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

[Nutduster]

A business trying to make money, nothing wrong with that. If you really care then don't buy their games and if enough people like you care about such things then they'll change their ways.

How did you manage to sum up the positions of both sides of this debate in the most trite way possible? Good job.

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

A business trying to make money, nothing wrong with that. If you really care then don't buy their games and if enough people like you care about such things then they'll change their ways.

It's wrong when the game starts to appeal to whales and griefers to the detriment of the rest of the playerbase; while at the same time, inflating ingame prices, reducing payouts, disregarding game breaking bugs, glitches, exploits and lack of game balance but patching money glitches ASAP, making the playerbase as toxic as posible, offering a bad value for buying Shark Cards, making the grind as boring, slow, repetitive and vulnerable to trolling as possible, all of this in the name of profit instead of fun, the primary objective of a game.

 

So yeah, there's so much wrong with that.

[Picklez]

A business trying to make money, nothing wrong with that. If you really care then don't buy their games and if enough people like you care about such things then they'll change their ways.

Go away.

[elfoam]

 

Wahalooha wtf?

Wahluu

 

I guess it's the original name of the Mountain.

It was maybe over the line of off topic..

I just raced it, nice race

Cheers

 

Always nice to go OT for a compliment. I had to really scale it back due to prop limits, happy with it in the end though. I got a few real life tracks if you wanna check them out.

 

I see.. kinda weird I've never heard that name before since I watched every race from 1976 to 2005 and even walked around the track and also live in one of the largest aboriginal communities in Australia :0. But here you go.. if they say so..

[Lonely-Martin]

A business trying to make money, nothing wrong with that. If you really care then don't buy their games and if enough people like you care about such things then they'll change their ways.

 

I'd agree IF we were talking about something that remained what i bought.

 

I bought knowing story mode was important enough to promise DLC there, and i bought knowing deep, immersive, varied DLC would come too, namely heists.

 

Though we did get heists, there has been little variety, and a serious lack of deep content. Worse, they've managed to more-or-less completely change their opinion regarding PvE so much that the last DLC had absolutely none. Hell, even the worst DLC this game saw, Gunrunning, had PvE missions, lol.

 

Basically, I bought some apples. But over the years, they became oranges... Don't really like oranges. But I've already bought them, so I get to NOT do as you suggested really.

 

Stats don't lie, I bought the game, and clearly I can go fish from there. What a great way to treat a customer, along with calling me a freeloader, of course.

 

Someone does/says this to me at Tesco's... Different results, for them!. It's worldly known that bad customer service is one of the biggest universal pet peeves out there. Some just won't be treated like a walking wallet, simple as that.

 

And people are right not to expect to be treated so.

[Nutduster]

Here are some more choice quotes from a publisher (EA in this case) who doesn't get it (or at least won't admit it publicly):

 

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ea-talks-battlefront-2-loot-box-controversy-its-be/1100-6455408/

 

Here's my favorite: "The reality is there are different types of players in games. Some people have more time than money, and some people have more money than time," he said. "You want to always balance those two."

 

You know, I kinda sorta vaguely remember an era in which games were just games, and you either made the time to play them or you didn't. Games as an eternal treadmill where you can skip the day's exercise by putting a $5 bill into a slot is not better in any way, and it concerns me that major publishers and devs like this describe their games matter-of-factly in these terms as if there's no other way to design them.

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

Here are some more choice quotes from a publisher (EA in this case) who doesn't get it (or at least won't admit it publicly):

 

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ea-talks-battlefront-2-loot-box-controversy-its-be/1100-6455408/

"It's been a great learning experience for us; we consider ourselves a learning organisation," he explained. "If we're not learning, that means we're failing in some way and we're constantly trying to watch what people do and how they play and listen to them to decide what's the best way to build great games."

"Learning organization"? Sure, that's why UFC 3 has loot boxes right?

 

https://www.astutegaming.com/single-post/EASPORTSUFC3BETA

[Nutduster]

Oh they're learning alright. They're learning how far they can go and what they can get away with.

