EA micro transactions in all our games!

  • 88 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by svenus97 (2289 posts) -

Oh you **** whiny **** Just don't buy it.

#52 Posted by ciorlandenis (331 posts) -

omfg, spend money on gamez ??? NEIN!!

#53 Posted by Shielder7 (5152 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shielder7"][QUOTE="BPoole96"]

Knew this would happy. Any money grabbing that gamers support in any way becomes the norm and eventually everyone will  just follow suit. Once the publishers decide they need even more money, they will just think of some new way to screw people over. I really won't be surprised if SP games start to have long grinds that will be annoying so the player will buy a shortcut DLC just to skip over it.

BPoole96

In other words paying for cheat codes and re spawns on the horizon.

We're already there

And The War Z makes you wait an hour to spawn again if you die unless you pay them money. You also lose any gear that you bought with real money for your character when he dies.

And let's not forget Capom selling Asura's Wrath "True Ending" as DLC

I meant on the horizon for EA
#54 Posted by GD1551 (9155 posts) -

Thanks PC gamers.

#55 Posted by McStrongfast (4271 posts) -
Ceeeelebrate good times come on!
#56 Posted by Heil68 (45197 posts) -
I dont mind, I just dont buy any of it.
#57 Posted by McStrongfast (4271 posts) -

Oh you **** whiny **** Just don't buy it.

svenus97

BECAUSE THAT HELPS WHEN EVERYONE ELSE IS BUYING IT

Well, best case scenario, it doesn't affect the game design at all. AND MONKEYS MIGHT FLY OUT OF MY BUTT.
Happy fun times ahead courtesy of Uncle Riccitiello.

#58 Posted by razgriz_101 (16871 posts) -
[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]All the major pubs have been doing it for ages, and if anyones really to blame for frivilous microtransactions its silly korean free mmo's.clyde46
Thing is though in FTP games, microtransactions are the only way for the devs to make money. I hate the fact thats its in a £40 game. They make you pay upfront then ask you to pay more once you get into the game.

its roots are their, the whole practice spawns from there EA's just using it in their product now..suddenly its all bad but its roots are traced back to there end of if anyone is to blame for microtransactions its games such as theres only now EA's got the tech and ideology to implement it in their products the now use it. All it is really is another revenue stream, which some people are suckers for and pay top dollar for unlocks, its really just an evolution of the cheat code and god fobid phonelines such as codemasters cheats and hints phone line.
#59 Posted by AntiType (6249 posts) -
I hope consumers do not buy into it. I am a huge SimCity fan, and I am NOT buying the new once since it is obviously gutted for DLC.
#60 Posted by svenus97 (2289 posts) -

[QUOTE="svenus97"]

Oh you **** whiny **** Just don't buy it.

McStrongfast

BECAUSE THAT HELPS WHEN EVERYONE ELSE IS BUYING IT

Well, best case scenario, it doesn't affect the game design at all. AND MONKEYS MIGHT FLY OUT OF MY BUTT.
Happy fun times ahead courtesy of Uncle Riccitiello.

If everyone is buying it then what's the problem...
#61 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -
I stopped buying EA games because I can't stand EA. I never bothered buying Mass Effect 3 or Battlefield 3 due to them being EA games. Well that and they aren't on Steam. I like having all my DD games in one place. I have no desire to deal with origin. At this point, the only way I will buy an EA game is if it is the game of the year edition that includes all the DLC for the game and at a cheap price of $20 or less.
#62 Posted by Rattlesnake_8 (18414 posts) -
i don't mind if they do it, I won't buy their games. I didn't buy Dead Space 3 and i wont support any future nickle and diming. Day 1 dlc? No thanks. On disc dlc? No thanks. Gamers need to use their money to show companies what they will and won't put up with.
#63 Posted by Animal-Mother (26962 posts) -

It's a shame people will miss out of good games for something they don't even have to buy into.

