"Pay to Play" Games are Egregious and Need To Go Away

[Commander Clueless]

Outlets like IGN simply do not give scores below a 5. We all know 7.9 is not a very good score.

The problem with metacritic as a whole is that reviewers use numbers very differently.

IGN doesn't give below a 7, but for a lot of reviewers, a 7 is equivalent to a good-not-great game.


Number ratings are really subjective, but that doesn't stop consumers and companies alike from basing things off of metacritic.

79 isn't a low score, but I'll bet it's below "bonus level" for EA (because they do that ludicrous metacritic-based bonus system for their developers and then kneecap them with other restrictions and requirements).

 

[Emperoreddy]

While I wholeheartedly dislike lootbox systems and CCGs being shoehorned in wherever possible, and do enjoy yelling about it on the internet, the market is dictating this stuff.

People want it, people buy it. It's that simple.

Not to my taste, but I guess that's what AAA has become.

The system is insidious where it tricks the player into thinking it isn’t so bad until they have already put too much money into the slot machine.

This is marketing and casino tactics.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Outlets like IGN simply do not give scores below a 5. We all know 7.9 is not a very good score.

Scores from places like IGN are almost always divorced from the actual content of the written review as well.

I’ve read plenty of reviews where I was sure the reviewer hated the game but the score was a 8 or a 9. IGN is the worst with this. They are so inconsistent.

Honestly the entire gaming presses reviews are flawed as hell. You got too many pandering because they don’t want to lose access to early review copies and free shit, others are know the developers on a personal level and feel bad trashing their games.

 

[Commander Clueless]

The system is insidious where it tricks the player into thinking it isn’t so bad until they have already put too much money into the slot machine.

This is marketing and casino tactics.

Agreed, and I'm in favour of similar regulation.

However, I don't think that will stop it.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Agreed, and I'm in favour of similar regulation.

However, I don't think that will stop it.

Nope. And you know a good chunk of sales are just parents buying the game for kids not knowing and kids getting drawn in and running their parents card.

We saw this in some of the worst mobile games. Kids running up insane bills on their parents dime.

 

[Dick Sledge]

Is 74 a good score?

Because that's what it's dropped to. I expect it to drop more as well.

 

[SniperHF]

I don't even like it when MP shooters have unlocks. Not terribly surprising I haven't played a multiplayer shooter since 2011 or so

 

[HanSolo]

Since when is a 79 on metacritic for a full priced AAA game considered good?

Do you honestly think even EA (burn in hell EA execs) thinks that's a good score?

Destiny made a ton of money with...what? A 67? I'm sure they don't give a shit about almost an 80

 

[Hammettf2b]

I don't pay attention to ratings scores anyway. If I want to check out a game before buying it, I usually just watch gameplay videos online.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

It is still going to sell like crazy.

I just don't get why so many people take this so personally. Yeah it's scummy and all that other stuff.

But I just do not care. I don't buy these games and I move on. Why has this become some kind of firestorm? There are a ton of great games available, gaming has never been better.

Why do the **** games get so much damn air time?

 

[Emperoreddy]

People care because it is so scummy. No one likes being milked dry by an industry they are highly interested in.

 

[Chaels Arms]

For me it's also the fear of how quickly this practice will explode if it works out well for EA here. Without the firestorm, without people speaking out either verbally or with their wallets the pay to play nonsense is just going to keep on getting worse and worse to the point where I'll have to pay $60 to buy NHL 19 and than another $100 to unlock the ability to shoot one timers.

 

[Sarcastic]

For what it's worth as a digital hat buyer, I worry about the Warframe method moving forward. Limit the amount of slots you have for equipment, but allow for users to buy more or grind their way towards earning currency to pay for it. It eventually forces you to commit funds to continue playing or lose the gear you've grinded towards. While EA might have been remarkably stupid in going with this system, I don't feel good about it as other less egregious ones may slip past the radar now.

 

[Individual 1]

I don't understand why you would want to play a multiplayer game where people are spending real life money on it to give themselves a noticeable advantage.

 

[Emperoreddy]

That is the other problem. It isn’t just game developers trying to squeeze you for money. They are also trying to completely monopolize your time

It is becoming that if you aren’t willing to exclusively play their game and grind for obscene amounts of hours, then don’t even bother trying to play online.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Is 74 a good score?

Because that's what it's dropped to. I expect it to drop more as well.

70s are could be fun and if you like the ip (Star Wars,transformers,xmen etc) it’s probably good.

 

[Belamorte]

For me it's also the fear of how quickly this practice will explode if it works out well for EA here. Without the firestorm, without people speaking out either verbally or with their wallets the pay to play nonsense is just going to keep on getting worse and worse to the point where I'll have to pay $60 to buy NHL 19 and than another $100 to unlock the ability to shoot one timers.

