Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Impermanent
Apr 1, 2010
Even if you put 300+ hours is as I have, you event gated quest stuff only becomes relevant for the tip top tier of gear in after 200 hours. For example, the budget end game meta stuff for a few weapons uses raging brachydos equipment. Technically that's an event quest, but in actuality you can just farm him whenever by jumping into newer player's SOS calls. And when the event is active, you're perfectly fine to just farm him at your own pace, no other played involved. All of this only If you want to get involved in late late late game optional post story and post post story content .

And again, the vast majority of cosmetic content, armor appearances and weapon appearances, is only gated by grinding.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cardiovorax
Jun 5, 2011

I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.

John Murdoch posted:

Time-limited events and cosmetics are usually just as awful and predatory as anything else, actually.

(I have no skin in the game re: MHW, but I loving hate the common stance of "well sure it has $3000 worth of cosmetic DLC but it's not P2W, therefore there's nothing wrong".)
They can be, certainly. MHW gets a bit of a pass from me in that regard because everything other than the cosmetic DLC doesn't cost you money, just time. You can't pay to get longer access to time-limited content or anything like that, so while there could be a predatory usage of those elements, I think MHW doesn't actually use them.

I mean, if literally all the additional content is effectively useless and has no purpose except for making you feel pretty, can you call it predatory? That always implies a stance of malicious greediness to me that MHW just does not have.

credburn
Jun 22, 2016

K8.0 posted:

Let's be real for a second : those of you who played pre-patch Mafia 1 back in the day, how many actually found this mission hard vs just heard from other people that it was hard?

I played Mafia version 1.0 and I lost that race twice and the third time nailed it, which was exactly what I think of when I think of a "hard level."

Cream-of-Plenty
Apr 21, 2010

"The world is a hellish place, and bad writing is destroying the quality of our suffering."

credburn posted:

I played Mafia version 1.0 and I lost that race twice and the third time nailed it, which was exactly what I think of when I think of a "hard level."

Somehow I got through it too, although I have no recollection of how. I remember having some sort of guide for the post-game easter eggs and bonus missions that unlocked all of the ridiculous extra vehicles--because there was no way I could have gotten them all on my own--so perhaps there was some sort of tip or cheat in there that got me through it.

Triarii
Jun 14, 2003

Admittedly I never even looked at the purchasable cosmetic stuff in MHW, and in fact I'm not even sure where you go to see it, so that didn't really factor into my impression. But the fact that it's rather out of the way makes it hard to call it predatory, at least compared to games that are injecting purchase links into your play experience at every turn.

John Murdoch
May 19, 2009

I can tune a fish.
^^ Thank you for the object lesson in the sliding scale that lets companies get away with this poo poo. The game does not reach or exceed Battlefront 2 levels of poo poo, therefore it must be fine. Who cares if a game has $3000 worth of cosmetic DLC, at least it doesn't have loot boxes!!!!

Cardiovorax posted:

I mean, if literally all the additional content is effectively useless and has no purpose except for making you feel pretty, can you call it predatory? That always implies a stance of malicious greediness to me that MHW just does not have.

With the preface that again, I'm not speaking directly to MHW (though I doubt its DLC is fairly priced in the slightest), loving yeah?! Yes it is predatory. Yes it is malicious greediness.

Your language belies the fact that you personally don't attribute much value to playing dress-em-ups, but if everyone thought the same way you did then there would be no cosmetic DLC because they would sell zero copies. Which was kind of my entire point in the first place: people readily brush off abusive bullshit in games as long as it dOeSeN't AfFeCt GaMePlAy.

John Murdoch fucked around with this message at 00:09 on Sep 27, 2020

threelemmings
Dec 4, 2007
A jellyfish!
Plus so many of the outfits look sweet anyways, it's also not a game where there's one set and you pay for the rest, there's a whole lot of cool setups from the get-go.

Cardiovorax
Jun 5, 2011

I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.

John Murdoch posted:

With the preface that again, I'm not speaking directly to MHW (though I doubt its DLC is fairly priced in the slightest), loving yeah?! Yes it is predatory. Yes it is malicious greediness.

Your language belies the fact that you personally don't attribute much value to playing dress-em-ups, but if everyone thought the same way you did then there would be no cosmetic DLC because they would sell zero copies.
Well, I suppose no, I don't. That kind of stuff doesn't matter to me at all and I have never spent so much as a single cent on cosmetic DLC. You seem to be a lot more angry about this than I am currently willing to be, so I'll just say that I see no problem with asking people to pay for purely optional content and I can't call it predatory because nobody is pressured into buying it through attached in-game benefits.

