PlugMonkey Comments

Page 1 of 83

  • What's the deal with Metal Gear Solid 5 microtransactions?

  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @redcrayon

    OK. Then you should be kept apart in this instance, to preserve your experience.

    This is something that is much more easily implemented in a feature than by leaving it as an exploit, like I keep being told how it was in The Good Old Days.

    Edit: And a good MT multiplayer system would have the opposition skipping a few leagues ahead of you, not getting a 1-0 advantage in your game.
    Reply -2
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @Solid_Strife

    It wasn't just 3 games, though, was it? It was lots of games. More games than had them. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have spent £40 on an Action Replay cart. NO ONE WOULD!

    You are reinventing the past.

    And then there's the time cost of finding and inputting these things every time. Once again, it's fine for people to spend time, but not OK for people to spend money. It's OK for you to grind through sites to find ways to do glitchy things to the games, but not OK for them to say "Here. For a small fee, we'll save you the bother and remove the glitches."

    It's not indefensible. There is no defence necessary, other than "if people want to buy them, let them."
    Reply -3
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @redcrayon

    Are you saying that microtransactions as a gameplay element don't exist solely to extract cash from people?
    Nope. I'm saying there are infinite shades of grey and that each game has to be judged on its individual merits. And that it's probably a little early to judge this one.

    Seeing as I was enjoying hunting monsters, rather than having a goal of getting the best gear as quickly as possible, it just seemed to miss the point of playing the game if you don't actually enjoy the grind.
    And you're welcome to think that. And they're welcome to think it's better to have the gear from the start (even if they're wrong). And if the publisher had offered them a $5 microtransaction to save them the bother of hacking the game, I don't really see how that spoils your experience any more than them spending time to work out how to hack it did.
    Reply -4
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @ABC123XYZ

    I completely agree that it should be marked on the box. If everyone is going to say the "Online experience not rated by ESRB" nonsense, they should definitely the marking MTs so that punters can make an informed (or completely irrational, if that's their poison) decision.

    Like games do on Apple's App Store, in fact. That was a good addition.
    Reply +3
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @redcrayon

    Rather than some people paying to skip a tedious grind, how about just having a mode where it isn't a tedious grind but actually enjoyable gameplay?
    What's a tedious grind? How is that defined? Maybe it's all gloriously entertaining from start to finish, but between the three kids and running my own company, I only get to play a few hours a week and now everyone's moving on to the next game, and I really would like to hold a decent gun, just for a minute.

    You're saying remove the grind altogether? Go back to simple 2D games? I'm all for that, but some people like the grind.

    Adding microtransactions means that the only reason for the mode to exist is as an economy of time vs money to grab more cash from players
    That's no more true than when the last guy said it. It's no more true than saying that all games exist solely to extract cash from people. Some do, some don't, regardless of payment model.
    Reply -3
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @arcam

    Why would the MP part be valid for "fun-level" criticism, but not "value-for-money" criticism?
    The "value-for-money" criticism is automatic and arbitrary (and not very logical) and therefore isn't valid. Saying "this game has MTs and is therefore bad value" is the same as saying "this game has MTs and is therefore no fun". You can criticise either aspect, but neither of those are valid criticisms.

    You're trying to separate the MP out and saying it shouldn't be subject to the same level of criticism as the rest of the game. That argument is much harder to justify IMO.
    No, I'm not. I'm trying to work out why a constant amount of singleplayer content becomes worse value for money if you add in a multiplayer service with optional charges.

    Or, to put it another way, how adding a multiplayer service with MTs is equated to taking away an multiplayer service without MTs, even when such a service:
    a) never existed in this instance.
    and
    b) isn't considered necessary to exist in order for the aforementioned constant single player experience to be considered 'good value'.
    Reply -4
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @ABC123XYZ

    That's fair enough. A punter needs to know what they're getting to make a judgement.

    It doesn't objectively make it worse value than the feature not being there at all though. And listing the total price to buy all the MT content is a meaningless number, a bit like putting how much it would cost to buy all the booze in the hotel.
    Reply -4
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @arcam

    Subject to criticism, sure. If it's no fun, criticise it. If it's no fun because of the MTs, criticise that specifically.

    Automatically subject it to criticism of value for money? That I don't quite follow.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @Solid_Strife

    OK. I never did get the Knights of the Round materia in FF7. What's the cheat code?

    I'm STILL stuck in the bloody maze dungeon of Phantasy Star 2 on the MegaDrive. Cheat code please!

    And I'd like to pimp my ship in Elite on the BBC without all that flying back and forth. Hit me with the cheat code, brother!

    Cheat codes were in some games. Not all. Not even most. Some developers left in the QA testers' debug tools. It was not a feature. This notion that the vast majority of games in the Good Old Days had cheat codes is a total fantasy.

    this is a huge problem that ruins most free to play games
    Like what? How are DOTA and LOL and WoT and Hearthstone all ruined by their MTs?
    Reply -2
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @ABC123XYZ

    So, if the game was a 30 hour single player experience that cost £50 that would be fine. Good value. But, because the game is a 30 hour singleplayer experience plus a multiplayer experience with MTs, that's terrible value. You should complain.

    And that's supposed to make sense to me, and what I'm saying doesn't make sense to you?
    Reply -3
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @Solid_Strife

    Cheat codes were NOT a regular game feature, even in The Good Old Days. If they were, I wouldn't have had an Action Replay cartridge, which I had to pay for. It's a nice piece of historical revisionism, but it doesn't really have any bearing on today.

    The simple existence of MT does not always mean the core systems have been designed purely to facilitate them. You've just made that up to fit your narrative. There are plenty of games that completely tack them on at the end, and they are totally unnecessary to fully enjoy the game.
    Reply -5
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @Zerobob

    Retailers should be forced to put large stickers on game boxes warning buyers that their £50 doesn't actually buy them the whole game, and put a total price on the game box which includes the cost of every possible micro-transaction.
    This is the other bit I don't get. If the £50 was just for the single player portion and there was no multiplayer at all, that would be fine. Nobody would complain. So how is this a logical complaint?

    It's like complaining that the mere presence of a minibar has made your hotel room a rip off. It boggles the mind.
    Reply +3
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @GoingPostal13

    There's no place for micro transactions in AAA games.
    Some people like grinding. Some people would rather pay to skip it. The two of you can coexist.

    Why does everyone have such a massive problem with paywalls and no problem at all with timewalls?

    Because you have a lot of time to invest in games.

    Only reason.
    Reply -7
  • Trine 3 dev says "future of the series is now in question"

  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @MaxiSleep

    Cliffhanger endings are a lazy deceitful practice that deserves every bit of hate they receive.
    Really. There's no amount of hate that would be disproportionate for the crime of a cliffhanger ending?

    I did always wonder why everyone keeps banging on about The Empire Strikes Back being "the worst one". At least now I know.
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 25/08/2015

    @SeeNoWeevil

    People need to step foot out the door and see how many hours of entertainment they can get for £15. Spoiler, not many.
    Needed saying again.
    Reply +1
  • Pokťmon World Championship players arrested over alleged gun plot

  • PlugMonkey 24/08/2015

    @peacefuloutrage

    The lack of an automatic fire mode as found in video games and movies isn't all that much of a reassurance, seeing as the only place where that is used to kill people is in those video games and movies. If the guy at Sandy Hook had been wildly spraying bullets around on full auto, that would probably have been a good thing.

    An AR-15 is simply a modular rifle. It is no different than most rifles,
    It's a semi-automatic with a 30 round standard magazine. Its intended design function is to kill human beings. That's not true of 'most rifles' in civilian hands. It's no different from 'most rifles', apart from it being specifically designed to shoot people as quickly, efficiently and effectively as possible.

    Couldn't you sport shoot with a gun that can't be used to shoot 30 people without pausing to reload? I used to sport shoot with an air rifle. Is that any less skill based? Why do you need military hardware? Can't you do it with a single shot or bolt action rifle? That's good enough of the Olympics. What sport shooting competition has rules that make firing that many rounds in quick succession a necessity? Or even an advantage?

    Sport shooting is not a remotely legitimate reason to own an assault weapon. Guns are a tool, like a hammer or a saw, this is true. But an AR-15 isn't a tool for shooting targets or hunting game, it's a tool for killing people. That's why it has features that guns designed for targets and game don't have.

    Civilians have no need for that.

    The overall murder rate is similar to other countries, people just use differing means.
    Um, no, the USA is 10th best for GDP per capita, but 107th best for murder rate. It's similar to other countries, sure, but it's not similar to other rich, developed countries. No, it's about four and a half times higher than the rate of other rich, developed countries.
    Reply +3
  • PlugMonkey 24/08/2015

    @SameerAFC

    The latest in a very long line of people to mistake social media for the electronic equivalent of a quiet chat in the back bar, rather than the electronic equivalent of shouting on a street corner.
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 24/08/2015

    Dear America,

    There is not one single remotely legitimate reason for a civilian to own an assault rifle.

