Take-Two plans to only release games with 'recurrent consumer spending' hooks

[Luigi22]

Remove this please

Edited November 20, 2017 by Luigi22

[Luigi22]

 

Just to point out CoD WW2 has only cosmetic microtransactions, doesn't harm your gaming right?. Not sure about Battlefield but if its only skins in it too, why would it harm your gaming?

While cosmetic Items may not have an effect on a games balance it is still content that gets hidden behind a paywall. This would not be so bad if you could simply purchase this specific item right away but in case of call of corridor and overwatch these items get hidden in lootboxes. So you pay on and on to get tons of crap you dont care about out of the way to get this one specific item.

 

I haven't played The Crew much (hour or so at friend) but playerbase must be seperated because of that right?

 

Not to my knowledge. The people who did not buy the dlc are unable to parttake in these new events however they can still play the main game with people who do own the dlc.

 

 

But if you can play the game just like others, shouldn't there be no problem? Or do you think microtransactions shouldn't have place in 60$ games at all. Even if they are cosmetic only?

 

By the way and to clarify, it's not bad at all if it's your opinion.

 

 

 

 

Man, if we're at the point that people accept the greed of these companies and point out that is perfectly normal.. no wonder gaming is getting worse.

 

However, what pisses me off is that they don't realize that people would be way more likely to pay for a DLC and have a balanced overall in-game economy than having to deal to something like this.

 

Nah, I like the fact that there's inequality in-game.

 

The purpose of GTA Online is to be a high roller and have all the badass toys. Whether you grind or pay real money for your stuff, your weapons, vehicles and CEO/VIP/MC abilities reflect your status in-game. I have to be a corporate drone most of the time in real life, so I like the fact that I can play a video game and destroy someone in retribution with no consequences.

 

Economic balance places more people on an equal footing. It's a good thing in society, but it's sh*t in a video game.

 

 

This is exactly the opposite of how I think. Imbalance has no place in PvP games; I'd much rather play a well-balanced arena shooter than a game where it's either dominate or be dominated, based solely on how much time you've put in or how much money you've invested (but seldom on actual player skill). That's a bullsh*t way to design a game. We can thank MMOs for introducing the idea of leveling and upgrading in a PvP context because they were too lazy to think of a better way to keep players on the treadmill, and too scared of losing their subscription revenue if they weren't always dangling that "higher level/better gear"-shaped carrot.

 

The combination really only works if you have highly refined PvP matchmaking, and as we all know, GTA Online really doesn't have matchmaking at all. You're just as likely to be in free roam with a level 2 as a level 900.

 

Everyone here is bashing them and saying this is a sh*t idea but you're forgetting this is a business. Businesses exist to make money. So for all of the criticism you are throwing at the company you need to understand that someone somewhere likes what they offer and is buying it. There are so many of those someones that they choose to do something like this.

 

You cant live in a capitalist society and then yell at people for wanting to make money without feeling a certain degree of hypocrisy.

 

Read the thread, FFS. This has been covered. We're all well aware that this is capitalism and the companies involved are in it to make money. What we object to is them choosing to sabotage the quality of their own product and let down their paying customers in the pursuit of short-term gains (that is to say, shark card money). Hopefully it bites them on down the road, but I'm not optimistic; despite recent outcries about this game and (even more so) Battlefront, gamers have proven they'll put up with all kinds of bullsh*t if a triple-A franchise lets them pretend to be a Jedi or drive a Ferrari off a mountai

.

 

 

 

 

How do you explain the fact Online has more players than ever, claimed by Rockstar or Take 2. If they are sabotaging their product, shouldn't playercount be going lower and lower? Instead of that it's getting higher and higher. Game might not be fun for you and some others but for most it seems to be.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Luigi22

[Kiethblacklion]

I wouldn't mind the implementation of microtransactions if it wasn't for the fact that developers make it much more difficult for those of us who DON'T spend real money in the game to unlock items. I have not once bought a shark card for GTA, and thus is takes me so much longer to buy and unlock things because of the high cost of items in the game.

With Battlefield 1, a player can spend real currency to buy loot crates. The crates only contain skins but there is no way to know what skins you will get. EA's implementation of this "gambling system" into the progression system of Battlefront 2 caused such a backlash that they temporarily disabled it. For those who didn't know, the in-game currency requirements to unlock the heroes was so high that it was calculated to take 40 hours of playing just to unlock either Vader or Luke. This is because the game gives you currency at a set rate while in the game as opposed to a percentage of the points that you earn from your in-game activities.

Personally, I dislike microtransactions within games. I spend what few hours a day that I have to spare in the game, running missions, races, etc. I don't mind putting my time in to earn the items in the game; I just dislike how developers making it frustrating enough to encourage you to spend more real money to get these items. Unfortunately, this trend of pay-to-win, pay-to-progress, pay-to-shortcut without a reasonable alternative for players to unlock the items without paying (such as forcing us to be in a public lobby to run CEO, MC, Hangar, Bunker missions) will continue from now on.

[Black-Dragon96]

But if you can play the game just like others, shouldn't there be no problem? Or do you think microtransactions shouldn't have place in 60$ games at all. Even if they are cosmetic only?

Thats exactly what I think. Microtransactions are something that belongs in Free to play titles, not in 60$ release versions of AAA games. It is a myth that microtranssction are a thing because games got more expensive to make.

The Witcher 3 was probably expensive to produce yet it still made profit without the use of microtransactions.

If a company cant make back the expenses of a product by selling said product, then this company made a mistake during the creation process of the product, I'm afraid.

 

 

That being said, I can see a well balanced microtransaction system as a way to charge for additional content instead of paid dlc. I still would not like microtransactions but i could live with a balanced system.

Back in the day, sharkcards where not so bad. Powerfull stuff was level locked so paying without playing did not get you anywhere. The people who payed had an advantage but it was not a huge advantage. The game was somewhat balanced.

