What the hell is happening with the video-game market?

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

Name a single game that doesn't have a cash shop that also gets free support after launch. I'll wait on that. Or hell, if it's so common, name several. Show how "common" this is.

And that is exactly what the cosmetics do, they sustain future development. Why does it really matter to you if the base game came with no cosmetics? (which, by the way, only the $40 version doesn't, the $60 ones all come with several Origins skins, and now also 10 loot boxes).

You're getting mad/bashing a game for doing exactly what is needed to sustain the game in the long run, while admitting they need something to sustain the game.

Again, I said, a cash-shop would've been acceptable AFTER the initial package was sold. Instead they took literally every unlockable item in the game and put it into said cash-shop system from the outset despite charging a premium cost for a game that barely amounted to more than half of what you'd get in the newest Battlefield.

To reiterate: Blizzard essentially carved away what little content players got to look forward to for their efforts in order to dangle it over their heads for financial gain while still making them eat the premium, upfront cost. No, that's not right and no they didn't NEED to do it this way to sustain the game by any means. Even independent developers don't have to operate like that let alone someone with as much financial backing as Blizzard/Activision.

You're making excuses for the inexcusable.

[Jester Joe]

Again, I said, a cash-shop would've been acceptable AFTER the initial package was sold. Instead they took literally every unlockable item in the game and put it into said cash-shop system from the outset despite charging a premium cost for a game that barely amounted to more than half of what you'd get in the newest Battlefield game.

They didn't though, there's several skins you can only get from buying the game. And honestly, what the hell would adding the cash shop system matter later? People would just get even more agitated, thinking "I worked for these skins, why can they just pay money for the chance!!". Mind you, that doesn't even address the fact that you never need to touch the shop if you play the game reasonably.

Also, yet again, Overwatch gets free updates, last I checked, Battlefield sells DLC for new content. Not quite the same.

They essentially carved away what little content players got to look forward to for their efforts to dangle over their head for financial gain while still making them eat the premium, upfront cost. No, that's not right and no they didn't NEED to do it this way to sustain the game by any means. Even independent developers don't have to operate like that let alone someone with as much financial backing as Blizzard/Activision.

Name in one way the cash shop "carved away content". Because it really, really didn't.

You're making excuses for the inexcusable.

And you're frustrated about nothing really. I get there are games that are screwed up with loot boxes (TF2 for a great example), but Overwatch actually does it alright. You can unlock literally ANYTHING in game through just normal playing. And yeah, there's holiday restricted skins, but at this point, we know roughly when each holiday event will start, and you can save your credits for just that.

The easier alternative is, if you hate the game that much, don't touch it. But don't go claiming it's "Only worth $20 or F2P", because go look at an actual F2P OW clone like Paladins and go compare, well, anything. The graphics, the polish, the server connections, the balancing, etc.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

They didn't though, there's several skins you can only get from buying the game. And honestly, what the hell would adding the cash shop system matter later? People would just get even more agitated, thinking "I worked for these skins, why can they just pay money for the chance!!". Mind you, that doesn't even address the fact that you never need to touch the shop if you play the game reasonably.



Name in one way the cash shop "carved away content". Because it really, really didn't.



And you're frustrated about nothing really. I get there are games that are screwed up with loot boxes (TF2 for a great example), but Overwatch actually does it alright. You can unlock literally ANYTHING in game through just normal playing. And yeah, there's holiday restricted skins, but at this point, we know roughly when each holiday event will start, and you can save your credits for just that.

I give up. I disagree, vehemently and I refuse to go on arguing about this because at this point, it's going in goddamn fucking circles.

I'm prepared to drop this hobby entirely if need be so please, by all means, continue to gobble and garble up this horseshit but I'm not going to legitimize it and my tolerance level for it is at an all-time, abysmal low.

[Jester Joe]

I give up. I disagree, vehemently and I refuse to go on arguing about this because at this point, it's going in goddamn fucking circles.

I'm prepared to drop this hobby entirely if need be so please, by all means, continue to gobble and garble up this horseshit but I'm not going to legitimize it and my tolerance level for it is at an all-time, abysmal low.

You're not making any points by repeatedly just insulting the game is the point.

But it's not helping when people continue to complain about literally every single situation of loot boxes without pointing out the ACTUAL bad cases of it, like Valve, and rather sit there and rail on Blizzard for god forbid, allowing all their loot boxes to be farmed in game if you wanted, but adding a cash shop because they have long term plans for the game and need to support that via free updates.

But go on, tell me the next time TF2 even decides to have an update while you continue to preach how bad Overwatch is when they've been updating almost every other month at least.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

You're not making any points by repeatedly just insulting the game is the point.

