You know, it's one thing that we "understand" we're being manipulated by microtransactions, but it's a whole 'nother ballgame when we see it so blatantly placed before our eyes in cold black and white.
Hopefully, this will turn the tide. I wonder what, if any, impact recent legal maneuvers overseas with regard to loot chest odds and so forth will have on this which obviously wasn't present in 2015?
Of course, we also have to be careful in assuming they'll actually use the patented process. It's possible that things have progressed beyond its capabilities over 2 years after filing.
It won't change anything - because people have become completely numb and even if they get alarmed - what do people do? Make some angry posts on social media - and in a few days - zero action and back to normal, and all is forgotten.
It seems that we've become a fatalist and apathetic society - completely unwilling to do anything beyond our immediate self-serving interest.
lol so true I am so glad I only run around in circles in warband now. I remember the first guild I joined in WoW, Prophets of Fury, He said he only played wow saved him money over single player rpgs.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. So to clarify...someone who does NOT pay, if this was implemented...would be far more likely to be paired with someone that pays for microtransaction?
If that is the case, then I don't really see why its bad. If its pay to win, it was already not worth playing to begin with. If its cosmetic stuff, then I think that is pretty fair. I've seen some epic stuff in WoW that I'd pay for if it was available without raiding, even if stats were taken out and it was just cosmetic lol.
Am I understanding it wrong? Cause it seems this would only be a problem in pay to win games...and if its cosmetic then not an issue. Is there something worse going on? I read through the article 3 times and still not really understanding it. Maybe too tired dunno or being dumb lol.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. So to clarify...someone who does NOT pay, if this was implemented...would be far more likely to be paired with someone that pays for microtransaction?
If that is the case, then I don't really see why its bad. If its pay to win, it was already not worth playing to begin with. If its cosmetic stuff, then I think that is pretty fair. I've seen some epic stuff in WoW that I'd pay for if it was available without raiding, even if stats were taken out and it was just cosmetic lol.
Am I understanding it wrong? Cause it seems this would only be a problem in pay to win games...and if its cosmetic then not an issue. Is there something worse going on? I read through the article 3 times and still not really understanding it. Maybe too tired dunno or being dumb lol.
"The example given was pairing one player with a microtransaction weapon that would be very effective in the fight with others who may wish to replicate that player's success by purchasing the same item."
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. So to clarify...someone who does NOT pay, if this was implemented...would be far more likely to be paired with someone that pays for microtransaction?
If that is the case, then I don't really see why its bad. If its pay to win, it was already not worth playing to begin with. If its cosmetic stuff, then I think that is pretty fair. I've seen some epic stuff in WoW that I'd pay for if it was available without raiding, even if stats were taken out and it was just cosmetic lol.
Am I understanding it wrong? Cause it seems this would only be a problem in pay to win games...and if its cosmetic then not an issue. Is there something worse going on? I read through the article 3 times and still not really understanding it. Maybe too tired dunno or being dumb lol.
"The example given was pairing one player with a microtransaction weapon that would be very effective in the fight with others who may wish to replicate that player's success by purchasing the same item."
yes, I read that. But, that goes back to the game being pay to win to begin with...if the game is pay to win, you'll still meet overpowered people who bought their way into power. What this feature would do is make it more likely, but it was already likely before.
When I tried archeage some months ago...I got owned over and over by so many pay to win people. This feature would make it more likely in a game like that...but...that goes back to...
in a pay to win game...it was already not worth playing because you'd still very often meet people who paid to win. This feature enhances that, but the game was already not worth playing before in that case. I guess this makes a game like Archeage even less playable lol. But it already wasn't playable before.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
Usually I hate software patents, especially somewhat vague ones like this one, because they are too easy to blunder into, or too hard to get around where trying to do something becomes silly due to a patent in your way. It is very easy to accidentally infringe on a software patent as a programmer and most programmers are not aware of every single software patent in existence.
In this case, it will make it much harder for any company other than activision to use these tactics. If you use any metrics at all to pair players -- you might have to defend them as not infringing on this patent or pay activision money (possibly a huge amount of money) -- or even have your project halted entirely.
What this patent does is make it clear whenever a game uses these tactics (they will be paying activision for the rights to do so), or they will get sued. Either way it makes it far easier to find games that do not use these tactics.
