I don't understand why these companies what to make money the bastards. I really hope they all close down...lol. 

Seriously though.. I understand the thought that folks may feel like they're paying for a game and then getting nickel and dimed, but I have been doing a lot of tablet gaming lately, and micro-transactions rule the roost in that format. It's really not bad in my opinion. I always have felt like I get my money's worth out of the game and if I liked it, I will pay a little more to get additional content, features etc. 

It seems that most folks around here want to buy a game and then get all future content for free. That just doesn't work. So let me ask you.. whats the difference if you buy content with MT or if you just spend another 40-50$ on an expansion? The companies need to get paid one way or another to keep the shit flowing. If they stop making money, they lay people off or shut down. 

Like others have said.. if you don't like the set up, don't buy the game. If you don't want micro-transactions, don't buy them. You have that choice. 

Originally posted by Wighty

Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse!

 

"We are building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way; to get to a higher level," said EA CFO Blake Jorgensen. "And consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of business."

 

 

Worse? This is what we already knew. I thought you were going to say something like, they were adding compound interest to what we already shell out or something.

This isn't a case of EA getting worse, it's a case of EA continuing to do what already pisses us off.

What bothers me is the ' and consumers are enjoying and embracing'........let me fix that for him, 'and consumers are offered no alternatives and must pay or quit. And many have quit our games for this reason, but the profits from those who still play supercede what we were gaining under old systems'.

EA's philosophy is to disenfranchise

millions of players generating thousands of revenue dollars 

for

thousands of players generating millions of revenue dollars

The next smart company will figure out how to generate millions with millions.

EA certainly won't be this company.

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by Nethkhar

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Nethkhar

 

It's not a matter of perspective, in the future the F2P will become so restricted it will be impossible to play for free. You are limited now.  I've been attempting to play swtor free, but how successful do you think i'll be when I cannot use a bank , I cannot trade with other players I cannot have more than 1 companion crew skill.   Yes it's possible but not really practical.

 

How do you know what is in teh future?

And what do you mean limited now? I play STO, DCUO and DDO for free. There is no need to spend a dime to enjoy myself. One game (TOR) did it wrong does not mean all games do it wrong.

Plus, it is a competitive market. Games that put too many restrictions will have a smaller market share. I don't have to play TOR, you know.

How do I know what's in the future, by looking at what has happened over the last 10 - 20 years and seeing the trend.  I'm not saying swtor is a good implementation but  it makes sense for any company making a game to make it nigh on impossible for you to play it for free. Why wouldn't they. They aren't charities.   I don't know about the other games you mentioned but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that a company that makes a game that makes no money will not be around long.

IF we look at how f2p has been handled over that last 10 years that should give you more hope that there will be more good models of f2p than bad.  The history of f2p has gone from mostly bad to many good titles now. 

Exactly. If all future f2p games are more like sto, ddo, ps2 mh .. Then i have no complaint.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by DancingQueen

It's time to finally boycott EA games.

Vote with your wallet.

You as a consumer has the power.

 

This is the correct action that forces companies to understand if you really feel strongly about something.

Course I won't be one of them since I want to play the next Need for Speed, BattleField, Fifa, Dead space etc and I don't feel that strongly about EA's business decision.

As I stated in a prior post... EA is way bigger than "voting with your wallet"... How'd that walmart boycott go around Christmas...

For the .5% of gamers that read these forums and actually give a damn... the 99.5% of people who never visit a forum and have no clue of the impact this has will still line up to buy FiFA and EA Sports titles which is the bulk of their business anyhow...

The best thing you can do is stay informed and make your own decisions... but be realistic... you don't have that kind of power or leverage...

Originally posted by Wighty

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by DancingQueen

It's time to finally boycott EA games.

Vote with your wallet.

You as a consumer has the power.

 

This is the correct action that forces companies to understand if you really feel strongly about something.

Course I won't be one of them since I want to play the next Need for Speed, BattleField, Fifa, Dead space etc and I don't feel that strongly about EA's business decision.

As I stated in a prior post... EA is way bigger than "voting with your wallet"... How'd that walmart boycott go around Christmas...

For the .5% of gamers that read these forums and actually give a damn... the 99.5% of people who never visit a forum and have no clue of the impact this has will still line up to buy FiFA and EA Sports titles which is the bulk of their business anyhow...

 

The best thing you can do is stay informed and make your own decisions... but be realistic... you don't have that kind of power or leverage...

And that is the issue.  You (not you specifically but the general you) may not like it.  However if most people do it anyway, they are showing they are accepting of it.

The vote with your wallet still works, but if most people thinks it's ok the community then has spoken in favor of it, then it becomes an individual problem and not a company or genre problem.

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

And that is the issue.  You (not you specifically but the general you) may not like it.  However if most people do it anyway, they are showing they are accepting of it.

The vote with your wallet still works, but if most people thinks it's ok the community then has spoken in favor of it, then it becomes an individual problem and not a company or genre problem.

Exactly.

Recently I've seen a lot of people confusing wallet democracy (voting with your wallet) with wallet dictatorships (my vote determining the direction of an entire industry,) which is pretty silly.

"IF we look at how f2p has been handled over that last 10 years that should give you more hope that there will be more good models of f2p than bad.  The history of f2p has gone from mostly bad to many good titles now. "

F2P is only with us because that allows a MMO to have a cash shop. Old F2P games were not bad because they were F2P, they just lacked funding. The F2P funding principle is not now 'making good titles'. F2P revenue principles have been combined with subscription to create a funding and revenue model not seen before.

This started when Turbine converted Lotro to a cash shop and subscription model, called by many at the time the Turbine model. The important element for funding was not that players could play without a subscription; it was that a cash shop could be introduced into a subscription MMO.

The use of the word "free" is dubious in games which have both a subscription and a cash shop. But gaming companies are going to hold on to using that word for dear life.

What we have now is titles that are funded in a way they never were before; they are not F2P or P2P but use a hybrid revenue model.