Its diffrent today. The powerfull stuff is no longer locked, every Level 1 player can hand over reallife cash and instantly get the gear of a highlevel player while the players who did not pay grind their a$$ of.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Black-Dragon96

[Nutduster]

 

 

 

 

 

Man, if we're at the point that people accept the greed of these companies and point out that is perfectly normal.. no wonder gaming is getting worse.

 

However, what pisses me off is that they don't realize that people would be way more likely to pay for a DLC and have a balanced overall in-game economy than having to deal to something like this.

 

Nah, I like the fact that there's inequality in-game.

 

The purpose of GTA Online is to be a high roller and have all the badass toys. Whether you grind or pay real money for your stuff, your weapons, vehicles and CEO/VIP/MC abilities reflect your status in-game. I have to be a corporate drone most of the time in real life, so I like the fact that I can play a video game and destroy someone in retribution with no consequences.

 

Economic balance places more people on an equal footing. It's a good thing in society, but it's sh*t in a video game.

 

 

This is exactly the opposite of how I think. Imbalance has no place in PvP games; I'd much rather play a well-balanced arena shooter than a game where it's either dominate or be dominated, based solely on how much time you've put in or how much money you've invested (but seldom on actual player skill). That's a bullsh*t way to design a game. We can thank MMOs for introducing the idea of leveling and upgrading in a PvP context because they were too lazy to think of a better way to keep players on the treadmill, and too scared of losing their subscription revenue if they weren't always dangling that "higher level/better gear"-shaped carrot.

 

The combination really only works if you have highly refined PvP matchmaking, and as we all know, GTA Online really doesn't have matchmaking at all. You're just as likely to be in free roam with a level 2 as a level 900.

 

Everyone here is bashing them and saying this is a sh*t idea but you're forgetting this is a business. Businesses exist to make money. So for all of the criticism you are throwing at the company you need to understand that someone somewhere likes what they offer and is buying it. There are so many of those someones that they choose to do something like this.

 

You cant live in a capitalist society and then yell at people for wanting to make money without feeling a certain degree of hypocrisy.

 

Read the thread, FFS. This has been covered. We're all well aware that this is capitalism and the companies involved are in it to make money. What we object to is them choosing to sabotage the quality of their own product and let down their paying customers in the pursuit of short-term gains (that is to say, shark card money). Hopefully it bites them on down the road, but I'm not optimistic; despite recent outcries about this game and (even more so) Battlefront, gamers have proven they'll put up with all kinds of bullsh*t if a triple-A franchise lets them pretend to be a Jedi or drive a Ferrari off a mountai

.

 

 

 

 

How do you explain the fact Online has more players than ever, claimed by Rockstar or Take 2. If they are sabotaging their product, shouldn't playercount be going lower and lower? Instead of that it's getting higher and higher. Game might not be fun for you and some others but for most it seems to be.

 

 

1. Unless you have stats not provided by the company in whose best interest it is to pretend their game is a non-stop success, maybe you should not take that as the last word on the game's popularity. Use common sense.

 

2. Like I just said in the post you quoted, gamers have proven they will put up with a lot of sh*t if a game offers them something they can't get elsewhere. I played GTA Online for 4 years with dozens of friends and every last one of them bitched and bitched about the game, about shark cards, about the lack of balance in free roam, about the bugs, about the lobby crashes and infinite load screens, etc. Look at the comments on Rockstar's own support page, or on the GTA sub-reddit. Gamers are a misanthropic bunch anyway but even by their standards, there is widespread anger about a lot of choices Rockstar and Take Two made for this game. Why are they still playing it? Well, you already quoted me on that - re-read it.

 

3. Last point: if you think they're NOT sabotaging their own product, why don't you try ACTUALLY DEFENDING THE PRICES OF IN-GAME STUFF. I love this perpetual argument about general principles, while not one of you will actually stand up and say, yes it is totally reasonable for a single in-game vehicle to require 20+ hours of grinding or $50 in real money to obtain. Please defend that in ANY terms other than "businesses need to make money." Go ahead, I will wait.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Nutduster

[Aggregate Demand]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gamers have proven they'll put up with all kinds of bullsh*t if a triple-A franchise lets them pretend to be a Jedi or drive a Ferrari off a mountain.

 

 

Right there. That's exactly why I play video games. I want to be able to manage Arsenal Football Club, drive cross-country across the United States in a Koenigsegg, and get in a jet so I can fly up to my yacht and defend it against attackers. I want to do sh*t I can't do in my pasty ass real life existence.

 

That's why I play video games. I'm not an avant-garde tool about business ethics, nor am I a silly twat regarding video game storylines in a similar way to the dickheads who rave about The Wire, The Sopranos and Breaking Bad (OMG, RDR had an amazing storyline, and the only reason I have this opinion is because I read an IGN review which I ultimately parroted to make myself sound informed and special). I just want to have fun.

 

Do I care about shelling out some coin to better enjoy the game? Nope. And if I did, I'd learn to be patient and work for it, as opposed to stomping my feet in a hissy fit because a video game developer didn't sell me a virtual vehicle for a virtual price I deemed acceptable.

[HamwithCheese]

"I play games to have fun."

 

"You gotta work for those pixels by grinding."

[Luigi22]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Man, if we're at the point that people accept the greed of these companies and point out that is perfectly normal.. no wonder gaming is getting worse.

 

However, what pisses me off is that they don't realize that people would be way more likely to pay for a DLC and have a balanced overall in-game economy than having to deal to something like this.

Nah, I like the fact that there's inequality in-game.

 

The purpose of GTA Online is to be a high roller and have all the badass toys. Whether you grind or pay real money for your stuff, your weapons, vehicles and CEO/VIP/MC abilities reflect your status in-game. I have to be a corporate drone most of the time in real life, so I like the fact that I can play a video game and destroy someone in retribution with no consequences.

