EA Brings Microtransactions to Dead Space 3

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,651
0
0
Circumventing a gameplay mechanic by letting people pay for stuff is not good game design. It's just plain, good old-fashioned greed. It has no place in these types of games.
And you should be worried. Even if you don't plan to spend a cent on these resources. In the past you could simply use cheat codes for this. In the past you had to complete challenges to unlock skins and weapons and stuff of such nature. Now you have to pay for all of that. Little by little these assholes are removing features that should have been in the game from the start and then selling them back to you. God only knows what they will come up with next.

This is where PC gaming has an advantage in form of a trainer.
 

Saulkar

Regular Member
Legacy
Aug 25, 2010
3,142
2
13
Country
Canuckistan
Errrrrrrrrr, hows about no! Jesus, I guess E.A. ran out of money to fund their solid gold threaded suits for their board of directors. If I do get this game I will then grind the disk to a pulp then download a cracked version with the no doubt always online string attached to it to prevent the bypass of this gameplay element removed. I do not consider this particularly evil, just really, really, stupid.
 

DrunkOnEstus

In the name of Harman...
May 11, 2012
1,712
0
0
I'm not really all that offended by this, and I understand why they're doing it. They have the data that says people spend hundreds of dollars for one axe in Diablo 3 even though they don't really need to. They Spent extra money to make the ultimate Dead Space (in their eyes, at least), adding Optional co-op for the fans at the usual $60 price. To recuperate those costs: Tell fans to make sure they buy it as they need to sell 5 million if they want another title in the series. Let them craft/upgrade weapons as usual, without extra money, but offer the optional route of spending actual cash because there's rich and crazy people who do that.

I could see the uproar if real money was the only way to do crafting. The way I see it, this is just more options for different players as opposed to watering down the whole thing and giving a sub-standard product to everybody. Want to play alone? Go do that. Wish a friend could play with you? Invite him over and fire it (and something else) up. Rich and crazy, and don't want the gameplay of finding resources? Spend that cash you use as toilet paper to make some bad-ass guns. Otherwise play as you would normally. This is actually the right way to please everyone.
 

Ed130 The Vanguard

(Insert witty quote here)
Sep 10, 2008
3,782
0
0
DrunkOnEstus said:
I'm not really all that offended by this, and I understand why they're doing it. They have the data that says people spend hundreds of dollars for one axe in Diablo 3 even though they don't really need to. They Spent extra money to make the ultimate Dead Space (in their eyes, at least), adding Optional co-op for the fans at the usual $60 price. To recuperate those costs: Tell fans to make sure they buy it as they need to sell 5 million if they want another title in the series. Let them craft/upgrade weapons as usual, without extra money, but offer the optional route of spending actual cash because there's rich and crazy people who do that.

I could see the uproar if real money was the only way to do crafting. The way I see it, this is just more options for different players as opposed to watering down the whole thing and giving a sub-standard product to everybody. Want to play alone? Go do that. Wish a friend could play with you? Invite him over and fire it (and something else) up. Rich and crazy, and don't want the gameplay of finding resources? Spend that cash you use as toilet paper to make some bad-ass guns. Otherwise play as you would normally. This is actually the right way to please everyone.
It does sound like a good idea in theory, right up until they start altering the gameplay around it.

It occurred with Diablo 3's auction house causing loot drops being nerfed to oblivion and I wouldn't bet on EA not doing something similar.
 

Sixties Spidey

Elite Member
Jan 24, 2008
3,299
0
41
Yet you people didn't give a shit when DS1 and 2 had a shitload of DLC weapons and armor a'la the weapon and armor packs for ME2 and ME3?

Sorry, but glass houses, people.
 

bug_of_war

New member
Nov 30, 2012
887
0
0
You all seem to be assuming that EA is going to force you to buy the resources. So far, all that has been said is that they are giving players the option to choose to buy the scrap to make good weapons. Yes, it's stingy seeing as how it's a 2 player linear game, but that's what businesses do, find ways to get more money to fund future products to make more money. So instead of saying, "This has ruined the game for me, not buying it now" or assuming that they'll make the scrap metal in game quite scarce, how about we just take a step back, wait for a reviewer whom you believe to be on the mark most of the time talk about what the game is like when it comes out, and then make a decision.

