Support NeoGAF

[Chronospherics]

So... basically every current AAA game with MT implementation in form of loot / gambling boxes? Like he has been doing for some time now?

When I try think good MT models in gaming all that pops right into mind are Path of Exile and WarFrame. F2P games both.

So...like this game? And basically almost every single one he covered?

While I understand what you're saying, he also rants on games just for being premium, and having MT, and the fact that he rants about games just for having MT, undermines his criticisms of the more granular issues.

I appreciate that his content does cover issues like randomisation, and predatory practices in MT, however I feel that this discussion is undermined by the simple fact that Jim is against MT in premium products. Therefore, anyone that might be interested in his criticisms, likely stops watching at the point they hear him explain why MT should only feature in free to play games.

The reality is that premium + MT is here to stay, and in my own opinion, if the developer wants to offer MT options on their premium title that's fine, but the issue is that their premium content in itself, needs to represent good value independent of that MT, and the MT needs to avoid predatory practices.

Also, Jim's content would benefit from explaining what consumers need to do to campaign for better practice in the regulation of MT. Complaining on youtube comments and steam reviews is not enough.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Overall development costs have more than doubled, and many games released this gen don’t make money.

AAA games do generally need additional monetization, that’s a basic fact at this point. How that monetization is achieved, on the other hand, is what’s worth debating.

Loot boxes are gross and predatory, but incredibly profitable. We need better DLC and less disruptive alternatives.

I'll concede as I'm sure you're closer to the real number than I am.

I agree with you on the subject of loot boxes too. It's refreshing to hear a developer express this view.

 

[shandy706]

Cross posting:

Turn 10 just released a statement, will fix the VIP issue returning it back to FM6 levels and gave a few bonuses to current VIP and Ultimate owners.

"Secondly, and even more significantly, we will be changing VIP rewards in Forza Motorsport 7. This new system will work like it did in Forza Motorsport 6, offering a 2X base credit bonus after every race. We’ve already started work on this feature and we will release it as soon as possible. Look for more information on this update as we near the release date."

Do we have a new thread for this?

Definitely new thread worthy. Shows that they are listening and reacting at least. Turn 10 tends to be pretty responsive, glad to see they're moving quickly.

 

[xrnzaaas]

Do we have a new thread for this?

Definitely new thread worthy. Shows that they are listening and reacting at least. Turn 10 tends to be pretty responsive, glad to see they're moving quickly.

Yes we have a thread about it and it's more like realizing they've taken one step too far (or too many little steps at the same time ). The number of refunds must've been quite noitceable.

 

[IISANDERII]

Game design and functionality were already impacted..

I told you guys when Overwatch gated speech lines and sprays behind random lootboxes. Any game that has lootboxes and the ability to pay real money for them = game design insidiously impacted to push people to spend said real money. Doesn't matter the nature of the content. If i were a reviewer included in MC, i would score 310 every game that does this.

Nothing's preventing having random boxes AND the ability to selectively purchase any item. Except the sheer greed, exploitation of players and corruption of game design so clearly evident by devs and pubs choosing not to.

Jim Sterling didn't have much issue with Overwatch's lootboxes, he gave the game 9/10.

 

[LordRaptor]

Jim Sterling didn't have much issue with Overwatch's lootboxes, he gave the game 9/10.

He did

 

[Pokemaniac]

While I understand what you're saying, he also rants on games just for being premium, and having MT, and the fact that he rants about games just for having MT, undermines his criticisms of the more granular issues.

I appreciate that his content does cover issues like randomisation, and predatory practices in MT, however I feel that this discussion is undermined by the simple fact that Jim is against MT in premium products. Therefore, anyone that might be interested in his criticisms, likely stops watching at the point they hear him explain why MT should only feature in free to play games.

The reality is that premium + MT is here to stay, and in my own opinion, if the developer wants to offer MT options on their premium title that's fine, but the issue is that their premium content in itself, needs to represent good value independent of that MT, and the MT needs to avoid predatory practices.

Also, Jim's content would benefit from explaining what consumers need to do to campaign for better practice in the regulation of MT. Complaining on youtube comments and steam reviews is not enough.

And what exactly is the problem with criticizing games for the mere inclusion of Microtransactions? They are an inherently negative element of design. There is pretty much no potential for them to make a game better, but a whole lot of potential for making games worse.

 

[Kareha]

Modern gaming really has gone to shit, probably why retro gaming is becoming so popular.

 

[thumb]

And what exactly is the problem with criticizing games for the mere inclusion of Microtransactions? They are an inherently negative element of design. There is pretty much no potential for them to make a game better, but a whole lot of potential for making games worse.

I've been strongly criticizing loot boxes in non-F2P games in multiple threads. And I generally agree with Jim Sterling. But not in the case of the mere inclusion of microtransactions, which to me are largely neutral absent details about what the transactions are and how much they cost.

Let me give an example. Let's say you run a game studio, and you can only budget a certain amount of artist and engineering time to generate alternate costumes. Well, if costumes become a profit center, rather than a cost center, then suddenly you can justify more time on them. Hence, on average, we should expect games that sell cosmetic items to have more cosmetics available than games that offer them for free. This can be advantageous if you're a customer like me, and really appreciate having lots of different options for how your in-game characters look. In other words, I would much rather have many more costumes than just a couple free ones.

Similarly, I have bought all manner of interesting add-ons for games: digital art books, soundtracks, lore guides, and so on. All of them microtransactions for the base game. And I doubt they would exist if they were simply made to be given away for free.