But it's not helping when people continue to complain about literally every single situation of loot boxes without pointing out the ACTUAL bad cases of it, like Valve, and rather sit there and rail on Blizzard for god forbid, allowing all their loot boxes to be farmed in game if you wanted, but adding a cash shop because they have long term plans for the game and need to support that via free updates.

But go on, tell me the next time TF2 even decides to have an update while you continue to preach how bad Overwatch is when they've been updating almost every other month at least.

How did I insult the game?

Me saying it's a piece of shit and Mei looks like a hideous, overly clothed doughnut roll of a character design are insults. I made factual fucking observations about it's size. About its costs and how it treats its progression/unlocks. It's a matter of whether or not you agree it warrants a full price-tag and more importantly, whether or not you agree with a glorified gambling system that hoards all the unlocks from the outset especially when you've already paid your entry free.

The facts are the facts, what we're arguing about is more of the philo-goddamn-mother-fucking-sophical aspect of whether or not the game is a proposition of fair value.

I argue it isn't. You argue it is. We're at an impasse but the problem is, the consumer base and the industry are clearly leaning your way and it's only going to get worse as a result. Hence why I'm prepared to bail on the hobby and why I'm getting worn out debating. Fact is, I actually like Overwatch as a game. I just think everything about how they monetized it is absolute bullshit and they could've done it much better and fairer for their customers without shooting themselves in the foot while they were at it.

Greed always wins until it doesn't.

[IIamaKing]

Absolutely not.

You really think with the amount of money they put into the game it's only worth $20? That's just horribly incorrect. Maybe you'd have a point if they didn't keep updating the game for free, but even then, no.

Funnily enough there are at LEAST 3 other Overwatch clones, that do just as good of a job at being a team based shooter as OW, that are free or 20$. Blizz gets away with overcharging for what should be FtP with Microtransactions because its blizz.

[Jester Joe]

How did I insult the game?

Me saying it's a piece of shit and Mei looks like a hideous, overly clothed doughnut roll of a character design are insults. I made factual fucking observations about it's size. About its costs and how it treats its progression/unlocks. It's a matter of whether or not you agree it warrants a full price-tag and more importantly, whether or not you agree with a glorified gambling system that hoards all the unlocks from the outset especially when you've already paid your entry free.

The facts are the facts, what we're arguing about is more of the philo-goddamn-mother-fucking-sophical aspect of whether or not the game is a proposition of fair value.

I argue it isn't. You argue it is. We're at an impasse but the problem is, the consumer base and the industry are clearly leaning your way and it's only going to get worse as a result. Hence why I'm prepared to bail on the hobby and why I'm getting worn out debating. Fact is, I actually like Overwatch as a game. I just think everything about how they monetized it is absolute bullshit and they could've done it much better and fairer for their customers without shooting themselves in the foot while they were at it.

Greed always wins until it doesn't.

Generally, when you say things like "continue to gobble and garble up this horseshit" in regards to a game, it's not exactly casting it in a kind view.

And maybe they're leaning that way on Overwatch because it actually is pretty fair. I mean, even your own response was basically just "I wouldn't have minded if they did it later", but why does that really matter? I mean, part of the reason skins were added if you followed the beta testing, was because players were complaining there wasn't a sense of progression. And then from there, yeah, it was added as an optional way that you could just buy boxes if you want.

That was nothing on the same level as TF2 that would dump crates into your bags that you couldn't do anything with unless you felt like paying $2.50 to open a SINGLE crate that could just include a weapon you already have. Oh, but it has an extremely small chance to be an unusual hat, which you could sell for $150! (At least, when the game was bigger).

That's my issue here. I see people complaining about Overwatch saying "It could be better, this is just going downhill!" while ignoring that Overwatch IS the better. It might not be perfect, but it's actually going back UP the hill from games like TF2/Dota 2. And no one can take a second to realize that, and be supportive of that kind of movement.

Funnily enough there are at LEAST 3 other Overwatch clones, that do just as good of a job at being a team based shooter as OW, that are free or 20$. Blizz gets away with overcharging for what should be FtP with Microtransactions because its blizz.

Subjective of course, but in terms of balance/polish? Not really, nothing can come close to Overwatch since Blizzard is supporting it. I mean, I enjoy playing a F2P "Overwatch" myself, Paladins. But the game is a mess. You have to TRY to miss shots. I'm not sure what's going on there.

[unbound]

Greetings champions. This is a small rant that I'll be making, so #1 - don't take things too seriously, 'cause I'm pissed off, #2, feel free to disagree/agree with me, #3 - I'd be grateful if you contribute with the thread with your opinion.

