The solution is pretty simple: don't buy anything EA makes, ever. You don't have to know the details to know that they're going to try to force you to pay again after the initial purchase to get access to what you thought you were buying up front.
Originally posted by Quizzical The solution is pretty simple: don't buy anything EA makes, ever. You don't have to know the details to know that they're going to try to force you to pay again after the initial purchase to get access to what you thought you were buying up front.
I agree completely. Unfortunately there are just too many gamers with impulse control issues who will go ahead and buy these games, bitch loudly they are being ripped off, yet still reward the companies such as EA for doing so.
If you dont do stupid things while youre young, youll have nothing to smile about when youre old.
Considering all items are intellectual properties and still belong to EA whether you paid for them or not, they will have a very hard time trying to make a case of theft.
EA will cut their losses, apply patch and continue.
"So, arguably if you go into this game knowing you are supposedto be paying for these weapons and you notice a glitch allows you to accumulate them without paying, that's theft as well."
SUPPOSED TO? Excuse me?!
My view on this: exploit away. We shouldn't tolerate cash shop crap in single player games, at least not ones there's already a fee for.
There's no excuse for exploiting. Even if it's an EA game.
There's no reason why you shouldn't be able/allowed to exploit in a single-player RPG. So long as you don't breach any laws (like using their game assets to sell your own game without their permission/license) what you do in your single player game is entirely irrelevant to the developers.
This is just a case of idiotic suits at EA trying to milk as much from players as possible, even if it makes absolutely no sense. I'm not saying companies shouldn't allowed to make money (hey, it's a private company so they can do whatever they want), but that's a case of very poor judgement from EA.
"So, arguably if you go into this game knowing you are supposedto be paying for these weapons and you notice a glitch allows you to accumulate them without paying, that's theft as well."
SUPPOSED TO? Excuse me?!
My view on this: exploit away. We shouldn't tolerate cash shop crap in single player games, at least not ones there's already a fee for.
There's no excuse for exploiting. Even if it's an EA game.
There's no reason why you shouldn't be able/allowed to exploit in a single-player RPG. So long as you don't breach any laws (like using their game assets to sell your own game without their permission/license) what you do in your single player game is entirely irrelevant to the developers.
To second this, single-player games are fundamentally different from multi-player games. In a multiplayer game, if you give yourself some super weapon and go kill a bunch of other players with it, you ruin the game for others. In a single-player game if you do the same thing, you don't disrupt things for anyone else. Some single-player games even have cheat codes built in or allow players to greatly modify how the game works to make it easier for players to "cheat".
If EA is trying to block how single-player games can be played and charge extra to implement things that players can do on their own, then EA is being stupid. If you want to restrict how players can play your game, you make it online and make the server check things.
I'm not advocating piracy here, but if you've properly and legally paid for a single-player game, then do whatever you want with it. Modifying game parameters? Editing saved game files? Declining to apply future patches? Have at it. Unless, of course, you think it makes the game less fun.
Originally posted by Swanea Cash shops for single player games are just dumb. Keep it up people, maybe EA will learn.
It is actually far better than cash shops in multiplayer games. In multiplayer games the chance that you affect someone else whether it is just visually or ingame-economically is far larger.
"So, arguably if you go into this game knowing you are supposedto be paying for these weapons and you notice a glitch allows you to accumulate them without paying, that's theft as well."
SUPPOSED TO? Excuse me?!
My view on this: exploit away. We shouldn't tolerate cash shop crap in single player games, at least not ones there's already a fee for.
There's no excuse for exploiting. Even if it's an EA game.
There's no reason why you shouldn't be able/allowed to exploit in a single-player RPG. So long as you don't breach any laws (like using their game assets to sell your own game without their permission/license) what you do in your single player game is entirely irrelevant to the developers.
To second this, single-player games are fundamentally different from multi-player games. In a multiplayer game, if you give yourself some super weapon and go kill a bunch of other players with it, you ruin the game for others. In a single-player game if you do the same thing, you don't disrupt things for anyone else. Some single-player games even have cheat codes built in or allow players to greatly modify how the game works to make it easier for players to "cheat".
If EA is trying to block how single-player games can be played and charge extra to implement things that players can do on their own, then EA is being stupid. If you want to restrict how players can play your game, you make it online and make the server check things.
I'm not advocating piracy here, but if you've properly and legally paid for a single-player game, then do whatever you want with it. Modifying game parameters? Editing saved game files? Declining to apply future patches? Have at it. Unless, of course, you think it makes the game less fun.
But item mall in multiplayer games has never been about fairness, it has been about monetization. In an economic sense, the two cases are very similar: both are exploiting stuff to bypass the item mall. Few if any company gives a shit about how other players are affected by that "super weapon", what is important is how it will affect their income.