It doesn't matter if the game is P2W or not. It's this whole approach that is fucked up.
Imagine learning that Zara pairs kids at school--Zara wearing and non-Zara wearing--to encourage kids to force their parents to buy Zara clothing for them.
Doesn't matter if Zara clothes are warmer or not. This is a fucked up practice.
This would also open the gates to a whole new world of fuckedupness that we will experience in not so distant future.
Post edited by ConstantineMerus on
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. So to clarify...someone who does NOT pay, if this was implemented...would be far more likely to be paired with someone that pays for microtransaction?
If that is the case, then I don't really see why its bad. If its pay to win, it was already not worth playing to begin with. If its cosmetic stuff, then I think that is pretty fair. I've seen some epic stuff in WoW that I'd pay for if it was available without raiding, even if stats were taken out and it was just cosmetic lol.
Am I understanding it wrong? Cause it seems this would only be a problem in pay to win games...and if its cosmetic then not an issue. Is there something worse going on? I read through the article 3 times and still not really understanding it. Maybe too tired dunno or being dumb lol.
"The example given was pairing one player with a microtransaction weapon that would be very effective in the fight with others who may wish to replicate that player's success by purchasing the same item."
yes, I read that. But, that goes back to the game being pay to win to begin with...if the game is pay to win, you'll still meet overpowered people who bought their way into power. What this feature would do is make it more likely, but it was already likely before.
When I tried archeage some months ago...I got owned over and over by so many pay to win people. This feature would make it more likely in a game like that...but...that goes back to...
in a pay to win game...it was already not worth playing because you'd still very often meet people who paid to win. This feature enhances that, but the game was already not worth playing before in that case. I guess this makes a game like Archeage even less playable lol. But it already wasn't playable before.
It's the evolution towards more and more blatant usages of the "pay to win," placing more and more pressure on the player to pay, that's the issue.
Anyone who thinks this will end here is completely forgetting how we got here in the first place. This will continue to get worse, not better.
I've mentioned elsewhere that folks who wish to make excuses (not saying you are, just elaborating on my point) for this kind of behavior are naively optimistic about an industry that has given no one any reason to hold such optimism. Again, there were posters here (myself included) who made this very point before it got here. It's socioeconomic stratification in a hobby that was long a bastion of release from such stratification, now being pushed directly into your face in a rather blatant attempt to skin more money out of our hides.
It seems there's a real possibility that we may have gotten here unknowingly years before we even realized it.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. So to clarify...someone who does NOT pay, if this was implemented...would be far more likely to be paired with someone that pays for microtransaction?
If that is the case, then I don't really see why its bad. If its pay to win, it was already not worth playing to begin with. If its cosmetic stuff, then I think that is pretty fair. I've seen some epic stuff in WoW that I'd pay for if it was available without raiding, even if stats were taken out and it was just cosmetic lol.
Am I understanding it wrong? Cause it seems this would only be a problem in pay to win games...and if its cosmetic then not an issue. Is there something worse going on? I read through the article 3 times and still not really understanding it. Maybe too tired dunno or being dumb lol.
"The example given was pairing one player with a microtransaction weapon that would be very effective in the fight with others who may wish to replicate that player's success by purchasing the same item."
yes, I read that. But, that goes back to the game being pay to win to begin with...if the game is pay to win, you'll still meet overpowered people who bought their way into power. What this feature would do is make it more likely, but it was already likely before.
When I tried archeage some months ago...I got owned over and over by so many pay to win people. This feature would make it more likely in a game like that...but...that goes back to...
in a pay to win game...it was already not worth playing because you'd still very often meet people who paid to win. This feature enhances that, but the game was already not worth playing before in that case. I guess this makes a game like Archeage even less playable lol. But it already wasn't playable before.
It's the evolution towards more and more blatant usages of the "pay to win," placing more and more pressure on the player to pay, that's the issue.
Anyone who thinks this will end here is completely forgetting how we got here in the first place. This will continue to get worse, not better.
I've mentioned elsewhere that folks who wish to make excuses (not saying you are, just elaborating on my point) for this kind of behavior are naively optimistic about an industry that has given no one any reason to hold such optimism. Again, there were posters here (myself included) who made this very point before it got here. It's socioeconomic stratification in a hobby that was long a bastion of release from such stratification, now being pushed directly into your face in a rather blatant attempt to skin more money out of your hide.