 

Economic balance places more people on an equal footing. It's a good thing in society, but it's sh*t in a video game.

 

This is exactly the opposite of how I think. Imbalance has no place in PvP games; I'd much rather play a well-balanced arena shooter than a game where it's either dominate or be dominated, based solely on how much time you've put in or how much money you've invested (but seldom on actual player skill). That's a bullsh*t way to design a game. We can thank MMOs for introducing the idea of leveling and upgrading in a PvP context because they were too lazy to think of a better way to keep players on the treadmill, and too scared of losing their subscription revenue if they weren't always dangling that "higher level/better gear"-shaped carrot.

 

The combination really only works if you have highly refined PvP matchmaking, and as we all know, GTA Online really doesn't have matchmaking at all. You're just as likely to be in free roam with a level 2 as a level 900.

 

Everyone here is bashing them and saying this is a sh*t idea but you're forgetting this is a business. Businesses exist to make money. So for all of the criticism you are throwing at the company you need to understand that someone somewhere likes what they offer and is buying it. There are so many of those someones that they choose to do something like this.

 

You cant live in a capitalist society and then yell at people for wanting to make money without feeling a certain degree of hypocrisy.

Read the thread, FFS. This has been covered. We're all well aware that this is capitalism and the companies involved are in it to make money. What we object to is them choosing to sabotage the quality of their own product and let down their paying customers in the pursuit of short-term gains (that is to say, shark card money). Hopefully it bites them on down the road, but I'm not optimistic; despite recent outcries about this game and (even more so) Battlefront, gamers have proven they'll put up with all kinds of bullsh*t if a triple-A franchise lets them pretend to be a Jedi or drive a Ferrari off a mountai

.

 

 

How do you explain the fact Online has more players than ever, claimed by Rockstar or Take 2. If they are sabotaging their product, shouldn't playercount be going lower and lower? Instead of that it's getting higher and higher. Game might not be fun for you and some others but for most it seems to be.

 

1. Unless you have stats not provided by the company in whose best interest it is to pretend their game is a non-stop success, maybe you should not take that as the last word on the game's popularity. Use common sense.

 

2. Like I just said in the post you quoted, gamers have proven they will put up with a lot of sh*t if a game offers them something they can't get elsewhere. I played GTA Online for 4 years with dozens of friends and every last one of them bitched and bitched about the game, about shark cards, about the lack of balance in free roam, about the bugs, about the lobby crashes and infinite load screens, etc. Look at the comments on Rockstar's own support page, or on the GTA sub-reddit. Gamers are a misanthropic bunch anyway but even by their standards, there is widespread anger about a lot of choices Rockstar and Take Two made for this game. Why are they still playing it? Well, you already quoted me on that - re-read it.

 

3. Last point: if you think they're NOT sabotaging their own product, why don't you try ACTUALLY DEFENDING THE PRICES OF IN-GAME STUFF. I love this perpetual argument about general principles, while not one of you will actually stand up and say, yes it is totally reasonable for a single in-game vehicle to require 20+ hours of grinding or $50 in real money to obtain. Please defend that in ANY terms other than "businesses need to make money." Go ahead, I will wait.

Remember that Take 2 is publicly traded company. They just can't throw any numbers out of their head and lie to current and for possible future stockholders. Especially in their annual reportings. Or possibly could but it wouldn't be for their own good on a long run and would likely mean some legal actions against them. And as long as more people does like the game and content they give, they are good.

 

 

For the prices of some items, yes I do also think they have gone throught the roof in some cases, where price doesn't even meet with value. But as it has been pointed out before, people have more money than ever ingame so it's logical prices do go up as well. Also it's not meant that you should have every single item or buy all the latest DLC stuff. And use of real money to get items is everyones own thing to decide. Also could you tell me which vehicles require 20+ hours to get, there ain't many in my opinion. 200 000 per hour is easily doable with I/E, even more if running MC and Bunker on background and have good group of crew members who knows how to do things. It's like Rockstar gives tools to people but they refuse to use them.

 

 

To point outI do think prices of clothing are bit too high in some cases and I guess that's the biggest problem for many.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Luigi22

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

 

Right there. That's exactly why I play video games. I want to be able to manage Arsenal Football Club, drive cross-country across the United States in a Koenigsegg, and get in a jet so I can fly up to my yacht and defend it against attackers. I want to do sh*t I can't do in my pasty ass real life existence.

 

That's why I play video games. I'm not an avant-garde tool about business ethics, nor am I a silly twat regarding video game storylines in a similar way to the dickheads who rave about The Wire, The Sopranos and Breaking Bad (OMG, RDR had an amazing storyline, and the only reason I have this opinion is because I read an IGN review which I ultimately parroted to make myself sound informed and special). I just want to have fun.

 

Do I care about shelling out some coin to better enjoy the game? Nope. And if I did, I'd learn to be patient and work for it, as opposed to stomping my feet in a hissy fit because a video game developer didn't sell me a virtual vehicle for a virtual price I deemed acceptable.

You claim wanting to "have fun" while at the same time (even with enough evidence) still defending microtransactions, which are as anti-fun as it gets and insulting anyone who appreciates good storytelling regardless of source...

 

Not even a literal shill is as hypocrite as you.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Voodoo-Hendrix

[Chang]

Damn, he typed literal shill. That's some ole Girl with the Dragon Tattoo stuff.

 

Just give me Breaking and Entering and alls forgiven.

 

I Chang

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

Damn, he typed literal shill. That's some ole Girl with the Dragon Tattoo stuff.

 

Just give me Breaking and Entering and alls forgiven.

 

I Chang

I meant "literal shill" as in someone who gets paid for defending a product or company without disclosing it, that is, the original meaning of shill.