It's fine if you disagree, but maybe you shouldn't just take it as a given that your position is objective truth.

K8.0
Feb 26, 2004

Her Majesty's 56th Regiment of Foot

John Murdoch posted:

With the preface that again, I'm not speaking directly to MHW (though I doubt its DLC is fairly priced in the slightest), loving yeah?! Yes it is predatory. Yes it is malicious greediness.

Your language belies the fact that you personally don't attribute much value to playing dress-em-ups, but if everyone thought the same way you did then there would be no cosmetic DLC because they would sell zero copies. Which was kind of my entire point in the first place: people readily brush off abusive bullshit in games as long as it dOeSeN't AfFeCt GaMePlAy.

A pro post. gently caress cosmetic DLC, gently caress the way it warps the motivations of developers, and gently caress the way it exploits weak-minded people who really should not be spending so drat much money on a video game. It's really weird to me to see that on this one issue goons are OK with squeezing cash out of the most exploitable people because "I like cosmetics." I like them too, at least when they're well done and appropriate for the game, that doesn't mean it's OK to milk kids and people with poor judgement for hundreds or thousands of dollars by spacing out incrementally cooler cosmetics over months and years. I'd much rather they charge for some content and hit everyone who plays the game for less than exploit a small number of people.

sebmojo
Oct 23, 2010


Legit Cyberpunk









Shops are also extremely predatory in the way they are constantly full of goods that they sell for money

pentyne
Nov 7, 2012

K8.0 posted:

A pro post. gently caress cosmetic DLC, gently caress the way it warps the motivations of developers, and gently caress the way it exploits weak-minded people who really should not be spending so drat much money on a video game. It's really weird to me to see that on this one issue goons are OK with squeezing cash out of the most exploitable people because "I like cosmetics." I like them too, at least when they're well done and appropriate for the game, that doesn't mean it's OK to milk kids and people with poor judgement for hundreds or thousands of dollars by spacing out incrementally cooler cosmetics over months and years. I'd much rather they charge for some content and hit everyone who plays the game for less than exploit a small number of people.

1- Kids spending tons of cash on useless pop culture junk is a tale as old as time they aren't gonna be saving for rent or retirement at 15 let them spend their cash how they want.
2- People spending thousands of dollars on fancy skins and dances aren't some gullible victims they bought something that was 100% as advertised and completely optional.

"Exploit" would imply there's some deception going on, like the lootboxes with rigged % or way lower chances of winning then advertised. With cosmetic DLC people are literally getting what they pay for, no more no less. Calling them victims is like claiming selling fast food to fat people is exploiting them as well.

Impermanent
Apr 1, 2010

K8.0 posted:

I like them too, at least when they're well done and appropriate for the game, that doesn't mean it's OK to milk kids and people with poor judgement for hundreds or thousands of dollars by spacing out incrementally cooler cosmetics over months and years. I'd much rather they charge for some content and hit everyone who plays the game for less than exploit a small number of people.


sorry, as a maoist third worldist i see any separation of an amerikkkan from their money as ultimately in service of a global communist revolution, so I have to support these things.

Cardiovorax
Jun 5, 2011

I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.

pentyne posted:

2- People spending thousands of dollars on fancy skins and dances aren't some gullible victims they bought something that was 100% as advertised and completely optional.
Some of them are. I have to give John Murdoch this: old people on the edge of senility and young teens who steal their parents' credit cards to buy more internet bullshit exist and they should not be discounted. Things that would not affect a normal grown adult are predatory when applied to those demographics.

I just don't think they're at all the target demographic of Capcom or that they'd be exploited through MHW except accidentally.

Stux
Nov 17, 2006

i mean mhw is good for not putting content behind its dlc but it doesnt really excuse the game having like 200 pieces of insanely overpriced cosmetic dlc, thats not there because its fair or to lure in people who are able to be responsible with their money. its pretty egregious even if the game is overall "better" about this stuff than others. but just because theres a bunch of games that are completely off the wall with how bad their mtx are doesnt make the less bad examples good.

Morter
Jul 1, 2006

:coolspot:
Seashells by the
Seashorpheus

sebmojo posted:

Shops are also extremely predatory in the way they are constantly full of goods that they sell for money

sonic_no_ethical_consumption_capitalism.jpeg

And we're back at the start.