#64 Posted by AmnesiaHaze (5683 posts) -
[QUOTE="AmnesiaHaze"]well its just preference , you cant say its right or wrong to purchase DLC , if i spent 60$ already why not add a 10$ extra to get new stuff provided i like the game, if you say you could afford then it means you dont want it (enough)Shielder7
If you cannot see the principle, and how this is going to affect the game in a negative way through your cloud smoke of arrogance we have nothing more to discuss.

you may be affected in a negative way because you want it for free, but the devs got cash for future investments and i did recieve cool weapons to play with, its a win-win for us , but i understand why you feel left out ...
#65 Posted by Miroku32 (8666 posts) -
Shame some people fail to see why this is becoming a big problem. That argument that you don't have to buy the DLC if you don't want to is getting old.
#66 Posted by Animal-Mother (26962 posts) -
Shame some people fail to see why this is becoming a big problem. That argument that you don't have to buy the DLC if you don't want to is getting old. Miroku32
But the problem is it's the truth. I know it's beating a dead horse. But you don't have to buy anything.
#67 Posted by KillzoneSnake (1751 posts) -

I will not buy anymore games from EA. I hope other people do this as well. Don't show support! Plus EA horrible at making games :lol:

#68 Posted by Miroku32 (8666 posts) -

In the long run publishers like EA will remove even more content from the games and charge them as "DLC".

For example, in the past new weapons, skins and stuff like that were unlockables. Now most of them are DLC.

Sooner or later you will see EA will follow Crapcom and release the real ending of a game as a DLC, or lock the multiplayer content and force you to pay it if you want to play.

Sure, you don't have to buy the real ending or the multiplayer part or anything but it is amazing how people allow companies like EA or Crapcom remove parts of the games that were once standard to have in the full package.

#69 Posted by Jack-Burton (2303 posts) -
People will just eat it up like all terrible practices when EA sticks this on there favorite games. Bu..... bu.... bu...... it doesn't affect your game, fine bend over and take it and bend over and take the next terrible scheme they will dream up, because they realize you won't say anything. You Pay your $60 soon all dlc will be micro transactions $1 for this skin, $1 for that unlock and you ass will be so sore from the pounding EA has been giving you, you just wont care any more. Soon they will be stealing your blue eyed girls just like David Lo Pan and you will just sit back and take that too I bet.
#70 Posted by Moriarity_ (1349 posts) -
I already have more than enough reason to not buy anything from EA. This is just reinforcing my decision.
#71 Posted by McStrongfast (4271 posts) -

[QUOTE="McStrongfast"]

[QUOTE="svenus97"]

Oh you **** whiny **** Just don't buy it.

svenus97

BECAUSE THAT HELPS WHEN EVERYONE ELSE IS BUYING IT

Well, best case scenario, it doesn't affect the game design at all. AND MONKEYS MIGHT FLY OUT OF MY BUTT.
Happy fun times ahead courtesy of Uncle Riccitiello.



If everyone is buying it then what's the problem...

When it brings in enough revenue for it to be a profitable venture, smartypants. Not literally everyone. I didn't buy Dead Space 3 and no microstransactions in ME3, FIFA or Tiger Woods, and look where we are. I can try to be vigilant for myself, but I'm not the only consumer out there am I?

When you're designing games around a business model which may benefit from making the game worse for those who don't pay, then that is an issue. Game design becoming more about manipulating people into upping companies' bottom lines than "good" design.

Currently it's theoretically a bad thing, which could very easily go dark side. It's essentially about trusting companies to not get tempted to go down that path. Let me reintroduce you two, THIS IS ELECTRONIC ARTS. This is Real Racing 3.

So that's the problem.

 

#72 Posted by The_Gaming_Baby (6337 posts) -

I think it's a ripoff and I refuse to buy anything of the sort

#73 Posted by svenus97 (2289 posts) -

[QUOTE="svenus97"][QUOTE="McStrongfast"] BECAUSE THAT HELPS WHEN EVERYONE ELSE IS BUYING IT

Well, best case scenario, it doesn't affect the game design at all. AND MONKEYS MIGHT FLY OUT OF MY BUTT.
Happy fun times ahead courtesy of Uncle Riccitiello.

McStrongfast



If everyone is buying it then what's the problem...

When it brings in enough revenue for it to be a profitable venture, smartypants. Not literally everyone. I didn't buy Dead Space 3 and no microstransactions in ME3, FIFA or Tiger Woods, and look where we are. I can try to be vigilant for myself, but I'm not the only consumer out there am I?

