Konami Adds "Paid" Insurance "Service" to Metal Gear Solid V Mulitplayer
- Thread starter StewShearerOld
- Start date
God damn it; I finally scraped the funds to buy the damn thing, and then Konami goes and does this shit. You inconsiderate bastards; get your multiplayer ganking bullshit the fuck out of my singleplayer experience.
this will only stop you from being notified about what you lost, not actually protect it, and unless you do that every single time you even feel like playing, you'll get an avalanche of notices and your stuff/staff will take a hit.Voxoid said:
Personally, I haven't been notified about any losses, and never invaded, so my rank is low, which might be the only thing keeping my base safe.
Nice single player game you're having there, it'd be a shame if anything were to happen to it. Maybe we could offer you our premium protection package for a modest price?
I really don't get why this is a feature that affects single player. All this encourages me to do is not buy/ play the game until it's either fixed or there aren't many online players to worry about. #FucKonami
I really don't get why this is a feature that affects single player. All this encourages me to do is not buy/ play the game until it's either fixed or there aren't many online players to worry about. #FucKonami
Chalk me up as yet another person who has never played a Metal Gear game in my life, and knows nothing about the lore, but was seriously considering buying this game. With this news, I cannot consciously support this kind of business practice, and since I was already slightly iffy on playing it due to my lack of knowledge in the story, it looks like they won't see a single penny out of me.
The problem with microtransactions that many people like to ignore is that they aren't nearly as optional as the publishers would like you to think. Nobody sells a product if there is no market, so in order to rake in microtransaction dollars, they need to create market in the first place. They are just creating a problem and selling us the solution, or, at best, exacerbating a problem. And it works because too many people buy into the idea that microtransactions are an after thought, an addition crudely bolted onto the game at the end with no one, not a single person on the development team, ever considering how they'll factor into game play. In reality, the microtransactions are factored in, and the gameplay is designed with them in mind. "But it's optional," they say. "You don't have to buy them," they say. The reality is, games with microtransactions are usually designed to deliver a sub-optimal experience to those who don't pay. And that's only the surface level; don't even get me started on the other stuff that goes on in microtransaction games. The sheer amount of psychological manipulation could give the gambling industry a run for its money.
So yes, rest assured that your jokes about the Mafia and protection rackets are well founded, because the shoe most certainly fits. At this point it's almost as if Konami is playing along with the whole #Fuckonami hashtag. I look forward to seeing this on the fuckonami news update.
The problem with microtransactions that many people like to ignore is that they aren't nearly as optional as the publishers would like you to think. Nobody sells a product if there is no market, so in order to rake in microtransaction dollars, they need to create market in the first place. They are just creating a problem and selling us the solution, or, at best, exacerbating a problem. And it works because too many people buy into the idea that microtransactions are an after thought, an addition crudely bolted onto the game at the end with no one, not a single person on the development team, ever considering how they'll factor into game play. In reality, the microtransactions are factored in, and the gameplay is designed with them in mind. "But it's optional," they say. "You don't have to buy them," they say. The reality is, games with microtransactions are usually designed to deliver a sub-optimal experience to those who don't pay. And that's only the surface level; don't even get me started on the other stuff that goes on in microtransaction games. The sheer amount of psychological manipulation could give the gambling industry a run for its money.
So yes, rest assured that your jokes about the Mafia and protection rackets are well founded, because the shoe most certainly fits. At this point it's almost as if Konami is playing along with the whole #Fuckonami hashtag. I look forward to seeing this on the fuckonami news update.
There's a Youtuber named George Weidman who did a piece a few months ago on the Kojima departure. He had a source in Konami willing to speak via e-mail (anonymously of course), his source was quoted as saying, "Konami is going to burn the Metal Gear franchise to the ground". We're starting to see just how.erttheking said:
Not everything you say is for certain. For starters, the gambling machine development (Gaming)and mobile/console development (Digital Entertainment)are separate sectors of the parent corporation. Konami had a big mobile hit in 2010 but the mobile market's much more fickle than console. There's companies in Japan with a much stronger grasp over mobile who've been doing it longer plus there's big Nintendo's emerging mobile to compete with. It's not implausible that Konami mobile could find itself completely out gunned by it's competitors and crushed. If Konami's mobile gamble loses the corporation money (doesn't make as much as share holders think it should) that could mean the eventual closure of Konami's digital entertainment wing so that money and resources can be sent elsewhere. If their digital sector goes, with out new releases of old IPs to springboard their Pachinko spinoffs, there's potentialy more quicker money to be made selling them to the highest bidder than there is sitting on them.Fox12 said:
This all is to say nothing of what could happen to Konami (or any other Japanese company) if Japan sees a huge economic downturn like they had at the end of the 80's.
Personally I turn of online mode because of the inexplicable menu lag when the game's online. But yeah, pretty much the only way to ensure your stuff won't get stolen without buying into this insurance plan is to make sure you're not connected to the internet at all when you turn on the game.Lil_Rimmy said:So what you are saying is that I turn my internet off BEFORE starting the game, then I would be UNSTOPPABLE?!
But yeah, I really don't care enough about my bases to even turn online off
You don't need to be online to reap the most significant benefit from FOBs. You just need to be online to build and upgrade your FOB, then you can play offline while retaining the increased unit caps forever. Besides, it seems most people who raid me are kind of bad, as I keep getting free points because they almost always lose when they invade.Briantb said:
If you play the game offline completely you cannot use the online FOB making it far harder to get the required levels in each area of the FOB high enough to develop the best weapons and items. I stopped playing for a week when I started up again I had been raided a dozen times with some staff and alot of resources taken by other players online. I don't care for the way its set up and now with this micro transaction I don't care for it even more.Lightknight said:
How can you tell you've made an FOB? I've heard that part of the story requires you to make one, but I don't think I've reached that point yet. Cause I've not lost any money after not playing, but I have gained money.
Either way, complete bullshit. People comparing this to mafia protection fees are not far off. It's only an issue because your making it on Konami. Fucking assholes.
Either way, complete bullshit. People comparing this to mafia protection fees are not far off. It's only an issue because your making it on Konami. Fucking assholes.
It's part of the story and happens around mission 21. There's a tutorial for it.Elfgore said:
The thing is the whole FOB aspect of the game is more of a benefit than a detriment. The best advice is focus on one platform type at a time and don't try to make one of each at the very start. The more platforms you have for a specific section means an invader has farther to go to reach the core. Develop weapons and items highlighted green as these are used by your security staff and don't skimp on the security staff either.
On the topic of insurance it's mostly useless anyway. In my experience losing to an invader isn't going to ruin you. They can only kidnap members of your security team (and only at the rank you set security to) and steal online resources (the stuff your base gathers depending on where it's located and stuff you've stolen). Now if they reach the core of the section they can get some of your regular staff but only 11. Plus once you are invaded you can't be invaded by anyone for a certain amount of time depending on how badly you were hit or after you invade someone else's base and if they set off the alarm you can retaliate to steal back your stolen staff and resources.
In the end, at this point in time the main reasons you might get invaded are to take resources if you have a ton lying around, to get back at you for attacking them or to steal your
nuke
Apparently doesn't matter, FOB's are stored on Konami's servers and are separate entities from you game and without them apparently it's nearly impossible to obtain the best equipment and final upgrades.Voxoid said:
So let's see, they have a multiplayer feature that affects single player with no way to circumvent it and still be able to get everything out of the game...wow this is incredibly scummy.
You summed it up pretty well, the insurance stuff is bullshit, and the long development times and high costs for late game stuff seem to only be there to encourage using mb coins to speed things up, but the actual invasion stuff is being grossly over exaggerated by people here. Some people seem to be painting invasions as this terrible detriment to your single player base, but invasions are on a timer, and you are limited in what you can lose and how often, as long as you aren't invading yourself and drawing retaliations or attention for hoarding resources from invasions, you will almost never be invaded, I just logged in after a week of not playing and I was invaded a grand total of two times, both failed.ColaWarVeteran said:
You really never lose more than what you gain by building an FOB, successful invasions are rare on consoles, PC has cheaters but even then my friends with the PC version only report getting invaded occasionally. Even losing non security geam staff is really not a big deal since you'll never lose more than the extra staff the FOB gives you, so even if you are the exception and get invaded a bunch even if you aren't invading others, having the Fob is still better than not having one.
People should be able to more easily opt out if they don't want to do the invasion stuff, but getting invaded and losing stuff isn't nearly as bad as people are making it seem.
Even before this, I had no idea the FOBs were that bad Having to grind away for the best stuff? No thanks.
I had traded MGSV back in (partly because screw Mission 12), and was wondering if I had made a mistake, since it did have superb gameplay. Guess that doesn't matter now.
Looking forward to the inevitable Jimquisition on this.
I had traded MGSV back in (partly because screw Mission 12), and was wondering if I had made a mistake, since it did have superb gameplay. Guess that doesn't matter now.
Looking forward to the inevitable Jimquisition on this.