Also here's the thing: Just because MHW has a lot of individually priced DLC, doesn't make the shop predatory. This is purely for people who not only like the game enough to want to indulge in the cosmetics, but who also get a little something out of 'supporting' the game--which, on the aspected of 'Games as Service because it has timed (read: cycling) events: It's literally getting its FINAL title update next week. After that it might be more collaborative events which are nothing but special missions you grind on if you want some kind of content from another game or a gimmicky piece of gear. This generates, at worst, the slightest bit of FOMO.

Also, back on the subject of "lots of stuff in store, ergo bad!", please be aware of the 43 items being 'figures'--little items you put in your 'Room' (your little semi-designable abode that you do functional in, just look and maybe take pictures), and 42 of them are Pendants: little danglies you can put on your weapon.

Could they put them in packs? Yeah. Could they give us more free poo poo? They are: it's the actual content that you can play and earn game-affecting stuff (ie: equipment) in! I'm not saying you have to like the game or approve of their practices, but making a stink about there being a 'large total dollar amount of DLC' because everything is individually itemized is really loving disingenuous, IMO, and the furthest stretch to get to 'predatory'.

Edit: To try and make my point concise: my personal barometer of what makes a shop 'bad' or 'predatory' is based on how much the game itself incentivizes the average player to get it. Things like time-savers, especially in the face of games bloated with too much content or too little gains (ex: XP booster for AC: Odyssey) is precisely what I would consider terrible. But there's nothing to want to make people get random loving hairstyles other than the player likes the game enough to want to have it--and that wouldn't exactly be the fault of the game. 'Why isn't it free?' you might ask? I dunno, and you'd have something that I couldn't easily respond against, but it'd go into this whole capitalism talk, that we shouldn't really have in a thread where we drat-near fangoon over a specific game DRM platform. :shrug:

Morter fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Sep 27, 2020

Cardiovorax
Jun 5, 2011

I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.

Morter posted:

making a stink about there being a 'large total dollar amount of DLC' because everything is individually itemized is really loving disingenuous, IMO, and the furthest stretch to get to 'predatory'.
Concurred. Sum totals do not a predatory approach to DLC make, it's how you're being incentivized for spending extra money on the game that does.

Stux
Nov 17, 2006

Morter posted:

I'm not saying you have to like the game or approve of their practices, but making a stink about there being a 'large total dollar amount of DLC' because everything is individually itemized is really loving disingenuous, IMO, and the furthest stretch to get to 'predatory'.

its polygons. theyre tiny little models. its priced out individually with a high overall cost for all of them but small individual prices specifically because that structure side steps the part of some peoples brains that tell them not to buy them. you do not make $400 worth of $1 dlc for any reason other than fishing for whales who will buy it all over a couple of years because they can easily rationalise each individual purchase.

read this part of your post again:

Morter posted:

Also, back on the subject of "lots of stuff in store, ergo bad!", please be aware of the 43 items being 'figures'--little items you put in your 'Room' (your little semi-designable abode that you do functional in, just look and maybe take pictures), and 42 of them are Pendants: little danglies you can put on your weapon.

then think what the incentive is for the company to make these and price them out the way they have a bit more critically. its a dual purpose of allowing people who do not personally fall into buying it to easily rationalise it as fine because "its just some little trinkets. theyre only $2 each. you dont HAVE to buy them. its not ACTUAL content." while at the same time allowing people who do fall into buying them to easily rationalise each singular purchase with the exact same logic while they buy every single one and spend hundreds on digital junk without ever being fully cognizant of the real cost.

K8.0
Feb 26, 2004

Her Majesty's 56th Regiment of Foot

Morter posted:

I'm not saying you have to like the game or approve of their practices, but making a stink about there being a 'large total dollar amount of DLC' because everything is individually itemized is really loving disingenuous, IMO, and the furthest stretch to get to 'predatory'.

I think you need to get to know some of these degenerate cosmetic addicts. Many of them want it all, however much all is. Collection is a common obsession. I've run across plenty of people making 30k a year or less who are spending thousands of dollars a year on cosmetic bullshit in games. Even people with kids they need to take care of and stuff like that. It's hosed up when you're talking to someone hearing his kids in the background and he's telling you he just dropped another $70 on skins. I'm not saying it's an addiction and they can't help themselves and they aren't in any way responsible, but it sure as poo poo is exploitative and I'm really strongly opposed to it.