[imburgundy]

I want to start off by stating my extreme disappointment in the direction of microtransactions in the gaming industry. There is just way too many sleazy ways for them to just siphon money from people for the wrong reasons and most of the time its probably unsuspecting parents. Unfortunately, now that the publishers have the taste of blood they will never give this up so we might as well accept this. As the consumers, we should be vocal about our disdain for this direction to fill the companys coffers but at the same time we have to be fair as well. Games nowadays are so massive and so detailed that it would be impossible to not be expanding the amount of employees working on a specific project all the while game prices stay pretty consistently in the $60 range. Again, in no way am i justifying these practices, they are predatory and as of now they clearly over inflate prices of new content and minimize payouts.

 

I've been playing Rockstar games for many years and they have always delivered massively detailed games that can be replayed for hours and hours after completion. Yeah their gta online DLC's could be better and more attention to detail but this game is 4 years old and its not showing any signs of slowing down. I think that proves the base game was something special. I think the hype trains that we always get on before DLC(myself included) kinda hurts too because we get these illusions of grandeur and it will never live up to that because at this point they are going for cash grabs with as little effort as possible. Hopefully that means more detailed content in future games. So i think we should hold off serious judgements until Red Dead 2 releases. Rockstar has always been a true innovator and most games try to copy their game model to mixed reviews usually. So I'm hoping Rockstar leads the way with a new fair direction of microtransaction(its not going anywhere!).

 

As for which model I'd settle for... I'd settle with free 2 play/microtransaction because you still have the option. If its a monthly subscription, whose to say that the devs wont just hold out all sorts of features/content and dangle them in front of your face just so you keep paying your subscription. Atleast in free 2 play you get the option of playing and then deciding if you want to put more of your money into the game if the product is good enough. What anyone does with their own money is their business. It's the better of 2 evils in my opinion.

 

If they were as bad as some on here make them out to be, they wouldn't be giving us 2 weeks worth of double money MC contracts right before the big Holiday season DLC which 2 years ago brought us $6-8 million yachts and last year millions of dollars worth of mostly now obsolete "special vehicles" and executive office garages(really cool but lots of problems). So expect something big here.

 

These are just my opinions though

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

I'm not against microtransactions as an alternative to normal DLC, what I'm against is companies turning the game as unfun, boring, repetitive and grindy as possible in hopes to entice you to buy them out of frustration.

 

I mean, instead of making me consider buying them, it turns me away from the game completely. How many people were looking to SWBFII and got turned away because of the Pay-to-win scheme?

 

I should be compelled to buy microtransactions to make the game more fun, not to jump straight to the fun because the rest of the game was made unfun on purpose.

[Lonely-Martin]

@ imburgundy...

 

Buying it at full premium retail price, twice, is NOT free to play.

80m copies. The costs were more than returned.

Sorry, can't agree.

An innovator, like you suggested R* are, doesn't follow trends, they set them. And they're setting a poor one now. One that 20 year fans aren't enjoying.

'Thank you, and goodbye... Except with a 'f*ck you, freeloaders' vibe.

 

(* Just edited this to show who I was replying to, and stupid spelling on my part, lol)

Edited December 6, 2017 by KWF1981

[Jenkiiii]

So i think we should hold off serious judgements until Red Dead 2 releases.

 

Apologies for using a single sentence from your post, but this is a fair summary of your reasoning.

 

This is not the time to 'give Rockstar a break' or 'take it easy and give them a chance'. Four years of a game that's been tweaked nearer and nearer towards the sale of shark cards. This is the time to protest and not buy RDR2. Rockstar need to give us a good game first, and then hope the consumers jump on board. Gone are the days of jumping blindly into major titles and hoping it works out well in the end.

 

We're expecting a major GTA online Christmas update next week, and a huge portion of the GTA online community will be watching the underlying marketing tactics like a hawk.

[Lonely-Martin]

 

So i think we should hold off serious judgements until Red Dead 2 releases.

Apologies for using a single sentence from your post, but this is a fair summary of your reasoning.

 

This is not the time to 'give Rockstar a break' or 'take it easy and give them a chance'. Four years of a game that's been tweaked nearer and nearer towards the sale of shark cards. This is the time to protest and not buy RDR2. Rockstar need to give us a good game first, and then hope the consumers jump on board. Gone are the days of jumping blindly into major titles and hoping it works out well in the end.

 

We're expecting a major GTA online Christmas update next week, and a huge portion of the GTA online community will be watching the underlying marketing tactics like a hawk.

Testify, my brother!.