To condem EA for doing something which is entirely optional in regards to how it effects players is kinda unfair. Yes it's stingy, greedy and not essential for a game like Dead Space, but in the end, it's your money, and you don't have to spend it on crap that you don't want, and THAT'S the best way to send a message that one particular thing in a game is not wanted. And before you say that not buying the game will send the same message, or that they will keep throwing it in their games, you gotta realise 2 things. A) Not buying the game tells the company that the game series is not what is wanted, not aspects in the game itself, B) Companies make "purchase in game add on content", which means they have to place resources into developing that. While they may not spend much on actually doing so, they still want to see a significant profit in order for them to consider doing it with more games and expanding upon the "Purchase in game add on content". So if you don't buy it, they make no profit, the thing that nobody wanted gets thrown away.

So, how about we lay off EA for making a decision that so far technically does not effect you directly or indirectly.
 

dakkster

New member
Aug 22, 2011
141
0
0
Ever since that whole "Dead Space 3 needs to sell 5 million copies to break even" I've been expecting it to be watered down (co-op in a horror game series based on the dread of isolation, more action and COVER-BASED SHOOTING instead of building up atmosphere and suspense) and exploited. This is not a surprise, but it is a disappointment and the final nail in the coffin for me. The first Dead Space is one of my all-time favorites. The second was a bit too heavy on the action for my taste. This? What a joke.

And you people who point to ME3 for the microtransactions... yeah, but that's not where EA has been doing this the longest. In their sports games you can buy booster packs for your teams if you play their "Ultimate Team" game mode. That's been going on for several years and EA has been raking in the cash. Not surprising that they will try to jam that into every other game they publish.
 

dakkster

New member
Aug 22, 2011
141
0
0
bug_of_war said:
You all seem to be assuming that EA is going to force you to buy the resources. So far, all that has been said is that they are giving players the option to choose to buy the scrap to make good weapons. Yes, it's stingy seeing as how it's a 2 player linear game, but that's what businesses do, find ways to get more money to fund future products to make more money. So instead of saying, "This has ruined the game for me, not buying it now" or assuming that they'll make the scrap metal in game quite scarce, how about we just take a step back, wait for a reviewer whom you believe to be on the mark most of the time talk about what the game is like when it comes out, and then make a decision.

To condem EA for doing something which is entirely optional in regards to how it effects players is kinda unfair. Yes it's stingy, greedy and not essential for a game like Dead Space, but in the end, it's your money, and you don't have to spend it on crap that you don't want, and THAT'S the best way to send a message that one particular thing in a game is not wanted. And before you say that not buying the game will send the same message, or that they will keep throwing it in their games, you gotta realise 2 things. A) Not buying the game tells the company that the game series is not what is wanted, not aspects in the game itself, B) Companies make "purchase in game add on content", which means they have to place resources into developing that. While they may not spend much on actually doing so, they still want to see a significant profit in order for them to consider doing it with more games and expanding upon the "Purchase in game add on content". So if you don't buy it, they make no profit, the thing that nobody wanted gets thrown away.

So, how about we lay off EA for making a decision that so far technically does not effect you directly or indirectly.
But it DOES affect the players directly. No, no one is forced to buy the resources, but if you're so naive that you don't realize that EA/Visceral will create an economy for it by making collecting them yourself excruiatingly tedious, you're not paying attention to how freemium titles work. The players will want to just skip the tedium and throw out a couple bucks on a resource pack. Not everyone, no, but enough to make it a viable economy for EA/Visceral.
 

dakkster

New member
Aug 22, 2011
141
0
0
Sixties Spidey said:
Yet you people didn't give a shit when DS1 and 2 had a shitload of DLC weapons and armor a'la the weapon and armor packs for ME2 and ME3?

Sorry, but glass houses, people.
Completely different thing. This exploitation is directly tied to a new, highly touted game feature that is being pimped like crazy by EA/Visceral. That was not the case with the armor/weapon packs in the other games.