More like " NHL 2019 - it is for sale as $69.00, if you pay $89.99 for a pre-order it grants you 3rd jerseys, just $129.00 for a random superstar and just $5.99 for any player above average and for the price low price of $9.99 you may have a chance to unlock Sidney Crosby, or for just $19.99 you can unlock him instantly and beat your friends. And do not forget you can have other superstars on your team as well, again for the low price of $19.99 each. And all the real stadiums can be unlocked for just $29.99. It's in the game"

 

[TheBluePenguin]

User scores cannot count for anything especially for this game, everyone on Reddit claims to have canceled their preorders but then also claim to have given a horrible rating. Like I stated in the battlefront thread, I preordered for my 10yo, it was what he asked for his birthday months ago, and he likes the game and loved the first one, to me that is what the game is, a FPS for kids, both of them looked amazing graphically and he knows better than to ask me to shell out for crates so he just plays for fun

 

[Warden of the North]

The shills or apologists in the media over BF2 are infuriating.

"maybe they only use microtransactions because theyll lose money on the game if they dont".

No. No they wont.

 

[RandV]

The shills or apologists in the media are over BF2 are infuriating.

"maybe they only use microtransactions because theyll lose money on the game if they dont".

No. No they wont.

Yeah there neeeds to be a point where people start understanding that these things are kind of like ticket prices in pro sports (or anything else for that matter). Teams don't charge based on what they need to cover player salaries and other costs, they charge as much as they can get away with to earn the most revenue regardless of all other factors. Now the video game industry may have this set model to what a game should cost upfront, but with all these additional revenue streams opening up they're going to tweak it as best they can to make the most money. Nothing more nothing less.

I mean a company like EA has been making these games for over two decades now. They know roughly how much they're going to cost to develop and how much they will sell, so if they feel there's going to be any loss they can just cut out features on the development floor. There's really no justification in the 'games cost too much money to make' line of thinking, because so much of development is on a sliding scale.

 

[Emperoreddy]

The shills or apologists in the media over BF2 are infuriating.

"maybe they only use microtransactions because theyll lose money on the game if they dont".

No. No they wont.

Yepp. This isn’t about developers trying to make ends meet. This is uncontrolled greed trying to squeeze gamers dry.

It amazes me they have gotten this far already without more Backlash.

 

[Warden of the North]

Yepp. This isn’t about developers trying to make ends meet. This is uncontrolled greed trying to squeeze gamers dry.

It amazes me they have gotten this far already without more Backlash.

Semantics, but I dont think its the developers as much as its the publishers (EA in this case). My understanding is the publishers basically reaps all benefit from MTs and the developer gets basically nothing. My guess is theres a lot of really pissed off people on the dev teams who are pissed that their game is being slagged to the degree it is.

 

[Emperoreddy]

https://kotaku.com/hawaii-wants-to-fight-the-predatory-behavior-of-loot-1820664617

US rep going after loot boxes as gambling.

Important to note that while Battlefront is the main example, this would go after all companies and games that use Loot Box mechanics.

So not just pay to win, but cosmetic stuff too.

 

[KingBran]

Dumb dumb dumb. Bigger govt, more laws... crap that's not needed but stupid people want to spend money on micro transactions. Now our tax dollar are going to pay for dumb officials that feel a need to get some articles written about them for a little bit of fame because people are stupid and need the govt to tell them what to do and make laws around it. Stupidity all around.

 

[Leaf of the Mind]

Dumb dumb dumb. Bigger govt, more laws... crap that's not needed but stupid people want to spend money on micro transactions. Now our tax dollar are going to pay for dumb officials that feel a need to get some articles written about them for a little bit of fame because people are stupid and need the govt to tell them what to do and make laws around it. Stupidity all around.

The only reason government intervenes in these things is because companies are dishonest, and either get lazy or deliberately greedy. Back in the day they would sell a container of meat or dairy, and it would be adulterated or some other completely different product, thus requiring regulation.
Now people won't get sick or die off a mislabeled video game but if people pay x amount for a product (a more or less complete game) they should get the product.
I don't mind DLC if you have a good base experience to work with, but when most of a game is that, it's ridiculous.
It's very cynical that some games are now like casinos, where they know that most people will drop a bit of money and time, but their main targets are the "whales" who will drop a ton of time and money on making the whole thing profitable. A game's plot is made up of stimulus reward, repeat and rinse, but was it ever intended to go on indefinitely?
I miss the days when you'd get a reliable game right out of the box, but that's another discussion. Seeing some games go to launch, and eventually abandoned by their makers without even getting patched properly makes me want to game less and less.