DBO Forums - Reply 2 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/ Bungie.Org talks Destiny en Reply 2 (reply)

If I wanted an emblem, and didn't have the time or desire to play 90 hours, I'd buy it. Would you rather they monetize something less mundane?


yes
way, way less mundane, please


So you're saying you want to monetize things that could actually affect gameplay.

No, I didn't say that and I don't want that, I mean it could at least be something like a weapon skin, preferably more like a set of armor, and really I'd prefer for it to still be possible to earn it in-game.

We tend to balk at the cost of everything, and we expect to be able to buy used games,


um, what? why shouldn't we expect to be able to buy used games? we can buy used... everything else; it's a common enough and supported enough expectation that there have been multiple lawsuits based on not being able to


I expect that right. It's my property. But Cliffy has a point, which is this does affect game companies' ability to make a profit and fund future games.

I really doubt used game sales are making a bigger dent than people just downloading whatever games they want, and regardless I don't intend to let any company take away more of my rights with products than they already have.

My larger point is that there is a cost to everything, and something has to give somewhere.

That's pretty vague, what do you mean by "something has to give somewhere"?

Microsoft and Sony together lost $8 billion on hardware this generation. There is no free lunch, and there are no free games.

You of all people should know they generally don't make their money on hardware, they make it on games, and as I said, people are in fact getting them for free. I believe some parts of the industry are suffering for various reasons. I don't think EA, Activision, or Microsoft are in any of those parts. Sony might be, but mostly for other reasons.

I'm hopeful, though, that things will work out. Assuming Cody's right, and microtransactions ruin gaming for a time, some creative people will invent a different model.

I think a new model is extremely unlikely-- people have been figuring out different ways to charge for things for thousands of years. I think a different model is fairly unlikely, mostly just because of momentum. The most dramatic thing I can see happening in the near future is a paradigm shift in pricing.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4239 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4239 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 23:15:52 +0000 General Vagueness
Or they awoke to find EA backtracking (reply)

I'm going to be a typical fanboy and say I never believed Bungie was going to transform into Zynga because of what the original article implied. If I know anything about the Bungie culture, when they joined up with EA, they negotiated themselves a lot of freedom.


Wait, what?

Bungie never joined up with EA. They're currently in cahoots with Activision, a completely different company. ;)

See what happens when you take dramamine? Just say no to drugs, kids.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4227 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4227 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 21:22:15 +0000 Kermit
Or they awoke to find EA backtracking (reply)

I'm going to be a typical fanboy and say I never believed Bungie was going to transform into Zynga because of what the original article implied. If I know anything about the Bungie culture, when they joined up with EA, they negotiated themselves a lot of freedom.

Wait, what?

Bungie never joined up with EA. They're currently in cahoots with Activision, a completely different company. ;)

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4226 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4226 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 21:15:16 +0000 Claude Errera
Or they awoke to find EA backtracking (reply) I'm going to be a typical fanboy and say I never believed Bungie was going to transform into Zynga because of what the original article implied. If I know anything about the Bungie culture, when they joined up with EA, they negotiated themselves a lot of freedom.

The article seemed calculated to cause freak outs.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4224 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4224 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 21:03:42 +0000 Kermit
Or they awoke to find EA backtracking (reply) Now, I'm not saying that there wasn't a quote that was totally warped or disregarded to create a firestorm and lead to many hits on some "video game news" webpages, but I wouldn't go so far as to pretend like this was a dream or something made up. If anything it's EA walking it back and clarifying to try and calm the flames (and doing a bad job, considering those quotes). Remember everything with the free Crimson Map Pack and all of the blunders that went with it and specializations, but then Microsoft came out and said it was all part of the plan and a one week thing? It was all nonsense and trash.

Considering EA's history, I'm more inclined to believe the "journalists" than the guy from EA. If the journalists did warp or misquote, that's also pretty unforgivable and there should be a correction regardless. Either way, what the EA person just came out and said is still pretty pathetic in regards to microtransactions.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4220 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4220 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 20:10:42 +0000 Avateur
And they awoke to find it all had been a dream. (reply) It sounded fishy that EA could decide that regardless. Typically journalistic excess.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4219 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4219 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 19:59:33 +0000 Kermit
EA claims that's not what they meant (reply) "You could play this game for the next three years and never pay a penny on it," he said, "or you could play and immediately upgrade and get more excited about the game. Consumers love that."

