08:13 AM - May 26, 2011 by Steve_OS
Kotaku's Owen Good chimes in with some of his thoughts surrounding the latest micro-transactions to make their way into NCAA Football 12.
|
|||||||||
|
NCAA Football 12 News Post
08:13 AM - May 26, 2011 by Steve_OSKotaku's Owen Good chimes in with some of his thoughts surrounding the latest micro-transactions to make their way into NCAA Football 12.
NCAA Football 12 Videos
Member Comments
|
|||||||||||||
|
I am pretty much just an offline gamer and I hate paying $60 for some games where half of the game is online and I don't use it at all. EA always wants to be innovative in the industry with stuff like this, here is their chance, lol.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Plus they could sell the basic game on disc for $29.99 (offline modes only) and if you don't have an internet connection you wouldn't need any more than that. If you wanted the online portion you would obviously have an internet connection and you could purchase the online portion for an additional $29.99.
# 283
jeremym480 @ 05/28/11 06:47 PM
I would like that, as well. I'd also like for my cable company to let me select the channels that I want and pay for them a la carte. That a way I don't have to pay for Oxygen, Lifetime, CMT and a plethora of other channels that I've never watched. However, it ain't happening. Oh yeah and I'd also like for them to let me have HBO, Showtime & all UFC PPV's for free. That would be real nice of them.
I have no problem with extra features being added as DLC and having a price tag attached to them just as long as I can buy the game off of store shelves and have a complete game experience. I don't want to buy a stripped-down version of the game at full retail price then have to pay extra to play the full version.
It's the difference between getting a bonus and getting gouged. It all boils down to "can I enjoy playing this game without having to spend extra on features that should have been in the game to begin with?".
It's the difference between getting a bonus and getting gouged. It all boils down to "can I enjoy playing this game without having to spend extra on features that should have been in the game to begin with?".
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 287
PaperBoyx703 @ 05/28/11 10:51 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Hilarious watching people claim over and over again they're done, then come back again and again to offer up more defenses.
Also no idea why people keep bringing up cell phones, car dealerships and cable companies. Companies that have direct competition and have a lot more motivation to give me the most value for my dollar. Cable companies around me give deals to try and get my business. These companies aren't perfect either but I don't think it's a very good analogy. I guess I'll just be happy I have a choice what cell phone company to choose, who to get cable from, and where to buy my cars. And that the threat of me choosing a competitor, helps prevent companies from going overboard.
I have gotten showtime for free, as a reward for signing up with a cable company before. Was great.
Also no idea why people keep bringing up cell phones, car dealerships and cable companies. Companies that have direct competition and have a lot more motivation to give me the most value for my dollar. Cable companies around me give deals to try and get my business. These companies aren't perfect either but I don't think it's a very good analogy. I guess I'll just be happy I have a choice what cell phone company to choose, who to get cable from, and where to buy my cars. And that the threat of me choosing a competitor, helps prevent companies from going overboard.
|
|||||||||||||
|
I will just speak with my wallet and not buy NCAA 12. It is not ok to nickle and dime your customers after spending $60.
# 290
thejoker3624 @ 05/29/11 07:37 AM
These microtransactions are really beginning to turn me off from gaming, especially sports games. It's bad enough that we pay $60 every year for what is essentially a roster update, but now the games are missing features? One really good example is Tiger Woods 12. The game doesn't include several courses. What this means is that I'm paying $60 for half a game or a game that is not complete. That is bull!
Some may overlook this and say it doesn't matter but this is only the tip of the iceberg. Companies like EA are tested the waters to see how guliable and stupid we gamers are. You are going to see a lot more of this in the future as long as we keep buying these games that are virtually incomplete. I would be ok with this if they lowered the price of the games to about $30 and then let me decide what features I want. But that will never happen.
Sports games' values are already over-inflated. 6 months down the road they aren't even worth half what they were when they were released. No other genre of video games go down in value as fast as a sports game. Think about it. Would you pay $60 for Halo once a year if it was the same exact game as last year's but with a couple of added features? Of course you wouldn't. But sports games get away with this, mostly because they stop adding roster support for the old games and rosters are everything to a sports gamer.
Don't get me wrong. I love my sports games. I'm willing to pay the $60 for the roster updates. But I draw the line in the sand at the point where companies like EA think they can release an incomplete game for $60. At that point I will start waiting for these games to go down in price or not buy them at all. Or I will just start buying them every other year. I'm loyal but only to a certain point. I've put up the Madden garbage for the last 6 years (exceptection Madden 11 was much better.) This seems like a total ripoff to me. EA is going to lose a lot of customers down the road.
Some may overlook this and say it doesn't matter but this is only the tip of the iceberg. Companies like EA are tested the waters to see how guliable and stupid we gamers are. You are going to see a lot more of this in the future as long as we keep buying these games that are virtually incomplete. I would be ok with this if they lowered the price of the games to about $30 and then let me decide what features I want. But that will never happen.