Originally posted by Swanea Cash shops for single player games are just dumb. Keep it up people, maybe EA will learn.
It is actually far better than cash shops in multiplayer games. In multiplayer games the chance that you affect someone else whether it is just visually or ingame-economically is far larger.
It's not better. It encourages developers (and publishers) to remove content that should be in the game, and sell it on top of a $60 game. The same as Day 1 DLCs, it's just ridiculous. It's like ordering a meal at a restaurant and having to pay for the ustensils. I'm definitively never going to that restaurant, let alone buy any SRPGs with Day 1 DLC and a Cash Shop.
UPDATE: EA's PR sent over an e-mail to clarify that this isn't actually a glitch:
The resource-earning mechanic in Dead Space 3 is not a glitch. We have no plans to issue a patch to change this aspect of the game. We encourage players to explore the game and discover the areas where resources respawn for free. We've deliberately designed Dead Space 3 to allow players to harvest resources by playing through the game. For those that wish to accumulate upgrades instantly, we have enabled an optional system for them to buy the resources at a minimal cost ($1-$3
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
UPDATE: EA's PR sent over an e-mail to clarify that this isn't actually a glitch:
The resource-earning mechanic in Dead Space 3 is not a glitch. We have no plans to issue a patch to change this aspect of the game. We encourage players to explore the game and discover the areas where resources respawn for free. We've deliberately designed Dead Space 3 to allow players to harvest resources by playing through the game. For those that wish to accumulate upgrades instantly, we have enabled an optional system for them to buy the resources at a minimal cost ($1-$3
This is hilarious. EA is a bunch of greedy business men/women who don't pay attention to how the cash shops work in online games. The idea of having a cash shop is to provide shortcuts to success in games without it being entirely dependent on player success or having cosmetic upgrades. Thank you for saying that the game is functioning as it should, which honestly should have been the first response. Also, EA is a bunch of thieves for selling us single player video games and then trying to sell us short cuts.
I played WoW up until WotLK, played RoM for 2 years and now Rift. I am F2P player. I support games when I feel they deserve my money and I want the items enough. I don't troll, and I don't take kindly to trolls.
Originally posted by Swanea Cash shops for single player games are just dumb. Keep it up people, maybe EA will learn.
It is actually far better than cash shops in multiplayer games. In multiplayer games the chance that you affect someone else whether it is just visually or ingame-economically is far larger.
It's not better. It encourages developers (and publishers) to remove content that should be in the game, and sell it on top of a $60 game. The same as Day 1 DLCs, it's just ridiculous. It's like ordering a meal at a restaurant and having to pay for the ustensils. I'm definitively never going to that restaurant, let alone buy any SRPGs with Day 1 DLC and a Cash Shop.
This image is pretty much spot on :
Why wouldn't it encourage developers (and publishers) to remove content in multiplayer games as well?
Originally posted by Swanea Cash shops for single player games are just dumb. Keep it up people, maybe EA will learn.
It is actually far better than cash shops in multiplayer games. In multiplayer games the chance that you affect someone else whether it is just visually or ingame-economically is far larger.
It's not better. It encourages developers (and publishers) to remove content that should be in the game, and sell it on top of a $60 game. The same as Day 1 DLCs, it's just ridiculous. It's like ordering a meal at a restaurant and having to pay for the ustensils. I'm definitively never going to that restaurant, let alone buy any SRPGs with Day 1 DLC and a Cash Shop.
This image is pretty much spot on :
Why wouldn't it encourage developers (and publishers) to remove content in multiplayer games as well?
It does. Day 1 DLC has been done quite a few times already by EA (Mass Effect 3 and now Dead Space 3 comes to mind), Capcom has done it a few times (with their fighter games which have online multiplayer), etc. This is probably the first time a single or multiplayer game has had a Cash Shop however, but pretty sure it's not the last.
The problem is that you're paying $60 for a SIngle or Multiplayer game, but although everything is available on the disk you just bought, part of it are locked. It's like buying a bag of bread at a market, everything's there, but to get the last 3-4 slices you have to pay $1,99. It's things like these that encourages people to pirate games, even though it's illegal.
UPDATE: EA's PR sent over an e-mail to clarify that this isn't actually a glitch:
The resource-earning mechanic in Dead Space 3 is not a glitch. We have no plans to issue a patch to change this aspect of the game. We encourage players to explore the game and discover the areas where resources respawn for free. We've deliberately designed Dead Space 3 to allow players to harvest resources by playing through the game. For those that wish to accumulate upgrades instantly, we have enabled an optional system for them to buy the resources at a minimal cost ($1-$3
What a way to back peddle. If this is so, Why have a lawyer declare their playerbase to be thieves? This very statement proves their lawyer is guilty of making defamatory statements against players, so they should launch a class action suit against her or EA.