Hwurmp
May 20, 2005

sebmojo posted:

Shops are also extremely predatory in the way they are constantly full of goods that they sell for money

the best techniques to manipulate consumers get more research than cancer cures

Det_no
Oct 24, 2003
Some intense denial up in this. MHW even has weekly quests, daily when there's an event running, that rewards you stuff to help alleviate the grind.

Games as a service is not inherently bad, you guys. You don't have to pretend to be blind to the obvious just because you like the game.

Cardiovorax
Jun 5, 2011

I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.
How much does a publisher have to cater to fiscally irresponsible people before it starts being the fault of the buyer and stops being the fault of the seller? Is there any acceptable amount?

Det_no posted:

Some intense denial up in this. MHW even has weekly quests, daily when there's an event running, that rewards you stuff to help alleviate the grind.

Games as a service is not inherently bad, you guys. You don't have to pretend to be blind to the obvious just because you like the game.
I don't, personally. I just think you have an unrealistic definition of what "games as a service" actually means.

KazigluBey
Oct 30, 2011

boner

Stux posted:

i mean mhw is good for not putting content behind its dlc but it doesnt really excuse the game having like 200 pieces of insanely overpriced cosmetic dlc, thats not there because its fair or to lure in people who are able to be responsible with their money. its pretty egregious even if the game is overall "better" about this stuff than others. but just because theres a bunch of games that are completely off the wall with how bad their mtx are doesnt make the less bad examples good.

This is a good take.

I remember the bad iT's JuSt CoSmEtIc argument being thrown around wrt Overwatch and it's like, do people not realize the weight these things have in social multiplayer games? There's more than one way to FOMO your way into a user spending a stupid amount extra for digital JPEGS and it really sucks that what used to be rewards for, you know, playing the game are now hundreds/thousands of dollars in carved-out content.

Stux
Nov 17, 2006

Cardiovorax posted:

How much does a publisher have to cater to fiscally irresponsible people before it starts being the fault of the buyer and stops being the fault of the seller? Is there any acceptable amount?

i would say that 200 pieces of cosmetic dlc specifically priced to trick people does not come anywhere close to passing this bar

Cardiovorax
Jun 5, 2011

I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.

Stux posted:

i would say that 200 pieces of cosmetic dlc specifically priced to trick people does not come anywhere close to passing this bar
How do you 'specifically price' a DLC to trick people?

VVV No, either you give an answer or you admit you don't have one.

Stux
Nov 17, 2006

just ask yourself why those trinkets arent in a single purchase for $400 and then spend 2 seconds figuring out why that might be

KazigluBey
Oct 30, 2011

boner

Cardiovorax posted:

How do you 'specifically price' a DLC to trick people?

VVV No, either you give an answer or you admit you don't have one.

Stux has literally answered that question a few posts up so this isn't the gotcha you think it is.

Morter
Jul 1, 2006

:coolspot:
Seashells by the
Seashorpheus

Stux posted:

just ask yourself why those trinkets arent in a single purchase for $400 and then spend 2 seconds figuring out why that might be

Not a rebuttal but I might specifically just want a Nargacuga figure because it's my favorite monster. I wouldn't wanna pay 10-12 bux for a suite of figures that not only I don't want most of, but most of them wouldn't be able to fit in your house at once. That's another reason I feel like saying 'But people might want to COLLECT THEM ALL!' is a bit of a strawman in the case of this game: because you can't wear, nor show off that you have, all the DLC at once. It'd be senseless to reach that point, and honestly anyone who fell into that impulse would have issues with control/money handling that the game couldn't exactly assist. But that's neither here nor there.

Stux
Nov 17, 2006

that is my answer, i went into more detail in my other post. that pricing is designed so that each individual purchase is not felt, which allows certain people who have difficulty with impulse purchasing to spend hundreds of dollars without ever having their brain say hey, this is a lot of money youre spending. putting all of the same content at the same price in a single puchase would be enough to make nearly anyone balk immediately, because its a bunch of trinkets for hundred and hundreds of dollars. you split it up like this to take advantage of the segment of people who, through no fault of their own, struggle with being targetted like this. this is the explicit marketing model of a lot of mobile games that go after whales as well. its exploitative and the take of "well it doesnt work on ME" its particularly useless and is one the strategy also cultivates to stop people from going "this sucks stop doing it"

it doesnt mean you cant like the game or enjoy it or think its a good game or recommend it. its not a personal attack on you or your enjoyment to point it out. ive put hundreds of hours into mhw and enjoyed it immensely, and ive recommended it to others. it doesnt mean this isnt a bad tactic though, its just one that doesnt seem as bad at first glance given that there are so many other games that are far worse. but that doesnt excuse it.