And please don't misuse metaphors. The glass house/throwing stones metaphor does not apply here. There is no hypocrisy going on here.
 

DarkhoIlow

New member
Dec 31, 2009
2,531
0
0
kommando367 said:
No thanks. I'll just scrounge for resources.

inb4 vitriol
Pretty much this. You must be completely retarded to buy resources with $ for a single player game.

Talk about money grubbing to the tenth degree.
 

bug_of_war

New member
Nov 30, 2012
887
0
0
dakkster said:
But it DOES affect the players directly. No, no one is forced to buy the resources, but if you're so naive that you don't realize that EA/Visceral will create an economy for it by making collecting them yourself excruiatingly tedious, you're not paying attention to how freemium titles work. The players will want to just skip the tedium and throw out a couple bucks on a resource pack. Not everyone, no, but enough to make it a viable economy for EA/Visceral.
I'm not unaware of what businesses try to do. I understand that they will try and cash in on anything. But see, you're immedietly assuming they're going to make the finding of the scrap metal and crap tedious and hard. You know what, most of the objectives/getting ammo and what not was tedious in the first game. It was hard to make the decision, "Do I take the armour upgrade and drop the ammo/health/sellable object". I believe you are making an assumption based upon no solid facts other than, "EA/Visceral are corporations". So again, slamming EA for something that currently has no direct or indirect effect on the consumer is unwarranted. YOU still have a choice to spend your money, YOU can still choose not to buy something, YOU can choose to ignore anything you want, so in the end, you can either be the person who complains about a game, buys the game anyways, complains about aspects of the game, plays anyways, pays for the dlc/micro transaction, complains more; Or you can be the person whom is cautious about the game, purchases the game, complains or enjoys the game, ignores the dlc/micro transactions. It's that simple, you never know what might happen until it happens, and to sit here and speculate the worse simply because a *GASP* business focused corporation is head of production is a waste of time and is immature in the sense that you're using speculations and presenting them as facts. Doesn't matter how likely your speculation may be, it can always be wrong.
 

Sixties Spidey

Elite Member
Jan 24, 2008
3,299
0
41
dakkster said:
Sixties Spidey said:
Yet you people didn't give a shit when DS1 and 2 had a shitload of DLC weapons and armor a'la the weapon and armor packs for ME2 and ME3?

Sorry, but glass houses, people.
Completely different thing. This exploitation is directly tied to a new, highly touted game feature that is being pimped like crazy by EA/Visceral. That was not the case with the armor/weapon packs in the other games.

And please don't misuse metaphors. The glass house/throwing stones metaphor does not apply here. There is no hypocrisy going on here.
I don't really see a whole lot of difference between that and the other weapon/armor packs from DS1 and 2: They're both optional transactions that don't add anything meaningful to the game other than just extra equipment or resources, and the game can be played perfectly fine without them. Don't get me wrong, I totally understand the worry going on with this and its perfectly justified. I guess we'd have to see how the main game handles it, because so far it doesn't really sound like its pay-to-win. It smacks a bit of ME3's MP unlock system with the booster packs, which could also be redeemed with in-game currency.

Still doesn't mean I trust EA with it one fucking bit.
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
why would ANYONE buy it? if you really want to cheat weapons why not just get a trainer and hack the weapons in? or are we not allowed to modify our singleplayer games now?

it's not going to ruin the main game for anyone is it?
actually, it is. EA will make sure that spending extra money will be only way to enjoy the game.
 

KoudelkaMorgan

New member
Jul 31, 2009
1,365
0
0
Dead Space 1 I loved, but aside from that I really wish it didn't have the misfortune of being an EA property. I can only imagine what From Software, Capcom, or Konami could have collaborated with Visceral to make happen.

"EA: Its in the game...but you can totally pay us for more of it if you are lazy/we make it a pain in the ass to get."

The biggest thing wrong with this to me is that in an MMO for example, or regular DLC, you pay for stuff that is either NOT obtainable in game, was created later, or very very time consuming or rare to find. This however is literally giving you the option to pay real money for things that ideally in a well balanced game would be easily obtainable or at lest relative to their power.