So, okay. Here it goes:

What the actual fuck is happening with our video-game industry? We're slowly melting into some kind of monster, made of money and greedyness. "Welcome to the real world, kiddo" is something that I hear all the time, but really? Are you okay with these kinds of stuff?

Overall, we have consolidation of software developers overall that largely happened over the past 15 years. While we may want to look at video games as different than other industries (and, certain aspects of the video game industry are unique), what you are seeing is the result of large businesses being, well, large businesses.

The primary job of upper management of any corporation is to maximize profit to the shareholders. Industry is just the methods by which you accomplish that maximizing of profit. BTW, that isn't idle speculation on my part, but something that was hammered into us as part of my MBA. (There gets to be some interesting scenarios that business decisions don't make sense to most people, but make sense when you keep this in mind)

All of the things you are complaining about are the results of pushing towards maximizing that profit. Most of those things can be stopped by recognizing that and responding to the root cause...don't buy that stuff and they will stop doing it. You can't just say, "Please stop it" because every corporation on this planet only really cares about what your wallet has to say.

Competition can help, but you'll find that most corporations don't compete head-to-head very vigorously. Most industries have a handful of corporations that dominate their markets...making them oligopolies and not competitive industries in a meaningful way (basically, they are more than happy to just nibble at each other's market share rather than try to completely dominate since they make substantial money as it is, and getting to near monopolistic levels won't get them a whole lot more profit while substantially increasing the risk that the government will actually do something).

So, competition is something to hope for, but not something to count on. The only answer is to use your wallet and don't buy into it, and educate enough people to stop doing it themselves so that there is a fiscal impact...that is when things will change.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

Generally, when you say things like "continue to gobble and garble up this horseshit" in regards to a game, it's not exactly casting it in a kind view.

And maybe they're leaning that way on Overwatch because it actually is pretty fair. I mean, even your own response was basically just "I wouldn't have minded if they did it later", but why does that really matter? I mean, part of the reason skins were added if you followed the beta testing, was because players were complaining there wasn't a sense of progression. And then from there, yeah, it was added as an optional way that you could just buy boxes if you want.

That was nothing on the same level as TF2 that would dump crates into your bags that you couldn't do anything with unless you felt like paying $2.50 to open a SINGLE crate that could just include a weapon you already have. Oh, but it has an extremely small chance to be an unusual hat, which you could sell for $150! (At least, when the game was bigger).

That's my issue here. I see people complaining about Overwatch saying "It could be better, this is just going downhill!" while ignoring that Overwatch IS the better. It might not be perfect, but it's actually going back UP the hill from games like TF2/Dota 2. And no one can take a second to realize that, and be supportive of that kind of movement.



Subjective of course, but in terms of balance? Not really, nothing can come close to Overwatch since Blizzard is supporting it. I mean, I enjoy playing a F2P "Overwatch" myself, Paladins. But the game is a mess. You have to TRY to miss shots. I'm not sure what's going on there.

Again, it's too expensive for what it is and the loot box system needs to go.

Want to allow people to gradually earn unlocks? Sure. Want to add a price tag to them as well for quicker satisfaction? Sure. Just firstly, lower that initial entry fee. Sorry, there is nothing there that warrants forty to sixty dollars. Sell it for about twenty because the bulk of your money, is going to end up coming from your store anyway. Secondly, don't base your entire store scheme around gambling. That's shady. It's morally questionable and brings out the worst in people. Allow them to simply focus on progressing towards a specific unlock and or alternatively, buy it outright.

You get a little bit of the upfront cost return WHILE having a system in place that'll assure future profits. The better and more skins/unlocks you have, the more those profits will inevitably climb much like with LoL.

I cannot and will not look at a sixty dollar price-tag for the console players concerning a game that could fit on a thimble of Battlefield 1's content at release as warranted and I will never, EVER, see cleverly disguised gambling schemes as an okay thing because their twisted nature is two-fold:

1) Increase income from people trying to get X but having to purchase multitudes of boxes just to get what they want.

2) It's still gambling as mentioned. We know how that goes and how destructive it can be for given people. It's simply not necessary.

[Saucerian]

Deceptive release / pricing practices, casino-fying games both in gameplay and reward design, whales / oblivious buyers, gaming gone mainstream, ****ing smart phones.

In a nutshell, I think.

[Jester Joe]

Again, it's too expensive for what it is and the loot box system needs to go.

There is no supporting proof to this besides you not liking it, and you don't have to touch the cash store.

