Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

EA is really outdoing themselves!

168101112

Comments

  • BladestromBladestrom edinburghPosts: 4,946Member Uncommon
    It was published a while back for a mmorg, and was discussed here. Asside from that where exactly do you think blizzards massive profits come from?

    rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar

    Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D

  • CalmOceansCalmOceans BergenPosts: 2,273Member

    Let's imagine playing Tennis P2P vs F2P in real-life

     

    P2P Tennis:

    -your field is number 17, you're able to play on it for 4 hours non-stop, flat fee

     

    F2P Tennis:

    -you can play for "free"

    -each tennis ball you use will cost you $10

    -the tennis balls need to be inflated and the pump will cost you another $10 per use

    -if you want the air pressure pump instead of the handpump it will cost you another $10

    -you don't get to use your own rackets, we provide you with rackets for only $10

    -if you want strings for your racket it will cost you $10

    -...........

    -BUT IT'S "FREE" 111111!!!!!! and no one said you HAVE to have rackets or balls to play the game, you can just play without, it's a FREE game, what are you complaining about??11111111111

     

    idiots, I get tired of people defending this F2P garbage

  • MindTriggerMindTrigger La Quinta, CAPosts: 2,596Member
    Originally posted by Bladestrom
    It was published a while back for a mmorg, and was discussed here. Asside from that where exactly do you think blizzards massive profits come from?

    It's called volume.  Go look it up.  Pick up a personal finance class and a business management class while you are at it.

    A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    I might have said...."ok, I guess you have to do what you have to do".......but when a CEO is making 6 million a year, then no, I don't respect this decision at all, it is nickle and diming your consumer, completely against the interest of the playerbase.

    Feel free not to play any EA games, it is a free world.

    And i just finished Dead Space 3, without using microtransaction. Pretty fun time i had, i may add. Let's all vote with our wallets.

  • WickedjellyWickedjelly Yahoo, COPosts: 4,990Member
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    Let's imagine playing Tennis P2P vs F2P in real-life

     

    P2P Tennis:

    -your field is number 17, you're able to play on it for 4 hours non-stop, flat fee

     

    F2P Tennis:

    -you can play for "free"

    -each tennis ball you use will cost you $10

    -the tennis balls need to be inflated and the pump will cost you another $10 per use

    -if you want the air pressure pump instead of the handpump it will cost you another $10

    -you don't get to use your own rackets, we provide you with rackets for only $10

    -if you want strings for your racket it will cost you $10

    -...........

    -BUT IT'S "FREE" 111111!!!!!! and no one said you HAVE to have rackets or balls to play the game, you can just play without, it's a FREE game, what are you complaining about??11111111111

     

    idiots, I get tired of people defending this F2P garbage

    Congratulations...

    You have succeeded in dethroning the car and food analogies as the worst ever used by posters. Never thought I would see the day.

    The amount of people in this thread that seem unaware that that this in relation to EA games in general and not future or current mmo endeavors is rather astounding. It isn't about f2p with them, they've been hinting at it for a long time now, and their main focus is going to be with games you purchase and then have additional microtransactions like in DS3 made available

    1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.

    2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.

    3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,762Member Uncommon

    Cash shops are now at the heart of any funding stratergy for all games. They are all being made with an online play element so cash shops could be brought in. 

    We predicted this years ago, thats what Steam and Origin etc are all about, form a gaming club online, network with friends, bring in cash shop games. It was all part of the same package.

    "Free" to Play was an early element of that package need to bring about a monetised gaming environment. I am not saying the whole thing was planned from the start. But once they saw what they could do they pushed in that direction.

    The writting was on the wall and now gamers are being signed up at gunpoint, there will be no choice. Will we put up with it? Yes, and if you want to know why think about the younger gamer who is coming into gaming, think about the world of the internet that he is used to.

    Welcome to a new world of gaming, just remember to bring your credit card.

     

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by MindTrigger

    If the games you are choosing hold no value to you, then too bad for you. If a game sucks, don't buy it.  You don't get games for free just because *you* don't think they are worth paying for.

    Amusing, fairly amusing, have you seem to have missed the period in time when P2P games had limited (both level and time-wise) trials and the content allowed within that trial was polished to near perfection and fun and engaging, the moment you subbed and went passed the trial point you got that sick feeling of getting scammed. I got something similar to this with WoW post-Cataclysm, I gave that play for free to level 20 trial a try and I liked it, spent around 100$ getting all the expansions with a 1 month sub included in the package, played it... within 2 days I was bored of the game... played for almost 3 more weeks, hit level cap, got all the last tier items (then) in the game, walked away feeling like I got scammed (not to mention being a EVE-Online player I went for a PVP server... I forgot that PVP in WoW = a level 85 retard dropping on you in PVP gear while you're doing a quest and have aggro on you). So for 15$ a month I got 1 week of fun (that's cobbling together all the fun moments I had in the first few days and some fun moments during my stint in Northrend) and that's neglecting the box and xpac costs. Since then I've looked around and Blizzard isn't the only one who's pulling that trick on people with their P2P games.