 

I kid, but agree fully. Now, with EA taking heat too, is the time to do our best to see that this game does indeed return to form and have the others chasing.

 

I just can't get excited for the holiday DLC until I see something more, New, and engaging. The bit we do know, just not inspiring, aside the potential/expected snow, IMO.

 

Business/weaponised vehicle, another 3 month drip feed possibly... Sigh!.

 

That said, RDR2 will also go on to show some things going forward too, of course.

 

( * Again fixed spelling, bloody mobile!).

Edited December 6, 2017 by KWF1981

[Quinn_flower]

Viva la revolution!

[Lonely-Martin]

I'm not against microtransactions as an alternative to normal DLC, what I'm against is companies turning the game as unfun, boring, repetitive and grindy as possible in hopes to entice you to buy them out of frustration.

 

I mean, instead of making me consider buying them, it turns me away from the game completely. How many people were looking to SWBFII and got turned away because of the Pay-to-win scheme?

 

I should be compelled to buy microtransactions to make the game more fun, not to jump straight to the fun because the rest of the game was made unfun on purpose.

 

I enjoy progressive games with incentives and creativity, learning new things and even completing stuff, even self imposed challenges.

 

Microtransactions really does go against the grain for me. But certainly agree a fair trade off must come.

 

Those buying things getting their fill, but gamers getting immersion, depth, and challenges too.

 

Tough to balance, and I do feel GTA:O on old gen (aside the cheat problem) had hit the right balance.

 

Shark cards couldn't buy what you needed to earn/unlock. Didn't hurt the gamers, those buying could buy toys, but to get to the big stuff, you still had to play.

 

Now it's idling for cash, or research.

 

Even when being active with research, it's structured in a way that it takes much longer to progress if you do a lot of short and sweet jobs, contact missions take 4-5 mins, but research tick over after 7 or 14 mins.

 

Punishing, unless you pay.

 

( *That's 3. I'll stick to PC for here, )

Edited December 6, 2017 by KWF1981

[Kiethblacklion]

It would be relatively easy for companies like Rockstar and EA to find the balance between using microtransactions to allow players to "pay to win" as well as allow players to "play to win". The only thing stopping that balance is the company's willingness to allow players to play to win. I would probably buy a shark card if I knew that I was getting a good value for my money. But I'm not going to spend $100 on a card when the amount that I receive from it will be gone after 2 purchases.

 

Rockstar really needs to re-evaluate the cost of items and make them more reasonable, for both those who buy shark cards and use real money and for those who would rather play the game to earn the money for purchases. If not, then re-evaluate the payout for missions, heists, etc to something more reasonable. Players who refuse to put real money into the game, such as myself, don't want handouts or want it to be too easy. We just want it to be fair. I put my time in each week and I want to see a reasonable payout for that time and effort. That's not asking for too much.

 

I've been playing since the game was released on the 360 and I have witnessed how Rockstar has deliberately tweaked the game to make it more and more difficult to buy game items without purchasing shark cards. For instance, there use to be an abundance of armored trucks roaming around Los Santos that players who rob. I haven't seen one in over a year outside of story mode. All I want is a fair game, that treats me right for the time and effort that I put into it. I should be able to accumulate whatever I want by playing a reasonable amount of time just as much as someone who buys their toys with real money.

Edited December 6, 2017 by Kiethblacklion

[Ghoffman9]

Micro-transactions when implemented the way Rockstar has ruins games. To try and strong arm you into buying those accursed cards they try to make the game play itself not fun and ultimately not worth it. People buy games to play them and if the game is not fun to play then whats the point? The whole concept is self-defeating and makes the whole thing pointless. This is what people such as myself mean when we say Micro-transactions ruin games.

 

If Rockstar had it to where the cards were a hell of a lot cheaper, increased in-game payouts across the board, and not try to f*ck with the gameplay to make it not be fun and entertaining, I would have no problems with shark cards.

 

If any company feels the need to mess with the gameplay and make it less fun to play and harder to progress within their game, their heart is not in the right place. They care more about making money than giving the consumer a fair deal and making a good product. End of story.

Edited December 6, 2017 by Ghoffman9

[JuniorChubb]

I see.. kinda weird I've never heard that name before since I watched every race from 1976 to 2005 and even walked around the track and also live in one of the largest aboriginal communities in Australia :0. But here you go.. if they say so..

