Gears of War 4 Will Have Microtransactions

[MCerberus]

Shooter monetization: a history

Back in the day if you wanted new maps, you'd have to wait for someone to make something with the SDK, because new developer maps were slow to make any always included some devs' pet vehicle or weapon whose concept wasn't good enough to make it into the base game. Expansion packs for shooters weren't as popular a concept as they were for RTS games, and you'd have to go to places like Fileplanet that throttled your download speed for maps and patches if you didn't give them money.

Proto-lobby shooters eventually starting coming online in the east. And they were, to a game, total scams. To this day, if all your guns are "rentals" and you have no control over which ones you're able to unlock, here's where that scheme came from. Descendants of this prompted Japan to ban "total gotcha" systems, where you need to collect random pieces of loot from the roulette in order to assemble them together, one of the few strong consumer protection laws in all of gaming.

Fast forward a bit to online-enabled consoles and map packs generally have you 3-4 for $10, the price of a full arcade game at the time. Then for MW2, Activision listened to the whispers of satan and started monetizing things "Better". Jam season passes down throats! $15 for 2 maps! pay a subscription to have access to stat screens! They've improved in the same way you would if you promise to only punch adult dogs from now on.

Around the same time Valve popularized the "crate and key" system by bringing TF2 f2p. Despite being considered 'generally fair' the crates stunk up your inventory. Probably inspired by the Scrooge McDuckian amount of money, EA went to implement the old random drop system from those early games. The thought was that the multiplayer component of ME3 could support further development of maps and events without charging for maps. And it was so.

However, the industry only saw "micro transactions in full releases" and just added them to the pile of cash grabbing. So now you're season passing for maps while having cosmetics shoved in your face at all times. For more information on this subject, head to Jim Sterling's house and stand next to the cairn labeled "unless" and he will scream further into your face, eventually devolving into a 5 hour rant about Konami and pogs.

 

[CaitSeith]

So, cosmetic microtransactions exist and...I'm supposed to be outraged?

When was the first time microtransactions in AAA games outraged you? And what makes these ones different?

 

[Politrukk]

That's a blemish on the Gears name, but then again this is a new company that's running things.

 

[Dreph]

"I like the idea of why you buy Magic: The Gathering booster pack. If I could just buy the one card I want then I'm out, then you lose it, right?"

What does this even mean? As a magic player who is slowly pushing past casual, you tend not to buy packs to open them. It is probably the least cost efficient way to get cards. On top of that why would you assume you just randomly lose the card you bought.

Is there any context around this quote to make this make sense?

 

[Hawki]

So, cosmetic microtransactions exist and...I'm supposed to be outraged?

When was the first time microtransactions in AAA games outraged you? And what makes these ones different?

Well, can't say I've ever been outraged at all - "outrage" is far too strong a word. The most eregious microtransaction system I've found is Halo 5's REQ system, but that's far below the level of outrage. That the system exists at all was more annoying than the possibility of using money, and I found myself playing smaller modes in my time with the multiplayer anyway rather than Warzone, on the basis that I enjoyed them more. But even that's a far cry from GoW when the microtransactions are cosmetic.

So, no, I'm not bothered. If it starts affecting gameplay, maybe I'll get bothered, if not outraged.

 

[Dr. Crawver]

"I like the idea of why you buy Magic: The Gathering booster pack. If I could just buy the one card I want then I'm out, then you lose it, right?"

What does this even mean? As a magic player who is slowly pushing past casual, you tend not to buy packs to open them. It is probably the least cost efficient way to get cards. On top of that why would you assume you just randomly lose the card you bought.

Is there any context around this quote to make this make sense?

Yeah, this was what I was really wondering myself. That quote seemed to make no sense to me.

In addition, there seems to be a question no-one has asked yet, and I don't really see an answer to it. What do the cards "do"? They say it's only cosmetic, ok...what does that entail? Is it there's going to be a menu option where you can look at your cards? The reason why a lot of people buy magic cards is for the utilitarian benefits it can add to the game they play. The reason why people buy cards in hearthstone is for the utilitarian benefits. Who's ever going to buy a pack of cards that have no value what so ever in their own game? This whole thing feels like I'm missing something here.

 

[mysecondlife]

I can't even get mad. I wasn't going to buy it.

