I'm not sure I'm one being stubborn here, but regardless, if you think that noting that FIFA and GTA is going to sell regardless of the state of their microtransactions is clutching at straws, then I'm not sure what else to say.
Jim Sterling: I'm Not Applauding Sea Of Thieves For 'Just' Having Microtransactions
- Thread starter Finaj
- Start date
Splatoon 1 was also heavily derided at the time for basically releasing a clearly (at least in some people's eyes) incomplete product and trickling out content to artificially extend the life of the product.
he most certainly does not.
Y'all folks need to stop being disingenuous.
As far as online kinda yah. but content wise it had the single player campaign, half a dozen maps maybe and two modes i think. Fact of the matter is though they still supported it for a very long time with no additional monetization.
I agree with you to a point. Once they padded out the game late into its first year they continued to add a bunch of more content though. They are also taking this approach to Splatoon 2 i believe which i think most people agree is a complete game.
but there is demand for games that get continuous support. what's wrong with making the game customers want and having a business model tailored to that game.
They are deluded into thinking you spending money on cosmetics is going to make gaming worse for them.
Basically, they don't like thing.
Stop being ok with thing.
It's going to make more publishers do thing.
Flawed point. The game is also on Windows 10, you don't need Xbox Live Gold for Sea of Thieves on Windows 10.
Just watch the video, its not hard. If you're willing to spend more time in a topic arguing about a video you could watch in less time than you spend hitting 'post' that is a bit back to front.
Many of us can't watch since we're at work. Can you summarize?
Like, I totally understand why people hate loot boxes and shit, that stuff sucks.
But man, paying five bucks for a silly costume is just, like, the most absurd thing to complain about ever. That is like...five candy bars. Three sodas.
I definitely did.
He never once mentions Sony or Nintendo.
Just mentioning MS does not equal endorsement of Sony and Nintendo.
Wait till you get home from work then. The internet doesn't close at 5pm.
Ironically most of these games released 40 years ago you can still play today, where as many sub-par dead and discontinued GaaS games are gone forever once servers are shut down.
When you look at GTA V's sales and the amount of revenue GTA Online generates, I don't know how one can pretend that there's no feedback that people have completely embraced the service model of GTA V vs. the traditional expansion pack model of IV. I don't have exact sales figures, but it looks to me like IV is somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 - 30 million copies, whereas GTA V is sitting at around 80 million. Further, I hope someone else has some idea, but I'd be willing to bet that the expansion sales of IV are barely a drop in the bucket relative to what Online makes.
Jim Sterling: I'm not done crying and playing the victim because I and a few other gamers have no self control with their own wallets.
then you can't expect everyone to watch this right now. give it a few hours and come back
Why do you need a "most" qualifier?
Yes, companies continue to put money into things that continue to make money. Nobody has ever claimed that the entirety of that revenue goes back into ongoing development, and I don't know why anyone would expect that to happen, or have assumptions about 'how much' of that revenue goes back into ongoing development.
Because it doesn't matter. Its none of your business unless you are a shareholder.
As a consumer, do you get ongoing development for free funded by mtx? If yes, then case closed.
It really doesn't matter if its 1% of the revenue made or 99% of the revenue made, you are getting ongoing development paid for by MTX.
It's OP's choice to do so, but I will usually go out of my way to quote points. More OP's do this than not, but I don't see a problem with wanting a summary. If this was someone ERA truly hated people would be asking for quotes and not give said hated person clicks.
how are you going to exploit whales with one time purchases?
a monthly fee would actually cost customers more than this...
Painting people with gambling addictions like this is akin to telling those with chronic depression to "cheer up". Idiotic.
Really? We're going to pretend that he doesn't call out Nintendo? Have we already forgotten his rants against their dlc/amiibo, their streaming policies and the heat he took for giving Zelda a 7?
Everyone knows you like MS but you don't have to put blinders on and think they're the only one getting called out here.
You weren't charged £40/$60 to be allowed entry into the Whataburger.
The bigger picture is that consumers are now largely "okay" with buying non material (digital commodities) with credit, built on a labor force that largely doesn't receive the gains from this revenue stream, with very little accountability/transparency to where any of that money/credit goes.
In the absence of any clear data or facts, people seem to be willfully throwing up there hands and saying "oh, it's cool because games would not be a thing without this fucked up economic model. Cool beans. Just cosmetic."
That's not even getting into the fact that "just cosmetic" is essentially nonsense anyway. There is software "games" built entirely around roleplaying by customizing your character (VR Chat is probably the best example right now, but there are obviously a ton of other examples). So even if we are being totally reductionist about what constitutes a "game mechanic" I'm fairly certain that being able to customize your character is in fact a game mechanic.
Because people think that by paying 60 bucks, they are entitled to everything the game will ever offer.
Which is ridiculous.
Do they think when they pay admission into an amusement park or a theatre, snacks, toys, etc should be free. If not, then why is spending 5 bucks on a costume a problem?
Listening to this guy for 9 minutes is actually pretty hard. Would rather use some of that time just jumping into the discussion.
Lol I'm starting to think even you don't watch the videos.