It seems there's a real possibility that we may have gotten here unknowingly years before we even realized it.
yeah, I'm not trying to make an excuse or anything. And something like this is definitely further makes pay to win games even worse. Any game with a feature like this I would avoid. But I would think most people go into pay to win games already knowing that, or not playing them to begin with or leaving when they find out its pay to win. I mean, I did try archeage cause I figured I'd try it, but when I got owned by some pay to winner I pretty much left.
But if they actually put in this feature, I'd definitely avoid any games with it.
There IS a lot of indie games however that avoid things like this. There are some bad ones, but the majority that I play (and bought on Steam) are way better than anything EA or any big company puts out.
Maybe things like this will let the indie industry grow even more...if more and more people get fed up with this pay to win crap, maybe they'll go to indie companies that don't try to ruin the genre and actually have a love of what they do and not in it for milking the player for every cent.
I guess my point was...its already vastly better to avoid pay to win games, this just makes it more so. And if it gets worse and worse, then its even more of a reason not to play them lol.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. So to clarify...someone who does NOT pay, if this was implemented...would be far more likely to be paired with someone that pays for microtransaction?
If that is the case, then I don't really see why its bad. If its pay to win, it was already not worth playing to begin with. If its cosmetic stuff, then I think that is pretty fair. I've seen some epic stuff in WoW that I'd pay for if it was available without raiding, even if stats were taken out and it was just cosmetic lol.
Am I understanding it wrong? Cause it seems this would only be a problem in pay to win games...and if its cosmetic then not an issue. Is there something worse going on? I read through the article 3 times and still not really understanding it. Maybe too tired dunno or being dumb lol.
"The example given was pairing one player with a microtransaction weapon that would be very effective in the fight with others who may wish to replicate that player's success by purchasing the same item."
yes, I read that. But, that goes back to the game being pay to win to begin with...if the game is pay to win, you'll still meet overpowered people who bought their way into power. What this feature would do is make it more likely, but it was already likely before.
When I tried archeage some months ago...I got owned over and over by so many pay to win people. This feature would make it more likely in a game like that...but...that goes back to...
in a pay to win game...it was already not worth playing because you'd still very often meet people who paid to win. This feature enhances that, but the game was already not worth playing before in that case. I guess this makes a game like Archeage even less playable lol. But it already wasn't playable before.
It's the evolution towards more and more blatant usages of the "pay to win," placing more and more pressure on the player to pay, that's the issue.
Anyone who thinks this will end here is completely forgetting how we got here in the first place. This will continue to get worse, not better.
I've mentioned elsewhere that folks who wish to make excuses (not saying you are, just elaborating on my point) for this kind of behavior are naively optimistic about an industry that has given no one any reason to hold such optimism. Again, there were posters here (myself included) who made this very point before it got here. It's socioeconomic stratification in a hobby that was long a bastion of release from such stratification, now being pushed directly into your face in a rather blatant attempt to skin more money out of your hide.
It seems there's a real possibility that we may have gotten here unknowingly years before we even realized it.
yeah, I'm not trying to make an excuse or anything. And something like this is definitely further makes pay to win games even worse. Any game with a feature like this I would avoid. But I would think most people go into pay to win games already knowing that, or not playing them to begin with or leaving when they find out its pay to win. I mean, I did try archeage cause I figured I'd try it, but when I got owned by some pay to winner I pretty much left.
But if they actually put in this feature, I'd definitely avoid any games with it.
There IS a lot of indie games however that avoid things like this. There are some bad ones, but the majority that I play (and bought on Steam) are way better than anything EA or any big company puts out.
Maybe things like this will let the indie industry grow even more...if more and more people get fed up with this pay to win crap, maybe they'll go to indie companies that don't try to ruin the genre and actually have a love of what they do and not in it for milking the player for every cent.
I guess my point was...its already vastly better to avoid pay to win games, this just makes it more so. And if it gets worse and worse, then its even more of a reason not to play them lol.
It's certainly pushing me towards quality indie endeavors, as well as retreading old stomping grounds.