     

    Also if you were pre-NGE and continued playing that game for 2 years even after the NGE then it goes to show how much we can value your opinion on what constitutes a game worth, what was it? 45$/month? (sorry but no, the only reason it wasn't as bad as SWtOR was because SOE couldn't rip all the guts out of it to replace it with WoW mechanics and even so the fact people continued to pay 2 play that... ).

    image
  • DauzqulDauzqul Detroit, MIPosts: 1,406Member Uncommon

    I don't mind MTs if the game is free. What I don't like is "Pay 2 Win" or a "masked Pay 2 Play", where you really are paying $15 per month for features such as being able to hold more than 5 gold, wear blue items, browse the auction house, or play for 15 min without a gigantic ad minimizing your screen.

     

    Moreover, I really don't like purchasing a game, especially a FPS, and then getting bombarded with MTs. It's bs.

  • BrianshoBriansho Woodbridge, VAPosts: 4,779Member Uncommon
    Dead Space 4 - pay 60 for the disc and 10 to unlock each level.

    Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Scot

    The writting was on the wall and now gamers are being signed up at gunpoint, there will be no choice. Will we put up with it? Yes, and if you want to know why think about the younger gamer who is coming into gaming, think about the world of the internet that he is used to.

     

    Video games are not the only entertainment out there. It is a free world. No one says you must play games.

    I don't put up with anything in my entertainment. There is no point. There are always good movies, tv, books. There is no lack of entertainment.

  • raistlinmraistlinm new orleans, LAPosts: 673Member

    I think the question no one is asking is "when is it ok for a company to ask for more money" I mean honestly we are paying hundreds of dollars for systems that don't come with a single game is it also a bad thing for sony/microsoft to expect us to pay for a game right when we purchase the new systems they come out with?

    I am certainly not a cheerleader standing here urging any of these companies on but I think we nneed to stop looking at this issue in such black and white terms.

    For example if a game has to be ready to ship three months before it ships is it really that bad to have release day dlc? In my estimation it really isn't and these are the issues I don't hear about from those arguing for or against companies finding extra revenue streams.

    I think the issue simply isn't as cut and dried as many of us would like everyone to believe either for or against the idea I mean honestly why can't we also then just get pissed off about the hundreds we've spent on successive mario games when in theory they could have just waited until they got all those ideas and put them all into one game.

    Me personally I have had some games that I thought were so much fun I had to have the DLC, unfortunately for that company (Bioware) I tend to wait for a year after they release that game,  when it then releases with a version that has all the dlc in it I often purchase it but again if the alternative is for them to then simply move on to the next game with no support for the game I've already spent so much on I don't see it as a problem.

    Kudos to the poster above me who seems to have a very reasonable stance on this issue. No one is forced to play games nor are they forced to by into the extra content that comes along after release.

     I remember games back in the master system/genesis days costing little more than games cost now but we all know games cost alot more to make now than they did then so let's try and see things from the devs perspective

  • StonesDKStonesDK SomewherePosts: 1,805Member

    EA must make the best games in the business for people to rage about them so much. So great, that their titles are must-have's.

     

    Why else rage about something that can easily be avoided

  • BizkitNLBizkitNL NetherlandsPosts: 2,280Member Common
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by BizkitNL

    Now the CEO's salary is used as an argument? Wow.

    When someone uses the argument that they are just "trying to make money", yes it is, ESPECIALLY when developers using microtransations always said that F2P was needed for games to survive, when it obviously has only one reason, make as much money as humanly possible disregarding your consumers who are completely against this idea EA put forth.

    When a company said:

    "adding microtransactions is the only way for our games to survive and we can only compete by adding microtransactions"

    I might have said...."ok, I guess you have to do what you have to do".......but when a CEO is making 6 million a year, then no, I don't respect this decision at all, it is nickle and diming your consumer, completely against the interest of the playerbase.

    In that case: Stop buying gas for your car, stop buying aspirines, stop buying diapers for your kids. Because guess what: All those companies have high-salary CEOs.

    Judge the game by its gameplay. Not by its developers or publishers.

    Gaming is about games.

    10
  • raistlinmraistlinm new orleans, LAPosts: 673Member
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    Let's imagine playing Tennis P2P vs F2P in real-life

     

    P2P Tennis:

    -your field is number 17, you're able to play on it for 4 hours non-stop, flat fee

     

    F2P Tennis:

    -you can play for "free"

    -each tennis ball you use will cost you $10

    -the tennis balls need to be inflated and the pump will cost you another $10 per use

    -if you want the air pressure pump instead of the handpump it will cost you another $10

    -you don't get to use your own rackets, we provide you with rackets for only $10

    -if you want strings for your racket it will cost you $10

    -...........