I like getting excited enough about the game to want to own it, and I want the game to be good enough and fun enough for me to keep playing it without feeling a need to buy more things to actually feel said fun and excitement.

"We're building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way, either to get to a higher level,"

I'll just cut it off right there, shake my head, and laugh.

"It allows someone to take a game that maybe they played for 1,000 hours and play it for 2,000 hours," he said. "We are very conscious that we don't want to make consumers feel like they're not getting value. We want to make sure consumers are getting value."

Considering how Battlefield Premium works, this statement is pretty hilarious.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4214 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4214 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:57:20 +0000 Avateur
EA claims that's not what they meant (reply) http://www.polygon.com/2013/3/6/4070584/ea-wont-have-micro-transactions-in-all-future-games-exec-clarifies

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4213 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4213 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:26:07 +0000 Xenos
"Microtransactions make that possible"? Was that sarcasm? (reply)

I don't completely disagree with hardly any post you make, Cody, but I find your style offensive. Funny how you skipped right over Claude's most important criticism.

Generally, you never try to persuade, but only mock, belittle, and curse those with whom you disagree.

As far as his way of expressing his opinion, I don't get the feeling that he intends to mock, belittle, and curse others, as you say. I just think that he is vehemently passionate about his opinions, and because of that passion, I personally enjoy reading the discussions he is involved in (sometimes to the point of mirthful laughter), even when I disagree with what he has to say. Then again, you guys are more familiar with him than I, so...

As for the microtransaction issue (not including DLC) I won't argue what has already been said; I'll just put forth my own feelings on the issue. Overall, it just doesn't sit well with me. If the content being paid for is merely cosmetic and has no effect on gameplay, I could care less. But when the content being paid for does affect gameplay, e.g., makes a person level up faster, gives them more powerful weapons that would otherwise be difficult to obtain, helps them pass over difficult gameplay sections, it feels a lot like cheating. This especially applies to a multiplayer/socially focused game like Destiny. It really sucks when players around you are better/higher level/have better weapons than you because they paid for it and not because they earned it. Sure, I get the pleasure of playing the game in it's entirety and earning everything, but it would still leave me feeling frustrated and very unhappy. It would devalue the game in my eyes.

Think of it like this. How would you feel if your best friend, who you've spent years earning his/her respect and love and gaining his/her trust, suddenly started treating another person with the same amount of respect and love because they paid for it? Your friendship suddenly would feel worthless and the time spent getting to know eachother pointless. Not to mention you would probably lose your best friend. That's the only comparison I can make to how I feel about the issue.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4154 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4154 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 04:44:16 +0000 Mr Daax
YES (reply) Microtransactions tend to be small things such as weapons, items, or player classes. Actual playable content like additional campaign missions usually costs more than a dollar or two.

I guess if we want to look at Mass Effect, you could say that the Lair of the Shadow Broker, Arrival, and Overlord were more like traditional expansion packs: they cost between $5 and $10 and contained fairly lengthy self-contained chunks of story which were not necessary but added something worthwhile to the game, but then the various weapon packs or character costumes were more like what you'd think of as microtransactions: $2-$5, and they contained fairly minor items which didn't add anything to the game's story.

sooo I guess if they have a hit and decide to expand the story or whatever, cool. If they're just pawning off extra guns and shit, well, fuck that shit.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4152 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4152 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 04:14:44 +0000 Leisandir
YES (reply)

The problem is you're equating intentionally crippling with any and all forms of microtransactions. That is simply wrong.

In the rare case of a developer intentionally crippling a game and pushing the fix to microtransactions, then yes, I'd wager you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks that's a Good Idea.


Every instance of microtransaction use intentionally cripples the game.

1- Items only available through purchase. Intentionally crippled by not including them in the base game. Ask yourself if it would be better with everything available without having to purchase it. The answer is always yes. Intentionally crippled.