[Bruce Khansey]

 

Man, if we're at the point that people accept the greed of these companies and point out that is perfectly normal.. no wonder gaming is getting worse.

 

However, what pisses me off is that they don't realize that people would be way more likely to pay for a DLC and have a balanced overall in-game economy than having to deal to something like this.

 

Nah, I like the fact that there's inequality in-game.

 

The purpose of GTA Online is to be a high roller and have all the badass toys. Whether you grind or pay real money for your stuff, your weapons, vehicles and CEO/VIP/MC abilities reflect your status in-game. I have to be a corporate drone most of the time in real life, so I like the fact that I can play a video game and destroy someone in retribution with no consequences.

 

Economic balance places more people on an equal footing. It's a good thing in society, but it's sh*t in a video game.

 

 

I see your point, but I don't agree. Sure, it's a good thing to have people actually struggle to get the very best cars, weapons and safehouses in the game. No pain no gain, plus you would get bored own anything after 20 hours of play time. But the whole opposite is frustrating and meaningless.

Players are forced to do the same activities all over again, whether they like them or not. You have tons of jobs, contact missions, races, PvP modes and so on, yet there's no reason to play those unless you are utterly rich or a newbie taking advantage of a 2x $ bonus.

 

With all the contents this game has, it should give casual players the opportunity to earn money in any way they want, while "veterans", after hundreds of in-game hours, should have earned what they need to build their businesses and get access to the best vehicles, weapons ecc this game has to offer.

 

For instance, I'm level 130 (or so) and I've been playing this game for >300 hours, I think I deserve to buy and upgrade and Insurgent without having to heavy-grind for 10-15 hours.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Bruce Khansey

[Xiled]

Ah gta iv multiplayer much simpler than gta online but I was never bored playing it. I am around level 790 and have 4500 hours in gta online (mostly do to cloud simulator) but gta iv multiplayer was a much more enjoyable experience do to the game being about fun and not about grinding. I think that "ownership" has ruined the fun that gta multiplayer used to bring. Guns, Cars, Properties, good for a rp experience but not good for a gta game.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Xiled

[SeaWallTx]

Pay-to-Win...

...for real? Wait and I have to pay for the game initially too?

Nah, if I had it like that I'd just make it rain at the local strip club all the time.

I guess I won't be rejoining the community as a contributor OR player when GTAVI drops.

 

Sad day, very sad day indeed.

 

Ya know, we still have yet to get that promised GTAV story mode DLC, hell they even cut most of the good Online content from being in story mode. Like a double screwing there.

 

#NotPayingToWin

Edited November 21, 2017 by SeaWallTx

[SeaWallTx]

 

 

Man, if we're at the point that people accept the greed of these companies and point out that is perfectly normal.. no wonder gaming is getting worse.

 

However, what pisses me off is that they don't realize that people would be way more likely to pay for a DLC and have a balanced overall in-game economy than having to deal to something like this.

 

Nah, I like the fact that there's inequality in-game.

 

The purpose of GTA Online is to be a high roller and have all the badass toys. Whether you grind or pay real money for your stuff, your weapons, vehicles and CEO/VIP/MC abilities reflect your status in-game. I have to be a corporate drone most of the time in real life, so I like the fact that I can play a video game and destroy someone in retribution with no consequences.

 

Economic balance places more people on an equal footing. It's a good thing in society, but it's sh*t in a video game.

 

 

I see your point, but I don't agree. Sure, it's a good thing to have people actually struggle to get the very best cars, weapons and safehouses in the game. No pain no gain, plus you would get bored own anything after 20 hours of play time. But the whole opposite is frustrating and meaningless.

Players are forced to do the same activities all over again, whether they like them or not. You have tons of jobs, contact missions, races, PvP modes and so on, yet there's no reason to play those unless you are utterly rich or a newbie taking advantage of a 2x $ bonus.

 

With all the contents this game has, it should give casual players the opportunity to earn money in any way they want, while "veterans", after hundreds of in-game hours, should have earned what they need to build their businesses and get access to the best vehicles, weapons ecc this game has to offer.

 

For instance, I'm level 130 (or so) and I've been playing this game for >300 hours, I think I deserve to buy and upgrade and Insurgent without having to heavy-grind for 10-15 hours.

 

This is why I quite...

...1,000+hrs of gameplay

Character #1 Lvl 233

Character 2 Lvl 185,

and this is all done BEFORE we could make a 2nd character that began equal level to your 1st.

All that and I cannot purchase anything, I cannot enjoy the gameplay, I cannot ever seem to make money, not enough to matter,

and since I don't glitch money NOR will I pay real money for fake, I said phuck it all.

Edited November 21, 2017 by SeaWallTx

[Bruce Khansey]

 

 

 

Man, if we're at the point that people accept the greed of these companies and point out that is perfectly normal.. no wonder gaming is getting worse.

 

However, what pisses me off is that they don't realize that people would be way more likely to pay for a DLC and have a balanced overall in-game economy than having to deal to something like this.

 

Nah, I like the fact that there's inequality in-game.

 

The purpose of GTA Online is to be a high roller and have all the badass toys. Whether you grind or pay real money for your stuff, your weapons, vehicles and CEO/VIP/MC abilities reflect your status in-game. I have to be a corporate drone most of the time in real life, so I like the fact that I can play a video game and destroy someone in retribution with no consequences.

 

Economic balance places more people on an equal footing. It's a good thing in society, but it's sh*t in a video game.

 

 

I see your point, but I don't agree. Sure, it's a good thing to have people actually struggle to get the very best cars, weapons and safehouses in the game. No pain no gain, plus you would get bored own anything after 20 hours of play time. But the whole opposite is frustrating and meaningless.