Cardiovorax
Jun 5, 2011

I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.
There's this brand of little candy eggs in my home country that have little toys or collectible figures inside of them. Nobody considers them predatory for not coming in two hundred dollar bunches that guarantee that you will have one of every figure included with them, even though it would take a silly amount of money to collect them all. Not even people who agree with the idea that loot boxed should legally be considered gambling do.

That's because spending 500+ euros on candy over a period of years is your own drat fault.

Triarii
Jun 14, 2003

Det_no posted:

Some intense denial up in this. MHW even has weekly quests, daily when there's an event running, that rewards you stuff to help alleviate the grind.

Games as a service is not inherently bad, you guys. You don't have to pretend to be blind to the obvious just because you like the game.

It's not really about the label; what I was getting at is that GaaS games usually have to drag things out and make the game un-fun in certain ways in order to get people to spend money, and I don't see those problems in MHW. I'm kind of pre-judging Dauntless even though I haven't played it, because as a free to play game, I'm sure it's going to do something I don't like at some point in order to try to get into my wallet.

One general thing I know about it is that the hit detection and other gameplay logic is done server-side, because they need to make sure people aren't cheating and circumventing the ways they could be spending money. MHW doesn't care and does all of that client-side, which makes the game feel better.

KazigluBey
Oct 30, 2011

boner

Ahh, I see we've gotten to the "everyone who gambles at a casino is a perfectly rational actor fully in control of every facet of their being" part of the discussion, neat.

e.: Like, seriously, there's some pretty fundamental differences between Kinder Surprise Eggs and lootboxes in video games, Cardiovorax. Gambling addiction is a thing and lootboxes clearly pray on it, not sure why you've chosen to go to bat for that.

KazigluBey fucked around with this message at 01:32 on Sep 27, 2020

Cardiovorax
Jun 5, 2011

I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.

Triarii posted:

I'm kind of pre-judging Dauntless even though I haven't played it, because as a free to play game, I'm sure it's going to do something I don't like at some point in order to try to get into my wallet.
Same, it's why I asked about this earlier. When someone gives you something for free that cost a lot of money to create, you can always rely on the fact that they're making that money back in different ways.

Morter
Jul 1, 2006

:coolspot:
Seashells by the
Seashorpheus

Stux posted:

it doesnt mean you cant like the game or enjoy it or think its a good game or recommend it. its not a personal attack on you or your enjoyment to point it out. ive put hundreds of hours into mhw and enjoyed it immensely, and ive recommended it to others. it doesnt mean this isnt a bad tactic though, its just one that doesnt seem as bad at first glance given that there are so many other games that are far worse. but that doesnt excuse it.

Out of curiosity, how many people percentage wise, of those who play MHW, do you think 'fall for' whatever predatory tactics you're asserting the store has? Just how many really trip into the impulse/habit of collecting more than they need to for the sake of it? Do you imagine it's a significant amount? Do you think 'even one is too many'? Not a rhetorical question.

The way I see it: things like lootboxes/RNG-based cosmetics, especially for your weapon or armor, or season passes that incentivize people to pay to get more functional goods, would be the subject to this kind of scrutiny in my mind. So when a game, especially a GaaS game like Destiny 2, dangles them in front of players, then yeah I totally get it.

But the more we discuss this, the more it seems like the target for the proposed scenario of 'There's lots of individual things, to strike the perfect balance between rationalizing a small purchase, and wanting to have everything of a game you really like!' (Or however you want to paraphrase your argument, I"m not trying to misquote) seems to boil down to preying on a rather small group of whales--or people who are just irresponsible with money. I certainly don't blame the latter for falling for the kind of poo poo that Destiny 2 does, but for this game, I feel like that's a stretch to say that they specifically displayed their cosmetics that way in order to be perceived that way. I feel like more people would just as likely be offended by the total amount of displayed DLC, since that seems to be a can of worms that gets everyone riled up.

I sincerely want to see your point without arguing about it, but unless I'm reading you wrong, I'm just not getting it. It seems very elaborate to exploit money from what I'd imagine is very few, especially because MHW is explicitly not a pay-to-win game.

