The Jimquisition: Take-Two Isn't Making Enough Money From You

[VanessaMagick]

So, normally I wouldn't want to incite real discussion around here but this video's topic concerns GTA directly. I want to put it in the GTA Online section but I feel like the mods wouldn't like it and would move it or remove it.

 

 

[DOUGL4S1]

He's basically describing Capitalism. if anything, this shows that Shark Cards and overpriced online stuff are not Rockstar's fault, but T2's. Also mind that if it wasn't for T2, Rockstar would be bankrupt decades ago, specially with the Hot Coffee thing.

[Mister Pink]

I share Sterling's sentiments on microtransactions. I think they're a cancer on videogames, especially after you've paid a 60+ on a game. I don't mind DLC, if there's enough content on it to worth the price and the content was developed some time after the initial release as in, it's add-on, not locked on a disc or planned during main production, which I'm guessing most DLC is. At least try to give us the illusion your DLC is a desert an not something you sliced off the main course and and put sugar on it and is pawning it off like a desert.

 

As for the comments Zelnick made. I can understand he's talking business and when you do that at his level, there's the propensity to speak of your customer base in as numbers, which doesn't sound very nice when the customer hears it. Overall I think he's aware of not milking something to the max, which gives me hope. He's aware that customers can sniff out when they're being ripped-off. I'll give him that.

 

I still don't like the micro-transaction model. I don't think I ever will. I spend a lot of money on videogames. I have the disposable income to spend on microtransaction based stuff but out of principle, I wont support it.

 

CDPR did it well. Story DLC and free DLC items. I happily bought the 2 DLC's because I thought CDPR were being good to the customers. I knew the content would be sizable and everyone I know that purchased the DLC was happy with it. I didn't hear any complaints that it was too short or anything like it.

[VanessaMagick]

I share Sterling's sentiments on microtransactions. I think they're a cancer on videogames, especially after you've paid a 60+ on a game. I don't mind DLC, if there's enough content on it to worth the price and the content was developed some time after the initial release as in, it's add-on, not locked on a disc or planned during main production, which I'm guessing most DLC is. At least try to give us the illusion your DLC is a desert an not something you sliced off the main course and and put sugar on it and is pawning it off like a desert.

 

As for the comments Zelnick made. I can understand he's talking business and when you do that at his level, there's the propensity to speak of your customer base in as numbers, which doesn't sound very nice when the customer hears it. Overall I think he's aware of not milking something to the max, which gives me hope. He's aware that customers can sniff out when they're being ripped-off. I'll give him that.

 

I still don't like the micro-transaction model. I don't think I ever will. I spend a lot of money on videogames. I have the disposable income to spend on microtransaction based stuff but out of principle, I wont support it.

 

CDPR did it well. Story DLC and free DLC items. I happily bought the 2 DLC's because I thought CDPR were being good to the customers. I knew the content would be sizable and everyone I know that purchased the DLC was happy with it. I didn't hear any complaints that it was too short or anything like it.

I'm with you, and it's getting increasingly frustrating to have that opinion. I find it difficult to even believe the fee-to-pay model can be done well at all; but people are all to keen to say "shut the f*ck up", "it's optional", "it's not pay to win".

 

It's still something I'll talk about and voice dissatisfaction with, but more and more people will throw hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of dollars at a single game while simultaneously shouting down people who disagree with platitudes and weak excuses.

[Matrelith]

As long as microtransactions are optional (as is the case in GTA) I don't mind them. I know I'll never buy them and I don't play games which force microtransactions.

[luisniko]

They don't force you.

 

They just make you work.

 

The question is, why would you turn video game into a job? Why a grindy chore becomes a design in a Pay2Play video game?

 

It's great that this is getting more coverage. But if the players insist in blinding themselves, it will change nothing other than getting worse.

[HaRdSTyLe_83]

I don't mind DLC, if there's enough content on it to worth the price and the content was developed some time after the initial release as in

 

... but many games are being released with cut out parts and just few game hours in them just to make Dlc's that should have been in the game in the first place, and i cant agree with you on that cuz most of them are already being developed or even finished even before the game is released. i pre orded alot of games in the past, but i dont trust any of big or small developers to do so in present times

 

 

 

 

It's great that this is getting more coverage. But if the players insist in blinding themselves, it will change nothing other than getting worse.

 

all console gamers Pay2play (psn subscriptions etc), even after buying a 400$ console and a 60$ game, and that is even worse then any microtransactions

Edited June 5, 2017 by HaRdSTyLe_83

[Matrelith]

They don't force you.

 

They just make you work.

 

The question is, why would you turn video game into a job? Why a grindy chore becomes a design in a Pay2Play video game?

 

It's great that this is getting more coverage. But if the players insist in blinding themselves, it will change nothing other than getting worse.

 

I always thought GTA closely resembles (MMO)RPGs where money can be seen as exp. You need to earn exp (money) to get the best gear (cars, weapons w/e) and to do that you have to grind. It's part of the game and makes earning new stuff all the more rewarding. Of course not everyone has enough time to get everything, which is why you need to make choices. Do I really need helicopter X when helicopter Y functions just the same but looks a bit different? Do I really need supercar A which is one hundreth of a second faster than supercar B but costs twice as much? Do I want to grind this mission again a few times or take the easy way out and pay real money for it?

 

I remember back in the day I grinded days on end in MMORPGs to get the gear I wanted. It became a bit tedious but it was worth it in the end when I finally achieved my goal. GTA has been pretty much the same for me where saving up for a new car made driving it feel really rewarding. People these days want everything as soon as possible (for GTA it's basically the day of the release) and can't be bothered to put a little time into a game to get what they want, so they choose to pay with real money. But that's their choice, and I don't blame R* for getting benefits out of it. Without shark cards I don't think GTAO would've received the support it has gotten so far.

[luisniko]

Wrong.

 

People are willing to spend a 'little time' unlocking items in the game just like in any video games in existence.

 

And being a paid game, the time required to unlock an item in GTA Online is far from being 'little'. It makes the item worth less when compared to the time and effort spent on.

 

Seriously, this "people don't want to spend a little time in the game to unlock" is already old and proven to be untrue.

 

Shark Cards can be easily replaced with paid DLC.

Like I've said many times in GTAO section, Paid DLC can be easily applied in Online games(as has been practiced in other games). It depends on Rockstar to 'separate the fanbase' or not. If they don't want to separate them, they can release a Compatibility Update everytime a new DLC is being released. With compatibility update installed in our game, you can STILL play with me and see me using an item from the new DLC which you didn't buy and have right to access.

 

 

all console gamers Pay2play (psn subscriptions etc), even after buying a 400$ console and a 60$ game, and that is even worse then any microtransactions

For PS4 Online play, yes.

 

It is all thanks to Sony apologists who would defend exactly the same as how people would defend Rockstar/T2 and GTAO.

 

And by 'Pay2Play', I meant 'paid game'. An antonym to 'Free2Play'.