I get your point, and I agree somewhat. It's just one of those things that's disappointing to see from the perspective of someone who has been gaming long enough to remember when we all just paid a flat fee and enjoyed the title for what it was, maybe with an expac here or there. These games certainly weren't sliced and diced and transformed into the virtual equivalent of a store front window within a game.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. So to clarify...someone who does NOT pay, if this was implemented...would be far more likely to be paired with someone that pays for microtransaction?
If that is the case, then I don't really see why its bad. If its pay to win, it was already not worth playing to begin with. If its cosmetic stuff, then I think that is pretty fair. I've seen some epic stuff in WoW that I'd pay for if it was available without raiding, even if stats were taken out and it was just cosmetic lol.
Am I understanding it wrong? Cause it seems this would only be a problem in pay to win games...and if its cosmetic then not an issue. Is there something worse going on? I read through the article 3 times and still not really understanding it. Maybe too tired dunno or being dumb lol.
"The example given was pairing one player with a microtransaction weapon that would be very effective in the fight with others who may wish to replicate that player's success by purchasing the same item."
yes, I read that. But, that goes back to the game being pay to win to begin with...if the game is pay to win, you'll still meet overpowered people who bought their way into power. What this feature would do is make it more likely, but it was already likely before.
When I tried archeage some months ago...I got owned over and over by so many pay to win people. This feature would make it more likely in a game like that...but...that goes back to...
in a pay to win game...it was already not worth playing because you'd still very often meet people who paid to win. This feature enhances that, but the game was already not worth playing before in that case. I guess this makes a game like Archeage even less playable lol. But it already wasn't playable before.
It's the evolution towards more and more blatant usages of the "pay to win," placing more and more pressure on the player to pay, that's the issue.
Anyone who thinks this will end here is completely forgetting how we got here in the first place. This will continue to get worse, not better.
I've mentioned elsewhere that folks who wish to make excuses (not saying you are, just elaborating on my point) for this kind of behavior are naively optimistic about an industry that has given no one any reason to hold such optimism. Again, there were posters here (myself included) who made this very point before it got here. It's socioeconomic stratification in a hobby that was long a bastion of release from such stratification, now being pushed directly into your face in a rather blatant attempt to skin more money out of your hide.
It seems there's a real possibility that we may have gotten here unknowingly years before we even realized it.
yeah, I'm not trying to make an excuse or anything. And something like this is definitely further makes pay to win games even worse. Any game with a feature like this I would avoid. But I would think most people go into pay to win games already knowing that, or not playing them to begin with or leaving when they find out its pay to win. I mean, I did try archeage cause I figured I'd try it, but when I got owned by some pay to winner I pretty much left.
But if they actually put in this feature, I'd definitely avoid any games with it.
There IS a lot of indie games however that avoid things like this. There are some bad ones, but the majority that I play (and bought on Steam) are way better than anything EA or any big company puts out.
Maybe things like this will let the indie industry grow even more...if more and more people get fed up with this pay to win crap, maybe they'll go to indie companies that don't try to ruin the genre and actually have a love of what they do and not in it for milking the player for every cent.
I guess my point was...its already vastly better to avoid pay to win games, this just makes it more so. And if it gets worse and worse, then its even more of a reason not to play them lol.
It's certainly pushing me towards quality indie endeavors, as well as retreading old stomping grounds.
I get your point, and I agree somewhat. It's just one of those things that's disappointing to see from the perspective of someone who has been gaming long enough to remember when we all just paid a flat fee and enjoyed the title for what it was, maybe with a expac here or there. These games certainly weren't sliced and diced and transformed into the virtual equivalent of a store front window within a game.
yeah I agree. Its one reason I've gone into indie studios or smaller companies. Though in some ways I think Bethesda started things like that with their horse armor. That was many years ago. If I recall, they were the first to cause controversy over DLC...maybe other companies were doing things like that, but I don't remember as much controversy as the horse armor caused.
Then of course Bethesda puts in paid mods and makes a joke about horse armor in one of their paid mods lol...like a giant slap in the face to all their fans.
It is sad when good companies go down that road.
I think though the next major thing is gonna be even more paid mods and modding will soon be paid for and no longer free...bethesda is already going down that road and paving the way for future companies to do the same...
Unofficial patch! Fix the bugs we couldn't fix ourselves! that'll be 4.99 please.
That will be the future, I guarantee it...
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. So to clarify...someone who does NOT pay, if this was implemented...would be far more likely to be paired with someone that pays for microtransaction?