    Yours sincerely,

    The World.

    Edit: Interesting. Two out of ten people who read the EG comments section think that there is a legitimate reason for a civilian to own an assault rifle. Either of you fancy enlightening the rest of us as to what that is?
    Reply +23
  • The least realistic things video games think cars can do

  • PlugMonkey 24/08/2015

    wronger than a Chrysler PT Cruiser cabriolet. amirite?
    You are not wrong.
    Reply 0
  • Nintendo patents console without a disc drive

  • PlugMonkey 22/08/2015

    @VEGA

    I genuinely wonder how that's working out for them. Does it make them a lot of money? More money than they would make if they offered up their whole library for free, and used that to help sell 100 million consoles?
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 22/08/2015

    @markytonline83

    Bound to happen eventually. Physical media will be dead in 2 generations, tops.
    Reply +1
  • Lovers in a Dangerous Spacetime sets a release date night

  • PlugMonkey 19/08/2015

    @Sousuke_Sagara Your opinion differs from mine. I am therefore going to neg your comment and belittle you with mock exasperation, because apparently that's how we do things.

    You only liked it for a short while? Have you got no friends? Where's your soul? Seriously? Jesus...
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 19/08/2015

    @Sousuke_Sagara

    A few minutes? Jesus...
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 18/08/2015

    Yaaaaaaaaay!

    \o/
    Reply +2
  • Amazon cans trade-ins

  • PlugMonkey 19/08/2015

    @nothough

    You certainly wouldn't buy many of the AAA annual cash cows.

    But then, I don't.

    Or use Amazon.

    Or buy high street 'designer' clothing.

    One form of social irresponsibility doesn't really justify another, and the effort involved in using one of the countless alternatives is practically non-existent.

    I really am quite achingly hip. You could keep a side of beef in me for a week.

    :cool:
    Reply +2
  • Zombi review

  • PlugMonkey 19/08/2015

    @WorldScaper

    :lol:

    You're funny.
    Reply 0
  • The Force is strong with the limited edition Darth Vader-inspired PS4

  • PlugMonkey 17/08/2015

    I really like that controller.

    :redface:
    Reply +3
  • Why I will never call video games a hobby

  • PlugMonkey 17/08/2015

    Also, the word hobby can be a quietly dismissive, almost pernicious - it sets an activity outside of the rest of our lives.
    What a load of tosh. Millions of people's lives revolve entirely around their hobbies. This is likely true of every single person whose main passion isn't also their main source of income. Some people have vocations, some have jobs and hobbies.

    These hobbies cover every possible field of human expression and endeavour, and the only way to belittle or demean them is to completely redefine the word 'hobby', as has been done here.
    Reply +4
  • Nintendo employee fired after podcast remarks on localisation, fans

  • PlugMonkey 17/08/2015

    @redcrayon

    Who said anything about "stopping" them. I'm not talking about passing a law. This is a public relations issue. We are the public in the relationship. Sacking employees for minor infringements should be bad PR, but it isn't when the public's response is "What an idiot! Serves him right!"
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 14/08/2015

    @scuffpuppies

    I know it's not new, I'm still against it, and the effect it's having is increasing over time.

    Half the Gamergate stuff is really about there being no communication between the creators and the audience. There's just a yawning silence people fill with their own narrative.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 14/08/2015

    @I_Am_CatButler

    It's not really a harsh reality of the internet. There was no mob clamouring for his removal (for a change).

    It's a harsh reality of the ongoing corporatisation of everything. It's why all our politicians can only talk in soundbytes, and all our sportsmen can only talk in soundbytes, and now even our game developers. Generally in both of those fields there has been a bit of a push back against this as it renders everyone remote and unrelatable, which breeds hostility. Just look at Corbyn-mania.

    I understand the reality, what I don't understand is the response. Shouldn't we be pushing back against it here too? Calling him an idiot implies you think he is wrong, that he should change instead of the situation.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 14/08/2015

    @I_Am_CatButler

    And you heartily support that, and that's fine.

    And I think it's having an increasingly negative impact on the games industry and they could all do to just loosen up a little, and that's fine too.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 14/08/2015

    @scuffpuppies

    I've known people get the heave ho for leaking stuff and had no sympathy at all.

    Criticising company policy or management? That would be pretty ill advised. That would definitely fall under CatButler's 'this is not a private conversation you jackass!'