    -BUT IT'S "FREE" 111111!!!!!! and no one said you HAVE to have rackets or balls to play the game, you can just play without, it's a FREE game, what are you complaining about??11111111111

     

    idiots, I get tired of people defending this F2P garbage

    I can kill this entire pointless analogy with one word......Wimbledon.

  • jadan2000jadan2000 roosevelt, NYPosts: 511Member
    wow. out of principle, if he meant that literally, then i will probably be shying away from most EA titles

    image

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,762Member Uncommon

    If you take any random comment from anyone in EA that is not part of a gaming hype article you will start thinking about shying away from their titles. :)

  • greenreengreenreen Punchoo, AKPosts: 2,101Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by raistlinm

    I think the question no one is asking is "when is it ok for a company to ask for more money" I mean honestly we are paying hundreds of dollars for systems that don't come with a single game is it also a bad thing for sony/microsoft to expect us to pay for a game right when we purchase the new systems they come out with?

    ...snip

    It's not unreasonable for them to expect you to purchase games with consoles. Didn't you know they often cost more to make than they are sold for. I first heard about that years ago for the older playstations so it's not a recent thing. If they are making profit now on it across the board, I haven't read that.

    http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/what_do_your_gadgets_actually_cost_build

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by raistlinm

    I think the question no one is asking is "when is it ok for a company to ask for more money" I mean honestly we are paying hundreds of dollars for systems that don't come with a single game is it also a bad thing for sony/microsoft to expect us to pay for a game right when we purchase the new systems they come out with?

    It is always ok for a company to ask for more money. They ask ... does not mean that you have to give it to them.

    Games are not necessity of life. Companies can charge anything, anyway they want to. It is their creation. You don't have to play.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Scot

    If you take any random comment from anyone in EA that is not part of a gaming hype article you will start thinking about shying away from their titles. :)

    Why? It is not like i don't already know they want more money. It does not mean that i will give it to them.

    I played Dead Space 3 .. and finished the game without paying a single dime to RMT. Still fun.

  • StonesDKStonesDK SomewherePosts: 1,805Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by raistlinm

    I think the question no one is asking is "when is it ok for a company to ask for more money" I mean honestly we are paying hundreds of dollars for systems that don't come with a single game is it also a bad thing for sony/microsoft to expect us to pay for a game right when we purchase the new systems they come out with?

    It is always ok for a company to ask for more money. They ask ... does not mean that you have to give it to them.

    Games are not necessity of life. Companies can charge anything, anyway they want to. It is their creation. You don't have to play.

    The reason why people rage is because it's threatening their lifestyle, which is what gaming is for a lot of people. Not just a mere hobby. Almost a threat to their mere existance.

     

    The second problem is they make some of the best games on the market. If people thought their games where complete crap, then nobody would complain about the company motto. I'm sure there are people out there that doesn't like EA games but they don't rant about their DLCs or their Ingame stores since they have no interest in the games in the first place.

     

    The third problem is people are afraid of trendsetters. Particularly microtransaction trendsetters. It could potentially effect more companies than EA if they are successful with it.

     

    None of that however is something you can blame EA for. They are not a bunch of hippies sleeping at each others couches trying to code a game because they have a deep passion for it. They are in it to make money for themselves and their investors just like any big corporation should. If I was an investor in a company, I would want them to persue any revenue stream they could in order for my stocks to rise. Gamers don't see it that way because they are not investors, they are consumers and as a consumer it's their job to put their money where it's worth the most instead of  bitching on forums, and then buy the latest must have EA title anyway

  • madazzmadazz A town, ONPosts: 1,564Member Uncommon
    This is what the F2P players get. They were warned that it would not turn out how they dreamed it would. Did you guys really think that everything would be all rosey? Again, you guys were warned, and it is only going to get worse from here on out too. Do NOT underestimate greed. And while I am here, stop pre-ordering shit.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Starpower
     

    The reason why people rage is because it's threatening their lifestyle, which is what gaming is for a lot of people. Not just a mere hobby. Almost a threat to their mere existance.

     Now that is just sad. I play quite a bit of video games, and would even say it is the hobby i spent the most time on. But they are just ... entertainment. If people can see that, may be they need some perspective on life.

    The second problem is they make some of the best games on the market. If people thought their games where complete crap, then nobody would complain about the company motto. I'm sure there are people out there that doesn't like EA games but they don't rant about their DLCs or their Ingame stores since they have no interest in the games in the first place.

    I like some of EA games (Dead Space series is fun!) but i don't complain. So what if they want me to do RMT. Either a) I can play/enjoy/finish the game without using microtransaction, or b) I will do something else. While DS is fun, it is not a necessity of life for me to play #3. It is not like there is a lack of other entertainment. I have seasons of Supernatural yet to watch, and we are not even talking about current tv, movies, or novels yet.