2- Items available through purchase and play. Players paying for items are paying not to play, and this means that aspects of the game are unpleasant enough to pay to avoid. Irrespective of player tastes, when a developer creates something under this type of micro transaction, they are admitting that a non trivial amount of players would want to or be tempted to avoid playing the respective part of the game. If they did not think this, it would be pointless to spend the time to implement the microtransaction. They know lots of players will find the part of the game unpleasant. They are counting on it because that is the only reason someone would pay to not play. Therefore, they are intentionally crippling the game.

I am both disappointed and angry when something that by its very nature ruins games is not only not criticized, but EMBRACED. Gaming stockholm syndrome. Dammit people.

I guess one of the biggest issue of the micro transactions is the continued development post-release. Say EA is an evil corporation (yes yes, I know) and they define in the dev cycle that there should be an extra $10 of DLC / micro transactions to go on top of the game after release – fine, release a GOTY edition 9 months later with all the content included - everyone’s happy.

But what if they have an unexpected hit on their hands and the suits order another $20 worth of DLC to trickle out over the year and keep the minions playing. Is it better if it’s map packs / missions / fresh content? What if it’s just a pack of over powered guns? I know there’s a world of difference between a bag full of digital money and an extended player environment, but do people oppose any and all types of extra content? I think as many mention it’s more about how devs implement this rather than it being so black and white.

One would hope (and this is a foolishly optimistic view) that positive response to good games with well implemented extra content will trump cashing-in with gun packs and fun bucks, because players will vote with their wallets?

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4147 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4147 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 03:47:34 +0000 iZac
Reply 2 (reply)

I expect that right. It's my property. But Cliffy has a point, which is this does affect game companies' ability to make a profit and fund future games.


The industry has brainwashed you into thinking this so you feel okay about micro transaction models. You don't need to concern yourself with how games are paid for. Just demand excellent games, and if the way they pay for them makes the game worse, make them figure out a different way that doesn't compromise quality. They are big boys; I'm sure they can think of something else.

There are literally so many excellent games that are already out and exist, that I literally could not play them all in the rest of my life. If I never bought a new release from this point on, I'd still have more than enough excellent games to keep me busy till the day I die.

When you release a new game, that's what you are competing with. Utilize current technology in interesting or better ways, make your games better than old ones because of that, and you should have no problem making money. But taint your games with this bullshit, and I head straight for the used game store or ebay to get something released in 1996.

As is your right. Understanding how the market for used games affects the bottom line does not make me feel that microtransaction models are perfectly fine, but it does help me understand the scope of the problem that the microtransaction model is trying to address, which is, how do you make money? I like your answer and completely agree with everything else you said.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4101 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4101 Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:46:58 +0000 Kermit
Reply 2 (reply)

I expect that right. It's my property. But Cliffy has a point, which is this does affect game companies' ability to make a profit and fund future games.

The industry has brainwashed you into thinking this so you feel okay about micro transaction models. You don't need to concern yourself with how games are paid for. Just demand excellent games, and if the way they pay for them makes the game worse, make them figure out a different way that doesn't compromise quality. They are big boys; I'm sure they can think of something else.

There are literally so many excellent games that are already out and exist, that I literally could not play them all in the rest of my life. If I never bought a new release from this point on, I'd still have more than enough excellent games to keep me busy till the day I die.

When you release a new game, that's what you are competing with. Utilize current technology in interesting or better ways, make your games better than old ones because of that, and you should have no problem making money. But taint your games with this bullshit, and I head straight for the used game store or ebay to get something released in 1996.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4098 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4098 Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:23:49 +0000 Cody Miller
Reply 2 (reply)

I expect that right. It's my property. But Cliffy has a point, which is this does affect game companies' ability to make a profit and fund future games.

Exactly. Cliff's point wasn't that you shouldn't expect to be able to buy and sell used games. It was precisely the opposite - that people DO expect it. And that consequently, developers/publishers can lose out on potential sales. So he's saying they're bound to try to come up with other ways to make money. Which is not only true, but obvious.