A lot of people sure likes to bitch about EA (with good reason) but will happily in the same breath fork over cash for titles such as the Mass Effect, Battlefield and The Sims series.
Put your cash where your mouth is. Otherwise being hypocritical is just a full time sport for you
A lot of people sure likes to bitch about EA (with good reason) but will happily in the same breath fork over cash for titles such as the Mass Effect, Battlefield and The Sims series.
Put your cash where your mouth is. Otherwise being hypocritical is just a full time sport for you
I would be guilty of buying BF3 and enjoying it but it has no cash shop. If it did I would not play it. I do not support cash shop games because I do not like having to buy anything else that should already be in a game. But people who keep supporting these cash shop games will soon see it go out of control and everything will have to be purchased.
UPDATE: EA's PR sent over an e-mail to clarify that this isn't actually a glitch:
The resource-earning mechanic in Dead Space 3 is not a glitch. We have no plans to issue a patch to change this aspect of the game. We encourage players to explore the game and discover the areas where resources respawn for free. We've deliberately designed Dead Space 3 to allow players to harvest resources by playing through the game. For those that wish to accumulate upgrades instantly, we have enabled an optional system for them to buy the resources at a minimal cost ($1-$3
What a way to back peddle. If this is so, Why have a lawyer declare their playerbase to be thieves? This very statement proves their lawyer is guilty of making defamatory statements against players, so they should launch a class action suit against her or EA.
It wasn't their lawyer that was quoted, it was just a rent-a-quote lawyer the BBC asked to comment.
A lot of people sure likes to bitch about EA (with good reason) but will happily in the same breath fork over cash for titles such as the Mass Effect, Battlefield and The Sims series.
Put your cash where your mouth is. Otherwise being hypocritical is just a full time sport for you
I would be guilty of buying BF3 and enjoying it but it has no cash shop. If it did I would not play it. I do not support cash shop games because I do not like having to buy anything else that should already be in a game. But people who keep supporting these cash shop games will soon see it go out of control and everything will have to be purchased.
To me that's like saying I hate puppymills but that one puppy was just so cute I just had to have it.
UPDATE: EA's PR sent over an e-mail to clarify that this isn't actually a glitch:
The resource-earning mechanic in Dead Space 3 is not a glitch. We have no plans to issue a patch to change this aspect of the game. We encourage players to explore the game and discover the areas where resources respawn for free. We've deliberately designed Dead Space 3 to allow players to harvest resources by playing through the game. For those that wish to accumulate upgrades instantly, we have enabled an optional system for them to buy the resources at a minimal cost ($1-$3
What a way to back peddle. If this is so, Why have a lawyer declare their playerbase to be thieves? This very statement proves their lawyer is guilty of making defamatory statements against players, so they should launch a class action suit against her or EA.
It wasn't their lawyer that was quoted, it was just a rent-a-quote lawyer the BBC asked to comment.
Comments
I agree completely. Unfortunately there are just too many gamers with impulse control issues who will go ahead and buy these games, bitch loudly they are being ripped off, yet still reward the companies such as EA for doing so.
If you dont do stupid things while youre young, youll have nothing to smile about when youre old.
Considering all items are intellectual properties and still belong to EA whether you paid for them or not, they will have a very hard time trying to make a case of theft.
EA will cut their losses, apply patch and continue.
FUCK EA. Voted worst company in the world for a reason.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
There's no reason why you shouldn't be able/allowed to exploit in a single-player RPG. So long as you don't breach any laws (like using their game assets to sell your own game without their permission/license) what you do in your single player game is entirely irrelevant to the developers.
This is just a case of idiotic suits at EA trying to milk as much from players as possible, even if it makes absolutely no sense. I'm not saying companies shouldn't allowed to make money (hey, it's a private company so they can do whatever they want), but that's a case of very poor judgement from EA.
To second this, single-player games are fundamentally different from multi-player games. In a multiplayer game, if you give yourself some super weapon and go kill a bunch of other players with it, you ruin the game for others. In a single-player game if you do the same thing, you don't disrupt things for anyone else. Some single-player games even have cheat codes built in or allow players to greatly modify how the game works to make it easier for players to "cheat".
If EA is trying to block how single-player games can be played and charge extra to implement things that players can do on their own, then EA is being stupid. If you want to restrict how players can play your game, you make it online and make the server check things.
