• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Video Game Thread - $70 Zelda Expansion!

lol Reddit is so dumb. a bunch of whiners who preorder and buy the game anyway and just come to complain time and time again. EA doesn't give two fucks because everyone buys the game anyway.

I don't believe for a second that the launch-day pricing scheme was an error in valuation. it was just a classic negotiation tactic of Anchoring and they're playing the base like a fucking fiddle by "lowering" the cost (while lowering the reward system) so everyone grudgingly gets what they want with a phantom "win".

hqdefault.jpg


Buy Titanfall instead of the mediocre battlefield series
 
ImTheCaptain said:
lol Reddit is so dumb. a bunch of whiners who preorder and buy the game anyway and just come to complain time and time again. EA doesn't give two fucks because everyone buys the game anyway.

I don't believe for a second that the launch-day pricing scheme was an error in valuation. it was just a classic negotiation tactic of Anchoring and they're playing the base like a fucking fiddle by "lowering" the cost (while lowering the reward system) so everyone grudgingly gets what they want with a phantom "win".

hqdefault.jpg


Buy Titanfall instead of the mediocre battlefield series
Click to expand...

Except EA just bought Respawn, so good luck with Titanfall 3.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
lol Reddit is so dumb. a bunch of whiners who preorder and buy the game anyway and just come to complain time and time again. EA doesn't give two fucks because everyone buys the game anyway.

I don't believe for a second that the launch-day pricing scheme was an error in valuation. it was just a classic negotiation tactic of Anchoring and they're playing the base like a fucking fiddle by "lowering" the cost (while lowering the reward system) so everyone grudgingly gets what they want with a phantom "win".

Buy Titanfall instead of the mediocre battlefield series
Click to expand...

this is certainly one way of looking at it.
 
the post I linked to discussed a possible psychological rationale for people spending money on loot crates, so yeah.

you're not concerned that some of the games you've enjoyed and paid for are beginning to introduce micro-transactions with subsequent editions ... or in other cases are/have always been functionally structured around their consumption?
 
TenaciousKory said:
the post I linked to discussed a possible psychological rationale for people spending money on loot crates, so yeah.

you're not concerned that some of the games you've enjoyed and paid for are beginning to introduce micro-transactions, or are/have always been functionally structured around their consumption?
Click to expand...

no i hate lootboxing. period. I hate pretty much all non-narrative DLC purchase. I think you should pay $60 (or whatever) for a game with no content "locked" and buy additional quest/narrative if you want. That's how i grew up but i realize it's an antiquated view of the industry.

i don't have the luxury of time to play games as much as I did so I buy vastly fewer games. I also only play single-player stuff with transactions involving aesthetics-only purchases (skins and so forth). I do worry that my kid(s) will grow up in the world of micro transactions but the market (!) is there and unless people stop buying these games we're already past the event horizon.

If a person bought BFII (especially those involved in the "beta") and were surprised/dismayed at the final launch, they're a part of the problem.
 
I don't personally mind microtransactions for cosmetic items in games (Overwatch is obviously the golden standard for this, but from personal experience I think that Dota and Destiny 2 do it well). When it even has the illusion of being pay2win (and Rocket League has struggled with this at a very minor level in the past, IMO), I have a lot of problems with that, especially if we're talking about a full-priced game, and not a F2P "unlockable full experience" model.

I also think reading Kotaku over the past couple of years has made me a little less comfortable with even cosmetic microtransactions from a moral/ethical standpoint.
 
Last edited:
ImTheCaptain said:
they did, but that's not unusual. My point was support IPs that don't do the things you hate. Like you said, Blizzard vs EA, guys.
Click to expand...

The water's muddied there, too, though. It's getting increasingly tough to find major IPs that aren't getting bogged down by loot crates and/or microtransactions, which is sort of the problem. I mentioned Destiny 2 as a "good" example, but the game does still push microtransactions, and I don't think Activision's *other* major franchise buys them a lot of goodwill. I trust Blizzard, fine, but they've dipped their toes in the water in the past, both with Diablo 3 and Overwatch.

There are obviously different "levels" of bad, here; I don't think EA would ever dream of making a StarCraft II free to play. But I don't think loot crates are going anywhere, regardless of gamer support.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
they did, but that's not unusual. My point was support IPs that don't do the things you hate. Like you said, Blizzard vs EA, guys.
Click to expand...

Are you implying that Blizzard doesn't push microtransactions?
 
TenaciousKory said:
Are you implying that Blizzard doesn't push microtransactions?
Click to expand...

I think he was trying to lend nuance to discussion of the practice, which is fine. Blizzard certainly is among the "best" about it, like I've said. They make Overwatch crates easy to get without paying real money, and AFAIK none of the "coolest" shit is locked behind paywalls in that game. They're also historically super generous about content in game expansions, and were one of the first developers to offer a free online gaming platform for servers/matchmaking/communities, which was maintained for games wayyyyy after they stopped making money.
 
sure. that's fine. I guess I buy the spectrum approach. if you're going to nuance the discussion, though - it may help to understand that EA isn't even the worst offender. 2k's most recent games have driven the whole thing off a cliff. they're charging people to buy a free-to-play game.
 
TenaciousKory said:
sure. that's fine. I guess I buy the spectrum approach. if you're going to nuance the discussion, though - it may help to understand that EA isn't even the worst offender. 2k's most recent games have driven the whole thing off a cliff. they're charging people to buy a free-to-play game.
Click to expand...

which games are you talking about
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top