All future EA games to feature microtransactions

[GMT 389]

saw this pic and immediately had to think about this thread:

 

 

which basically sums up my thought of dlc and microtransactions for non-online games (which is, in short, I think that many publishers abuse our nowadays internet capabilities to do what the picture says)

[LexusInfernus 908]

Besides that, the major expansion packs did cost money, and if I remember correctly you also had to pay a bit to download certain landmarks for SimCity 4 from the Maxis website.

 

Both SimCity 4's nor SimCity 3000's spare landmarks were free.

I misremembered that bit then. 

 

In any case, it remains to be seen if Maxis is going to make us pay for every separate landmark, or whether or not we can get some of them for free. 

 

Also, everyone complains about the DLC filling up supposedly incomplete games, but everyone keeps buying those games and their DLC. Great way to show those evil bastards at EA that their business practices are unacceptable. 

[Duke87 1,070]

Crack addicts will continue buying crack regardless of the business practices of the drug dealers.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Crack addicts will continue buying crack regardless of the business practices of the drug dealers.

Gamers aren't crack addicts. 

[Ocram's Razr 964]

Games are more expensive --Ocram

[EyeofMobius 27]

EA is of course risking to put the nails in its own coffin for many gamers who have seen their favourite series bought out and made into an expensive flavourless hobby. Based on how the new Simcity rolls I may entirely give up on the publisher and join the growing list of EA haters4life.

 

A note on what I do like about current game business offerings:

 

The DLC season pass. Company releases game as well as a seasons pass for guaranteed upcoming content that expands and lengthens the experience of the game. My current favourite example of this is Borderlands 2 where the seasons pass is promise a total of 4 extra sub campaigns for a decent price. With 3 of 4 already released and some of the content being equally or more entertaining than the base campaign.

 

Indie developers. Bless the people striking out and away from the big business side of software. With the explosion of social media as well as the higher capacity infrastructure of the internet a broom closet full of people are now able to make really satisfying game experiences and get them out to the world free or low cost to the user. Also there are now new ways to finance these indie games and have a fanbase grow and develop the game as they also donate supporting funds in early stages. A good example is Planetary Annihilation where they made a concept movie and got tonnes of donations to launch development properly. A better example is to look at one of the likely three biggest games in the world right now; not CoD, not WoW but Minecraft. I heard about it through word of mouth during early beta, went to the site demoed the alpha, bought beta and havent looked back since. Want more examples you dont even have to leave our forums to see projects on the go for things with amazing potential.

 

Modding capability. One of the biggest things I noticed when the latest Simcity was announced is that the SC4 modding community got many shoutouts for being healthy and active. There does seem to be indescision in the big business side of games on whether modding is good or not. I vote good because if i didn't want to play modded games I would probably have a console for gaming instead of having a computer that is specced for gaming. I applaud Companies like Bethseda and Fireaxis for rising strong and tall while maintaining mod capability. Look at Minecraft again as well, I don't play vanilla Minecraft anymore because for me it is the mods that make it a game I will be playing to an indeterminate time in the future. If the new Simcity flops as a result of EA's meddling then I am sure to go back to SC4 with a few Gig of modded content on the go without batting an eyelid.

[Duke87 1,070]

Crack addicts will continue buying crack regardless of the business practices of the drug dealers.

Gamers aren't crack addicts. 

 

No, but they are video game addicts. And just like drug addicts, they are not willing to stop supporting the supplier because it means denying themselves their fix.

 

It's easy to be indignant on the internet about how the sequel to your favorite game is being ruined by its maker, but at the end of the day it's still the sequel to your favorite game and so you're not going to not buy it - you're going to bend over and deal with it. As you said yourself, everyone complains, yet everyone keeps buying the games. That is blatantly the behavior of an addict. If gamers weren't addicts, they would, you know, stop buying the games.

[LexusInfernus 908]

 

Crack addicts will continue buying crack regardless of the business practices of the drug dealers.

Gamers aren't crack addicts. 

 

No, but they are video game addicts. And just like drug addicts, they are not willing to stop supporting the supplier because it means denying themselves their fix.

 

It's easy to be indignant on the internet about how the sequel to your favorite game is being ruined by its maker, but at the end of the day it's still the sequel to your favorite game and so you're not going to not buy it - you're going to bend over and deal with it. As you said yourself, everyone complains, yet everyone keeps buying the games. That is blatantly the behavior of an addict. If gamers weren't addicts, they would, you know, stop buying the games.

Yes, if EA had the monopoly on making games. There are plenty of alternative companies that do not conform to this kind of business practice. But in fact, we punish those who have good business practices. CD Projekt releases all their games without any DRM, including The Witcher II and it subsequently got pirated a few million times. 

 

I hate to say it, but if consumers behave like this, it is of little wonder that modern gamers get screwed over. We reap what we sow.