Want to allow people to gradually earn unlocks? Sure. Want to add a price tag to them as well for quicker satisfaction? Sure. Just firstly, lower that initial entry fee. Sorry, there is nothing there that warrants forty to sixty dollars. Sell it for about twenty because the bulk of your money, is going to end up coming from your store anyway. Secondly, don't base your entire store scheme around gambling. That's shady. It's morally questionable and brings out the worst in people. Allow them to simply focus on progressing towards a specific unlock and or alternatively, buy it outright.

That's ignoring that the $40 amount IS the lower fee. It's still a AAA game, and very rarely do they have $40 entry points. And I highly doubt a bulk of their money comes from the store anyway, since there's no motivation to buy boxes outside of maybe "Last day of the event, I'll buy 10 boxes for fun".

And you CAN buy the specific unlock with in game currency. I'm not sure why you're dismissing that so heavily.

You get a little bit of the upfront cost return WHILE having a system in place that'll assure future profits. The better and more skins/unlocks you have, the more those profits will inevitably climb much like with LoL.

Except LoL is an outright cash grab with how little you get to start. Why you would consider that fine just because it's "Free to play" while Overwatch seems to be Satan incarnate to you is beyond me.

I cannot and will not look at a sixty dollar price-tag for the console players concerning a game that could fit on a thimble of Battlefield 1's content at release as warranted and I will never, EVER, see cleverly disguised gambling schemes as an okay thing because their twisted nature is two-fold:

Except Battlefield doesn't get free content over the ENTIRE LIFE CYCLE of that game. Unlike Overwatch.

[IIamaKing]

Subjective of course, but in terms of balance/polish? Not really, nothing can come close to Overwatch since Blizzard is supporting it. I mean, I enjoy playing a F2P "Overwatch" myself, Paladins. But the game is a mess. You have to TRY to miss shots. I'm not sure what's going on there.

And this line of thinking is why blizzard gets away with what to do. The other titles HAVE to sell themselves at their actual value, blizz gets to tack on a premium because "no one polishes like blizz". Its hokum.

Thats not to say the others in the space ARE as polished I cant really speak, I played Paladins and it was pretty much the same experience as I had when playing OW. I noticed no major difference to justify the difference in cost.

[Aeula]

Sadly the video game industry is a triangle of Money, Time and Quality.

You can only choose two corners, the third has to be sacrificed.

Money - Make the game cheaply/on a budget
Time - Make the game quickly
Quality - Make the game good/high quality

Most companies are choosing money and time at the expense of quality.

The best games I've played tend to ignore the time factor and focus on quality and keeping within their budget so as not to go bankrupt half way through development.

The game takes longer as funds are slow to come in, but the end result is usually pretty good.

[Jester Joe]

And this line of thinking is why blizzard gets away with what to do. The other titles HAVE to sell themselves at their actual value, blizz gets to tack on a premium because "no one polishes like blizz". Its hokum.

Except it's true. Graphically, balancing, support, and well, almost everything is usually better.

You can try to claim it's "hokum", but when those "Overwatch" clones literally ripped characters right out of Overwatch ability wise, clearly they're doing something right.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

There is no supporting proof to this besides you not liking it, and you don't have to touch the cash store.

Do you just love getting hammered in the ass and apologizing for it after the fact? At least be honest about what gets you off! I mean, if that's your thing that's your thing but we need some transparency here to better establish motives.

That's ignoring that the $40 amount IS the lower fee. It's still a AAA game, and very rarely do they have $40 entry points. And I highly doubt a bulk of their money comes from the store anyway, since there's no motivation to buy boxes outside of maybe "Last day of the event, I'll buy 10 boxes for fun".

And you CAN buy the specific unlock with in game currency. I'm not sure why you're dismissing that so heavily.

Forty bucks for the PC, sixty for the consoles. It's still shite, either way you swing it from a sheer position of value.

Meanwhile, you're still legitimizing gambling by giving your own take on how you deal with the appeal. Classy. Guess everyone should just be you and get past their potential, obsessive natures. Which makes one wonder, why would Blizzard go with this system in the first place if it was that easy?

Additionally, in-game currency doesn't come readily and was only made more difficult by the recent update. I've actually sat at 500 coins for weeks on end. So much for that defense, right? They don't do shit for the players. These are delusions at best. It's more convenient and realistic to look at an update to the loot system and ask, "How is this fucking me over?" and you'll usually arrive at an easy answer.

Except LoL is an outright cash grab with how little you get to start. Why you would consider that fine just because it's "Free to play" while Overwatch seems to be Satan incarnate to you is beyond me.

...Because you can still play LoL, upfront, for free with a handful of heroes. Then when you want X or Y, you can go and buy it directly. This is a super simple concept that you seem utterly unable to grasp.

