Makes a good meme doesn't it.:lol:Triple aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Still lets all believe Dart over a veteran industry insider.
Makes a good meme doesn't it.:lol:Triple aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Force... Nobody forces people to buy those cosmetic items, either through ingame currency or money.And no country taxes the pretend money so every bloody game has to force that bullshit on my head?
One of its few merits.FO76 is not a common crowdfunded project.
Who's talking about forcing buying?Force… Nobody forces people to buy those cosmetic items, either through ingame currency or money.
Force… Nobody forces people to buy those cosmetic items, either through ingame currency or money.
Except players who need a sense of belonging and desire to appear as a gamer when they hate on gaming.
One of its few merits.
This, like with Star Citizen, is plain despicable practice that exploits "fanboyism"/younger audience. I mean if you saw an adult on a street trying to sell a kid a Kinder egg for 50$, would you say: "It's on you, if you fall for it.
Makes a good meme doesn't it.:lol:
Still lets all believe Dart over a veteran industry insider.
Indeed. You also have to be very ignorant to not realize how publishers have a tendency to slowly introduce this into their games, until it eventually becomes tied to progression systems so it affects everyone, or even pay to win/PvP. Or as Chris Roberts likes to say: " You win by having fun!" ( and having a big wallet lets you have so much more "fun"!)
Who's talking about forcing buying?
I'm forced to see the damned scam store!! I don't watch shit in toilets so please keep it out of my games too.
Players desired it. They supported stuff like Steam that provide tools to increase the social dimension of a vid product. And so on.We are nearly in 2019.
To say than no one is "forcing" anyone in a game with a social side in 2018 is to be quite an idiot.
To negate than those companies want to add at any cost a "social" side to their games to enjoy the same social mechanisms used in Facebook and other social platforms is to be quite an idiot.
A means to defend themselves against buying cosmetic stuff for money when it is available for ingame currency: play the product, build up ingame currency, buy.To say than the gamers have any mean to defend themselves against that kind of mechanisms would just prove than you are a really weak target for this kind of attempt.
Oh, talking about weak and social mechanisms, is that streamed?
Your ignorant paranoia isn't uncommon. What's amusing is that you're pretending this case is particularly bad.
I don't really mind the fantasy that optional cosmetics that you can get for in-game currency ruin games that you don't even play.
That kind of fear mongering has existed for a very, very long time. If I had to give a rough estimate of the literally hundreds of games I've played with "real-money" transactions as part of the equation - maybe 5 of them have been bad enough to seriously impact my enjoyment of the game. Battlefront 2 is an example of that - and that's why they eventually caved and changed it.
Publishers are greedy - not necessarily stupid.
To each his own, though.
I prefer to focus on what I play myself - and that also gives me the advantage of actually understanding what I'm talking about.
But I know that's not the norm when you feel like talking and nonsense fits your agenda
It is no longer disdain for gaming, it is hatred on gaming.
Gaming is not about winning, it is not about losing. It is about gaming.
As soon as a game includes winning and losing, then both winning and losing must be designed to be enjoyable.
Now for players, in their case, it is all about dominating, all about prevailing, all about conquering they cant stand losing so winning is the only fun possible
What's pathetic is this guy here (BOBO) ^ twisting my words. I already said it shouldn't exploit young kids who steal their parent's credit card or whatever, that's common sense, dum-dum. Of course that's appalling. But if a grown adult or kid who has permission to buy things wants to buy the objects, that's their choice. Likewise they have the choice to not buy it. I'm not talking about kids who aren't allowed to buy things in the game racking up credit card bills, that's ridiculous lol.
The only reason BOBO cares is because he owns stock with CD Projeckt Red and wants to see Bethesda fail anyway, seeing as they are "rivals" or something (even though Beth is far ahead of CDPR in terms of sales and as an overall business). That's why every other post of his is praising CDPR while trying to take down the big guy on the block - Bethesda. Ain't gonna happen, bud.
I already said it has a better story and characters. Must it be better at everything?!
So that's the secret of Zynga's Farmville. And other cowclickers.Gaming is not about winning, it is not about losing. It is about gaming.
Good point. If consumers are supposed to listen to such bullshit (we're not talking about actual games here but scamware and broken pieces of s, right?), then developers should listen to the same consumers who say "don't make it".What I disagree with is the attitude "don't like it, don't buy it". Practices like this are designed to exploit more than just rich kids, are being investigated for that same reason.
Well it all boils down to content makers want views on YouTube Wisdom. Yes the video names will be click bait it draws viewers. Still some insiders are correct sometimes.This made me laugh at first, but perhaps there is merit in it?
After all veteran industry insiders have proven about as useful as journalist integrity in the past 10 years.
Its a nice idea in theory, but in reality neither sells well without a generous portion of drama and bullshit.
This made me laugh at first, but perhaps there is merit in it?
After all veteran industry insiders have proven about as useful as journalist integrity in the past 10 years.
Its a nice idea in theory, but in reality neither sells well without a generous portion of drama and bullshit.
Your own ignorance and silly attempts to rationalize everything using wordplay it's actually rather amusing here.
In this case, there are actual blatant facts, this is of the worst anti consumer releases from major publisher.
You have:
- a blatantly poorly done product released in absolutely unacceptable technical state
- that was very soon discounted, very short after release
- that also came with nonsensical, false advertising ( 16 times the detail of our previous titles!)
- their PR also knew about this and were practically joking on Twitter about it ( "we look forward to "spectacular bugs")
- it also came with false merchandise advertising, and were even filed a lawsuit for it, for which they first lied about the reasons for it
- on top of that, there was also a leak of user private information
- and we now have blatantly overpriced microtransactions, even by "AAA standards"
And previous practices of the same publisher speak enough on it's own.
So in this case, both greedy and stupid..no matter how much you like their games, no sane person would defend this.
Funny, I knew this wasn't about microtransactions and almost entirely about your agenda and problem with a game you don't play or have any intention of playing.
…
Your energy is being wasted my young friend. I know all about that.
@ChienAboyeur;
But it's more than that.
Firstly, one fairly important element of game design that makes losing enjoyable, especially for PvP, is balance. Pay-to-win will sooner or later ruin the balance.
And... Nothing. Progression toward what, toward winning, toward beating the product, toward dominating, prevailing, conquering.Secondly, even coop/PvE games run into issues with pay-to-win. The moment you can "buy" progress in the game, the developer has an incentive to make progression more difficult.
Just to clarify: I do not mean difficult in the sense of complex, but rather in the sense of more grinding.