Players are forced to do the same activities all over again, whether they like them or not. You have tons of jobs, contact missions, races, PvP modes and so on, yet there's no reason to play those unless you are utterly rich or a newbie taking advantage of a 2x $ bonus.

 

With all the contents this game has, it should give casual players the opportunity to earn money in any way they want, while "veterans", after hundreds of in-game hours, should have earned what they need to build their businesses and get access to the best vehicles, weapons ecc this game has to offer.

 

For instance, I'm level 130 (or so) and I've been playing this game for >300 hours, I think I deserve to buy and upgrade and Insurgent without having to heavy-grind for 10-15 hours.

 

This is why I quite...

...1,000+hrs of gameplay

Character #1 Lvl 233

Character 2 Lvl 185,

and this is all done BEFORE we could make a 2nd character that began equal level to your 1st.

All that and I cannot purchase anything, I cannot enjoy the gameplay, I cannot ever seem to make money, not enough to matter,

and since I don't glitch money NOR will I pay real money for fake, I said phuck it all.

 

 

Exactly.

 

Avoiding glitches and Shark Card is your choice, but that doesn't mean you still have to struggle after all the time you spend in the game.

[Quinn_flower]

Holy crap...that's a name I haven't seen in a while....hey seawalt!

[Nutduster]

 

 

Gamers have proven they'll put up with all kinds of bullsh*t if a triple-A franchise lets them pretend to be a Jedi or drive a Ferrari off a mountain.

 

 

Right there. That's exactly why I play video games. I want to be able to manage Arsenal Football Club, drive cross-country across the United States in a Koenigsegg, and get in a jet so I can fly up to my yacht and defend it against attackers. I want to do sh*t I can't do in my pasty ass real life existence.

 

That's why I play video games. I'm not an avant-garde tool about business ethics, nor am I a silly twat regarding video game storylines in a similar way to the dickheads who rave about The Wire, The Sopranos and Breaking Bad (OMG, RDR had an amazing storyline, and the only reason I have this opinion is because I read an IGN review which I ultimately parroted to make myself sound informed and special). I just want to have fun.

 

Do I care about shelling out some coin to better enjoy the game? Nope. And if I did, I'd learn to be patient and work for it, as opposed to stomping my feet in a hissy fit because a video game developer didn't sell me a virtual vehicle for a virtual price I deemed acceptable.

 

 

Why don't you drop the insults for a bit and actually engage with the arguments I am making? I have already told you repeatedly that I am less concerned with ethics than I am with a company I have supported putting out a product I no longer enjoy because its current form makes me feel like they're trying to take advantage of me. You can call me an "avant garde tool" if you want, but this is actually the core of consumerism: the business has to maintain a relationship with their paying customers if they provide a product that is engaged with on an ongoing basis. I'm not that interested in sitting in judgment of Rockstar for the rightness or wrongness of their actions; I am interested in influencing them to make games that I like better. As we all should be.

 

And I too like the simple pleasures, which is why I put up with the downsides of GTA Online for most of 4 years. I know where you're coming from. But that doesn't mean we should accept anything and everything. They are not immune to consumer criticism; in fact they benefit greatly from it, because if they don't get it, the only other way they will know how we feel is when we stop buying their products. Businesses do need a chance to figure things out between success and going broke. e.g. If Coca-Cola starts tasting like dishwater tomorrow, I will stop buying it - but I'm also going to voice my displeasure online somewhere and maybe write the company directly. They get a chance to hear what's wrong, and to fix it. No amount of you attempting to shame people like me into not talking is going to stop me, sorry. You may not like the tone of these threads but I think they're actually a necessary component of our relationship with Rockstar.

 

(By the way, those shows you cited all are fantastic. Anti-intellectual snobbery isn't any better than the regular kind of snobbery.)

 

For the prices of some items, yes I do also think they have gone throught the roof in some cases, where price doesn't even meet with value. But as it has been pointed out before, people have more money than ever ingame so it's logical prices do go up as well. Also it's not meant that you should have every single item or buy all the latest DLC stuff. And use of real money to get items is everyones own thing to decide. Also could you tell me which vehicles require 20+ hours to get, there ain't many in my opinion.

 

 

 

1 - Not everyone has more money than ever, and that's part of the problem. Rockstar clearly jacked up their prices to deplete the bank accounts of glitchers and hardcore grinders, without caring that all the mostly-honest, casual players of the game (which is the majority) are broke all the time. Out of the pool of roughly 20 guys I used to play with - and these were more than casuals, they all played at least a few times a week - about 15 of them rarely had more than 2 million dollars, and many usually had just a few hundred thousand. Which in this game is nothing. I was always loaning them the new vehicles I bought and employing them in my businesses (I was a hardcore grinder) so they could at least experience the new content.

 

2 - I realize you don't have to own everything, but I think it's at least reasonable that players should get to own best-in-class cars for racing (and the best in class option has changed several times for every class), the best PvP tools (since free roam is nothing but a war zone), and whatever is necessary to access playable content (meaning a high-end apartment, a clubhouse and biker business, an office and both kinds of warehouses, a bunker and MOC, arguably the yacht, etc.). Add in a modest budget for character customization and a handful of frivolous cars, and you're already looking at many tens of millions of dollars to keep up with the Joneses.

 

3 - There aren't that many that require 20+ hours, but there are a hell of a lot that require 5-10. There are hundreds of articles of clothing that require up to an hour each. Across the board, almost everything - except some of the original game content and early DLC stuff - is priced outrageously higher than what it should be. Look at the relative prices of the Bati and Akuma (still two of the best bikes in game) with all upgrades, vs. most of the DLC bikes they've added. Look at the original clothing prices or mask prices vs. any of the newest ones. Look at the supercars - we originally had one that cost a mil and one that cost $800,000, and now we have a handful that are $2 million or more. Look at sports cars - most of the original ones cost around $100-150,000, and the DLC ones tend to be 5x or 7x as much. We're not making THAT much money.