 

I hadn't either, when I built the track I done a little research and they are both official names for the track. Surprised you had not heard that considering your locality, interest and knowledge.

 

Don't drive my GTA version, if you have been there for real you will only be disappointed...

[Serbian_Wolf194]

What needs to understood is that as long as people keep buying useless sh*t via microtransactions and spend money on ridiculous BS, they will keep milking it cause it's bringing in cash.

 

Stop buying sharkcards and other crap alike, stop supporting this kind of business behaviour.

Edited December 6, 2017 by Serbian_Wolf194

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

What needs to understood is that as long as people keep buying useless sh*t via microtransactions and spend money on ridiculous BS, they will keep milking it cause it's bringing in cash.

 

Stop buying sharkcards and other crap alike, stop supporting this kind of business behaviour.

Well, most of us haven't bought Shark Cards and don't plan to buy them in the future.

 

Also, the thing about microtransactions is that you need a small percentage of players than buy them en masse (aka, "whales") to keep the wheel turning at the detriment of everyone else.

 

There's also the fact that many people dismiss the problem with "I don't buy them so it doesn't affect me" or "Don't tell me how to spend my money". The only thing that's left is to inform the players and pressure the company in hopes of making a change.

[imburgundy]

Not trying to defend the current structure of GTA Online. It's absolutely become all about shark card sales. Not a single doubt about that and that portion of it really does bother me. Without any double money events going on you need to do some serious work just to accumulate a $1 million and thats not a lot of GTA dollars. Even with double mc contracts right now it takes a solid 5 hours of constant work and still that extra million doesn't get you very far(not everyone has that time). Smugglers Run is the perfect example the missions at first had hope for fun until we found out that each crate is only worth 10k. That was extremely insulting having to do a mission where you follow a titan for 15 minutes killing an infinite amount of buzzards and all for 10k??? Never been more insulted by a game in my life. Oh yeah and we only made 10 missions so if you want to make money off that business it will become a bore really quick. This is all created by the micro-transaction that this game has become.

The main point I was trying make earlier is that we all know that Rockstar is way better than this. Their track record for making highly detailed worlds and creating an immersive story campaign is hard to argue but with these new "profit streams" from micro-transactions and the fact the mastermind behind Rockstar The Benz is now gone leaves more unknowns than previous installments. Make no mistake though, all other gaming companies will be taking notes when Red Dead 2 drops because of this track record. Only time will tell and I really hope they prove us all wrong because as it stands now they purchased a canoe and are happily paddling down the profit stream and left all of us in their wake of greed

 

Just my opinions

[ALifeOfMisery]

I'm not against microtransactions as an alternative to normal DLC, what I'm against is companies turning the game as unfun, boring, repetitive and grindy as possible in hopes to entice you to buy them out of frustration.

 

I mean, instead of making me consider buying them, it turns me away from the game completely. How many people were looking to SWBFII and got turned away because of the Pay-to-win scheme?

 

I should be compelled to buy microtransactions to make the game more fun, not to jump straight to the fun because the rest of the game was made unfun on purpose.

Exactly. If Shark Cards were purely optional, and by that I mean they had no influence at all on content and gameplay, I'd be ok with them. I actually fall into the "more money than time" category.

 

But all content in GTAO is now geared towards selling Shark Cards, the game is such a grind, purposefully so, that R* actually incentivize skipping the gameplay all together.

 

I don't want the gameplay to be so grindy and sh*t that buying Shark Cards is a viable option. I want to be compelled to play.

[Kiethblacklion]

. Smugglers Run is the perfect example the missions at first had hope for fun until we found out that each crate is only worth 10k. That was extremely insulting having to do a mission where you follow a titan for 15 minutes killing an infinite amount of buzzards and all for 10k??? Never been more insulted by a game in my life. Oh yeah and we only made 10 missions so if you want to make money off that business it will become a bore really quick. This is all created by the micro-transaction that this game has become.

Just my opinions

The cargo value was the one thing that disappointed me about Smuggler's Run. We have 8 different cargo options, every single one of them has the exact same value. Why? $10,000 for a crate of the first cargo I can understand. But then the value should go up as you choose the other cargoes. Item number 8 should be worth over $100,000 and to balance out the increased value, make the missions harder. A higher difficulty to reward you with a higher valued crate.