Sports games' values are already over-inflated. 6 months down the road they aren't even worth half what they were when they were released. No other genre of video games go down in value as fast as a sports game. Think about it. Would you pay $60 for Halo once a year if it was the same exact game as last year's but with a couple of added features? Of course you wouldn't. But sports games get away with this, mostly because they stop adding roster support for the old games and rosters are everything to a sports gamer.
Don't get me wrong. I love my sports games. I'm willing to pay the $60 for the roster updates. But I draw the line in the sand at the point where companies like EA think they can release an incomplete game for $60. At that point I will start waiting for these games to go down in price or not buy them at all. Or I will just start buying them every other year. I'm loyal but only to a certain point. I've put up the Madden garbage for the last 6 years (exceptection Madden 11 was much better.) This seems like a total ripoff to me. EA is going to lose a lot of customers down the road.
# 291
thejoker3624 @ 05/29/11 07:44 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
For example coogr, and obviously no offense intended towards you or any other posters I respond to in this thread, but your post was talking about iOOTP and comparing it to NCAA 12's web content. Let's be honest, OOTP is a great sim and is MUCH more in depth and offers much more replay value than supersim/advance a week in NCAA 12 mode. If you've ever seen OOTP and played it you would realize that paying $5 for that full game is a lot different than a $3 addon to an already $60 game.
I, like propoop, just don't see why everyone defends this method of DLC. It's like if we are against it somehow we are the devil. I would think everyone would be for paying the least possible for a video game. I also know that businesses are in the business to make money. However, it seems to me that EA Sports is making plenty of money off of Madden/NCAA as is (otherwise how could they pay about $1 billion for these exclusivity deals). What should upset the consumer, and what upsets me and propoop, is that it's obvious that EA is sinking more $ into exclusivity deals to eliminate competition rather than reinvesting that same money into making the actual game better for their consumers.
Also, 2k5 online league ESPN integration was miles ahead of anything I've seen from EA regarding online dynasties and that was 6 years ago. They didn't charge me anything for that, and they charged $20 for the game. I admit they were not going to continue charging $20 but it's funny that after they did that EA's method of attack was to buy up the licenses because they had the funds rather than trying to create a better video game, because they had the funds. How a mindset like this can be defended by consumers is troubling.
|
|||||||||||||
|
What do you consider a car that is fully featured?
What do you consider a car that is not fully featured?
I consider a car that has everything it could possibly have that the "developer" created to be a "fully featured" car. I consider any car that is missing one of those items to not be fully featured.
Therefore, the online dynasty that I get with my game, is not "fully featured" if I have to turn around and pay $X for another feature. Enhancement, feature, whatever word you want to use it's the same thing. Just saying enhancement to try to defend the charge.
The analogies with other industries do not work with this case because there are other companies making the same products so if one lags behind the other they were meet their doom in due time. The problem here is unique. We have a gaming company who bought out the rights to a license that effectively creates a monopoly in a genre that pumps out annual releases where it is accepted (even by me) that the change in the game from year to year is very small in relation to the changes in iterations that different genres have. Think about what goes into a new Halo game and compare that to what goes into a new NCAA game. They have last years tweaked version (after months of testing by the consumers because they obviously don't test enough themselves) and the same engine and they add graphical tweaks and one addition to the engine, get the roster information and sell millions of copies at $60 a pop. They don't test the rosters to make sure they seem legit, they don't thoroughly test their modes to make sure they all work correctly (for example, progression in dynasty mode, gamebreaker gameplay two years ago which pretty much made this NCAA blitz). Whereas Halo for example has to create a whole new story line, whole new maps, whole new graphic models, whole new sounds, testing, etc. It's basically a whole new game whereas NCAA is simply an "update" that we have come to accept every year.
And now you want me to pay more $ for "new features" now? I have to come to accept that too? I think that's where me and propoop are viewing this from. At what point does it stop?
Hypothetical question, let's say they charge for Pro Combat uniforms, is that also defendable because it is an "enhancement"? Or is that something that we should get along with the $60 we are paying for the game?
Also, just came to mind, it's going to be great when/if EA stops supporting the online dynasties that people are still running on NCAA 12 by the time NCAA 14 comes out. If I paid $ for those extra features and they were taken away from me down the line because the "server costs" are too high by then I would be GREATLY upset.
|
|||||||||||||
|
If you do, do you pay extra for on demand for the channels you do currently pay for? Because that would be what is happening here. EA is asking you to pay extra for an "enhancement" to a feature that you already paid for.
I,for one, know I do not pay extra for on demand services for the channels I do have so I appreciate the easy analogy you allowed me to make.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Thank god the NBA denied it. I wish the NFL did the same.
I guess this isn't a legit source either though.
|
|||||||||||||
|
And EA is not doing the exact same thing as the rest of the free world because they have a monopoly on the NCAA and NFL console football sports gaming business. AT&T can not buy out every cell tower in the world. McDonald's can't buy out the entire meat inventory. Comcast can't buy out the entire cable industry.
They bought out the competition for a huge amount of money and now in order to recoup that money they need to charge for features that should be in the $60 game. Period.
Post A Comment
Working...