[Lonely-Martin]

^ Add to that, the casual may need 51 times at least 3.5 hours of uninterupted gameplay, as short but sweet jobs can interfere with progress here too. It's 7 or 14 minutes, if something lasts 4 minutes, like contact missions, the research/product stalls... Not to mention actual time spent sourcing supplies too, all to unlock the new, game-altering (in some cases) items. Mixed randomly with nonsense that does very little other than cosmeticly.

 

For a DLC, those hours is horrendous. And we shouldn't be made to see that buying supplies or even shark cards is the one real option if you wish to casually play and are forced into a default PvP environment. Balance is key.

 

Me, my character's a tight sod, lol. Through choice I won't pay for things I can steal. I'm good with that, repeating things is all good. But this much is just too much. There has to be a fair trade off between time or money, and that part has been growing, although, fortunately, the hanger was free of this nonsense.

 

Hoping so much that's the last of it, but I won't be holding my breath. And that's the issue. This is R*/GTA... To think/expect the next addition to be sub-par is just not something I've done, until of late.

[Jenkiiii]

I'm reading a huge amount of polarized opinions here: Rockstar is great / Rockstar is evil. Neither is true, but finding a balance is key, through engaging gameplay.

 

Probably the most important word in GTA online history: HEISTS.

I'm not the biggest fan of repeat grinding to get in-game cash, but this is an example of everything that Rockstar did right in the past. If you wanted the Hydra you had to physically play and win through the missions to subsequently gain access to it. The sense of achievement and organic reward was just right. But now, all you have to do is pay a premium price of $4M at Warstock instead of the original asking price of $3M for completing the mission.

 

You could argue that the above 'heists' example isn't that relevant in 2017 because heists are now several years old, and Rockstar are merely giving us a way to obtain such items without needing to play or grind legacy game-modes, and you'd be right. The problem is, however, that Rockstar are now using this concept across the board. If you want the Bombushka or Tula, for example, then all you have to do is pay a 30% surcharge on top of the base fee - no need to complete missions or actually do anything. And this could become a disastrous gaming model, when we no longer need to engage in gameplay or achieve objectives in order to obtain specific items.

 

No need to play, just pay. This is not the way forward!

[Darealbandicoot]

 

Strauss Zelnick elaborating on his opinion on microtransactions and the gamers who buy them.

[PkUnzipper]

lol fk you take 2 and zeldick.....rip rdr2 and gta series....actually all take 2 games......dont touch my fking bioshock zeldick. and this is why cheat engine and mod menus exist because of sh*t like this......i edited my vaules for assassin creed becuase ubi soft wants me to pay more for outfits....nope let me change a few things around tada.

 

 

https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/309190/TakeTwo_plans_to_only_release_games_with_recurrent_consumer_spending_hooks.php

 

- Take-Two chief Strauss Zelnick, speaking to investors on a conference call today.It may not always be an online model, it probably won't always be a virtual currency model, but there will be some ability to engage in an ongoing basis with our titles after release across the board. That's a sea change in our business."

In a conference call with investors today, Take-Two Interactive chairman and CEO Strauss Zelnick made it clear that, at least for Take-Two, the game industry is now all about "recurrent consumer spending" rather than game sales.

"The business, once upon a time, was a big chunky opportunity to engage for tens of hours, or perhaps a hundred hours," he said. That has turned into ongoing engagement. Day after day, week after week. You fall in love with these titles, and they become part of your daily life."

This perspective is not terribly surprising, given that Take-Two continues to generate tons of revenue from sales of in-game items and virtual currency in games like Grand Theft Auto Online and NBA2K 17.

However, it still gives other devs in the industry a bit more insight into where Take-Two plans to take its business in the future: "recurrent consumer spending opportunities" (aka microtransactions).

"We've said that we aim to have recurrent consumer spending opportunities for every title that we put out at this company. It may not always be an online model, it probably won't always be a virtual currency model, but there will be some ability to engage in an ongoing basis with our titles after release across the board," Zelnick continued.

"That's a sea change in our business. Recurrent consumer spending is 42 percent of our net bookings in the quarter. It's been transformative for us."

And Take-Two isn't alone -- just earlier today Ubisoft reported its latest quarterly earnings, and "player recurring investment" revenue was a big chunk of its revenue.

"One of the things we've learned is if we create a robust opportunity, and a robust world, in which people can play delightfully in a bigger and bigger way, that they will keep coming back. They will engage. And there is an opportunity to monetize that engagement," added Zelnick. "There's a lot of room for growth. This is just the beginning."

 

Sweet Godric. Who would've thought Take Two to be the new EA

 

When this horrific vision of theirs comes to fruition, this is the day the GTA (and most likely RDR) franchises begin to die a slow, agonizing death where quality is concerned. Just like every franchise EA managed to taint and contaminate. Then shuttered their popular dev franchises once they had been milked dry for all they were worth. This cancer has already started with the micropurchase/shark card setup in GTAO. Since it looks like we're definitely getting a GTA 6, then expect ZERO free DLC. Expect you'll be paying for EVERTHING via Shark Cards in the future. Because it seems that R* was using GTAO to gather data on server and player utilization stats. Push out increasingly superficial and overly expensive DLC and gather data on how far players are willing to play/grind/cheat to play GTAO.

 

Welcome to the world of the EABorg universe. The Dark Ages have finally caught up with the R* franchises at last. RIP GTA. It was good knowing you while it lasted....

Edited November 21, 2017 by PkUnzipper

[Luigi22]

I wouldn't mind the implementation of microtransactions if it wasn't for the fact that developers make it much more difficult for those of us who DON'T spend real money in the game to unlock items. I have not once bought a shark card for GTA, and thus is takes me so much longer to buy and unlock things because of the high cost of items in the game.