[Lonely-Martin]

 

What needs to understood is that as long as people keep buying useless sh*t via microtransactions and spend money on ridiculous BS, they will keep milking it cause it's bringing in cash.

 

Stop buying sharkcards and other crap alike, stop supporting this kind of business behaviour.

Well, most of us haven't bought Shark Cards and don't plan to buy them in the future.

 

Also, the thing about microtransactions is that you need a small percentage of players than buy them en masse (aka, "whales") to keep the wheel turning at the detriment of everyone else.

 

There's also the fact that many people dismiss the problem with "I don't buy them so it doesn't affect me" or "Don't tell me how to spend my money". The only thing that's left is to inform the players and pressure the company in hopes of making a change.

 

 

Yep!.

 

I, a player that fully, at one time or another, experienced this game that R* created (I mean, why create it, lol), have been made to feel I have nothing to offer in terms of the feedback and possibly add to the ever growing potential within a game like this. One I've loved to feel an affinity with too over the years. Though, I fully accept 'my' way is certainly not for all, 100%.

 

I am now completely over-looked in favour of some people that intend to not see even a tenth of what the creators made, purely because of money.

 

Makes me seriously doubt the future because, simply, money talks. The fans mean little when they get this ignored, or have things taken away even. To me, PvE is being eradicated, co-op PvE that is. Difficulty to produce seemingly the reasons, but I'm sure that's not entirely true, as we've seen, do something right, it sells.

 

Imagine a DLC that has Gunrunning's cash potential (speculating here, seen it made loads here as my source), but equally Heists level of depth and rewarding gameplay. IMO, they could have it both and no-one would complain. Again, up to the transfer, I do feel they were on the right track, and we'll never know if the game will be as popular had they gone the other way and made a paid DLC, I mean, no-one predicted the sales of GTA V over it's first 24 hours to week either. (If that makes sense).

 

Never been against cash, but when people use it to squeeze others, it does get my back up a bit. And though I mentioned it often, to be called, or alluded to as a freeloader for doing what I'm actually really supposed to be doing, by paying in full to embrace this ongoing, albeit, unchartered journey. Experiencing their game.

 

To now, after the success, after we as gamers did our bit, gave it it's praise and to be cast aside over money, is poor. And IF the next DLC adds to Gunrunning's flaws and it turns out that research was a dip in to see, but turns out to become the norm, and again, RDR2 proves further going forward that I'm just not welcome.

 

As sad as it'd be from my gaming POV, I'd simply just move on without them now. Be a shame. But I'm not putting in this much effort for nothing again.

 

Games, for me, without a bit of direction, or objectives, are easy to become a bit boring, repetitive and stale. I got bored waiting for the research, it hampered my natural game, one I'd spent year adjusting to many times with the changes and additions, always had to make way for cheats too as I'd simply never 'win'... Becomes a chore hoping through hoops that get put up because I play this way, not that. Challenges, yes. Repetitive, sometimes cheat ridden things, not gaming.

 

Story, great. Then online with contact missions, awesome. Heists, getting tougher, nice! (Real challenges too!). Lamar's missions, again tougher, good AI, IMO. Freemode (prior to Gunrunning NOTING the blue Sultan's for lone sessions only), further toughness from the games NPC's. And we could choose to mix it up too for a 'high demand' bonus... BONUS!... Choice!. Ain't my fault if some feel that bonus isn't much and PvE players are earning too much. We didn't make all these mixed messages.

 

All me, no biggie. Win some, lose some.

 

This year... Well, we got what we got, you tell me, they completely phased out PvE in the end, and what did come was locked heavily behind cash. Not directed at you here Voodoo, lol, more a general rumbling following on/adding to your post.

 

So yes, as I don't buy them anyway. What can I do?. So I voice my gripes here in the thin hope R* heads this. But again, it's just my preferences, hence me trying to understand more, maybe so I learn to adapt, but there's much more to this, I do feel. I've rethought a lot since being here, but this I'm sure of, just not me.