If that is the case, then I don't really see why its bad. If its pay to win, it was already not worth playing to begin with. If its cosmetic stuff, then I think that is pretty fair. I've seen some epic stuff in WoW that I'd pay for if it was available without raiding, even if stats were taken out and it was just cosmetic lol.
Am I understanding it wrong? Cause it seems this would only be a problem in pay to win games...and if its cosmetic then not an issue. Is there something worse going on? I read through the article 3 times and still not really understanding it. Maybe too tired dunno or being dumb lol.
"The example given was pairing one player with a microtransaction weapon that would be very effective in the fight with others who may wish to replicate that player's success by purchasing the same item."
yes, I read that. But, that goes back to the game being pay to win to begin with...if the game is pay to win, you'll still meet overpowered people who bought their way into power. What this feature would do is make it more likely, but it was already likely before.
When I tried archeage some months ago...I got owned over and over by so many pay to win people. This feature would make it more likely in a game like that...but...that goes back to...
in a pay to win game...it was already not worth playing because you'd still very often meet people who paid to win. This feature enhances that, but the game was already not worth playing before in that case. I guess this makes a game like Archeage even less playable lol. But it already wasn't playable before.
It's the evolution towards more and more blatant usages of the "pay to win," placing more and more pressure on the player to pay, that's the issue.
Anyone who thinks this will end here is completely forgetting how we got here in the first place. This will continue to get worse, not better.
I've mentioned elsewhere that folks who wish to make excuses (not saying you are, just elaborating on my point) for this kind of behavior are naively optimistic about an industry that has given no one any reason to hold such optimism. Again, there were posters here (myself included) who made this very point before it got here. It's socioeconomic stratification in a hobby that was long a bastion of release from such stratification, now being pushed directly into your face in a rather blatant attempt to skin more money out of your hide.
It seems there's a real possibility that we may have gotten here unknowingly years before we even realized it.
yeah, I'm not trying to make an excuse or anything. And something like this is definitely further makes pay to win games even worse. Any game with a feature like this I would avoid. But I would think most people go into pay to win games already knowing that, or not playing them to begin with or leaving when they find out its pay to win. I mean, I did try archeage cause I figured I'd try it, but when I got owned by some pay to winner I pretty much left.
But if they actually put in this feature, I'd definitely avoid any games with it.
There IS a lot of indie games however that avoid things like this. There are some bad ones, but the majority that I play (and bought on Steam) are way better than anything EA or any big company puts out.
Maybe things like this will let the indie industry grow even more...if more and more people get fed up with this pay to win crap, maybe they'll go to indie companies that don't try to ruin the genre and actually have a love of what they do and not in it for milking the player for every cent.
I guess my point was...its already vastly better to avoid pay to win games, this just makes it more so. And if it gets worse and worse, then its even more of a reason not to play them lol.
It's certainly pushing me towards quality indie endeavors, as well as retreading old stomping grounds.
I get your point, and I agree somewhat. It's just one of those things that's disappointing to see from the perspective of someone who has been gaming long enough to remember when we all just paid a flat fee and enjoyed the title for what it was, maybe with a expac here or there. These games certainly weren't sliced and diced and transformed into the virtual equivalent of a store front window within a game.
yeah I agree. Its one reason I've gone into indie studios or smaller companies. Though in some ways I think Bethesda started things like that with their horse armor. That was many years ago. If I recall, they were the first to cause controversy over DLC...maybe other companies were doing things like that, but I don't remember as much controversy as the horse armor caused.
Then of course Bethesda puts in paid mods and makes a joke about horse armor in one of their paid mods lol...like a giant slap in the face to all their fans.
It is sad when good companies go down that road.
I think though the next major thing is gonna be even more paid mods and modding will soon be paid for and no longer free...bethesda is already going down that road and paving the way for future companies to do the same...
Unofficial patch! Fix the bugs we couldn't fix ourselves! that'll be 4.99 please.
That will be the future, I guarantee it...
I honestly can't say I feel it definitely won't happen, which is already depressing enough a thought. It seems that, as @ConstantineMerus mentioned earlier in the thread, this could certainly open up a whole new can of worms if Activision is able to begin slipping it into titles without a noticeable backlash from consumers and/or gaming pubs (hint hint Bill and the gang!).