    And god forbid, if EA makes a game fun enough for me to do RMT, more power to them.

     

    The third problem is people are afraid of trendsetters. Particularly microtransaction trendsetters. It could potentially effect more companies than EA if they are successful with it.

     This smacks of people who are bitter and cannot deal with change. This is no difference than the horse stable hands who are upset that automobile is going to take their "careers" away. And again, we are not talking about anything serious here .. just entertainment.

    None of that however is something you can blame EA for. They are not a bunch of hippies sleeping at each others couches trying to code a game because they have a deep passion for it. They are in it to make money for themselves and their investors just like any big corporation should. If I was an investor in a company, I would want them to persue any revenue stream they could in order for my stocks to rise. Gamers don't see it that way because they are not investors, they are consumers and as a consumer it's their job to put their money where it's worth the most instead of  bitching on forums, and then buy the latest must have EA title anyway

    Very much so. If people are so upset, vote with their $$$. Apparently not enough are upset enough. EA is making MORE money doing RMT. This should tell you something.

     

  • taziartaziar Hollywood, FLPosts: 52Member

    EA is not just talking about F2P games.  This will include store bought SINGLE PLAYER games.  (With constant internet connection required for DRM and micro-transactions)  Do you not understand how bad that is?  As the F2P  market has shown us, it will not be limited to cosmetic items or expanded content, no matter what they promise.  Single player DLC has already gone from adding actual content, like new campaign or maps, to selling individual items and gear.  The same with pre-order bonuses.  These items are more powerful that what you should have at the time, altering game balancing.  If they will do that, they will go further.  Right now, games are generally balanced for people who buy the game, not all the microtransactions.  This will change if we let it.  

     

    F2P games are designed to be difficult, grindy, and inconvenient if you don't pay.  This model will migrate to the Single Player / B2P market.  You will have single player games where they arbitrarily limit how much you can carry, and sell you bags of holding.  They will give you games with 3 classes, and sell you 3 more.  A game store purchase will not get you a complete game, as they will hold something back to sell you.  Spells, vehicles, cool weapons, whatever.  They will get away with it too.  Most professional reviewers are either paid off, or are still overwhelmed with honeymoon hype to write an accurate review.  Worse, EA is the biggest publisher, so if you want to continue to play video games, you will have little choice.  

     

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by taziar

    EA is not just talking about F2P games.  This will include store bought SINGLE PLAYER games.  (With constant internet connection required for DRM and micro-transactions)  Do you not understand how bad that is?  As the F2P  market has shown us, it will not be limited to cosmetic items or expanded content, no matter what they promise.  Single player DLC has already gone from adding actual content, like new campaign or maps, to selling individual items and gear.  The same with pre-order bonuses.  These items are more powerful that what you should have at the time, altering game balancing.  If they will do that, they will go further.  Right now, games are generally balanced for people who buy the game, not all the microtransactions.  This will change if we let it.  

    These are single player games. Just play on casual difficulty and you will have no problem. I finished Dead Space 3 without spending a dime on RMT, and i don't know what is the hoopla.

    So what if they put in more RMT. If it rubs me the wrong way, i won't play their games. They are not the only video game makers out there. And even if other devs are following suit, i can always find entertainment other than video games. 

    And what do you mean "we let it"? You sound as if you have any control. Your only recourse is not to play EA games. Not that it will do any good.

    F2P games are designed to be difficult, grindy, and inconvenient if you don't pay.  This model will migrate to the Single Player / B2P market.  You will have single player games where they arbitrarily limit how much you can carry, and sell you bags of holding.  They will give you games with 3 classes, and sell you 3 more.  A game store purchase will not get you a complete game, as they will hold something back to sell you.  Spells, vehicles, cool weapons, whatever.  They will get away with it too.  Most professional reviewers are either paid off, or are still overwhelmed with honeymoon hype to write an accurate review.  Worse, EA is the biggest publisher, so if you want to continue to play video games, you will have little choice.  

     F2P games are difficult? I thought the complaint is that they are "easy-mode". I play lots of F2P MMOs and none is difficult. Certainly the ones i am playing are not grindy, and inconvenience vary.

    But that is the point. I do NOT have to play video games. There are other forms of entertainment. And right now, there are enough other devs, and indies that if you don't play EA games, you still have almost infinite number of games to play.

     

     

     

  • XAPKenXAPKen Northwest, INPosts: 4,919Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Wighty

    Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse!

     

    I never thought that.

     

    Suits are in business to optimize revenue.  They'll do so however possible.

     


    Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now turned Amateur Game Developer.  I don't Forum PVP.  If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident.  Realm Lords 2 on MMORPG.com
Sign In or Register to comment.