Stux
Nov 17, 2006

Morter posted:

Not a rebuttal but I might specifically just want a Nargacuga figure because it's my favorite monster. I wouldn't wanna pay 10-12 bux for a suite of figures that not only I don't want most of, but most of them wouldn't be able to fit in your house at once. That's another reason I feel like saying 'But people might want to COLLECT THEM ALL!' is a bit of a strawman in the case of this game: because you can't wear, nor show off that you have, all the DLC at once. It'd be senseless to reach that point, and honestly anyone who fell into that impulse would have issues with control/money handling that the game couldn't exactly assist. But that's neither here nor there.

yeah again, its a really nice side effect of the tactic to get people going "those people would have a problem anyway, and what if i want to just buy one? i would have to pay way more otherwise!!" when we are talking about a level of content that could very easily just be in the game. as a normal reward you dont pay for. again the entire set of trinkets costs multiple times the cost of the actual game and dlc together. are all of those trinkets the same amount of work and effort as the entire game and dlc? are they cumulatively worth 10 times as much as the game itself? or are they some tiny models which next to the actual content in the game including all of the different equipment and weapons and monsters amount to little more than a small number of static polygons? why are they extra? why are they so much more expensive? why are they priced in this manner? its very much worth sitting down and thinking about these things when you see games take this kind of angle, and work out why they would do this.

Mordja
Apr 26, 2014

Hell Gem
A fool and his money are soon parted, and if it subsidizes my playtime then godspeed.

Cardiovorax
Jun 5, 2011

I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.

Stux posted:

we are talking about a level of content that could very easily just be in the game.
That's a facetious argument, because you could say that about any amount of content so long as it does not match your arbitrary measuring stick for what is or isn't 'worth paying for as extra content.'

What, you imagine all that cosmetic DLC was free to design and create?

Cardiovorax fucked around with this message at 01:38 on Sep 27, 2020

pentyne
Nov 7, 2012
Is anyone seriously arguing that paying $5 for a purple armor set in Fortnite, then getting exactly that set, is somehow analogous to gambling?

Like, make an argument that someone that exploits or deceives people is bad, but people spending $5 here and there over a period of time until they spent $400 is not them being victims of a greedy unscrupulous company any more then the someone spending $400 over the course of the same time buying fast food.

Like, make a coherent argument how digital cosmetic being "spaced out" as it's being described is any different then buying a book one at a time rather then only being allowed to buy entire series of all 40 novels.

pentyne fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Sep 27, 2020

Morter
Jul 1, 2006

:coolspot:
Seashells by the
Seashorpheus

Stux posted:

again the entire set of trinkets costs multiple times the cost of the actual game and dlc together. are all of those trinkets the same amount of work and effort as the entire game and dlc? are they cumulatively worth 10 times as much as the game itself? or are they some tiny models which next to the actual content in the game including all of the different equipment and weapons and monsters amount to little more than a small number of static polygons? why are they extra? why are they so much more expensive? why are they priced in this manner? its very much worth sitting down and thinking about these things when you see games take this kind of angle, and work out why they would do this.

Ah, okay, this is a different argument, and personally not one I'm well equipped for. I don't plan to persuade you on changing your mind, but I see it like this:

If the idea is 'cosmetic MTXs should be free because they shouldn't cost as much money as the game (when added up)', then by that token, the devs would be well within their right to ask for money with every content drop, because they worked on it. At that point, we get into the topic of 'what should be free, and what's reasonable to ask more money for', and that's a whole :can: I don't care to have, but with how the scenario is currently displayed: I'd much rather get free playable stuff and have the option to pay for cosmetics, than the other way around. Just about any other configuration where we would pay less money for these cosmetic trinkets, while ideal, would probably fall under the jab towards capitalism I made before ('what would incentivize devs to make more content, if not money', etc), but until I stumble upon solid arguments--rather than a flurry of 'what about/why not' questions, no offense--I can't help but consider the current state the best compromise, because everyone gets more of the hard work that would likely be enough to be another expansion. Doesn't make you wrong or me right, it's just making me less understanding of your frustration. I'm fine to leave it at that.

Volte
Oct 4, 2004

woosh woosh
Gaming is a vice and encouraging and facilitating gaming for financial gain is inherently predatory.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Midnight Pooptrain
Oct 13, 2012

2001's Father of the Year
I spend 500 on candy wtf is wrong with that

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply