Fallout 76 players say the Atom shop prices are getting out of hand

Triple aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! :D
Makes a good meme doesn't it.:lol:

Still lets all believe Dart over a veteran industry insider.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,180
Location
Spudlandia
And no country taxes the pretend money so every bloody game has to force that bullshit on my head?
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.
FO76 is not a common crowdfunded project.
One of its few merits.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
Force… Nobody forces people to buy those cosmetic items, either through ingame currency or money.
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.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
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.

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.

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?
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2018
Messages
262
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.

Please don't tell adults about this 'exploit'. I've brokered a few deals on artwork and classic cars over my lifetime and i can assure you, 'fanboyism' is not connected to an age group. Worth is determined between a willing buyer and a willing seller.

All your judging from the sideline won't change the mind of either if they are really motivated.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
2,871
No, but it might change those who are undecided. It's not judgement, it's a warning.
 
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
2,315
Makes a good meme doesn't it.:lol:

Still lets all believe Dart over a veteran industry insider.

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.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
2,871
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"!)

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.

Any activity that lets them win is good to them. So first priority for devs is to give them products that makes failing an unlikely outcome.
That gives combat design like TW3 players do not have to watch the screen to prevail, only hammer a button.

Hence the fear about pay to win. Pay to win what. PvP, one winner, one loser. If only the winner has fun, then there is a structural issue because not everyone can win as some must lose for others to win.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
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.

Better to stick to CDR projekt and alike products, they are the most likely to keep minorities (from western perspective) out of a product.

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.
Players desired it. They supported stuff like Steam that provide tools to increase the social dimension of a vid product. And so on.
Been pointed out for years now on this forum. Dozens of posts about that stuff.
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?
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.

Solution and means provided free of charges. Works 100 pc. Very valuable.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
@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.

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.
 
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
2,315
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. :)
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
1,603
I do not see how @BoboTheMighty; twisted your words, @TheRealFluent;. Maybe I am missing something? Based on you mentioning young kids, I suppose you refer to post post #40? But he does not specifically mention / quote or otherwise reference you there.

Or are you cross-referencing to another thread?
 
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
2,315
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 ;)

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.

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

Nonsensical babbling. It's exactly shoehorning Mt's that affect gameplay mechanics, that makes "gaming for gaming's sake" less enjoyable. Losing is never designed to be "enjoyable".

And seriously: see a shrink for this bizarre Witcher obsession you've got going for.

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 think you've got it backwards…you, and a few others, are taking CDPR's success a bit too personally.
I mean D'artagnan at one point practically started practically crying some people like their last game over Skyrim. ( Literally went something like this:
I already said it has a better story and characters. Must it be better at everything?!

You can see practically everywhere, Bethesda is taking a hell of a lot of criticism lately, and this is coming even from their "hardcore fans" ( instead of "haters"/clickbait youtubers)

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.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
3,898
Location
Croatia
Gaming is not about winning, it is not about losing. It is about gaming.
So that's the secret of Zynga's Farmville. And other cowclickers.
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.
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".
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
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.
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.



Update: So TLDR I'll believe Jim this time Wisdom. Sorry.:)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,180
Location
Spudlandia
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.

"Industry veterans" ;)

I'm having fun with that term. As an example of that kind of thing, I work with literally hundreds of IT "experts", personally.

We're talking people who've worked 10-30 years in the field.

Guess what I think of 90% of them in terms of their expertise ;)

Usually, when people stand on a soapbox and use Youtube to promote their own agendas - I get sceptical. For good reason.

The amount of misinformation out there is staggering.
 
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.

If you want to be taken seriously, then you need to talk about the issue - not other issues that aren't relevant.

I'm not defending anything - that would require being invested in the outcome of the opinions of ignorant people.

I'm pointing out that this level of cosmetic microtransactions is incredibly common - and does absolutely nothing to my enjoyment of the game itself. Same goes for other people with actual brains available.

By brains, I mean the ability to understand that it's not all a big conspiracy to ruin the game for everyone - but simple opportunism that's 100% par for the course in this industry.

Your energy is being wasted my young friend. I know all about that.

Time to wise up and focus on better things :)

At least, that would be my recommendation.
 
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.

My wild imagination immediately turned this into yet another case of deliberate ignoring blood in pee or stool then dying from cancer.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
@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.

This goes out of control, people talk and talk without even paying attention to their own words.PvP usually means winner and loser. People who cant stand losing and think winning is fun only pay to win. They pay a product so they can win.

That is the main reason why devs remove any potential cause of failure. So that those players can get what they desire: pay to win.
This impacts most products these days, especially those without micro transactions.

Micro transactions and PvP change nothing to the situation: two players buy stuff, PvP, one of them is going to lose, one of them is going to be disatisfied as he did not get what he paid for: pay for win.

Every single product these days is marked by the pay to win mindset because players want to dominate, they want to prevail, they want to conquer.

Microtransactions and PvP has nothing to do with. They only mean that players might not get what they pay for: pay to win, they will pay to lose. That is the issue: pay to lose, that is what players can not stand, not pay to win as they want this, they want to pay to win, they want all products to be pay to win. They pay, they win.
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.
And... Nothing. Progression toward what, toward winning, toward beating the product, toward dominating, prevailing, conquering.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
What are you on again?
Players want equal treatment where skills and not wallet matters. Cosmetics are borderline acceptable - while no skin in League of Legends will buff your character, some Fortnite skins tend to be useful for camouflage and could be called pay2win. Lootboxes are not acceptable regardless of the content inside those - it's not videogames, it's gambling.

Anyway, it's not players but only hotel owners who want to win by paying. These people who want to win by paying are not called players, but are called (killer) whales.
http://www.gamesbrief.com/2011/11/w...ows-the-beating-heart-of-a-free-to-play-game/
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
Back
Top Bottom