This may or may not be true but regardless it has nothing to do with the implementation of post-release support (DLC/Expansions/MTX) and more with the fact that post-release support exists (or mainly, has to exist) at all.
If this was really the crux of peoples arguments (just worrying about the addicts/victims) then they would offer concrete solutions like monthly cap limits on spending. But most of the time, they just complain to complain.
Loot boxes are gambling.
Buying cosmetics and knowing exactly what you get for how much money is not gambling.
This isn't a criticism of mtx as much as it is a criticism of publicly traded companies and capitalism as a whole though. Like, devs weren't getting paid better for successful games in the early 00's before online gaming was a thing. Worker exploitation is a fundamental part of labor in all industries, regardless of the monetization method.
Those are listed games, among other triple A games. None of which are the particular games YOU listed nor Amiibos. And he said he generally shies away from using them, even if he thinks they're good examples of Microtransactions cause he feels they can't be held to similar standards.
So again, what're you on about?
And he has complained about Amiibos.
Jim has become harder and harder to watch with every video.
What he wants is so absurd. Monetization of video games will not go away. Especially if the game is a GaaS like Sea of Thieves. If someone wants to spend 5 bucks for a peg leg or some shit, let them. It allows me to play a game that is regularly updated without having to commit to a subscription like a traditional MMO.
What he wants is so absurd. Monetization of video games will not go away. Especially if the game is a GaaS like Sea of Thieves. If someone wants to spend 5 bucks for a peg leg or some shit, let them. It allows me to play a game that is regularly updated without having to commit to a subscription like a traditional MMO.
No, but it is highly regulated, because places who do, proven they cannot regulate themselves. Thus, we will see more and more of this...
https://www.resetera.com/threads/senator-calls-on-esrb-to-re-consider-loot-boxes.23354/
There is no gambling in Sea of Thieves. No lootboxes. A la carte purchases only.
no but you paid for your meal. and generally, if you want to add to your meal, you have pay some more.
in Sea of Theives, you pay for your meal, and the devs keep cooking and delivering more food, non stop for at least two years. even if you don't to pay a dime extra, they'll keep feeding you. if you want to add a desert or simply feel like throwing some money at the service staff, you can pay a few extra bucks. that's what this is.
how is this unreasonable?
I agree people who just post "NEW JIM STERLING VIDEO HOOBOY" with a YT embed and zero summary of what it contains are doing a shit OP not conducive to discussion, because he usually has 1 minute of actual discutable content and 9 minutes of gurning comedy playing to his fan base. And I don't actually want to watch his videos because it shits up my YT recommends.
And everyone knows you don't like them, yet here you are right on queue :)
I'm only talking about this video and in it he lambastes Xbox and separates them from Sony and Nintendo as companies who never use any form of MTX because 'they're a platform holder' and make enough money anyway. Even though both have used MTX in one way shape or form in the past. That is spreading misinformation and painting a narrative that is untrue.
I may prefer/like Xbox more but I don't relentlessly downplay either of the competition cause I don't really care about what other people are doing on hardware I don't own. Though there are obviously people out there who feel the opposite and are compelled to continuously post in threads about things they hate, I suppose we're all different.
Exactly. You pay $5 for that burger. If you wanna add extra patties or bacon, gotta pay.
The only time he mentions Nintendo or Sony at that point is when he says “Sony, Nintendo and even theoretically Microsoft can afford to make big lavish AAA games without microtransactions”.
There’s no praising of Sony or Nintendo at any point
A lot of people didn't like it when he used 1st party titles as examples of how AAA $60 gaming should be done. He even mentioned it in this video.
Microsoft owns RARE, Sea of Thieves is essentially XBONE exclusive. Last I checked The PC version isn't coming to an open platform like Steam. It's there to promote MS's own service.
Can't have your cake and eat it too.
My point is that you'd think that consumers would want some level of transparency regarding where their money is actually going if they truly believe the axiom that microtransactions support post-release content. This is something that gone vary dramatically from game-to-game, studio-to-studio, and so I think it's just completely dishonest to have this entrenched position that microtransactions are always good for post-release development. When there are plenty of examples of games/studios phasing out or ending development for software *even though* the title had microstransactions.
Really my biggest issue with this whole "debate" is that so many consumers seem to be content acting like they're shareholders, instead of advocating for consumer-level policies that could make their games better.
The fact of the matter is if I buy a game for 60 bucks, then three months later I want to buy a silly costume for my character, I honestly don't see why that's bad. I like, don't. I already spent the sixty bucks. If I have a job, I have no doubt received several paychecks already in that interval. Acting like buying a silly dress for 5 bucks several months down the line is some grave sin against gaming is just plain...well, silly.
Maybe I'm just a young neo-gamer used to this kind of stuff. I'm 22, probably making me younger than the vast majority of this forum (though still older than the even newer gamers who mostly buy MTX, I bet).
Ffs, he calls out Xbox for having MTX while extolling that Sony and Nintendo don't - when they have/do. We're going round in circles here, let's agree to disagree :)
How is this divulging into MS vs. The Others fanwarz? WTF, come on! Does it have to be every damned thread?