When you're designing games around a business model which may benefit from making the game worse for those who don't pay, then that is an issue. Game design becoming more about manipulating people into upping companies' bottom lines than "good" design.

Currently it's theoretically a bad thing, which could very easily go dark side. It's essentially about trusting companies to not get tempted to go down that path. Let me reintroduce you two, THIS IS ELECTRONIC ARTS. This is Real Racing 3.

So that's the problem.

 

It's very sad that you missed on a good game like DS3 because you have an irrational fear of completely optional micro-transactions. Oh, and, you can buy stuff with an in-game currency as well... There is nothing wrong with micro-transactions, especially since all of it is basically cosmetic. Refusing to buy a game because it has m-t in it is like refusing to buy a car because it can come in different colors.
#74 Posted by Shottayouth13- (6808 posts) -
.99c to buy a different colour shoe in fifa.
#75 Posted by Blue_Shield (2610 posts) -

It depends on how they use it.

If it is just paid cheat codes, that's fine.

However, if it evolves into freemium model (e.g. Jetpack Joyride), where it's unrealatistic to have real progression without micro transactions, then yes, that would be unexcusable.

#76 Posted by KungfuKitten (21139 posts) -

If I'm trying to play the game and it blatandly states "buy this!" or "if only you had bought this!" then I want a refund.
I had that issue with Sleepy Dogs.

If it's in the launcher I don't feel that bad about it, but if I'm in the game, I'm in the fricking game. So let me be.

#77 Posted by GeForce- (308 posts) -

I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

#78 Posted by McStrongfast (4271 posts) -

[QUOTE="McStrongfast"]

[QUOTE="svenus97"]

If everyone is buying it then what's the problem...svenus97

When it brings in enough revenue for it to be a profitable venture, smartypants. Not literally everyone. I didn't buy Dead Space 3 and no microstransactions in ME3, FIFA or Tiger Woods, and look where we are. I can try to be vigilant for myself, but I'm not the only consumer out there am I?

When you're designing games around a business model which may benefit from making the game worse for those who don't pay, then that is an issue. Game design becoming more about manipulating people into upping companies' bottom lines than "good" design.

Currently it's theoretically a bad thing, which could very easily go dark side. It's essentially about trusting companies to not get tempted to go down that path. Let me reintroduce you two, THIS IS ELECTRONIC ARTS. This is Real Racing 3.

So that's the problem.

 

It's very sad that you missed on a good game like DS3 because you have an irrational fear of completely optional micro-transactions. Oh, and, you can buy stuff with an in-game currency as well... There is nothing wrong with micro-transactions, especially since all of it is basically cosmetic. Refusing to buy a game because it has m-t in it is like refusing to buy a car because it can come in different colors.

You're the one who said "don't like don't buy it". Now you're telling me "don't like it buy it"?

I didn't buy Dead Space 3 because I don't particularly care for Dead Space. If I did I probably would've been disappointed by it for other reasons.

There's nothing irrational about being concerned about where things are heading with this stuff. I'm not talking about Dead Space 3, I've been told EA didn't cross the line with that game. But I think it's foolhardy to believe that they never would. Because this is Electronic Arts and this is Real Racing 3.

#79 Posted by Mr_BillGates (3186 posts) -

Clearly inspired by those MMO item malls and TF2 hats. PC, the plague that continues to hurt the gaming industry.

#80 Posted by Ly_the_Fairy (8652 posts) -

I haven't bought an EA game in such a long time because they do this kind of stuff.

#81 Posted by lamprey263 (24208 posts) -
I don't get why people are so upset by this, the microtransaction thing is a good way for EA to make money on impatient gamers, people who want better weapons, armor, supplies, without earning it in the game, screw them if they can't play a game the way it was meant to, and Dead Space 3 through the salvage bots gets you points to use for microtransactions that don't require paying actual money, so you don't really need to pay money if you don't want to.
#82 Posted by soulitane (13603 posts) -
[QUOTE="Miroku32"]Shame some people fail to see why this is becoming a big problem. That argument that you don't have to buy the DLC if you don't want to is getting old. Animal-Mother
But the problem is it's the truth. I know it's beating a dead horse. But you don't have to buy anything.

