Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare Gets Microtransactions

[NuclearKangaroo]

So Rockstar not only has microtransactions in GTAO from the get go, but also gloats about how much money they're getting from it, and everybody just shrugs.

EA adds it later, and suddenly its "Fuck EA" this, and "EA is a heartless corporate bastard" that.

Let's get some fucking consistency already.

from me youll get a very straight answer

if its not free to play, and it had microtransactions and those microtransactions affect the gameplay, its bullship, complete and utter bullshit


its the very definition of locking content alreay o the disk and selling it to you later on

id say Valve seems to be one of the very few companies that manages to not be disgusting with their microtransactions, both TF2 and Dota 2 have microtransactions, but those games are F2P, CS:GO has microtransactions, but those are only for cosmetics and you can get em for free via trading, and Portal 2... nevermind

 

[Bindal]

and Portal 2... nevermind

And Portal 2 never had any beyond those from launch...

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

and Portal 2... nevermind

And Portal 2 never had any beyond those from launch...

that experiment was short lived, i still find hilarious how if you try to trade portal 2 items from inside the game it still says "youll be able to trade items soon!", oh boy maybe when HL3 comes out


but yeah no more microtransactions were ever added to the game, and any "bad" valve couldve done with portal 2 was easily fixed by how amazing the game was supported post launch, culminating with the perpetual testing initiative, now youll die of old age before you run out of portal 2 levels to play

 

[ASnogarD]

-snip-

id say Valve seems to be one of the very few companies that manages to not be disgusting with their microtransactions, both TF2 and Dota 2 have microtransactions, but those games are F2P, CS:GO has microtransactions, but those are only for cosmetics and you can get em for free via trading, and Portal 2... nevermind

TF2 wasnt a free to play title, I paid for the game at BETA and for a long time it was a retail game... Valve took a old game that had passed its prime sales time and turned it F2P, but there was no cause to complain as I already had hours of fun out of it and was already tiring of it at the time... so no complaints here.

Valve isnt beyond a few nasty tricks mind you, I still feel they did a EA with L4D 1 and 2... to my eyes L4D 1 was a broken piece of software for a long time and when it got finally sorted out, L4D 2 was around the corner shattering the remnants of the L4D 1 community that stuck it out through since release.
I have not played L4D 2 at all... even when the game had that special where you could get it for free.

As for PvZ... the biggest insult is that this... thing is called PvZ, its so different from the original its not even the same genre.
It cant even say its being different in being bold with trying new shit out, it took a fun and casual strategy title and turned it into a generic shooter, in a era where shooters are well overly common.

... and microtransactions are EA's bag these days, it shows quiet clearly that EA have no idea of whats going on in the gaming world.
Cant even see whats wrong with having players pay to avoid playing the game... d-oh.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

This is EA we're talking about, shoving microtransactions into everything is their MO now.

Its now a question whether you can complete the game/get max level with or without dragging out your wallet again.

 

[BabuNu]

Am I the only one who thinks that this is a step in the right direction for EA? At least the microtransactions don't give people anything that can't be gotten through normal gameplay.

I agree that this is definitely worse than microtransactions to buy cosmetic items only (e.g. Dota 2) but it's much better than microtransactions to buy things that you can't earn through regular gameplay.

It's still not great but it's less shit than all the shitty shit they've been shitting our way in the past right? And I guess that's positive...?

 

[ASnogarD]

Am I the only one who thinks that this is a step in the right direction for EA? At least the microtransactions don't give people anything that can't be gotten through normal gameplay.

I agree that this is definitely worse than microtransactions to buy cosmetic items only (e.g. Dota 2) but it's much better than microtransactions to buy things that you can't earn through regular gameplay.

It's still not great but it's less shit than all the shitty shit they've been shitting our way in the past right? And I guess that's positive...?

If it was a completely free 2 play title that had a microtransaction based income structure, yes it would of been fine... a F2P with only time saving features in the store, great.

The game is a full priced retail game, you are suppose to buy and be able to play it fully... yet it also has a store.
NOW , you may argue this just effects players who are too lazy to earn later items BUT can we really trust EA not to empathise the grind a bit to encourage players to the store a bit...hmmm ?
I think not, EA have only proven a desire to maximise profits out of IP's with very little regard to player satisfaction or indeed the gameplay balance of the actual IP's in question.

Just because it isnt as shit as it could of been, doesnt make it a good shit or less shitty.... shit is shit and EA is EA.
The message must be clear, we as players do not want microtransactions in our pay to play games as we the players do not trust ANY publisher / developer to not add something to the game to encourage players to part with more cash.
You also need to understand that publishers / developers will test our tolerances to see what they can get away with and accepting something gives it precedence for more, which slowly becomes normal... like DLC these days, which used to be extras in the game or Easter eggs to be found... its now normal to shave off parts of the game to sell you later.

 

[squid5580]

Am I the only one who thinks that this is a step in the right direction for EA? At least the microtransactions don't give people anything that can't be gotten through normal gameplay.

I agree that this is definitely worse than microtransactions to buy cosmetic items only (e.g. Dota 2) but it's much better than microtransactions to buy things that you can't earn through regular gameplay.

It's still not great but it's less shit than all the shitty shit they've been shitting our way in the past right? And I guess that's positive...?

If it was a completely free 2 play title that had a microtransaction based income structure, yes it would of been fine... a F2P with only time saving features in the store, great.

The game is a full priced retail game, you are suppose to buy and be able to play it fully... yet it also has a store.
NOW , you may argue this just effects players who are too lazy to earn later items BUT can we really trust EA not to empathise the grind a bit to encourage players to the store a bit...hmmm ?
I think not, EA have only proven a desire to maximise profits out of IP's with very little regard to player satisfaction or indeed the gameplay balance of the actual IP's in question.

Just because it isnt as shit as it could of been, doesnt make it a good shit or less shitty.... shit is shit and EA is EA.
The message must be clear, we as players do not want microtransactions in our pay to play games as we the players do not trust ANY publisher / developer to not add something to the game to encourage players to part with more cash.
You also need to understand that publishers / developers will test our tolerances to see what they can get away with and accepting something gives it precedence for more, which slowly becomes normal... like DLC these days, which used to be extras in the game or Easter eggs to be found... its now normal to shave off parts of the game to sell you later.

First off it isn't a full retail game. It is a budget retail game. Since launch they have increased the in game money you make twice. The second time not more than 2 weeks ago. So I have my doubts they are going to turn around and nerf the in game money made per match. If (and it is a big if) they were to then I would be first on the "lets hate EA" bandwagon. But as it stands right now they have given us 2 substantial DLCs (including a new mode, new map and a bunch of new character variants, skills and silly hats) for free. Not to mention balancing the economy in favor of the player. They also have said all future DLC will be free with a bi-weekly schedule. All this equals out to the MTs being nothing more than a "donate to support us" button. It changes nothing in the game. It isn't gonna help those lazy players all that much since what you are buying isn't going to help you whatsoever (silly hats don't impact gameplay and that is what you are getting along with 1/5 character pieces unless you buy the guaranteed character pack).

EA is handling this right and it doesn't make it wrong or bad just because it is EA

 

[ASnogarD]

You pay for the game, its a paid for game... budget retail, what the hell is that ? Whats this, its somewhat free but not but it is at budget to play ?
Its at the amount they expected to sell and gain a profit at launch from, it didnt make the money expected (probably because it isnt really what PvZ fans wanted, its so far removed from that title as to not be the same at all) as it probably didnt gain the market traction expected... the huge fanbase wanted more PvZ so it is understandable EA expected to move a lot.

It still is a store in a pay for title, irrespective of how 'well' it is being handled... would you like being robbed by a very polite and extremely friendly robber ? Robbery done right is right ?

League of Legends is a F2P done right, yet it often gets criticism for not simply handing out its champions for free like DOTA2, yet you can with time play at a equal level with anyone putting in the cash... and its completely free to download, and boasts a lot of free content.

Just because it is a budget title, it cannot simply tack on a store after launch and expect to get away with it without some flack... EA or no, a store in a pay for title is still something to fight against.
EA and all the others will take small steps to try get a store in a full priced title, start small then eventually build up...we have to nip it in the bud, so to speak.

 

[ThunderCavalier]

Meh... it's really hard for me to care about this. Unless this causes unbalancing issues, this just allows people to pay to get content instead of grinding for it.

I know that this could be a slippery slope that could lead to more microtransactions down the line on better games, but, as it stands, it's just EA doing a new move on a game that they know will get money. Business as usual for EA, really.

 

[otakon17]

And no one was surprised, at ALL. I mean what did you or anyone expect when they turned Plants Vs. Zombies into a multiplayer third person shooter? I mean really, it's EA of course they're gonna milk this cow for what it's worth. Hell I don't even think I've seen a proper review on this blatant cash-in yet on here or anywhere for that matter.

 

[Qizx]

You pay for the game, its a paid for game... budget retail, what the hell is that ? Whats this, its somewhat free but not but it is at budget to play ?
-snip-

I have to jump on this as well, what exactly is a "budget game?" A game under 30? Under 4? What are you allowed to get away with in a "budget" game?

OT: Everyone who's surprised by this please put your hands up!
No one? Ok didn't think so. EA gonna do what they do best.

 

[otakon17]

This is EA we're talking about, shoving microtransactions into everything is their MO now.

Its now a question whether you can complete the game/get max level with or without dragging out your wallet again.

God, do you think they'll try to shove some into Dragon Age: Inquisition? I mean, the hell could they jam into it? You level up faster(and make the game easier), you buy in-game gold(to make the game easier). I don't know WHAT they could micronize but I fear they're gonna attempt.

Also, that too. Microtransactions on a full price retail game is just being greedy and they know it but people aren't informed enough to know better and fall for this shit. ARGH! EA, I was starting to think you were finally getting your head out of your ass but now it seems you're going back in not just as far but FURTHER. I know one thing, when I get DA: Inquisition I'm gonna buy it as cheaply as possible.

 

[Something Amyss]

Am I the only one who thinks that this is a step in the right direction for EA? At least the microtransactions don't give people anything that can't be gotten through normal gameplay.

EA's been doing this for years. You'd be forgiven for thinking it started with Dead Space 3, though, because people suddenly had a problem with it. Still, they've had games, primarily sports and racing games, with this sort of setup before.

So Rockstar not only has microtransactions in GTAO from the get go, but also gloats about how much money they're getting from it, and everybody just shrugs.

What internet were you on?

 

[Something Amyss]

I have to jump on this as well, what exactly is a "budget game?" A game under 30? Under 4? What are you allowed to get away with in a "budget" game?

Budget games are ones that are generally released with an initial MSRP of 30 bucks or less US from the PS3/360 era on, and 20 bucks or less for several generations before.