Except Battlefield doesn't get free content over the ENTIRE LIFE CYCLE of that game. Unlike Overwatch.

Yet it is still far larger and more content rich at its base than Overwatch a year later. Odd.

Your arguments are weak padawan. Try again.

[IIamaKing]

Yet it is still far larger and more content rich at its base than Overwatch a year later. Odd.

Your arguments are weak padawan. Try again.

Also remember they do get SP modes, something OW does not have. Now we can argue if its worthwhile or not, but it is content, hours of it, content that will never be in OW.

[GennGreymane]

If you feel the need to "speed the game up" by paying for ingame currency. There may be an issue and no, the issue is not with the gamer, its with the game design.

[Jester Joe]

Do you just love getting hammered in the ass and apologizing for it after the fact? At least be honest about what gets you off! I mean, if that's your thing that's your thing but we need some transparency here to better establish motives.

Try using actual arguments dude, rather than acting like this.

Forty bucks for the PC, sixty for the consoles. It's still shite, either way you swing it.

Clearly popular opinion proves otherwise, and yet again, the average price of a AAA game.

Meanwhile, you're still legitimizing gambling by giving your own take on how you deal with the appeal. Classy.

Not really, but nice try. Not sure how you get "Gambling!" out of "Play the game and ignore the cash shop".

Additionally, in-game currency isn't easy to come by and was only made more difficult by the recent update. I've actually sat at 500 coins for weeks on end at this time. So much for that defense, right?

Clearly you haven't played much then, since they upped the amount of coins you get from coin chests.

...Because you can still play LOL, upfront, for free with a handful of heroes. Then when you want X or Y, you can go and buy it directly.

Except you're screwed if your favorite free heroes rotate out, or are nerfed to oblivion. Or when you want to play competitively, but you need certain characters for each role because they're the strongest. (and then they proceed to get nerfed to oblivion because they're too strong!)

Yet it is still far larger and more content rich at its base than Overwatch a year later. Odd.

And oddly enough, Overwatch will still be around in another year or two, with more characters added. Where will Battlefield be at that point? On a completely different sequel that you have to fork over $60 for?

Your arguments are weak padawan. Try again.

Says the one who tried starting off their post with-

Do you just love getting hammered in the ass and apologizing for it after the fact? At least be honest about what gets you off! I mean, if that's your thing that's your thing but we need some transparency here to better establish motives.

yeah, forgive me if I don't take your word for granted.

[Quibble]

the cost to make AAA games increased to a point were a single failure could ruin a company, and even a success was meger profits so the industry adapted to one that generates more reliable revenue. If anything really helped usher in this new way of marketing / selling games its the mobile market. Cheap to produce games with optional purchases had higher profit margins (assuming here...) thus the larger companies took notice, esp their investors.

I loathe mobile games with payments, as they currently seem to be..
I honostly wouldn't mind spending some money once in a while, to boost my performance for a short while.. But the prices in mobile games, are fucking insane.

I rarely ever buy new games as they release nowadays. I'll wait myself and pay 1/3 the initial price for a Game of the Year edition after a year or two and just enjoy the full game in one go then, like I did with Shadow of Mordor, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Dragon Age: Inquisition and other games like it. Not to say I won't pay for games that I seem to be worth it, like Life is Strange: Before the Storm or other Blizzard titles (own all games except Destiny 2 with almost all respective DLCs - only lacking SC2 coop commanders)

I think you mean Tomb Raider? As Rise of the Tomb Raider is from Feb 2016 and still cost 49,99 euro.

Anyway, I do the same.
With AAA games I wait til they are atleast 19,99 euro before I buy. Prefferably I would wait for it to get even lower than that, but depends if I have other games to play, and how bad I want it.. Like I recently bought Styx: Shard of Darkness full price, because I had nothing else I wanted to play currently.

None AAA games I wait for them to go below 9,99 euro.

[Jester Joe]

Also remember they do get SP modes, something OW does not have. Now we can argue if its worthwhile or not, but it is content, hours of it, content that will never be in OW.

A whole 6 hours of it.
Maybe 15 if you replay for perfection.
https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=38001

If you feel the need to "speed the game up" by paying for ingame currency. There may be an issue and no, the issue is not with the gamer, its with the game design.

It really depends on the game.

Something like LoL? I would say yes, it's on the game design, because "speeding the game up" would actually benefit you far better because you can get more characters, which when it comes to MOBAs, more options is always better.

When said reward is purely cosmetic? That's on you if you feel the need to have it "now". And I'm guilty of that myself, like how I "needed" the Junkenstein skin. It's not Blizzard's fault for making a skin that I happened to love, it's mine if I decide to fork out money to try and get that skin faster.