 

With Battlefield 1, a player can spend real currency to buy loot crates. The crates only contain skins but there is no way to know what skins you will get. EA's implementation of this "gambling system" into the progression system of Battlefront 2 caused such a backlash that they temporarily disabled it. For those who didn't know, the in-game currency requirements to unlock the heroes was so high that it was calculated to take 40 hours of playing just to unlock either Vader or Luke. This is because the game gives you currency at a set rate while in the game as opposed to a percentage of the points that you earn from your in-game activities.

 

Personally, I dislike microtransactions within games. I spend what few hours a day that I have to spare in the game, running missions, races, etc. I don't mind putting my time in to earn the items in the game; I just dislike how developers making it frustrating enough to encourage you to spend more real money to get these items. Unfortunately, this trend of pay-to-win, pay-to-progress, pay-to-shortcut without a reasonable alternative for players to unlock the items without paying (such as forcing us to be in a public lobby to run CEO, MC, Hangar, Bunker missions) will continue from now on.

 

 

 

I don't mind lootboxes personally as long as they don't contain any content that gives advantage to another, more in FPS games. Also they should be only in +18 rated or Mature (17 it is I assume?) games, as it is much like gambling. But then it's also parenting thing, parents should make sure they don't play such games.

 

 

 

 

Gamers have proven they'll put up with all kinds of bullsh*t if a triple-A franchise lets them pretend to be a Jedi or drive a Ferrari off a mountain.

 

 

Right there. That's exactly why I play video games. I want to be able to manage Arsenal Football Club, drive cross-country across the United States in a Koenigsegg, and get in a jet so I can fly up to my yacht and defend it against attackers. I want to do sh*t I can't do in my pasty ass real life existence.

 

That's why I play video games. I'm not an avant-garde tool about business ethics, nor am I a silly twat regarding video game storylines in a similar way to the dickheads who rave about The Wire, The Sopranos and Breaking Bad (OMG, RDR had an amazing storyline, and the only reason I have this opinion is because I read an IGN review which I ultimately parroted to make myself sound informed and special). I just want to have fun.

 

Do I care about shelling out some coin to better enjoy the game? Nope. And if I did, I'd learn to be patient and work for it, as opposed to stomping my feet in a hissy fit because a video game developer didn't sell me a virtual vehicle for a virtual price I deemed acceptable.

 

 

Why don't you drop the insults for a bit and actually engage with the arguments I am making? I have already told you repeatedly that I am less concerned with ethics than I am with a company I have supported putting out a product I no longer enjoy because its current form makes me feel like they're trying to take advantage of me. You can call me an "avant garde tool" if you want, but this is actually the core of consumerism: the business has to maintain a relationship with their paying customers if they provide a product that is engaged with on an ongoing basis. I'm not that interested in sitting in judgment of Rockstar for the rightness or wrongness of their actions; I am interested in influencing them to make games that I like better. As we all should be.

 

And I too like the simple pleasures, which is why I put up with the downsides of GTA Online for most of 4 years. I know where you're coming from. But that doesn't mean we should accept anything and everything. They are not immune to consumer criticism; in fact they benefit greatly from it, because if they don't get it, the only other way they will know how we feel is when we stop buying their products. Businesses do need a chance to figure things out between success and going broke. e.g. If Coca-Cola starts tasting like dishwater tomorrow, I will stop buying it - but I'm also going to voice my displeasure online somewhere and maybe write the company directly. They get a chance to hear what's wrong, and to fix it. No amount of you attempting to shame people like me into not talking is going to stop me, sorry. You may not like the tone of these threads but I think they're actually a necessary component of our relationship with Rockstar.

 

(By the way, those shows you cited all are fantastic. Anti-intellectual snobbery isn't any better than the regular kind of snobbery.)

 

For the prices of some items, yes I do also think they have gone throught the roof in some cases, where price doesn't even meet with value. But as it has been pointed out before, people have more money than ever ingame so it's logical prices do go up as well. Also it's not meant that you should have every single item or buy all the latest DLC stuff. And use of real money to get items is everyones own thing to decide. Also could you tell me which vehicles require 20+ hours to get, there ain't many in my opinion.

 

 

 

1 - Not everyone has more money than ever, and that's part of the problem. Rockstar clearly jacked up their prices to deplete the bank accounts of glitchers and hardcore grinders, without caring that all the mostly-honest, casual players of the game (which is the majority) are broke all the time. Out of the pool of roughly 20 guys I used to play with - and these were more than casuals, they all played at least a few times a week - about 15 of them rarely had more than 2 million dollars, and many usually had just a few hundred thousand. Which in this game is nothing. I was always loaning them the new vehicles I bought and employing them in my businesses (I was a hardcore grinder) so they could at least experience the new content.

 

2 - I realize you don't have to own everything, but I think it's at least reasonable that players should get to own best-in-class cars for racing (and the best in class option has changed several times for every class), the best PvP tools (since free roam is nothing but a war zone), and whatever is necessary to access playable content (meaning a high-end apartment, a clubhouse and biker business, an office and both kinds of warehouses, a bunker and MOC, arguably the yacht, etc.). Add in a modest budget for character customization and a handful of frivolous cars, and you're already looking at many tens of millions of dollars to keep up with the Joneses.

 

3 - There aren't that many that require 20+ hours, but there are a hell of a lot that require 5-10. There are hundreds of articles of clothing that require up to an hour each. Across the board, almost everything - except some of the original game content and early DLC stuff - is priced outrageously higher than what it should be. Look at the relative prices of the Bati and Akuma (still two of the best bikes in game) with all upgrades, vs. most of the DLC bikes they've added. Look at the original clothing prices or mask prices vs. any of the newest ones. Look at the supercars - we originally had one that cost a mil and one that cost $800,000, and now we have a handful that are $2 million or more. Look at sports cars - most of the original ones cost around $100-150,000, and the DLC ones tend to be 5x or 7x as much. We're not making THAT much money.