    But just talking candidly about the realities of how stuff works?
    Reply +2
  • PlugMonkey 14/08/2015

    @redcrayon

    I understand why he got into trouble, but I would expect the reaction from the audience to be "that's wrong!" not "serves him right!"
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 14/08/2015

    @I_Am_CatButler

    If he'd turned up on a radio or TV programme and spoke in his role as a Nintendo employee in that way he'd expect to be disciplined.
    In what way? Explaining the realities of the industry and his job?

    If he worked at McVities, went on Radio 4 and explained why they don't export Jaffa Cakes to Swaziland, I don't think he'd get sacked.

    I don't think this is about him not understanding the internet being public.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 14/08/2015

    @I_Am_CatButler

    Yet another idiot discovers that when you talk to 'the internet' it isn't harmless banter between friends, it's broadcasting to the world. If it isn't your actual job at least have the sense to do it anonymously.
    That's just such an awful sentiment.

    We are increasingly in a situation where the people who play games have absolutely no knowledge or understanding of the people who make games.

    It's creating an unhealthy relationship where no-one dare stick their head over the parapet for fear of having it shot off by the mob, and now this chap has got it in the back from his employer.

    You're saying he's an idiot, and that no-one should speak to the public unless they are the officially appointed corporate spokesperson. That's so horrible! Is that really what you want? To only ever hear from the officially appointed, on-message PR consultant?

    He didn't say anything offensive or even critical. His sacking is a ludicrous over-reaction.
    Reply +3
  • Mooncrest developers cancel their Kickstarter

  • PlugMonkey 12/08/2015

    @sam5959

    Linky

    My god, it's bad...
    Reply +1
  • Zombi will have more melee weapons, but cuts multiplayer

  • PlugMonkey 31/07/2015

    Why do all zombie games have a nail bat? Terrible idea for an anti-zombie weapon, guaranteed to get stuck in the first zombie you hit with it.

    Get yourself a crowbar.
    Reply +32
  • Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons dated for PS4 and Xbox One

  • PlugMonkey 31/07/2015

    @MattEvansC3

    Heh heh. Thatís certainly one possibility, although the girlfiend was equally unimpressed and when I defended the selection based on it being widely critically acclaimed, her fairly brutal assessment was ďthose people must have very small soulsĒ ;P so I donít think itís entirely down to me being an emotionally stunted yobbo.

    It hit me like the emotional equivalent of a jump-scare, no real weight behind it. I think that was either because it was so at odds with the logic of the rest of the world, or because we went to pains to try and avoid finishing off the spider, which left it all feeling a bit railroaded.

    Probably mostly the latter. A similar thing ruined Spec Ops: The Line for me.

    To use the humour analogy, I think they fluffed the punchline and while the effort was admirable, I think we can aspire to do it (even) better. Thereís a lot more to a really affecting tragedy than just Sad Thing Happens At The End, and Brothers missed more than it hit for me.

    Your humour analogy Iím definitely going to keep. Why do we readily accept that people find different things funny, but then think everyone should find the same things sad? We shouldnít, and I shanít in future. Itís not really about soul size or engagement, we just have different senses of sad.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 31/07/2015

    @MattEvansC3

    Actually, the way the control scheme is weaved into it in that way is pretty damn cool. I'd forgotten about that, and it really was very clever. Well reminded.

    However, the fact that I'd completely forgotten that happened speaks volumes about how disengaged I had become from the story it was weaving into by that point.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 30/07/2015

    @internisus

    Remind me which bit you mean?
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 30/07/2015

    The ending really isn't that fantastic.

    The world, on the other hand, was wonderful. Buy it for that, and then try not to feel too let down by the cheap and slightly nonsensical ending that people keep raving about. That's my advice.
    Reply -5
  • The strange joy of failure in Pandemic

  • PlugMonkey 27/07/2015

    @Bander

    FFS. If you can't lose, you're not even talking about something that should be called a game!
    Amen! A game is something with variable outcomes. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. That's what makes it so you can play it again, and again, and again finding different ways to win and lose. That is what makes it a game

    The most widely accepted model for videogames at the moment gives one single outcome that is reached (eventually) by all players. They're not really, by the strictest of definitions, games at all. They are illusions of games. They create the impression that you are playing and winning at a game, but there isn't actually any game there. Gameplay, but no game.

    At the moment, I'm really hungry for more game in my games. I don't think I'm alone. I think that's why roguelike and survival games are so popular right now.

    More of that. More assymetrical multiplayer wotnot. And more losing and starting again. Losing really can be so much more fun. It's the savoury to victory's sweet.
    Reply +2
  • An hour with Randy Pitchford

  • PlugMonkey 26/07/2015

    @ronorra

    Well, that either hit the nail on the head, or rambled incoherently around the nail for two and half minutes before I turned it off.

    It's all very subjective, I suppose.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 26/07/2015

    @Shary_Phil

    Also I hate Randy because
    "We could of been"
    he can't spell.
    Randy was talking, not writing...
    Reply +2
  • PlugMonkey 24/07/2015

    @tennocyte

    At least he didn't start by asking if he was a pathological liar...

    There's so much truth in this interview.

    When you say you've heard a lot about it, don't forget you've not actually heard anything, because you've heard speculation and noise.
    This is true.

    But the most simple and obvious answer is, they just made a game I didn't like. They tried to make a game I liked and I didn't like it.
    This is so true.

    Here's the thing: there are going to be folks for whom it doesn't matter what is said, it doesn't actually matter what the truth is. There are people who have decided I'm a villain and they're going to continue that narrative.
    if those things are the truth and you're not accepting them, then you don't want the truth. You just want me to say what you want to hear.
    This is true, and sums up 99% of the people commenting and comment voting on this thread.

    Gaming really is astonishing for the divide between how much the 'fans' think they know, and how much they actually know about how any of this crap is created. Astonishing.

    Neg away. It won't make any of it any less true.
    Reply +5
  • Gabriel Knight: Sins of the Fathers remake now on iOS and Android

  • PlugMonkey 24/07/2015

    @Maleta

    I read an interview somewhere about how they also auditioned Tim Curry for The Joker, and his version was just too scary.

    Two really, really top voice actors.
    Reply 0
  • Hearthstone's next expansion is all about the Hero Power

  • PlugMonkey 24/07/2015

    @Alnilam

    by pointing out the ranking system that make it pretty much impossible to never win, and that many many people have shown that 100% F2P is very viable.
    I'm pretty sure I never said that free players never win. And I'm pretty sure I said that playing free is viable, just like it is in all the F2P games people are prejudiced against.

    In fact, I'm pretty sure my argument is that is one of the ways they are the same.

    'At a disadvantage' does not mean 'never win'. It means 'at a disadvantage'. I've even said that you are only occasionally at a disadvantage. That not withstanding, the game still monetises people by placing them at a(n OCCASIONAL! MINOR!) disadvantage and letting people pay to get past it.

    I 100% understand that your gf has not done this. That doesn't make it not there. It's there.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 24/07/2015

    @Gigaflop

    Actually you did:

    "I don't get how paying to avoid waiting is worse than paying to avoid losing."
    Oh, Jesus wept. I quite clearly didn't mean "pay to stop losing ALTOGETHER".

    Some cards in Hearthstone are better than others. You're seriously telling me a Legendary card isn't better, it's only different?

    You don't need to spend any money, you just play a little
    Your concept of 'a little' is flawed.

    I either need to spend money or play at a disadvantage until I have what another player could have just bought.

    Even if all the cards were equal, certain combinations are stronger and I would be at a disadvantage until I either bought or ground my way to those better combinations.

    This is irrefutable. How come people have such a hard job admitting it's there with a game they like, oh wait, I get it.

    I'm not saying it's a bad game, I'm saying this is how the monetisation works, and it's the same as how the monetisation works in other F2P games people are needlessly prejudiced against.

    The new cards blizz makes are not better. They are different.
    Whether they are better or different, they are still expensive.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 23/07/2015

    @Alnilam

    I know how both games work.

    CC makes you wait, HS makes you play at a disadvantage.

    HS never makes you wait, but then CC never makes you play at a disadvantage.

    Both make you pay to avoid the undesirable thing. Neither is 'better', neither is 'worse', and your girlfriend is doing exactly as well at HS without paying as I am doing at CC without paying.

    She doesn't mind the occasional unbalanced fight (and they are occasional, because most players are playing for free like her) and I don't mind occasionally running out of lives because my bus ride really isn't that long.

    They're the same.

    (Except that there is no expansion in CC that costs forty quid.)

    There is no reason to be prejudiced against other free to play games and not against Hearthstone. They are exactly the same beasts. Mostly good beasts, I think, because otherwise they quickly fail. If ever there is one succeeding, the great likelihood is they are offering a good experience at a good price, like Hearthstone is.
    Reply 0