It's worth noting, I guess, as @Wizardry mentioned on the previous page, Activision has released a statement saying this was exploratory and they aren't using it in any titles. I do wonder what would keep them from simply waiting for this brouhaha to settle down by repeating that statement, only to turn around and slip it in as soon as we've stopped looking out for it.
Developers aren't obligated to reveal their matchmaking algorithms as far as I know.
People on reddit are already questioning that this might already be implemented in certain games. At least if I'm understanding the comments right. Like some teams in Madden 18 code_star on reddit said seem impossible without him paying. But still, seems its already partly used in some way
Wow. Solid article. They plan to match average players with great players who've purchased items in hopes of luring the average players into mimicking the great player's loadout. If the mark does purchase the system will matchmake games for the mark which are advantageous to that purchased item, which necessarily must put others at a disadvantage. We can assume the advantageous matchmaking for the mark will then diminish over time and the cycle will begin anew.
This really makes me wonder if this happens in the next Madden 18 game. I feel like I'm constantly playing against teams with players that would seem impossible to get without paying for. My record on "seasons" mode where you build a team from a deck that you grind or pay for is terrible, but my record on game modes with more fair player distribution is fantastic.
That may or may not just be a paranoid reaction to the news. It would be interesting to see someone keep some data on their personal matchmaking experiences over the next few weeks and share it online.
Shoudln't be allowed to get a patent on such...
In my eyes this is just Blizzard / Activision being a patent troll so all other game companies pushing out said games have to pay them royalties, or collect money however that stuff works.
That may or may not just be a paranoid reaction to the news. It would be interesting to see someone keep some data on their personal matchmaking experiences over the next few weeks and share it online.
yeah, would be really interesting to see if its hyperbole (is that the word I'm looking for?) or if its actually something more. I'm sure there'll be people testing this out that know the game(s) really well enough to figure out if its actually true or not.
Though never really heard anyone complaining about the matchmaking in those games before this news, so it more likely to be nothing...never know though if they were already testing the waters or not and maybe people didn't really put two and two together.
In any case, if they have the patent for it...I doubt they are gonna let it sit there and gather dust. Even if it takes them a few years or whatever to use it. Even though people patent all kinds of stupid crap...I still don't see a reason to patent something unless one intends to use it...or maybe they intend to sue people using similar things and screw them over and make them pay for it lol. A get rich quick scheme.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
I notice you LOL'd everyone that posted negative feelings towards this information. Pot, meet Kettle.
Not at all.
I have no issue with 'feelings', people not liking something, things just get silly when people try to apply some 'funny' reasoning or justification to their preferences...hence an honest laugh because they are indeed funny.
It won't be long since all these fuckers share the same data pool. Imagine posting "I feel blue today" on your FB as a pathetic attempt to whore for some pity from your friends then you'd get a pop-in from Battlefront "Nothing beats the blues, like the new missile cruise! - $14.99" then just when you want to make the purchase Star Citizen opens up a new window "Why get a missile cruise when you can get a battle cruise? - $249.99) you were already depressed and stupid now you are confused too. It is only then you'd get the final blow when that cool chick you've been in-game-stalking to play Destiny 2 with comes online and you're hoping she'd calm some of your agony, build up a shred of your self-steam and then maybe have your kids one day but NO! That's when Activision kicks-in: "She's out of your league you filthy peasant, unless you get our new ladies-cannot-resist-gear for $599.99 you cannot group with her."
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
It won't be long since all these fuckers share the same data pool. Imagine posting "I feel blue today" on your FB as a pathetic attempt to whore for some pity from your friends then you'd get a pop-in from Battlefront "Nothing beats the blues, like the new missile cruise! - $14.99" then just when you want to make the purchase Star Citizen opens up a new window "Why get a missile cruise when you can get a battle cruise? - $249.99) you were already depressed and stupid now you are confused too. It is only then you'd get the final blow when that cool chick you've been in-game-stalking to play Destiny 2 with comes online and you're hoping she'd calm some of your agony, build up a shred of your self-steam and then maybe have your kids one day but NO! That's when Activision kicks-in: "She's out of your league you filthy peasant, unless you get our new ladies-cannot-resist-gear for $599.99 you cannot group with her."
