Every Take-Two game will have microtransactions from now on

It is always extremely concerning when the head of a corporation starts using words like "transformative"
 
treelo said:
You are talking to a generation of people who know no different, you are preaching to people who think you are talking utter shit as they do not understand what you are saying, it is all they know

And i can probably give you a little bit of info on why the game is doing shit, it was because the first game was not very good, you can blame it on microtransactions all you like 'Einstein'....its a fucking shit game....

You think the majority of 10-17 year olds who play the games read internet forums and take notice of what is said......you do not have children(and probably never will)

Me and my sons all bought the first one, and gave up on it pretty quickly because the game was pretty bad compared to other online games, not because of the transactions element, but because the game was poor, which is why people are not purchasing this
Click to expand...
I'm preaching to people who think I'm talking utter shit? You clearly do not have your finger on the pulse in this forum. Read the threads about microtransactions. For the most part, I'm preaching to the choir.

The hollow experience of the first game (which is parcel to this microtransaction drip-drip-nickel-and-dime scheme) feeds into why this game isn't selling well, but in fact, the early access had a record participation far beyond the first, so you're waxing condescending while making an ass of yourself, here. No, quite obviously, it had nothing to do with the previous game, or that base wouldn't have grown. Something happened between the early access release and the official launch announcement that changed how the public felt about playing the game.

What, oh what could it be? Hmmmm....
 
Madmick said:
I'm preaching to people who think I'm talking utter shit? You clearly do not have your finger on the pulse in this forum. Read the threads about microtransactions. For the most part, I'm preaching the choir.

The hollow experience of the first game (which is parcel to this microtransaction drip-drip-nickel-and-dime scheme) feeds into why this game isn't selling well, but in fact, the early access had a record participation far beyond the first, so you're waxing condescending while making an ass of yourself, here. No, quite obviously, it had nothing to do with the previous game, or that base wouldn't have grown. Something happened between the early access release and the official launch announcement that changed how the public felt about playing the game.

What, oh what could it be? Hmmmm....
Click to expand...

Yeah, you do realise you are posting in a fighting forum?

So the general consensus probably is not very indicative to the general public at large

And i'm pretty sure you could get early access without actually buying the game...infact i know, i had it, and didn't bother
 
treelo said:
Yeah, you do realise you are posting in a fighting forum?
Click to expand...
I do. One would expect a reader to have extrapolated this from the fact I specifically qualified that audience in reference.
So the general consensus probably is not very indicative to the general public at large
Click to expand...
Except that the public at large is who isn't buying the game.
And i'm pretty sure you could get early access without actually buying the game...infact i know, i had it, and didn't bother
Click to expand...
Wow, the crux of that point went over your head, entirely.
 
treelo said:
You are talking to a generation of people who know no different, you are preaching to people who think you are talking utter shit as they do not understand what you are saying, it is all they know

And i can probably give you a little bit of info on why the game is doing shit, it was because the first game was not very good, you can blame it on microtransactions all you like 'Einstein'....its a fucking shit game....

You think the majority of 10-17 year olds who play the games read internet forums and take notice of what is said......you do not have children(and probably never will)

Me and my sons all bought the first one, and gave up on it pretty quickly because the game was pretty bad compared to other online games, not because of the transactions element, but because the game was poor, which is why people are not purchasing this
Click to expand...

Well I for one liked the first game and was excited about the second one with a story mode and to see what they improved. I would have bought the second one if it wasn't for learning about the microtransactions on here and reddit... I have no issue with loot boxes as long as they are cosmetic but when people can pay more to have an advantage over players.... I cant support that. It isnt really fair at all.
Also I do think teenagers read forums and take notice. When I was growing up all we had was nintendo power now kids have game sites, review sites, twitter and places like reddit to get info about games. Really I think this info helps them out more than someone like me, who could afford the game and even upgrades, But for a kid with an after school job that pays little Im sure a good amount of them check out reddit, twitter and twitch to find out how games are before they spend the little money they have on it.
From what Ive heard from people online the game is fun and star wars is huge... So It def is because of the transactions -pay to win, that sales are down. The head of disney didnt call EA because he thought the game was sh!t, he did it because of all the bad press a game associated with star wars was getting over the pay to win BS
 
Last edited:
Holy shit at 85 million copies

Beat out Wii Sports lol
 
If anything, I think this will encourage piracy.

Netflix shows that customers will pay a price to "support the artists" as long as that price is affordable enough. But once a corporation sinks its hand too deep into customers' pockets, they'll look for cheap / free alternatives.

Reminds me of when VHS movies were like $50+, then blank tapes / bootlegs came out, and they came down to a more reasonable $10-$15 / tape.

The bigwigs at these "interactive entertainment" corporations are looking to exploit the most they possibly can out of the dedicated gaming audience, and are just pushing it a bit too much with microtransactions on top of a $60 base price. If they're so motivated by the microtransaction model, they need to make their titles free-to-play, but this is corporate greed at its most apparent.

Fallout 4, GTA V, Middle-Earth: SOW, and a slew of otherwise top-rated games just got crushed by bad reviews recently after these latest cashgrabs, and I think the resistance is real. The question is if the dummies who end up supporting this base price + microtransactions model will be a significant enough customer base for publishers to profit enough off of it anyway, and thus keep this model sustainable, or if they'll decide the bad PR isn't worth whatever they're making from the microtransactions, and revert back to what it was.
 
RTL said:
If anything, I think this will encourage piracy.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm pirating the ever loving fuck out of battlefront. I don't think I've pirated or stolen a game since my early 20's. But there is Star Wars to be had here. Only thing I care about at this point in the single player campaign.
 
Last edited:
HereticBD said:
Thanks, Generation Retard.

Next up:

"Games are a very costly endeavor for any developer, and a lot of times, it's just not cost effective to release complete games. This is why we are moving towards a more fragmented release model. It's also exciting news for gamers, as their favorite titles will now have new, and expansive content every six months. We really believe this decision is the best one for developers and gamers."
Click to expand...

Reminds me of an email I got from Ebay about how they were raising fees and how that is great news for buyers for sellers alike. What condescending corporate bullshit.
 
CEROVFC said:
Reminds me of an email I got from Ebay about how they were raising fees and how that is great news for buyers for sellers alike. What condescending corporate bullshit.
Click to expand...

Well, hopefully the tides are turning a bit, and people are wising up. EA just created a big shit storm by playing that game with the new "Star Wars Battlefront" game. Here's hoping the backlash goes further than some complaints on the internet, and people don't buy the game no matter how much EA tries to fix it.
 
Ironically the GAAS model is exactly why I stopped playing GTAO and purchasing CODs every year.

I was alright with purchasing DLC for COD for a while, until I started working away quite a bit. I'd get home and fire up COD and not be able to find a match because I didn't have the latest DLC and the playerbase was fractured.
I got to play once a month or something and I had to pay another 15 dollars to find a match for a game I already owned? That's when I realized what was happening with COD, I wasn't buying a game, I was subscribing to one, 60 dollars per year and 15 dollars every 3 months in between. There's nothing inherently wrong with that model but when you come from the old-school era it feels wrong, and I couldn't support it. I was out.

GTAO was super fun, playing missions, driving around. But it was taking me forever to get enough cash to purchase new cars. And I couldn't keep cars that I stole in a game called GTA? Why did they give you so little money for missions, and price the cars so high? And then I heard about "Shark Cards". Oh. I'm not even against purchasable content in theory, but it was so clear that the entire game was designed around incentivizing people to buy things rather than earn them through gameplay. It was just an online marketplace, there was no skill here, we may as well just compare bank account statements to declare a winner. I turned it off and walked away.

I went back to playing old games on emulators. I've been playing Cuphead. I've been playing PUBG. I've been playing Starcraft 2.

SC2 had extra content I had to purchase, but it was full campaigns, and I've purchased the product and that's it.
Cuphead and PUBG I purchased once and have been playing them, no other BS.

Unfortunately I'm not the target market, for every person like me who walks away from GAAS there are 3 12 year old kids getting COD and BF2, and bugging their parents for more money. Parents who don't understand gaming really, and don't have time to engage their kids. 10 bucks to get some time without the kid bugging them? Sure why not.

When I have a kid I hope they play video games, they'll damn well be doing other things as well, but when they do play video games they are getting one of my old laptops with a NES emulator, solitaire and skifree. Have fun kid.
 
Medulla Omoplata said:
Oh. I'm not even against purchasable content in theory, but it was so clear that the entire game was designed around incentivizing people to buy things rather than earn them through gameplay.
Click to expand...


At the end of the day, it's this right here.

If you have to grind for tens of hours for small rewards, you know the ability to use virtual currency is a token gesture.
 
Ugh, micro transactions are a big reason why I rarely buy new titles anymore. It seems it’s only going to get worse.

It’s hard to completely blame the companies for going this route when the consumers are being compliant.
 
Hopefully with this regulation or possible outright banning of loot boxes now catching steam in Australia, France, Belgium and the US this is the tipping point, that greedy, predatory mega corps. like EA, Activision, Ubisoft and Take Two aren't so keen on microtransactions in there games any more.

They won't go away but regulation is the key here.

 
Hyperglide said:
Hopefully with this regulation or possible outright banning of loot boxes now catching steam in Australia, France, Belgium and the US this is the tipping point, that greedy, predatory mega corps. like EA, Activision, Ubisoft and Take Two aren't so keen on microtransactions in there games any more.

They won't go away but regulation is the key here.

Click to expand...


Not a fan of the government getting involved in this. Maybe forcing them to give refunds in cases where kids stole CC's or something like that otherwise leave it a lone. The gaming market has done a great job of putting companies like this in their place on their own. That one game Evolution got massive media out cry for their DLC and Star Warrs\EA has as well. Disney had to get on them because they didn't like all the negative press surrounding Star Wars.
 
method115 said:
Not a fan of the government getting involved in this. Maybe forcing them to give refunds in cases where kids stole CC's or something like that otherwise leave it a lone. The gaming market has done a great job of putting companies like this in their place on their own. That one game Evolution got massive media out cry for their DLC and Star Warrs\EA has as well. Disney had to get on them because they didn't like all the negative press surrounding Star Wars.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. As long as they regulate the microtransaction and loot boxes/gambling only this shouldn't be a problem. If you let corporations do whatever they want they will run roughshod over consumers cause capitalism.

Just look at net neutrality for a modern example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,986
Messages
55,459,521
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top