 

 

1 - You are right about that not everybody has more money than ever, for example I personally have only 200 000 and rank 180 or something at the moment and started to really play online fall of 2016 when finally decided to buy current gen console and was rank 30 or something and dirt poor. Best way to make sure everyone has chance to make equal amount of money is to adjust money you get from races and contact missions, I personally also think they should do that. Would still prefer CEO and MC stuff over contact missions.

 

2 - I also want best cars of each class and ones that look nice in my opinion, although you don't really need more than best of super, sports and motorcycles classes. You also listed all the "necessary" things you need to have if you want to experience every aspect of the game. I wouldn't personally suggest anybody to buy V anymore if they buy it Online in their mind, unless they are willing to spend few hundreds in Sharkies. Or grind horribly.

 

3 - Some items are maybe priced too high yes, but as you mentioned it yourself, it's because of highrollers. This brings us to another question, why there are still many millions of active players? If it's horrible grind shouldn't people be doing something else?

 

And to make sure i'm not understood wrong, yes I don't always even myself enjoy grind.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Luigi22

[Kiethblacklion]

1 - You are right about that not everybody has more money than ever, for example I personally have only 200 000 and rank 180 or something at the moment and started to really play online fall of 2016 when finally decided to buy current gen console and was rank 30 or something and dirt poor. Best way to make sure everyone has chance to make equal amount of money is to adjust money you get from races and contact missions, I personally also think they should do that. Would still prefer CEO and MC stuff over contact missions.

 

 

 

2 - I also want best cars of each class and ones that look nice in my opinion, although you don't really need more than best of super, sports and motorcycles classes. You also listed all the "necessary" things you need to have if you want to experience every aspect of the game. I wouldn't personally suggest anybody to buy V anymore if they buy it Online in their mind, unless they are willing to spend few hundreds in Sharkies. Or grind horribly.

 

3 - Some items are maybe priced too high yes, but as you mentioned it yourself, it's because of highrollers. This brings us to another question, why there are still many millions of active players? If it's horrible grind shouldn't people be doing something else?

 

And to make sure i'm not understood wrong, yes I don't always even myself enjoy grind.

 

 

For me, part of the reason I still play after all these years is the gaming community that I joined back in February. Until I joined them, I only played GTAO by myself in friend only sessions or with one other friend. We would get on and goof around but not really accomplish much. Since I joined my gaming group, at least 4-8 of us play each week, running missions, running races, just goofing off and having fun. Plus, I finally got around to learning the Rockstar editor and started making the videos for my gaming group, which breathed a whole new life into the game for me.

 

Basically, I just accepted that I shouldn't focus so much on trying to grind out for money all the time and just get into the game and have fun with my friends. Surprisingly, I've managed to increase my bank roll faster when goofing around with my friends than when I was deliberately trying to raise funds for stuff.

 

The grind is a pain but I find that as long as I can find ways of having fun and just enjoying what I can, I don't pay much attention to it.

[Chang]

Sounds like Belgium just drew a line in the sand on micro transactions.

 

I Chang

[Quinn_flower]

Seems like change is coming....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R* going to have to follow suit and make prices reasonable and adjust a few things..if they don't want another problem like ea....no r* stop showing me I need to buy a shark card...I'm not buying crap from u.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Quinn_flower

[JAKEBAB]

Seems like change is coming....

 

 

R* going to have to follow suit and make prices reasonable and adjust a few things

They don't have loot boxes in GTA V though, there is nothing to change.

[Quinn_flower]

 

Seems like change is coming....

 

 

R* going to have to follow suit and make prices reasonable and adjust a few things

They don't have loot boxes in GTA V though, there is nothing to change.Oh but they have sublimal messaging...telling you to buy a card which forces or brainwash you saying well "I guess one card wouldn't hurt I get my stuff faster than grinding day and night"

 

Think like a kid or a adult who have a addiction problem. With these secret messaging drilling in ur head little by little they would get their money. Heck it's even in the loading screen for fk sake and sometimes u get emails in games saying buy one. It's even in the pause menu right there in bold letters but a shark card.

 

I'm glad this is starting to snow ball on these devs I can't imagine r* has to rethink how rdr2 is going to be unless they want to be like ea...and r* well they have their own problems with the governments in the past.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Quinn_flower

[JAKEBAB]

 

Oh but they have sublimal messaging...telling you to buy a card which forces or brainwash you saying well "I guess one card wouldn't hurt I get my stuff faster than grinding day and night"

 

Think like a kid or a adult who have a addiction problem. With these secret messaging drilling in ur head little by little they would get their money. Heck it's even in the loading screen for fk sake and sometimes u get emails in games saying buy one. It's even in the pause menu right there in bold letters but a shark card.

 

Lmao I can't tell if your serious or not.

[Quinn_flower]

 

Oh but they have sublimal messaging...telling you to buy a card which forces or brainwash you saying well "I guess one card wouldn't hurt I get my stuff faster than grinding day and night"

 

Think like a kid or a adult who have a addiction problem. With these secret messaging drilling in ur head little by little they would get their money. Heck it's even in the loading screen for fk sake and sometimes u get emails in games saying buy one. It's even in the pause menu right there in bold letters but a shark card.

 

Lmao I can't tell if your serious or not.I'm dead serious. Stop defending r*.

 

It's subliminal messaging. It's like a person hears a ad on the radio say mcd and the ad is talking about this burger ect the thing that goes on their mind is like hey that sounds good I should go try! It's a tactic thats been around for generations and it's dirty.

 

It let those who are easily manipulated or persuaded to fall to these predatory practices.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Quinn_flower