Actually...humblebumble legit shared all their data with IGN after they got bought by them. No joke. You can look it up if you don't believe me or I can link it myself...but if you (or anyone else) ever used humblebundle all your data now belongs to IGN
Why does IGN need that info?
(edit: Oh think I read that wrong again. I should get off and go to bed lol)
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
You have to ask yourself what this software does. Does the purchased weapon sparkle? Do blue farts come out the rear of the avatar? I mean, really. Does this assume that two players anonymously matched talk to each other? Or are there going to be yellow arrows and flavor text, "Bro, I beat you cuz I've got a store bought weapon. Lulz."
Maybe it is just me but there is a part of this I can see as really really bad for everyone. Just think about it like this one part said that it is going to pair people up with people that are not as good as them. It is fine if this was a mentor system and voluntary but to force people to play with others that are not on skill with them in hopes of forcing the less skilled to buy something by making them fill bad is really crap in my opinion. Next comes the whole you are buying gear in a store might as well just not give anyone any weapons unless they buy them, that way everyone just has to run around punching each other to death unless they are going to pony up the money and slaughter everyone else /end sarcasm.
Why does it matter if a game has microtransactions or not? Is the game good? Then why punish yourself from playing a good game? I play Destiny 2 on console and its amazing and a ton of fun...I'm not gonna self harm myself by not playing it just because of some loot boxes or whatever. I'm gonna buy Star Wars Battlefront 2, because I love star wars and its looking to be another great game.
Too many people rage against microtransactions and DLC...and the vast majority of time they'd have no effect on the persons game.
Oh well, I hope those people leave the gaming genre so people who actually LIKE games can enjoy games without a bunch of whiners complaining about them.
And wasn't there a pro-microtransaction article just recently praising loot boxes and microtransactions? It was for battlefront 2 lol
Just like that article on this site, I learned to stop worrying about things like this and just enjoying the game itself. Now I have far more fun in all kinds of games.
Well, that certainly is one approach to life, learning to ignore when others are manipulating you.
Just not one I prefer as it in large part is how things got this way in the first place.
Remember when all of this cash shop / microtransaction stuff started people cautioned against the "slippery slope?"
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Comments
lol so true I am so glad I only run around in circles in warband now. I remember the first guild I joined in WoW, Prophets of Fury, He said he only played wow saved him money over single player rpgs.
If that is the case, then I don't really see why its bad. If its pay to win, it was already not worth playing to begin with. If its cosmetic stuff, then I think that is pretty fair. I've seen some epic stuff in WoW that I'd pay for if it was available without raiding, even if stats were taken out and it was just cosmetic lol.
Am I understanding it wrong? Cause it seems this would only be a problem in pay to win games...and if its cosmetic then not an issue. Is there something worse going on? I read through the article 3 times and still not really understanding it. Maybe too tired dunno or being dumb lol.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
When I tried archeage some months ago...I got owned over and over by so many pay to win people. This feature would make it more likely in a game like that...but...that goes back to...
in a pay to win game...it was already not worth playing because you'd still very often meet people who paid to win. This feature enhances that, but the game was already not worth playing before in that case. I guess this makes a game like Archeage even less playable lol. But it already wasn't playable before.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
In this case, it will make it much harder for any company other than activision to use these tactics. If you use any metrics at all to pair players -- you might have to defend them as not infringing on this patent or pay activision money (possibly a huge amount of money) -- or even have your project halted entirely.
What this patent does is make it clear whenever a game uses these tactics (they will be paying activision for the rights to do so), or they will get sued. Either way it makes it far easier to find games that do not use these tactics.
Imagine learning that Zara pairs kids at school--Zara wearing and non-Zara wearing--to encourage kids to force their parents to buy Zara clothing for them.
Doesn't matter if Zara clothes are warmer or not. This is a fucked up practice.
This would also open the gates to a whole new world of fuckedupness that we will experience in not so distant future.
Anyone who thinks this will end here is completely forgetting how we got here in the first place. This will continue to get worse, not better.
I've mentioned elsewhere that folks who wish to make excuses (not saying you are, just elaborating on my point) for this kind of behavior are naively optimistic about an industry that has given no one any reason to hold such optimism. Again, there were posters here (myself included) who made this very point before it got here. It's socioeconomic stratification in a hobby that was long a bastion of release from such stratification, now being pushed directly into your face in a rather blatant attempt to skin more money out of our hides.