 

[Tohuvabohu]

What, did everyone already forget that Gears of War 3 had microtransactions in it? Seems that way given from a few posts treating this as an apparently new thing. Huh. I knew you lot are quick to outrage and easy to forget. But I didn't think you'd forget something that already existed in a franchise.

 

[CyanCat47_v1legacy]

i didn't think it was possible to be any less excited for GoW 4 but then i saw this

 

[FalloutJack]

Heeey, look at all the never-bought-these-games-anyway I've got here. Microtransactions bad, probably kill sales out of spite.

 

[Strazdas]

That the system exists at all was more annoying than the possibility of using money,

This right here is precisely why every single one of them should be an outrage and should be literally banned because they are illegal gambling.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

I'm not sure about this crate system. If I understand it correctly (and you can disregard most of what I'm about to say if I've got the wrong idea here) this is another of those systems where instead of paying for an in game item you want, you instead pay for a crate containing some random item(s) instead. That seems to be what he's getting at with the collectable cards analogy. First of all, the reason why this works with collectable card games is because these rare cards have a practical application (within the game, at least), so it would kind of break the game if people could just cheaply buy any card they want. If all this stuff is just cosmetic then how exactly does the customer benefit from rolling the dice instead of directly buying it?

I've never been a fan of these mystery purchases where you front the cash and get ... something in return, and if you want a specific something then you have to keep gambling over and over. I'm not really a fan of gambling overall, and this seems rather close to gambling (minus the ability to win actual money).

I'm not sure how I feel about this type of thing. On one hand, as long as it's cosmetic it's rather tempting to just think they'll nickle and dime us regardless, so we're betting off with a system that doesn't infringe upon the actual gameplay buy monetizing actual in-game resources. But, on the other hand, I can't help but think these cases are just another way people will slowly become accepting of this type of thing (they kind of have already), so it sets a bad precedent for this to succeed.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

We wouldn't stand for this if it happened in movies "Pay $8 for your movie ticket, be offered extra scenes during the movie for just $2 each"
Even better if the scene you get is randomised so you won't know what you're buying until you're given it.

I'm not sure about this crate system. If I understand it correctly (and you can disregard most of what I'm about to say if I've got the wrong idea here) this is another of those systems where instead of paying for an in game item you want, you instead pay for a crate containing some random item(s) instead. That seems to be what he's getting at with the collectable cards analogy. First of all, the reason why this works with collectable card games is because these rare cards have a practical application (within the game, at least), so it would kind of break the game if people could just cheaply buy any card they want. If all this stuff is just cosmetic then how exactly does the customer benefit from rolling the dice instead of directly buying it?

I've never been a fan of these mystery purchases where you front the cash and get ... something in return, and if you want a specific something then you have to keep gambling over and over. I'm not really a fan of gambling overall, and this seems rather close to gambling (minus the ability to win actual money).

I'm not sure how I feel about this type of thing. On one hand, as long as it's cosmetic it's rather tempting to just think they'll nickle and dime us regardless, so we're betting off with a system that doesn't infringe upon the actual gameplay buy monetizing actual in-game resources. But, on the other hand, I can't help but think these cases are just another way people will slowly become accepting of this type of thing (they kind of have already), so it sets a bad precedent for this to succeed.

I'll tell you exactly how I feel about it. It's a load of bollocks, and gambling is exactly what it is, no mincing of words required. In the free2play industry they actually refer to their biggest customers as "whales" - A term taken straight from the Las Vegas Casinos used to describe the addicted high rollers that the establishment want to bleed their wallet dry. What a positive image!

I remember playing Medal of Honor multiplayer, when not only were all cosmetic skins free, but modding was unlimited, so you could design and download your own skins, maps, weapons, gamemodes etc.
I also remember when instead of "DLC" you bought "expansion packs" - Usually a brand new campaign around half the length of the original as well as about 50% more skins, weapons, maps etc., they were sold for around $15-20. Compare that to DLC which today has far less - One or two maps, One or two guns, maybe an extra mode if you're lucky.

The value of what your money in gaming buys you nowadays is garbage, and they are still trying to shake us down for more.

 

[senaji]

This becomes almost a routine for most games with a multiplayer mode, a good system to collected more money!


______________________________________________________________________________
apple iphone 6 [http://iphon6.fr/] galaxy note 4 avec abonnement [http://galaxynote-4.com/samsung-galaxy-note-4-avec-ou-sans-abonnement/]