I don't think the argument is about not buying it, because obviously you don't have to buy the DLC. I think it more comes down to, where will this end? Will they start putting this into MP games (I know they already have) and make it pay to win, ie giving people who pay weapons which other people can't even unlock. Or if they make the SP so hard a lot of people will either need to tediously grind their way through if they don't want to pay. Obviously that was a quite bad slippery slope argument, but it kind of gets across the point.
#83 Posted by Slow_Show (2153 posts) -

Cliff Bleszinski sums this all up nicely, continues to raise questions about why someone so intelligent went by "Dude Huge" and "Cliffy B" for so long.

#84 Posted by svenus97 (2289 posts) -

[QUOTE="svenus97"][QUOTE="McStrongfast"]When it brings in enough revenue for it to be a profitable venture, smartypants. Not literally everyone. I didn't buy Dead Space 3 and no microstransactions in ME3, FIFA or Tiger Woods, and look where we are. I can try to be vigilant for myself, but I'm not the only consumer out there am I?

When you're designing games around a business model which may benefit from making the game worse for those who don't pay, then that is an issue. Game design becoming more about manipulating people into upping companies' bottom lines than "good" design.

Currently it's theoretically a bad thing, which could very easily go dark side. It's essentially about trusting companies to not get tempted to go down that path. Let me reintroduce you two, THIS IS ELECTRONIC ARTS. This is Real Racing 3.

So that's the problem.

 

McStrongfast

It's very sad that you missed on a good game like DS3 because you have an irrational fear of completely optional micro-transactions. Oh, and, you can buy stuff with an in-game currency as well... There is nothing wrong with micro-transactions, especially since all of it is basically cosmetic. Refusing to buy a game because it has m-t in it is like refusing to buy a car because it can come in different colors.

You're the one who said "don't like don't buy it". Now you're telling me "don't like it buy it"?

I didn't buy Dead Space 3 because I don't particularly care for Dead Space. If I did I probably would've been disappointed by it for other reasons.

There's nothing irrational about being concerned about where things are heading with this stuff. I'm not talking about Dead Space 3, I've been told EA didn't cross the line with that game. But I think it's foolhardy to believe that they never would. Because this is Electronic Arts and this is Real Racing 3.

My "don't like it, don't buy it" refered to micro-transactions not the game itself.

#85 Posted by Jack-Burton (2303 posts) -
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/187939/EA_backtracks_on_microtransactions_in_all_future_games.php#.UTd3ATf7Qiv EA backtracks on the Micro-transaction stance, good on those who refused to bend over for EA and accept these practices.
#86 Posted by Animal-Mother (26962 posts) -
[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"][QUOTE="Miroku32"]Shame some people fail to see why this is becoming a big problem. That argument that you don't have to buy the DLC if you don't want to is getting old. soulitane
But the problem is it's the truth. I know it's beating a dead horse. But you don't have to buy anything.

I don't think the argument is about not buying it, because obviously you don't have to buy the DLC. I think it more comes down to, where will this end? Will they start putting this into MP games (I know they already have) and make it pay to win, ie giving people who pay weapons which other people can't even unlock. Or if they make the SP so hard a lot of people will either need to tediously grind their way through if they don't want to pay. Obviously that was a quite bad slippery slope argument, but it kind of gets across the point.

But it's going to start happening more and more.
#87 Posted by Ly_the_Fairy (8652 posts) -

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"][QUOTE="Miroku32"]Shame some people fail to see why this is becoming a big problem. That argument that you don't have to buy the DLC if you don't want to is getting old. soulitane
But the problem is it's the truth. I know it's beating a dead horse. But you don't have to buy anything.

I don't think the argument is about not buying it, because obviously you don't have to buy the DLC. I think it more comes down to, where will this end? Will they start putting this into MP games (I know they already have) and make it pay to win, ie giving people who pay weapons which other people can't even unlock. Or if they make the SP so hard a lot of people will either need to tediously grind their way through if they don't want to pay. Obviously that was a quite bad slippery slope argument, but it kind of gets across the point.

Yah.

If you don't like the practice it's simply best to not support the game at all. EA won't support the practice if they see it driving away gamers.

#88 Posted by FashionFreak (2291 posts) -

Because having a couple optional weapons available for $5 in Dead Space 3 DLC totally ruined the game. :roll: