TotalBiscuit says Microsoft won E3

-Dragmire-

King over my mind
Mar 29, 2011
2,821
0
0
Kibeth41 said:
Whatislove said:
TB is just getting further and further from a person who is actually reasonable. He only recently argued that the microtransactions in Overwatch were a good thing.
Overwatch microtransactions are a good thing.

One argument for them is that they gimp the progression for the sake of micro transactions. This is wrong.

Imagine for a second if the game only had loot boxes without an option to buy them. A game which gives you free cosmetics every couple of games is being generous, right? That's a good progression system. You're playing a game, and it's constantly rewarding you for playing it. It keeps you hooked in, because you want more rewards. It provides a constant goal.

So why is it suddenly negative when an optional microtransaction system is also included? Some people have decent jobs which unfortunately take up a lot of time. They don't have the time to grind levels but still want the progression. The micro transactions are there specifically for them.

If you have more time but less money - get boxes via levelling.
If you have more money but less time - buy loot boxes.
It's simply just an inclusive feature.

Frankly, people wouldn't be complaining if the option wasn't there. The only issue is that some people have a problem with some individuals paying money for cosmetics.

And don't quote the number that it takes 800 hours to unlock everything (so many people quote it to me). It takes 800 hours to unlock 1050+ items. You can only equip 126 items total on your characters. It takes 800 hours to unlock 919 items that you'll never use. Shit, chances are you only even play around 10 characters frequently. So that's literally only 60 out of 1050+ items which are desirable.
It doesn't have to be all or nothing with microtransactions. Plenty of people merely dislike the fact that you can only pay for random stuff instead of what they want directly.

Keep the boxes via leveling. Keep the option to buy loot boxes. Give the option to buy the items directly which will be more expensive than buying loot boxes.

It just seems like a better system to me.
 

marioandsonic

New member
Nov 28, 2009
657
0
0
Overall, this entire E3 was really meh.

I'm not sure how people would say Microsoft won. They may have some good games and a new console coming out, but if most of those games are also going to be playable on PC, and I already have a good PC, then what would be the point of getting that new console? Also, why isn't there a release date yet for Cuphead?!

Sony probably had the strongest lineup of games, but to me, none of them convinced me that I had to rush out and buy a PS4 (especially because of the PS4 Neo in development). Also, I know everyone loves Kojima, but I spent half of the trailer for his new game thinking "I have no idea what is going on."

Nintendo definitely showed that Zelda will probably be good. I just wish that they had more games to show other than Pokemon and...that was pretty much it. No information on the NX, either.
 

-Dragmire-

King over my mind
Mar 29, 2011
2,821
0
0
Kibeth41 said:
-Dragmire- said:
It doesn't have to be all or nothing with microtransactions. Plenty of people merely dislike the fact that you can only pay for random stuff instead of what they want directly.

Keep the boxes via leveling. Keep the option to buy loot boxes. Give the option to buy the items directly which will be more expensive than buying loot boxes.

It just seems like a better system to me.
Arguably, but a lot of people are merely angry about the inclusion of micro transactions, and not what the micro transactions actually offer or represent.

Some people choose to buy Loot Boxes, others don't like the fact that people have that choice.

Besides, as far as I know, Totalbiscuit never said the system is absolutely diamond flawless with no possible way to ever improve it in the entire future of humanity, he simply said he likes it, and it's not a bad system.

And I'd hardly say his points on it aren't a reason to say that Totalbiscuit ia unreasonable.

Er, right. I wasn't really saying anything one way or the other in regards to TB's specific outlook, just the system itself.

From what I gather, TB thinks that Bizzard's implementation of microtransactions are more of a nonissue since it does not affect gameplay rather than calling the system good or bad. It makes sense for him see the system this way considering how much of a mechanics focused gamer he comes across as.

I suppose what drove me to comment on this is that I don't consider this implementation of microtransactions "good" due to the randomness of the drops which I consider a considerable flaw. A good system, to me, is one that is convenient. I want to buy skin X, not the chance to buy skin X. A system that allows buying content but not letting the consumer choose what content they get does not get a passing grade in my book.
 

UncleThursday

New member
Mar 15, 2014
20
0
0
nomotog said:
Only if you buy it in the windows store. It's not like you can buy on steam and play on your xbox. You also can't buy a physical copy and then play that on both either. It's only if you jump into that place called the windows store.
Or if you buy it on the Xbox store on your Xbox. I haven't bought a physical copy of a game this generation. So, to think Microsoft wouldn't have the buying go both ways is asinine.

Now, if one doesn't care about playing the game on both the PC and the Xbox, then they have their options for buying on the PC: GoG, Steam, Windows Store, Origin, etc. Personally, unless I was going to be reviewing both platforms, or had friends who were only going to play a game on the Xbox (like my Division review, which is for both the PC and Xbox), then I'd probably just go for the PC version.I didn't buy DOOM on any console, simply because my PC is powerful enough to run it at ultra with no problems; and none of my friends were getting it. So there was no reason to care about buying it on multiple platforms, even for review; I simply stated viewers would need to look for console specific reviews if they were looking for thoughts on how it ran on those systems.

It's not like suddenly everyone HAS to buy through the Windows store. They only have to buy it through there, or their Xbox, if they want the game on both platforms for one price. If they only care about the PC version, there are other retailers to get their copies from, at their choice.

***

As to who won E3... one could argue that The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild won E3... but not Nintendo as a whole. It's totally subjective.
 

UncleThursday

New member
Mar 15, 2014
20
0
0
Fhqwhgod said:
inu-kun said:
Haven't watched the video yet, but from what's being said, aren't consoles far more consumer friendly the PC gaming? It's a single, not so big investment once every few (4-5) years rather then an extremely expensive one every 2-3 years. Require no technical knowledge and already optimized for the machine.
You are then paying way too much for your games after. Even if you have to play a game day one it will be a lot cheaper on PC. Of course if all you want is a neat almost PC you can connect to your TV to occasionally play a game and maybe use as a Netflix box a console is the cheaper option. But you may have to be okay with hardware upgrades every 3-4 years. Because this generation already was way behind when it released to be able to get to a 500$ pricepoint.
The days of every PC version of a game being cheaper on the PC than the console version, day 1, are long gone. If the games come from most large publishers, and are out on both the PC and consoles at the same time, they are the same price on both. The only recent exception to this is Overwatch, where the PC version for the non-super-delux-collector-whatever version is $40, while the console versions are $60. You may find storefronts online selling it cheaper day 1, but that is the specific storefront, not the publisher.

Back when PC gaming was seen as dying, yes, games often came out for the PC at the same time as their console counterparts for cheaper. But, not anymore. PC gaming is now bigger than console gaming, on the whole, again, so the publishers are keeping prices even.

The other thing about PCs is like what just happened to me. I built my PC in Feb. Put a GTX 980 Ti in it. Now, just a few months later, nVidia releases the 1080, with their "founders edition" being just slightly more than I paid for my 980 Ti hybrid card. There is always that chance that when someone finally decides to build a PC, that the components they put in it will be obsoleted within a short time frame; and, yes, with the price and power difference, the 1070 and 1080 have obsoleted the 970 and 980 cards-- there is literally no point in spending near the same amount of money for less powerful cards with a higher power consumption for new builds (unless the price for the 970 and 980s drops dramatically, but even then, you'd be better off with a 1070 or a 1080).

Granted, the PC market isn't moving as fast as it was in the late 90s and early 2000s, but it still can happen. By the time someone saves up the money for that system they want, they have to decide if they want (or in my case need, since I had been without a working computer for a while) that PC now, or if they can hold off a few months to see if one or more of their parts will be obsoleted by new hardware that is being released in the same price range. Still, I'm fine with my 980 Ti at least until the 1080 Ti is released, as it will do me just fine until then; but if I had a working computer when I bought this, I might have tried sitting on the money and waiting until I knew for sure if nVidia was releasing a new set of cards or not (it had been rumored for over a year and nothing had been showing up on either the nVidia or AMD side).

As to @inu-kun asking about investment and tech knowledge with PC vs consoles... sure, PCs can be a bigger up front cost, but, as I said, the PC hardware side of things has slowed down, dramatically. This isn't like the late 90s and early 2000s, where it seemed like every 6 months there was a new CPU with better speeds, and new GPU that was needed to run the newest games (like when DOOM 3 came out, or the infamous "but will it run Crysis?" days). Intel and AMD aren't looking for faster CPUs for the time being, instead focusing more on power consumption efficiency; so getting a decently fast CPU is going to last a while. RAM is cheap, I got 64GB of DDR4 RAM for my machine for like $450, which will last me for years with how current games and programs are. Even GPUs, with the release of the 10xx series and the new Radeon 480, aren't going to be huge issues for a few years as many games coming out over the next few years will still have minimum specs of a GTX 960 or equivalent (some as low as a 950), and even games like DOOM and The Division only have recommended specs of a GTX 970 or equivalent. It's going to be a while before the recommended specs start jumping to the new video cards.

So, my PC with a 6 core i7, 64 GB DDR4 RAM, and a GTX 980 Ti will last me a good many years (at least 5, if not more) for everything from web browsing, to gaming, to video editing. The earliest I should even think about upgrading the majority of my system will probably be mid 2020.

And, as for the technical know how to put one together, they're not that hard to build. Everything is pretty much plug and play. However, if someone either feels they can't build the machine, or (like in my case) doesn't have the time to do it themselves, any local PC shop will most likely do it for them for a fee of between $150-$200. In my case, paying that fee as a convenience for not having to deal with cable management, etc. was worth it with my work schedule. I dropped it off, went to work, and they put it together, installed the OS, and tested it by the time I was done. Sure, it's an extra cost, but nothing is free.
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,350
363
88
UncleThursday said:
It's not like suddenly everyone HAS to buy through the Windows store. They only have to buy it through there, or their Xbox, if they want the game on both platforms for one price. If they only care about the PC version, there are other retailers to get their copies from, at their choice.
Unless Microsft makes a deal to make those PC games Windows Store exclusive like Quatum Break.
 

UncleThursday

New member
Mar 15, 2014
20
0
0
CaitSeith said:
UncleThursday said:
It's not like suddenly everyone HAS to buy through the Windows store. They only have to buy it through there, or their Xbox, if they want the game on both platforms for one price. If they only care about the PC version, there are other retailers to get their copies from, at their choice.
Unless Microsft makes a deal to make those PC games Windows Store exclusive like Quatum Break.
Microsoft published Quantum Break. As the publisher, Microsoft gets the choice of what storefronts to put the game on. That's a good deal different from your thought.

You might as well be complaining that Sony didn't put Uncharted 4 up on Steam.

Everyone knows that many developers, and possibly publishers, don't want to see the Windows Store become the only place to get PC games, like Microsoft obviously wants. The amount of money they would need to pay third parties to exclusively sell their games only on the Windows Store over any other online PC game seller would be astronomical; potentially more than it would be worth to Microsoft (as in totalling billions each year). Hell, EA owns Origin, and even they don't make their own games exclusive to Origin. So, how do you think other third party publishers are going to act?

Now, if MS wants to make all their PC versions exclusive to the Windows Store? That's their prerogative. But, it will also severely limit sales of those games on the PC, since the majority of gamers look to Steam for PC games, first. But, that's on them.
 

Fhqwhgod

New member
Apr 7, 2015
112
0
0
UncleThursday said:
since the majority of gamers look to Steam for PC games, first. But, that's on them.
Some of them look at Steam only.
And a lot of them can't even use the MS store since they are on Windows 7 and have no intention of downgrading to 8 or 10.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Fox12 said:
That makes sense. I was a little put off when Microsoft was described as pro-consumer. I can get how someone would think that if they only paid attention to the surface details, but if you look a little deeper then you realize that Microsoft is still Microsoft. Microsoft is supporting cross platform play, and wants to support PC gaming? Great! Until you realize that they're obsessed with DRM, want an anti-consumer PC monopoly, and have zero interest in improving their customer service in the PC market. Why be pro-consumer when you can just strong arm everyone? Thanks, but I'll take... Literally anyone else in the gaming market.
Especially when you consider this applies specifically to Windows 10. Microsoft has been trying to force people to upgrade to 10 by any means necessary, including automatic updates and outright trickery.

Now, I will point out that I upgraded to 10 mostly voluntarily and I don't hate it. But I get why some of the practices of 10 are bothersome for people (especially since I lost work to some of its forced restarts), and I think their strongarm and deception tactics for updating are awful. The notion that Microsoft tying you further to Windows 10 is pro-consumer is a joke.

But I totally believe that Jon would have said it.
 

ZeD [taken 0]

New member
Apr 21, 2012
72
0
0
WinterWyvern said:
Nobody won E3, it was pretty boring all in all.
But it certainly wasn't Microsoft.

Let him believe it, tho. If it makes him happy.
You could try and watch the video.
 

Amir Kondori

New member
Apr 11, 2013
932
0
0
deadish said:
Amir Kondori said:
What "hassle"? No, seriously, what hassle?
Driver updates. Things breaking. Figuring out what settings would work best on your setup. Heck, figuring out whether your setup can run the game decently is a hassle ... etc.

Not everyone is capable of keeping track of computer hardware news, nor do most people want to. With consoles, if you see the PS4 logo, you know it will run and it will run decently. Zero burden of knowledge involved.
Literally none of that is a thing anymore. The latest version of Windows automatically updates your drivers and system updates. Games automatically select the best settings or else your video card's software, i.e. Geforce Experience. There are very prominently posted system requirements for all the major stores for PC. It is all plug and play now.