Will it ever end?
- Thread starter Nevakonaza
- Start date
I hate microtransactions, in-app purchases, season passes (or multiple season passes; *cough* Borderlands 2) and the rest as much as anyone. I've still bought into such games although occasionally I have definately avoided investing in a game sometimes due to it's payment model. I think there are lots of other factors and changes, probably not limited to but including:
I also think it's not helped having such a poor videogame industry media/press which has often failed to always challenge, criticise, acknowledge, understand or investigate this change over the past 10-15 years. Publishers control over game releases and their obsession with score aggregator sites, which are one shot deal that aren't updated, means reviewing media that are either scared to damage their relationship with publishers (i.e. review code) or don't see the payment model (i.e. Forza Motorsport 6 introduction of microtransactions 6 months after the game released) or worse don't consider it. This only gets easier to manage where real reviews start disappearing (i.e. Gamestrailers) and are replaced with 'quick looks / initial impressions' on Youtube and Twitch rather than real reviews becuase it's easier, quicker and cheaper to produce these.
So in short, I don't think it's going to change.
- Increasing cost of making, advertising and supporting games.
- Ongoing online cost of servers, cloud infrastructure, support teams and storefronts.
- The price of games remaining relatively static. I remember very specific examples like SEGA's Ghouls & Ghosts on the Megadrive being £45 at launch in the very early '90's.
- A consolidation of large multinationals publishers as smaller publishers have been acquired or gone out of business.
- Explosion of data and direct 1:1 relationships with customers. You know every single thing that the player is doing in your games which can be exploited.
- The digital revolution and the many different pricing models available now.
- The rise of software as a service.
I also think it's not helped having such a poor videogame industry media/press which has often failed to always challenge, criticise, acknowledge, understand or investigate this change over the past 10-15 years. Publishers control over game releases and their obsession with score aggregator sites, which are one shot deal that aren't updated, means reviewing media that are either scared to damage their relationship with publishers (i.e. review code) or don't see the payment model (i.e. Forza Motorsport 6 introduction of microtransactions 6 months after the game released) or worse don't consider it. This only gets easier to manage where real reviews start disappearing (i.e. Gamestrailers) and are replaced with 'quick looks / initial impressions' on Youtube and Twitch rather than real reviews becuase it's easier, quicker and cheaper to produce these.
So in short, I don't think it's going to change.
I miss the days of proper add-ons and expansions which were essentially a game in themselves, rather than the 1 mission dlcs that we get now
I hate small dlcs and micros
I agree, Dying Light The Following is exactly what DLC should be all about, they could easily have released that as a separate game and nobody would have thought any different.
They needed to do something though. Just the rate of inflation over the last 30 years means games should cost over £100 now, but they don't. The counter argument here is that there is a much bigger market for games, which is true, but they also cost a LOT more to make and there are more games companies to spread the profit across.
If you were given the choice of paying £100 for a game or spreading the cost over a pay for what you play scheme (DLC, etc), which would you choose?
There is also a lot more competition nowadays which means very rarely do we pay full price for a game. A little patience means never paying more than £25 for a game. This was unheard of when I was a kid (bahh, get off my lawn etc etc).
If you were given the choice of paying £100 for a game or spreading the cost over a pay for what you play scheme (DLC, etc), which would you choose?
There is also a lot more competition nowadays which means very rarely do we pay full price for a game. A little patience means never paying more than £25 for a game. This was unheard of when I was a kid (bahh, get off my lawn etc etc).
This.
For every idiot who keeps buying this **** longer it will continue and probably expand as companies realise most people are mugs.
Don't like it? Stop buying it, I hardly ever buy a game on release never purchase season pass etc but sadly I'm a minority.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,316
- Location
- Dormanstown.
I've never bought a season pass, I scoff at the concept.
I never buy DLC unless it's in a GOT edition.
These days I've got too many games to even play the DLC lol.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
+1
And like said if you don't have to have everything straight away it is cheap to get.
For example I played RAGE for the first time several months ago, Apparently it had a troubled buggy release however, Today it provides you with a beautiful looking bug free experience that can be bought for under a fiver when it's in a Steam sale. I followed that with a first play-through of Bio Infinite and Borderlands 1, Again they were both decent trouble free games that were very enjoyable while being available for a lot less than today's games.
The market is full of games you won't have tried yet that stand up to today's games at a fraction of the cost. Watchdogs and Battlefield 4 are two examples I haven't played yet, I came across both in sales at U-play and Origin respectively and got them at around 8 quid a piece.
There's no reason to rush into a game purchase, I'm not saying I don't do it what I'm saying is there's plenty to play while you wait for prices to sensibilize if you have an issue with todays prices.
Again I'm not saying I think costs are fine they're not and some of them do take advantage of the dlc set up to earn extra money but there are examples where dlc's are extra content worth buying, Dying Light's The following is one example. An example that is not IMO is Cities Skylines After Dark.
Cities: Skylines DLC's:
The After Dark dlc
Pay to watch the day become night and say "ooh that sunset makes my skyline look pretty"
for only £10.99
Or if you like snow try
The SNOWFALL dlc.
Pay to watch snow fall and say "Ooh that snow makes my city look pretty"
for only £9.99
What's next?
The Realism dlc
Pay to add bird droppings to rooftops so you can say "Ooh that's what they're doing to me, not so pretty"
Last edited:
This. People have spent thousands on Candy Crush Saga.
If they didn't, devs wouldn't all be clamouring for a slice of that pie.
Most games do it badly, but a season pass can be fine if done well.
Bethesda games do tend to have true expansions, which not only add big new areas - lots of content but also add new mechanics to the game which were not there on release. These I'm happy to get a season pass for, as it's prepaying for expansion packs. Also £15 for three XCOM2 expansions I also believe is fair enough.
The issue is when minor additions are treated like expansion packs (Total war new factions for example) which are not really new factions as they already existed & the DLC just unlocked them (perhaps with a few token easy to make units).
The quality as to how micro-transactions is hugely different across the world of gaming, with some games doing it perfectly (League of legends) but obviously there are others who make you pay to play (under the guise of free to play).
As long as the core game is full, has a deep amount of content & doesn't skimp on release then I'm happy to pay for additions - but additions being the keyword, not precut content.
Bethesda games do tend to have true expansions, which not only add big new areas - lots of content but also add new mechanics to the game which were not there on release. These I'm happy to get a season pass for, as it's prepaying for expansion packs. Also £15 for three XCOM2 expansions I also believe is fair enough.
The issue is when minor additions are treated like expansion packs (Total war new factions for example) which are not really new factions as they already existed & the DLC just unlocked them (perhaps with a few token easy to make units).
The quality as to how micro-transactions is hugely different across the world of gaming, with some games doing it perfectly (League of legends) but obviously there are others who make you pay to play (under the guise of free to play).
As long as the core game is full, has a deep amount of content & doesn't skimp on release then I'm happy to pay for additions - but additions being the keyword, not precut content.