Paid content in videogames (DLC, loot boxes, passes, currencies, "surprise mechanics" and - new! - pay more or wait!)

Exactly.
That was never a problem in, say, Half Life death match (which is still one of my best MP gaming experiences..).

Come to think of it. Bring back 20-30 minute death matches.
Everything these days has to have teams, objectives and rounds.

Give me thirty minutes of having a bunch of dudes in an arena with gooseberry fool loads of guns.

DOOM 2016 deathmatch doesn't count... It was gooseberry fool.

7256930752

OrangeRakoon wrote:
Hime wrote:I get what you're saying but is it any more fun to be killed by someone who has run to the rocket launcher than being killed by someone who has unlocked it over time? Does it make any real difference?

I think so. Seeing that someone can run and get the rocket launcher that quickly is something you can learn from and adapt to. You can try it yourself in the next game, or learn a way to counter it because you know it could happen in any game. In contrast, if it's an unlockable I can't learn from it and do it myself because it's impossible without having unlocked it, and there is less adaptation to it as a tactic that may be used against me because rather than being possible every game, it's only possible in games with a player who has unlocked it. That last point might seem like a strange distinction, but I think it increases the feeling of luck having an affect in the game, which in turn makes it feel more unfair. It feels less unfair to get killed with a rocket launcher if you know you can do it back.

Fair enough and some good points, my favourite multiplayer games have both classic pick up weapons in the level and RPG lite systems so I can see why you would prefer that style of game.

I made a bit of an apple and oranges comparison as in most games with progression you're just unlocking slightly different variations of gun types, there are no power weapons unlocked at the end. Obviously if you could go into a game of Halo with a rocket launcher you'd be at a massive advantage but the first sniper rifle available in CoD will take just as many shots to kill someone as the last one that you unlock.

OR is spot on. Extrinsic rewards shouldn't change how the game plays, but we've gotten so used to endless upgrade treadmills that it's become ok.

Hime wrote:the first sniper rifle available in CoD will take just as many shots to kill someone as the last one that you unlock.

It's good to know this - I haven't owned any of the modern COD games, only played them at friends, and I was under the impression that later guns were better. You do unlock more loadout space though right, and more/better perks?

I am also fine with progression in an MMO styled game. These aren't competitive games played in discrete matches, which I think is the difference.

I haven't played CoD in a while so can't comment on now, but when I dropped off the weapons did all have different stats. The ones you had at 1 were not the same as at 70 or whatever. Now, were they better or worse? That depends on playstyle, but I think it's safe to say from a pool of 1 of each weapon type to a pool of like 6 of each weapon type (as well as some more options like grenade launchers) at least one will be flat out statistically better on a latter unlock.

I think the one I remember was you start with the unguided RPG. Then later get one that locks onto drones and helicopters. Then one that can lock onto people or locations. So if I only have access to and RPG and my opponent has a Stinger, and we both launch a UAV, he has the advantage.

Met wrote:I haven't played CoD in a while so can't comment on now, but when I dropped off the weapons did all have different stats. The ones you had at 1 were not the same as at 70 or whatever. Now, were they better or worse? That depends on playstyle, but I think it's safe to say from a pool of 1 of each weapon type to a pool of like 6 of each weapon type (as well as some more options like grenade launchers) at least one will be flat out statistically better on a latter unlock.

I think the one I remember was you start with the unguided RPG. Then later get one that locks onto drones and helicopters. Then one that can lock onto people or locations. So if I only have access to and RPG and my opponent has a Stinger, and we both launch a UAV, he has the advantage.

The concept of a an unlockable side-grade is a lie. Choice is power.

danbo.vg wrote:But while many people equate free-to-play with pay-to-win, the latter does not require the former. The history of multiplayer FPS games since Modern Warfare came out has been a sordid one of XP bars and unlocked assault rifles - the later Battlefield games taking this to ridiculous heights by hiding essential equipment (anti-air missiles, revive paddles, ammo boxes) behind slow-burn XP mechanisms and introducing a lavishly-produced web application for the sole purposes of (badly) finding servers and tracking all the tiny bars you still need to fill. BF4 ups its ante further by introducing crates of random unlocks, purchasable by buying Slim Jims. (If I worked at EA, a regret I would take to my grave beside all the obvious ones is that this scheme was not called “Jim to Win”.)
All this offers an improvement to your toolset in exchange for your investment. And no, the concept of “sidegrades” is a lie. Even if half of these games were complex enough to have so many equipment options shoehorned in without one emerging as the clear superior, choice is power.

http://blog.danbo.vg/post/66271442677/paying-to-win

Winckle wrote:The difference with a steam sale is that it's not random (AFAIK).

Steam will pop up an advert "Cool Game 4 is 50% off", and if you want to buy Cool Game 4 you do.

It doesn't offer you to buy a random game that could be Cool Game 4, or Bland Game 7.

Yeah, I don't really think there is anything wrong with what Steam has done, it's just I feel like a bit of a chump. I haven't really played any games with loot creates in though so that's the only was I can really relate to this conversation.

they don't even bother fitting the lootboxes around the games theme now, it's just cards whatever. star wars... cards... car games... cards :lol:

the world needs Uno with lootcrates

Watching that video it is hard to argue that this lootbox craze has gone too far.

Was it EA who were pushing that weird short lived licencing thing last gen where if you wanted to buy a second hand game you had to pay £10 for a "pass".

captain red dog wrote:Watching that video it is hard to argue that this lootbox craze has gone too far.

Was it EA who were pushing that weird short lived licencing thing last gen where if you wanted to buy a second hand game you had to pay £10 for a "pass".

Yup.

I used to associate EA with all my favourite childhood games - the early FIFAs, Nuclear Strike, Populous, Command & Conquer, SimCity, Medal of Honour, The Sims, Battlefront etc.

Now all I see is a bunch of knobheads.

BID0 wrote:

This thumbnail offends me far more than lootcrates ever can

Looking at videos of mordor, battlefront, need for speed, forza 7 etc, they all start to look more and more like a single design singularity with largely similar and unimmersive UI, one where the actual gameplay seems secondary to managing all these cards, menus and currencies; that what you're actually doing moment to moment is merely facilitating box opening animations or various bars/numbers going up slowly. That to me is one of the worst parts of it; the core game is diluted or pushed to one side in favour of mo' money.

OrangeRakoon wrote:
BID0 wrote:

This thumbnail offends me far more than lootcrates ever can

EPIC FAIL ANGRY RANT

Belgium's gaming commission may classify Overwatch and Battlefront 2 as gambling, setting a precedent that other countries may follow.

This is what happens when publishers' hubris goes too far.

Go belgium!

Now hopefully everyone will quickly go "oh yeah so it is" and this gooseberry fool show can end.

Trelliz wrote:Belgium's gaming commission may classify Overwatch and Battlefront 2 as gambling, setting a precedent that other countries may follow.

This is what happens when publishers' hubris goes too far.

I was keeping an eye on Need for Speed Payback but, thankfully, my all-new, innovative approach of waiting for reviews is paying off. Some critics seem to be taking a similar viewpoint to Push Square:

Push Square wrote:Need for Speed Payback is a real-world example of microtransactions gone wrong. As an open world racer, the game’s inoffensively average – but when paired with its bafflingly bad progression system, it’s frankly an embarrassment. It’s scary to think that publishers are quite literally sabotaging their own games in pursuit of a bonus buck or two these days.

I can’t imagine wanting to wade through such a lousy approach even at a big discount.

Errkal wrote:Go belgium!...

I’m yelling Go Belgium!, too

.

Karl wrote:
OrangeRakoon wrote:
BID0 wrote:

This thumbnail offends me far more than lootcrates ever can

EPIC FAIL ANGRY RANT

Of all the youtubers out there with "EPIC" and "CRAZY" and "AWESOME" in their channel names, Angry Joe is actually one of the better ones. I'm not saying he's amazing but he does usually have a point when he gets, well, angry.

Angry Joe is f*cking awful. A cancerous channel.

Paid content in videogames (DLC, loot boxes, passes, currencies, "surprise mechanics" and - new! - pay more or wait!)

Who is online

Affiliates