Photek wrote:Trelliz, stop like. I know you’re laser focused on loot boxes and monetisation in games but now you are critical of games that don’t have loot boxes by assuming they were going to have them.
On the contrary, their lack of inclusion is an anomaly in forza games this gen.
Forza 5 was heavily criticised for "its increased grind, lower payout and higher cash shop prices" a process designed to encourage people to spend their way out of a deliberate problem which was then rolled back ONLY after enough of a stink was kicked up.Forza 6 snuck microtransactions in after several months (and the review period was over) so you could buy the blind-packs of 'mods' which were cards you could apply for bonuses in certain racesBattlefront 2 and its shitstorm happened at the end of 2017, Horizon 4 comes out in september 2018, enough time to yank out the monetisation but leave in all the bells and whistles they would have interacted with. The changes they made to things like the "wheelspins" which are lootboxes by any other name are a clear indication of this change. In Horizon 3 they had cars or cash only. In Horizon 4 they pad them out with clothes, horns and other pointless guff. This, combined with the live service model which relies on FOMO as a driving mechanism, you have to do X activities in a certain time or you won't get the shiny trinkets, the expansion of wheelspins with super wheelspins (3 things instead of 1 per "spin") makes it look very much like this was going to be monetised out the arse, maybe not at launch but afterwards, as the previous games have demonstrably done.
A further element to this is the Forza VIP pass, which dovetails this with the "games haven't gotten more expensive" fallacy. The VIP pass is a coin doubler - a F2P mechanic that on the surface gives players a helping hand in getting more in-game currency quicker, but also punishes anyone who DOESN'T buy it by leaving them in the 'slow lane' of progress, a deliberate mechanism of creating a problem and selling a solution. Also to continue the above trend remember when
Forza 7's VIP coin doubler originally lasted a finite number of races, but that too was pulled back after enough bad PR? They are as bad as anyone else at pushing for what they can get away with in terms of taking the piss and I fully expect them to try again with the new one if that is going for 'Games as a Service'.
Thinking about it, the entire Xbone launch lineup was pushing this as well. Does anyone remember Crimson Dragon? A game that was pasted as
"a neutered, rushed shell of a game devoid of any character, identity, or personality...thanks to design elements that reek of shallow, free-to-play, microtransaction-baiting mobile development habits. I also remember being called all kinds of things at the start of this generation when talking about Ryse, linking
this scary article about monetising game design and at the time saying:
I, 7 YEARS ago, wrote:The combination of grinding, microtransactions and gambling is a horrendous triumvirate of exploitation, and is only going to get worse.
It does feel like being a conspiracy nut when all of this is so blindingly obvious and out in the open, often announced to rapturous applause and record sales. Has the narrative that games need this stuff because they've become so expensive to make by companies who post massive profits which it pays next to no tax on and lays off staff in droves in the same breath becomes so ingrained? Games didn't use to have all this gooseberry fool and seeing them go this way is grotesque. To be clear, I don't object to the concept of paying for games, it is when those games are designed to outwardly encourage or subtly psychologically manipulate you to keep paying for the
same game is where I draw the line. I probably should have put TRIGGER WARNING: CRITICISING MICROSOFT at the start and I'm sure I'll get called mentally ill or that I can't "get my tiny mind" around some nuanced point why this is all fine again, but whatevs.