It seems there's a real possibility that we may have gotten here unknowingly years before we even realized it.
But if they actually put in this feature, I'd definitely avoid any games with it.
There IS a lot of indie games however that avoid things like this. There are some bad ones, but the majority that I play (and bought on Steam) are way better than anything EA or any big company puts out.
Maybe things like this will let the indie industry grow even more...if more and more people get fed up with this pay to win crap, maybe they'll go to indie companies that don't try to ruin the genre and actually have a love of what they do and not in it for milking the player for every cent.
I guess my point was...its already vastly better to avoid pay to win games, this just makes it more so. And if it gets worse and worse, then its even more of a reason not to play them lol.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
I get your point, and I agree somewhat. It's just one of those things that's disappointing to see from the perspective of someone who has been gaming long enough to remember when we all just paid a flat fee and enjoyed the title for what it was, maybe with an expac here or there. These games certainly weren't sliced and diced and transformed into the virtual equivalent of a store front window within a game.
Then of course Bethesda puts in paid mods and makes a joke about horse armor in one of their paid mods lol...like a giant slap in the face to all their fans.
It is sad when good companies go down that road.
I think though the next major thing is gonna be even more paid mods and modding will soon be paid for and no longer free...bethesda is already going down that road and paving the way for future companies to do the same...
Unofficial patch! Fix the bugs we couldn't fix ourselves! that'll be 4.99 please.
That will be the future, I guarantee it...
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
It's worth noting, I guess, as @Wizardry mentioned on the previous page, Activision has released a statement saying this was exploratory and they aren't using it in any titles. I do wonder what would keep them from simply waiting for this brouhaha to settle down by repeating that statement, only to turn around and slip it in as soon as we've stopped looking out for it.
Developers aren't obligated to reveal their matchmaking algorithms as far as I know.
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/770xtw/how_activision_uses_matchmaking_tricks_to_sell/?utm_content=comments&utm_medium=hot&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=pcgaming
[–]Separati 95 points 7 hours ago
Wow. Solid article. They plan to match average players with great players who've purchased items in hopes of luring the average players into mimicking the great player's loadout. If the mark does purchase the system will matchmake games for the mark which are advantageous to that purchased item, which necessarily must put others at a disadvantage. We can assume the advantageous matchmaking for the mark will then diminish over time and the cycle will begin anew.
[–]Code_star 4 points an hour ago
This really makes me wonder if this happens in the next Madden 18 game. I feel like I'm constantly playing against teams with players that would seem impossible to get without paying for. My record on "seasons" mode where you build a team from a deck that you grind or pay for is terrible, but my record on game modes with more fair player distribution is fantastic.
[–]BallisticamITX - 3770K, MSI 390x, 16gb 1866mhz [score hidden] 32 minutes ago
People have questioned the same about FIFA too, seems like players from paid packs are better than the same player from a reward pack.......
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
Though never really heard anyone complaining about the matchmaking in those games before this news, so it more likely to be nothing...never know though if they were already testing the waters or not and maybe people didn't really put two and two together.
In any case, if they have the patent for it...I doubt they are gonna let it sit there and gather dust. Even if it takes them a few years or whatever to use it. Even though people patent all kinds of stupid crap...I still don't see a reason to patent something unless one intends to use it...or maybe they intend to sue people using similar things and screw them over and make them pay for it lol. A get rich quick scheme.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
I have no issue with 'feelings', people not liking something, things just get silly when people try to apply some 'funny' reasoning or justification to their preferences...hence an honest laugh because they are indeed funny.
Why does IGN need that info?
(edit: Oh think I read that wrong again. I should get off and go to bed lol)
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
You have to ask yourself what this software does. Does the purchased weapon sparkle? Do blue farts come out the rear of the avatar? I mean, really. Does this assume that two players anonymously matched talk to each other? Or are there going to be yellow arrows and flavor text, "Bro, I beat you cuz I've got a store bought weapon. Lulz."
<facepalm>
Well, that certainly is one approach to life, learning to ignore when others are manipulating you.
Just not one I prefer as it in large part is how things got this way in the first place.
Remember when all of this cash shop / microtransaction stuff started people cautioned against the "slippery slope?"
We're almost at the bottom of the hill now.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon