forced on a game that doesn't need them.

    Day one/ pre-order dlc isn't terrible but we would be better off without them.

    Day one patches or updates are fine if you have an internet connection but, because not everyone has an internet connection, are pretty bad. If a game is almost unplayable upon release then it will stay that way for those people. The Skyrim debacle comes to mind.

    XBL/ PSN/ Steam/ NNID - MatMan562

  • ronuds 7 Mar 2013 19:40:40 21,788 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Day 1 patches get a bad rap. A game goes gold about a month (?) prior to it showing up on store shelves. I don't mind that they've improved the game in that time.
  • Bremenacht 7 Mar 2013 19:51:42 19,656 posts
    Seen 35 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    They're all shit. A way to get games out the door before QA is done properly and to make more cash than they deserve. Mass Effect 2 - day 1 DLC advertised in-game with massive spoiler FFS.

    Even crack dealers aren't as bad as publishers. At least you get your first few rocks for free, until you're hooked. No, publishers insist you pay 40 first and then ravage your pockets.

    They are all criminal scum and should be hanged.
  • RobTheBuilder 7 Mar 2013 20:09:06 6,521 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    DLC - No
    Day One Patches - annoying but better than bugs
    Micro-transactions - Yes. They force game design to be around making money not playing well.
  • Savatage 7 Mar 2013 20:13:40 38 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Not online so I don't give a toss about the other two, but day 1 patches means publishers can knowingly shove an unfinished, buggy piece of toss out the door and charge full price for it, and there's not a thing I can do about it. Hate em.

    /glares balefully at Skyrim
  • Deleted user 7 March 2013 20:19:19
    RobTheBuilder wrote:
    Micro-transactions - Yes. They force game design to be around making money not playing well.
    Not inherently. There are dozens of mobile games with microtransactions that are perfectly playable without spending a penny. Endless Runners are a good example here - in ones like Jetpack Joyride or Temple Run you progress in the game by playing the game. You can pay to skip that progress (or to make it easier), but at no point are you prevented from playing as normal, at no point does it inherently funnel you towards "you must pay to get past this specific point".
  • Tricky 7 Mar 2013 20:25:26 4,485 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    You see Bremenacht's taking the same black and white view about microtransactions that so many hand-wringers have. If it's clear that the game design had been gimped as a result of it's inclusion then yes (assuming it's a full price game) I'd agree it's bad, but I haven't yet seen a prime example of this actually being the case (and that includes DS3).
  • King_Edward 7 Mar 2013 20:29:01 11,471 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Tricky wrote:
    You see Bremenacht's taking the same black and white view about microtransactions that so many hand-wringers have. If it's clear that the game design had been gimped as a result of it's inclusion then yes (assuming it's a full price game) I'd agree it's bad, but I haven't yet seen a prime example of this actually being the case (and that includes DS3).
    You missed the Real Racing 3 review?
  • bad09 7 Mar 2013 20:30:53 6,254 posts
    Seen 45 seconds ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Micro-transactions in full price games absolutely is evil and frankly shameful, I do not believe for a second they "need" to do it because of the cost of making games, it's a money grab from the stupid plain and simple and games WILL be designed around nudging you to buy.

    Day one DLC not really evil but really shitty thing to do to people who just laid out on your product "Hey buy our game then take it home and buy some more of it straight away you mugs!"

    Pre-order and retailer DLC needs to die like the cunts who thought them up, no matter when or where I buy your product it should be the same. The suits even know people hate it but it supposedly gives them more marketing which is more important than customer satisfaction apparently.

    Day one patches are evil in that they have encouraged publishers to rush games out and patch them day one and forced gamers to use the internet as a bloody utility actually needed now for non multiplayer gaming (same for scum sucking DRM) when it really should not be, I shouldn't have to pay for a internet connection just to ensure video games work.

    Edited by bad09 at 20:32:12 07-03-2013
  • Tricky 7 Mar 2013 20:32:47 4,485 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    @King Edward - I said full priced game. Free to play is a whole different matter.
  • RobTheBuilder 7 Mar 2013 20:35:55 6,521 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    @meme Those games are some of the better examples.

    Problem is that when large companies with shareholders become involved it destroys gameplay. A game which is fairly designed won't require anyone to buy anything, a game which gets people buying add-ons has to be designed to be grinding or unfairly difficult in order to drive revenue.
  • King_Edward 7 Mar 2013 20:37:50 11,471 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Is there anything customer friendly about microtransactions?
  • disusedgenius 7 Mar 2013 20:44:16 5,614 posts
    Seen 11 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Mircotransactions are fine if implemented correctly.
    Day One DLC leaves a sour taste in the mouth.
    Day One patches are better than the alternative.
  • Syrette 7 Mar 2013 20:46:03 44,211 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    King_Edward wrote:
    Is there anything customer friendly about microtransactions?
    Well, someone out there is buying them...

  • StarchildHypocrethes 7 Mar 2013 20:46:54 26,593 posts
    Seen 31 seconds ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    King_Edward wrote:
    Is there anything customer friendly about microtransactions?
    Anything offering a customer willing to pay a shortcut, that doesn't impact on anyone else, is surely customer friendly.
  • King_Edward 7 Mar 2013 20:57:14 11,471 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Syrette wrote:
    King_Edward wrote:
    Is there anything customer friendly about microtransactions?
    Well, someone out there is buying them...
    That doesn't make it friendly.

    Look at Dead Space. A friendly shortcut would've been to offer unlimited resources on easy mode.

    Offering a paid for shortcut in a paid for game is like charging you extra for being shit or busy. It's not friendly, it's exploitative.Obviously it's different if the game is free as the player can simply not play the game, and not lose anything.

    Evil is a strong word, I think dickish fits best.

    Edited by King_Edward at 20:58:24 07-03-2013
  • ronuds 7 Mar 2013 20:59:17 21,788 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    It's not that microtransactions are "inherently" evil - I think it's more that we're watching EA and the like make them become that way with each game they release.
  • disusedgenius 7 Mar 2013 20:59:57 5,614 posts
    Seen 11 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    To be fair they make much more sense if you don't go straight for the most egregious example as the standard.
  • THFourteen 7 Mar 2013 21:05:26 34,468 posts
    Seen 30 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    King_Edward wrote:
    Tricky wrote:
    You see Bremenacht's taking the same black and white view about microtransactions that so many hand-wringers have. If it's clear that the game design had been gimped as a result of it's inclusion then yes (assuming it's a full price game) I'd agree it's bad, but I haven't yet seen a prime example of this actually being the case (and that includes DS3).
    You missed the Real Racing 3 review?
    The review is not accurate. I've played for 4 hours now and not spent a penny.

    There is a few initial "waits" of five minutes here and there, but after you have more than one car you're laughing.
  • Bremenacht 7 Mar 2013 21:28:45 19,656 posts
    Seen 35 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Tricky wrote:
    You see Bremenacht's taking the same black and white view about microtransactions that so many hand-wringers have. If it's clear that the game design had been gimped as a result of it's inclusion then yes (assuming it's a full price game) I'd agree it's bad, but I haven't yet seen a prime example of this actually being the case (and that includes DS3).
    I mentioned one: ME2! As soon as you start the game, the in-game store immediately advertised a big spoiler. The AC series made a point of digging out chapters and DLCing them, making it very clear you're missing parts of the whole, but I don't feel I missed out there.

    Also, there's no hand-wringing going on here. I don't like it. It feels very much like the thin end of a wedge. I detest the idea that DLC gets sorted out before they've even fixed the bugs in a game.

    The stuff that really works is stuff that's clearly added on. Minerva's Den springs to mind, although I've not played it. You take it or leave it. Borderlands, RDR, Modern Warfar, Halo - all take it or leave it DLC. Nothing taken away; no problem at all.
  • Page

    of 2 First / Last

    Previous
Log in or register to reply