[Xiled]

Imagine if people made a bigger uproar the way they did when rockstar took down the openiv mod for a week. But no, microtransactions ruining the game for anyone who isn't a super fanboy/whale? No there precious mods were more importantly. If they decide paid mods in the future since people enjoy free mods, just remember the uproar you made for getting openiv back, but not saying anything else about the shady tactics rockstar has done. It might sound crazy paid mods right? I mean we thought microtransactions wouldn't catch on, but look at them in the industry now compared to the $3 horse armor from oblivion. Back than there was an uproar over that $3 armor. Who made oblivion you might say? Bethesda who has also started making paid mods with there creation club. They call them "mini dlc". Shady already and its just the beginning unfortunately.

[HamwithCheese]

 

. Smugglers Run is the perfect example the missions at first had hope for fun until we found out that each crate is only worth 10k. That was extremely insulting having to do a mission where you follow a titan for 15 minutes killing an infinite amount of buzzards and all for 10k??? Never been more insulted by a game in my life. Oh yeah and we only made 10 missions so if you want to make money off that business it will become a bore really quick. This is all created by the micro-transaction that this game has become.

Just my opinions

The cargo value was the one thing that disappointed me about Smuggler's Run. We have 8 different cargo options, every single one of them has the exact same value. Why? $10,000 for a crate of the first cargo I can understand. But then the value should go up as you choose the other cargoes. Item number 8 should be worth over $100,000 and to balance out the increased value, make the missions harder. A higher difficulty to reward you with a higher valued crate.

One of the hardest things I've done in this game was infiltrate a military base, fight of endless waves of robot men collect one package and deliver it to my base.

 

That was for 10 grand. The basic rule of thumb is "harder the difficulty the bigger the reward" not just for games, but in life too.

 

Since then, I've been dreading the day I finished all 42 crate recoveries.

[Lonely-Martin]

Smugglers Run is the perfect example the missions at first had hope for fun until we found out that each crate is only worth 10k. That was extremely insulting having to do a mission where you follow a titan for 15 minutes killing an infinite amount of buzzards and all for 10k???

 

* For the chance to make $10k... All that, just for the chance to make the cash man... Could simply end up empty handed, not bad for an evenings gaming.

 

/s.

 

I agree dude, I see your points for sure. Just pointing out the obvious, lol.

 

Though, I don't know much about the Benz, aside his name and he used to be there, his input, I'm not up to speed.

Edited December 6, 2017 by KWF1981

[Quinn_flower]

alright lets see if r* learned from ea and bungie..... this update will make or break them. the gaming community is restless atm with all the bs the devs been doing as of late.

[Rafae]

alright lets see if r* learned from ea and bungie..... this update will make or break them. the gaming community is restless atm with all the bs the devs been doing as of late.

Super glad they made it pve focused albeit with all the military nonsense too

 

More focus on pve has been a huge request as of late

[Kiethblacklion]

 

 

. Smugglers Run is the perfect example the missions at first had hope for fun until we found out that each crate is only worth 10k. That was extremely insulting having to do a mission where you follow a titan for 15 minutes killing an infinite amount of buzzards and all for 10k??? Never been more insulted by a game in my life. Oh yeah and we only made 10 missions so if you want to make money off that business it will become a bore really quick. This is all created by the micro-transaction that this game has become.

Just my opinions

The cargo value was the one thing that disappointed me about Smuggler's Run. We have 8 different cargo options, every single one of them has the exact same value. Why? $10,000 for a crate of the first cargo I can understand. But then the value should go up as you choose the other cargoes. Item number 8 should be worth over $100,000 and to balance out the increased value, make the missions harder. A higher difficulty to reward you with a higher valued crate.

One of the hardest things I've done in this game was infiltrate a military base, fight of endless waves of robot men collect one package and deliver it to my base.

 

That was for 10 grand. The basic rule of thumb is "harder the difficulty the bigger the reward" not just for games, but in life too.

 

Since then, I've been dreading the day I finished all 42 crate recoveries.

 

My crew and I ran a bunch of contact missions last night to restock our bank accounts after I bought the hangar and one other guy upgraded his mobile command center. There were two missions where we earned $22,000 for less than 10 minutes worth of work. That's the equivalent of selling 4 crates of cargo. After 3 hours, we had made over $200,000 just from contact missions. When you compare that to the rewards of running cargo from the hangar, the hangar missions are highly inefficient. For what you have to do to obtain the cargo and eventually sell it, the payout should be so much higher.

Edited December 7, 2017 by Kiethblacklion