I'm not advocating piracy here, but if you've properly and legally paid for a single-player game, then do whatever you want with it. Modifying game parameters? Editing saved game files? Declining to apply future patches? Have at it. Unless, of course, you think it makes the game less fun.
I wonder if people would react as heavily if Arenanet did the same in a game where you actually affect other people, oh wait.
It is actually far better than cash shops in multiplayer games. In multiplayer games the chance that you affect someone else whether it is just visually or ingame-economically is far larger.
But item mall in multiplayer games has never been about fairness, it has been about monetization. In an economic sense, the two cases are very similar: both are exploiting stuff to bypass the item mall. Few if any company gives a shit about how other players are affected by that "super weapon", what is important is how it will affect their income.
Single player + exploits ?¿
single player + micro transactions?.
Stupidity.
Exploits only happens becouse of bad development, if you release a single player game exploit able , well your fault .
You know to start with , what the hell is a single player game with micro transactions?¿.
That is the bigest stupidiest slap in the face to any fan of the series, sinceother games that had DLC of content already in the disk.
im a big fan of the series but i will wait till the game is work 20 bucks becouse i wont put up with this bs.
It's not better. It encourages developers (and publishers) to remove content that should be in the game, and sell it on top of a $60 game. The same as Day 1 DLCs, it's just ridiculous. It's like ordering a meal at a restaurant and having to pay for the ustensils. I'm definitively never going to that restaurant, let alone buy any SRPGs with Day 1 DLC and a Cash Shop.
This image is pretty much spot on :
Um lets just put this thread to bed.
http://kotaku.com/5982973/
http://kotaku.com/5982138/this-is-how-to-avoid-paying-microtransactions-in-dead-space-3
And..........
UPDATE: EA's PR sent over an e-mail to clarify that this isn't actually a glitch:
The resource-earning mechanic in Dead Space 3 is not a glitch. We have no plans to issue a patch to change this aspect of the game. We encourage players to explore the game and discover the areas where resources respawn for free. We've deliberately designed Dead Space 3 to allow players to harvest resources by playing through the game. For those that wish to accumulate upgrades instantly, we have enabled an optional system for them to buy the resources at a minimal cost ($1-$3Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Playing: Nothing
Looking forward to: Nothing
This is hilarious. EA is a bunch of greedy business men/women who don't pay attention to how the cash shops work in online games. The idea of having a cash shop is to provide shortcuts to success in games without it being entirely dependent on player success or having cosmetic upgrades. Thank you for saying that the game is functioning as it should, which honestly should have been the first response. Also, EA is a bunch of thieves for selling us single player video games and then trying to sell us short cuts.
I played WoW up until WotLK, played RoM for 2 years and now Rift.
I am F2P player. I support games when I feel they deserve my money and I want the items enough.
I don't troll, and I don't take kindly to trolls.
Why wouldn't it encourage developers (and publishers) to remove content in multiplayer games as well?
It does. Day 1 DLC has been done quite a few times already by EA (Mass Effect 3 and now Dead Space 3 comes to mind), Capcom has done it a few times (with their fighter games which have online multiplayer), etc. This is probably the first time a single or multiplayer game has had a Cash Shop however, but pretty sure it's not the last.
The problem is that you're paying $60 for a SIngle or Multiplayer game, but although everything is available on the disk you just bought, part of it are locked. It's like buying a bag of bread at a market, everything's there, but to get the last 3-4 slices you have to pay $1,99. It's things like these that encourages people to pirate games, even though it's illegal.
What a way to back peddle. If this is so, Why have a lawyer declare their playerbase to be thieves? This very statement proves their lawyer is guilty of making defamatory statements against players, so they should launch a class action suit against her or EA.
A lot of people sure likes to bitch about EA (with good reason) but will happily in the same breath fork over cash for titles such as the Mass Effect, Battlefield and The Sims series.
Put your cash where your mouth is. Otherwise being hypocritical is just a full time sport for you
I would be guilty of buying BF3 and enjoying it but it has no cash shop. If it did I would not play it. I do not support cash shop games because I do not like having to buy anything else that should already be in a game. But people who keep supporting these cash shop games will soon see it go out of control and everything will have to be purchased.
It wasn't their lawyer that was quoted, it was just a rent-a-quote lawyer the BBC asked to comment.
To me that's like saying I hate puppymills but that one puppy was just so cute I just had to have it.
EA - 2017
Dead space 5 - 59.99$
1.DLC - unlock your mouse 9.99$
2.DLC - Unlock 2 more buttons on your keyboard 4.99$
3.DLC - Ability to save and load game 6.99$
Stop supporting big corporations like EA if you don't want this things to happen.
Ah, thanks for the clarification.