The argument about which specific "other ways" are appropriate is an entirely separate conversation from this point, of course.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4097 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4097 Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:20:54 +0000 stabbim
You forget, Halo: Reach DID have micro-transactions (reply) It's too bad you never played the Noble map pack, I loved those maps. Once 343 and Certain Infinity took over I thought the new maps were meh, but Noble was fantastic.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4050 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4050 Tue, 05 Mar 2013 03:26:06 +0000 Xenos
Reply 2 (reply)

If I wanted an emblem, and didn't have the time or desire to play 90 hours, I'd buy it. Would you rather they monetize something less mundane?


yes
way, way less mundane, please

So you're saying you want to monetize things that could actually affect gameplay. I'd rather they not have microtransactions, but cosmetic stuff would bother me less.

We tend to balk at the cost of everything, and we expect to be able to buy used games,


um, what? why shouldn't we expect to be able to buy used games? we can buy used... everything else; it's a common enough and supported enough expectation that there have been multiple lawsuits based on not being able to

I expect that right. It's my property. But Cliffy has a point, which is this does affect game companies' ability to make a profit and fund future games.

My larger point is that there is a cost to everything, and something has to give somewhere. Microsoft and Sony together lost $8 billion on hardware this generation. There is no free lunch, and there are no free games.

I'm hopeful, though, that things will work out. Assuming Cody's right, and microtransactions ruin gaming for a time, some creative people will invent a different model.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4049 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4049 Tue, 05 Mar 2013 03:17:15 +0000 Kermit
You forget, Halo: Reach DID have micro-transactions (reply)

Were you blinded by their majesty?

To be honest, no. I played a lot of Halo 2 and 3 multiplayer. I stopped playing 3 when I didn't want to buy the mythic map pack. Then the playlists I liked were no longer available since I didn't have mythic, essentially driving me away. I played the hell out of the Reach beta and loved it, but come retail I played for a while, then lost interest when a map pack became available.

And I never liked ODST.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4048 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4048 Tue, 05 Mar 2013 03:15:36 +0000 Cody Miller
Reply 2 (reply)

If I wanted an emblem, and didn't have the time or desire to play 90 hours, I'd buy it. Would you rather they monetize something less mundane?

yes
way, way less mundane, please

We tend to balk at the cost of everything, and we expect to be able to buy used games,

um, what? why shouldn't we expect to be able to buy used games? we can buy used... everything else; it's a common enough and supported enough expectation that there have been multiple lawsuits based on not being able to

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4037 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4037 Tue, 05 Mar 2013 02:31:07 +0000 General Vagueness
Reply 2 (reply)

It's impossible to talk about only entertainment and fun. Games have to be funded somehow. My opinion is that nasty impacts tend to convert consumers into non-consumers, and well-made products can find a market.

Agreed on all counts. I just found it interesting that he avoided talking about anything but the money.

Huh? Maybe the justification of seeking profit was the subject of this post, and that had something to do with it being the focus of his thought process.

Well, now you sound like you don't believe him. Do you believe him or not? You know, I used to think of Cliffy B as an obnoxious kid who might be how you characterize him. A number of things, including the New Yorker profile a few years back, changed my mind. But my perception of him started to change when he openly stated, the year the first Gears came out, that Bioshock was the best game of the year. The fact that he would say that impressed me. It's not the comment of guy just out for self-enrichment or self-aggrandizement.

Okay, so you do believe him, sort of, but maybe not since he didn't explicitly take up the issues you mention.

Haha, sorry. I do believe him. It came out weird. What I was saying is that, just like how you said the subject of the post is about the justification of seeking profit, his little bullet point list of why he got into the industry is so out of place. He had absolutely no intention of discussing fun, love of the creation, genre, nothing. Just business, just money. And that's completely perfectly fine! So why throw the rest in there? It was almost as if he was trying to say something like, "C'mon, I'm your homie etc" and get you trust him. It's like he lacked confidence in his own thoughts on the matter and had to throw it in. I felt it detracted and missed out on a good opportunity for him to discuss how to make the business work with a fun and great model for consumers and actual gameplay.

If I wanted an emblem, and didn't have the time or desire to play 90 hours, I'd buy it. Would you rather they monetize something less mundane? Monetizing brings revenue, which helps to fund more games. This is what Cliffy B was saying: people gotta eat. I hope they get to do more than that. I wouldn't be bothered if Jason Jones and Cliffy each had an swimming pool full of gold coins to swim in because money is an exchange of value, and the fun I got out of Gears and Halo was worth way more than what I've spent on either franchise. Money also helps people focus on what they're good at. Cliffy and Jason can spend their energy on creating something great, and the money they have saves them from spending that energy fixing their cars or whatever.

But you already bought the emblem when you bought the game! Why pay twice? It's an emblem. It could have been available from the start, but apparently it was a better idea to make them a pain to unlock to try and get you to spend money on them (hypothetically).

The argument of "people gotta eat" is pretty much a joke. If you think microtransactions are enough to help them eat or pay the bills, you're mistaken. Maybe not if we're talking apps and cell phone games, but if we're talking AAA game makers, c'mon. It's a cash grab, nothing more. When EA says that every one of their games going forward will require microtransactions, that is not a decision made by a collective group of developers who think they need it to help pay their bills. They're being told by their publisher to do it or tough cookies, primarily so that EA can benefit and get more money from it, not the devs themselves. Now, I'm not implying that the devs come out with nothing or that there is no benefit for them, but it's pretty clear who wants this, what it's for, and why it happened, and it wasn't the devs. EA Sports, It's In The Game! Not anymore. You need to purchase the other portions or grind away, sucker.

We tend to balk at the cost of everything, and we expect to be able to buy used games, we're offended when even cosmetic items are monetized, and if an industry leader dares to speak bluntly about the hard calculus involved in creating games these days, we suspect he's Scrooge McDuck.

I'm not trying to simplify your viewpoint. I know that you and I care mainly about fun, but a bit more realism about how that fun got to us and how it can continue to get to us might be in order here. We're entitled to nothing. Neither are developers. They risk alienating us if they make games that aren't fun. That's part of the calculus, too.

I think I have the realism down fine, and I think I'm pretty open to understanding and even agreeing with a lot of the justifications behind these business decisions. But when a company goes out and declares that all games going forward will be required to do it, it's pretty clear that it's only a matter of time before these games will be affected negatively, watered down, and made worse for it. That isn't to say that really great games won't still be made and released under EA, but the potential for them to be worse than they would have been otherwise is there. Game designers may begin actually releasing games with portions that are purposely broken or terrible to try and get you to pay to bypass them. Hell, it looks like plenty do that right now with microtransactions. I just see a really bad and negative trend coming and, as a consumer, I don't plan on supporting EA's plans.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4032 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4032 Tue, 05 Mar 2013 01:11:04 +0000 Avateur
You forget, Halo: Reach DID have micro-transactions (reply)

It does many things well, and while I disagree about it being the ultimate Halo, I'd just like to point out that it doesn't need microtransactions to do the things it does well or to fail at the things it falls short on.


Well, at least if we go by Cody's definition of 'micro-transaction' as 'anything that's not a full-game release or bumper-sized expansion pack.'

Let me remind you:

  • DLC Map Packs: Noble, Defiant, Anniversary. $10, $10, $20 - $40.
  • Bungie Pro - $10 per year (until it ended)
  • Render minutes bundles - $variable

Were you blinded by their majesty?

I don't use Cody's definition. I've never considered map packs as something that fell under microtransactions. Bungie Pro is also a service that one pays for. I don't have a capture card, and Bungie Pro made it so I could render films. And there were free render minutes that I could use without purchasing bundles. Bundles just gave me a ton of minutes for a ton of videos if I ever needed it. I don't include a separate and optional service that allows me to convert video into a format that I can put onto a computer or take me with me anywhere well outside of the game as a microtransaction. A microtransaction would be something like, hey, you saved that film, but to watch it again or show it to anyone in the game's theater mode, shell out the cash. No thanks.

]]>
https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4031 https://destiny.bungie.org/forum/index.php?id=4031 Tue, 05 Mar 2013 00:53:45 +0000 Avateur