Its like the equivalent of being able to use real money for a Tanooki Suit powerup in Mario Brothers. Sure you can find them if you look for them, but why not waste real money to get one on top of the purchase price of the game?

I'm surprised Capcom hasn't set up a similar system for high level Pawns in Dragon's Dogma. Shocked actually, considering that they give EA stiff competition on the DLC front.
 

Negatempest

New member
May 10, 2008
1,004
0
0
bug_of_war said:
dakkster said:
But it DOES affect the players directly. No, no one is forced to buy the resources, but if you're so naive that you don't realize that EA/Visceral will create an economy for it by making collecting them yourself excruiatingly tedious, you're not paying attention to how freemium titles work. The players will want to just skip the tedium and throw out a couple bucks on a resource pack. Not everyone, no, but enough to make it a viable economy for EA/Visceral.
I'm not unaware of what businesses try to do. I understand that they will try and cash in on anything. But see, you're immedietly assuming they're going to make the finding of the scrap metal and crap tedious and hard. You know what, most of the objectives/getting ammo and what not was tedious in the first game. It was hard to make the decision, "Do I take the armour upgrade and drop the ammo/health/sellable object". I believe you are making an assumption based upon no solid facts other than, "EA/Visceral are corporations". So again, slamming EA for something that currently has no direct or indirect effect on the consumer is unwarranted. YOU still have a choice to spend your money, YOU can still choose not to buy something, YOU can choose to ignore anything you want, so in the end, you can either be the person who complains about a game, buys the game anyways, complains about aspects of the game, plays anyways, pays for the dlc/micro transaction, complains more; Or you can be the person whom is cautious about the game, purchases the game, complains or enjoys the game, ignores the dlc/micro transactions. It's that simple, you never know what might happen until it happens, and to sit here and speculate the worse simply because a *GASP* business focused corporation is head of production is a waste of time and is immature in the sense that you're using speculations and presenting them as facts. Doesn't matter how likely your speculation may be, it can always be wrong.
But it is all bad. What they are doing IS NOT to benefit anyone at all. No one wins from this other than EA. What these "advantages" used to be were cheat codes available to make it fun or easier for the player. Now they are charging the foolish customers into believing that they are paying for convenience. You remember those? The cheat code list for all weapons, infinite ammo, faster walking, faster reloading, etc? They are literally going to make money off of the gullible and that in itself it a terrible thing to do. It's like watching the snake oil salesman sell your neighbors something and you do absolutely nothing to stop it.
 

bug_of_war

New member
Nov 30, 2012
887
0
0
Negatempest said:
But it is all bad. What they are doing IS NOT to benefit anyone at all. No one wins from this other than EA. What these "advantages" used to be were cheat codes available to make it fun or easier for the player. Now they are charging the foolish customers into believing that they are paying for convenience. You remember those? The cheat code list for all weapons, infinite ammo, faster walking, faster reloading, etc? They are literally going to make money off of the gullible and that in itself it a terrible thing to do. It's like watching the snake oil salesman sell your neighbors something and you do absolutely nothing to stop it.
What they are doing benfits them, a business, whom has to make a profit so that they can still make more games so that they can make more money to make more games to make more money to make more games to make more money. It's not a benefit or disadvantage to the common consummer, so to be angry at something that is optional, and is entirely up to the individual is stupid. Yeah, it basically is a cheat code that you pay for, but you know what, very few games have cheats anymore because of Achievments/Trophies. And when a game does have cheats, often times it does little to enhance the gaming experience. For example, when you finish Assassins Creed 3, you gain the option to unlock cheat codes (so long as you are connected online), but most of them are just aesthetic touches. Cheat codes are practically dead, and while it does dissapoint me, I'm not gonna sit here crying about how a company is making it available for me to craft a weapon without having to go and find things. It's not an infinite ammo micro-transaction, and it's not a give me all weapons micro-transaction either. What it IS is a simple, "Look, if you're struggling, but don't wanna drop the difficulty, give us 5 bucks, and we'll give you the equipment to give you a hand".

It's not an I win button, it's a help me out button. I REALLY don't see the problem with this, at most it's a co-op linear story with no competetive aspects. Hell, Valve lets you buy the best weapons in TF2 rather than having players play the game, gain the achievments, and thus slowly unlocking better equipment, AND TF2 IS A COMPETETIVE MULTIPLAYER. Valve even took it a step further, and made it so you can spend 8 dollars on a hat that has no benefits in gameplay at all and is just an aesthetic touch. EA is giving players the option to choose if a player would like to purchase something that will benefit them in the single player. It only effects the individual who purchases it, so WHY is this such a big deal when Valve is doing the same thing for Team Fortress 2, only much worse, and don't say because TF2 is now Free 2 Play, because it was doing this shit when it costed money.

STOP hating EA because they're EA. They're nowhere near as bad as some companies.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
God, it's amazing how much I don't want this game. I haven't not-wanted a game as much as this one in quite a while. It's a shame, because I actually enjoyed the first two games. But every bit of news and information I hear about this game makes it seem increasingly worse and worse.

I mean for crying out loud, have you seen today's Penny Arcade?

 

Negatempest

New member
May 10, 2008
1,004
0
0
bug_of_war said:
Negatempest said:
But it is all bad. What they are doing IS NOT to benefit anyone at all. No one wins from this other than EA. What these "advantages" used to be were cheat codes available to make it fun or easier for the player. Now they are charging the foolish customers into believing that they are paying for convenience. You remember those? The cheat code list for all weapons, infinite ammo, faster walking, faster reloading, etc? They are literally going to make money off of the gullible and that in itself it a terrible thing to do. It's like watching the snake oil salesman sell your neighbors something and you do absolutely nothing to stop it.
What they are doing benfits them, a business, whom has to make a profit so that they can still make more games so that they can make more money to make more games to make more money to make more games to make more money. It's not a benefit or disadvantage to the common consummer, so to be angry at something that is optional, and is entirely up to the individual is stupid. Yeah, it basically is a cheat code that you pay for, but you know what, very few games have cheats anymore because of Achievments/Trophies. And when a game does have cheats, often times it does little to enhance the gaming experience. For example, when you finish Assassins Creed 3, you gain the option to unlock cheat codes (so long as you are connected online), but most of them are just aesthetic touches. Cheat codes are practically dead, and while it does dissapoint me, I'm not gonna sit here crying about how a company is making it available for me to craft a weapon without having to go and find things. It's not an infinite ammo micro-transaction, and it's not a give me all weapons micro-transaction either. What it IS is a simple, "Look, if you're struggling, but don't wanna drop the difficulty, give us 5 bucks, and we'll give you the equipment to give you a hand".

It's not an I win button, it's a help me out button. I REALLY don't see the problem with this, at most it's a co-op linear story with no competetive aspects. Hell, Valve lets you buy the best weapons in TF2 rather than having players play the game, gain the achievments, and thus slowly unlocking better equipment, AND TF2 IS A COMPETETIVE MULTIPLAYER. Valve even took it a step further, and made it so you can spend 8 dollars on a hat that has no benefits in gameplay at all and is just an aesthetic touch. EA is giving players the option to choose if a player would like to purchase something that will benefit them in the single player. It only effects the individual who purchases it, so WHY is this such a big deal when Valve is doing the same thing for Team Fortress 2, only much worse, and don't say because TF2 is now Free 2 Play, because it was doing this shit when it costed money.

STOP hating EA because they're EA. They're nowhere near as bad as some companies.
From which every thing you said can be done in a "cheat code" format. Everything. Sure maybe not all ammo, but maybe unlock a specific weapon type like from GTA. Sure their a business. But saying they are a business doesn't excuse anyone at all from scamming or nickle/diming their customers. Once a game like Dead Space is done, it's done. It's not an MMO nor is it some kind of competetive sport game (lol, TF2, Dota2). It's a single player game with a multiplayer mode. Nothing about the micro-transaction makes sense in a game like Dead Space 3.