• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Honestly, everyone suddenly angry about this is asleep at the wheel, capcom has been doing this for years. And it never affects the base game, so I just can’t bring myself to care at all

    I do wish that internet communities were less focused on outrage. Lemmy was pretty good for that maybe 8 months ago or so, but that’s passed.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      248 months ago

      It always affects the base game.

      Your entire design process is impacted by the mere existence of microtransactions.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        48 months ago

        Again, this stuff has been in multiple capcom games, and it hasn’t impacted anything. Nothing on re4 was devalued by its microtransactions either. It’s fine. For other companies that actually make things grinder sure, maybe. But this one just doesn’t do that. Which people might know if they paid attention.

        Honestly, people are just looking for an axe to grind. I’d love to see this effort towards companies that do mass layoffs or something instead. But this case is totally inconsequential

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          98 months ago

          You claiming it didn’t affect anything doesn’t make it reality.

          It’s fundamentally not possible for it not to change the design process of a game. Literally every game ever made with micro-transactions has been affected in one way or another, unless the first time the idea was discussed was after the game was shipped. “Just cosmetics” guarantees cosmetics that would have been earned with gameplay get taken away to be put behind a paywall, and all of the exploration and discovery involved in earning them is gone.

          All microtransactions make games worse, and all microtransactions are bad.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            38 months ago

            it’s the same system that was in the first game they just let idiots buy a thing to skip the mechanic. Unless you think this future implementation of micro transactions affected the past.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              It’s not the same system. It’s new code, built and tuned for the current version of the game. And it’s literally impossible for it not to be affected by the knowledge that microtransactions were going to exist.

              But let’s play make believe that it was theoretically possible for any microtransaction to not be actively malicious. Lying about it would still make everyone involved a bad person.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              18 months ago

              The first game had a built in eternal ferrystone when it saw most of its success.

              In no way is paying 3$ for every ferrystone except 5 the same as an eternal ferrystone.

            • @stonerboner
              link
              English
              88 months ago

              Absolutely.

              The key gambling system 100% impacted the community, who are the ones to provide gameplay to each other in these games.

              All previous Counter-Strike game had a 100% level playing field— all players had access to the same gear and visuals. This equity was very important to gameplay by keeping it competitive, specifically being able to recognize weapons and enemies easily.

              CS:GO took a sharp turn with this, effectively ending equity in the game. Not only did you have to spend money if you wanted you or your gear to look like others, but it also made it much more difficult to recognize enemies and gear people were carrying unless you more carefully inspected them. Bits sticking out around corners became much more difficult to recognize.

              There is likely much more impact to the game and its development on various levels, but this is a clear example of a negative impact of microtransactions being introduced.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                18 months ago

                And in TF2, where disabling skins is a console command away? Frankly surprised there’s no similar option in GO/2.

                • @stonerboner
                  link
                  English
                  38 months ago

                  In TF2, players cannot completely disable the hats. It takes a server operator employing mods or plugins to disable them. The equity was there. It ended with CS:GO.

                  As well, even if a player could opt out of seeing them, it doesn’t change the fact that the game was built around the gambling and still impacts other players you interact with.

                  There are some non-competitive games I think handle cosmetic-only micro transactions well (ex: Last Epoch). But I don’t try to fool myself that it doesn’t impact development or gameplay.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        28 months ago

        In some cases yes, like Ubisoft. They do design the game around the transactions.

        In this case the transactions are clearly being added in at the end by the publisher and weren’t influencing the development itself.

        Like seriously - selling me a wakestone or ferrystone? A dozen or so hours in I had too many to carry and was putting them in storage for a rainy day. Literally just grabbing two starter pawns from others and camping out will get you wakestones in a few minutes.

        The port crystal is the only useful item in the store, and frankly if you buy it you ruin your gameplay curve.

        The base game without microtransactions is paced exactly like the first game. The microtransactions here ruin the gameplay design if bought in one case and are worthless in the other cases. The base game without buying anything is what it was designed around and is also going to be the most enjoyable way to play.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      208 months ago

      They sent review copies without those features so they would get higher scores. It’s not a bunch of whiny nerds with nothing better to do, they literally pulled a bait and switch.

      Also if you think gaming news doesn’t belong in a gaming community you’re free to start your own instance.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      138 months ago

      People who say this are corporate bootlicking. They want to shame you for a natural response to a deceptive abusive tactic.

      https://readwrite.com/capcom-backtracks-quickly-and-removes-drm-after-players-rebel/

      The only way this shit gets fixed is by players being vocal and reacting appropriately to the issues.

      Intentionally fucking the game up to force people into microtransaction is clearly bad and should be shamed. It’s common sense.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      28 months ago

      I’m not sure if I agree on the microtransaction part, but I do agree when you say that internet gaming community have too much outrage now… Can’t people enjoy anything nowdays?