CS: GO Patch Monetizes Sprays, Makes Them Limited Use

AstaresPanda

New member
Nov 5, 2009
441
0
0
WTF !?!?! Valve?! VALVE !?!??!!? Go home valve you drunk.I am just sad panda sprays have been free since.....ever. just WTF
 

omega 616

New member
May 1, 2009
5,883
1
0
Fucking hell, be paying for bullets next.

Talk about nickel and diming? This is straight up extortion, $2 to $30 to spray 50 tags? Somethings just need to be left alone and not be made into a way to make more money.

Here I was thinking that over a $1,000 for a skin was insane!
 
Mar 30, 2010
3,785
0
0
So I've just read the FAQ and would you believe that not one of the questions was along the lines of "What the hell?", "Are you f*cking kidding me?", "What do you take us for?" or "I suppose you'll want the fillings from my damn teeth next?". Methinks the FAQ does not accurately represent genuine customer concerns.
 

Laughing Man

New member
Oct 10, 2008
1,715
0
0
Vote with your wallets.
I am sure people will and I fully expect CS:GO to finally drop out of the Steam Top Ten at some time around the next century...

I would get enraged and pissed off but I don't really care enough, besides Valve pissed away what little respect I had for them as a company in the dual effort of being utter wankstains with regards to their Greenlight QC and the intro of paid for Mods.

All I can advise is do what I have now started doing, never buy anything direct from Steam, if you do that then Valve get a portion of the cash, instead use alternatives where you can. Origin, Uplay or GOG. If none of those services offer the game then use a reseller site such as GMG, and then activate the code they provide you, that way Valve have to stump up the server costs of providing the download but get none of your hard earned cash.
 

Karadalis

New member
Apr 26, 2011
1,065
0
0
Valve: Why make new games if we can squeeze even the last penny out of our old ones and our sales plattform thats really a clusterfuck of unmoderated shovelware and half arsed early access game that go nowhere...

Has Valve done anything new in the last couple of years that didnt turn out to be poorly thought out and half arsed "features" for STEAM? Like greenlight and early access?

Oh.. dont forget paid for mods... cause that was a great idea.
 

J.McMillen

New member
Sep 11, 2008
247
0
0
SlumlordThanatos said:
I mean, removing a free feature and making you pay to get it back?
Actually... CS:GO never allowed sprays at all. The original CS and Source did, and a few people abused the hell out of it. That probably why Valve removed them from CS:GO BEFORE it was released.

Here's the thing, just like weapons skins they are completely optional. You don't have to use them and there's no real advantage to having them.
 

SlumlordThanatos

Lord Inquisitor
Aug 25, 2014
724
0
0
J.McMillen said:
SlumlordThanatos said:
I mean, removing a free feature and making you pay to get it back?
Actually... CS:GO never allowed sprays at all. The original CS and Source did, and a few people abused the hell out of it. That probably why Valve removed them from CS:GO BEFORE it was released.

Here's the thing, just like weapons skins they are completely optional. You don't have to use them and there's no real advantage to having them.
I stand corrected. I never actually played CS:GO; my only real experience with Valve's shooters was with Team Fortress 2, and they had plenty of sprays.

That being said, why make the sprays with limited use? I mean, even Blizzard didn't stoop that low...
 

J.McMillen

New member
Sep 11, 2008
247
0
0
SlumlordThanatos said:
That being said, why make the sprays with limited use? I mean, even Blizzard didn't stoop that low...
That's actually a good question. If they were worried about players spamming them all over the map they could have limited the number of uses per round/game. It would most likely have resulted in higher prices (initially) since they wouldn't have a limited number of uses. Of course, once people had the ones they wanted the prices would eventually go down as people tried to unload ones they didn't want.

Personally, I'd rather have an unlimited spray that I could buy directly from the artist. Forget drops and market nonsense, just let me pay the creator directly.
 

Bindal

New member
May 14, 2012
1,320
0
0
J.McMillen said:
SlumlordThanatos said:
That being said, why make the sprays with limited use? I mean, even Blizzard didn't stoop that low...
That's actually a good question. If they were worried about players spamming them all over the map they could have limited the number of uses per round/game. It would most likely have resulted in higher prices (initially) since they wouldn't have a limited number of uses. Of course, once people had the ones they wanted the prices would eventually go down as people tried to unload ones they didn't want.

Personally, I'd rather have an unlimited spray that I could buy directly from the artist. Forget drops and market nonsense, just let me pay the creator directly.
Or they could have done it like in all previous source games - one tag per player. If they put up a new one, the old one gets removed.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Mar 8, 2011
8,411
16
23
martyrdrebel27 said:
i maintain that Valve is just as bad a company as EA and Activision, they just get away with it.
I think they all get away with it.
 

runic knight

New member
Mar 26, 2011
1,118
0
0
yet another attempt that will result in backlash. Not as bad as the paid mod bullshit, probably, but still.
Valve, you got to get rid of the greed monkeys trying to copy EA's bullshit. If you need money that bad, charge a 1 cent more per purchase, or even allow people to resell their games and put a handling fee on the sale. But this? This stinks of lazy greed and people will not respond kindly. You guys been flushing your goodwill down the drain in a hurry a lot lately. got to stop that.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Because what CS:GO really needed right now was another controversy.

How does this get approved? How does this get to finalization without someone saying, "Uh, gee... Do you think whatever modest profits we make from this will be worth the ill will it's likely to generate?"

While I've given Valve some slack in the past on the basis that they're a relatively small company in terms of number of employees, and thus don't always have manpower to throw at issues like oversight... The flip side of that is that this kind of money-grubbing is much harder to justify.

Maybe the whole Steam Box/Steam Controller thing is biting into the treasury, but it's unwise to mistreat your customer base in an effort to make up for your own mistakes.