Anyone that knows me very well at all, knows that I refuse to give certain game companies my money anymore. As a consumer, I feel it's not only my right, but a responsibility to speak to these companies in the only language they seem to understand - money. I don't part my wallet for several companies, and one of them is EA.
I was a little interested in Titanfall, so I did what I usually do and waited until I could purchase it used at Gamestop, and so I finally got to play what EA would have you believe is the game of the fucking century. It's fun. Period. Full stop.
The first thing that happened was an expected one - server glitches. Seems every new game that comes out kills the ever loving shit out of servers in the first few weeks - and this was no exception. After a few hours of playing Enemy Within, I checked the servers again, and hey, look at that, back online.
Anyway, the campaign (if you can accurately call it that) is basically playing as both sides of whatever space conflict we are a part of (I honestly have no idea what most of the story is, because they literally do all of the plot points as recorded voices over your headset as you play) and they have 10 missions each - which will give you a feel for the game itself pretty well. So, the campaign is the tutorial albeit an extended one.
Once the campaign is over, Titanfall is just deathmatch with mechs. Now to some, that is game nirvana, and hey, if you like it, this is probably the game for you. There are some truly exciting moments and some pretty cool gameplay to be had. Me, not so much. I'm not a team deathmatch kind of guy. I kind of want to do it every now and then - and I usually get my fix in GTA online, where I can also do a shit ton of other things in between that occasional desire to team deathmatch.
If your ultimate online gaming experience is killing the other humans online with you in a virtual capacity, Titanfall is your huckleberry. If you're too young to get that reference, fuck you. If you want more plot or story, I'd skip this one. It's truly a case of whatever floats your boat.
Showing posts with label EA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EA. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 23, 2014
Thursday, February 13, 2014
Three little letters, that mean so much.
DLC
Did three letters (aside from something as obvious as SEX) ever hold so much promise?
Why then have publishers turned it into something that is almost reviled among anyone with a brain? Don't the developers realize just how much people hate being nickel and dimed to death? No, they don't? Apparently not.
With a few exceptions (and I'll get to them shortly) DLC is no longer holding up to what it could be, what it should be, and it's all about the almighty dollar. So many companies today are selling you product that they have already sold you, while others are selling you what SHOULD have been included with your original purchase, and it absolutely kills me to see how many people buy these things.
When I initially heard about the idea of DLC for games, I was actually pretty stoked. I was playing a lot of wrestling games and I could imagine how many more storylines could be so easily added to existing games to make them more valuable for a longer time. Of course, I'm thinking like a gamer, and not like a finance major.
DLC basically represents what you should have gotten with your initial purchase, but that the developers know you will pay to add. Everything from characters and color palettes for fighting games to unlocking content that is already on the disc you've purchased, is available for DLC, for a price of course.
The exceptions to this rule (the Shadowbroker mission for Mass Effect 2 jumps immediately to mind) are the ones that are starting to stand out, because they actually ARE using DLC for what it was intended: a way to make good games better and some games great. Valve is notorious for offering free DLC for their games - when others charge for the same thing - whereas Capcom wants to make me pay for characters in the Street Fighter X Tekken game that should have been included.
At the end of the day, I think DLC will get to where I was hoping it would be initially - but I think we're in for a long painful wait - and as long as some of the customers perpetuate the behavior by purchasing the content, it'll be even longer.
Did three letters (aside from something as obvious as SEX) ever hold so much promise?
Why then have publishers turned it into something that is almost reviled among anyone with a brain? Don't the developers realize just how much people hate being nickel and dimed to death? No, they don't? Apparently not.
With a few exceptions (and I'll get to them shortly) DLC is no longer holding up to what it could be, what it should be, and it's all about the almighty dollar. So many companies today are selling you product that they have already sold you, while others are selling you what SHOULD have been included with your original purchase, and it absolutely kills me to see how many people buy these things.
When I initially heard about the idea of DLC for games, I was actually pretty stoked. I was playing a lot of wrestling games and I could imagine how many more storylines could be so easily added to existing games to make them more valuable for a longer time. Of course, I'm thinking like a gamer, and not like a finance major.
DLC basically represents what you should have gotten with your initial purchase, but that the developers know you will pay to add. Everything from characters and color palettes for fighting games to unlocking content that is already on the disc you've purchased, is available for DLC, for a price of course.
The exceptions to this rule (the Shadowbroker mission for Mass Effect 2 jumps immediately to mind) are the ones that are starting to stand out, because they actually ARE using DLC for what it was intended: a way to make good games better and some games great. Valve is notorious for offering free DLC for their games - when others charge for the same thing - whereas Capcom wants to make me pay for characters in the Street Fighter X Tekken game that should have been included.
At the end of the day, I think DLC will get to where I was hoping it would be initially - but I think we're in for a long painful wait - and as long as some of the customers perpetuate the behavior by purchasing the content, it'll be even longer.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
(Not so) Free to play games...
Does anyone remember arcades? You know, those locker room smelling, dusty, grimy, sawdust floored dens of iniquity that our parents hated and loved at the same time?
Why the mixed feelings? Well, because they knew they were going to shill out some cash when we saw one, but at the same time, for a few quarters they could leave their kids unattended (yeah they did that in the 80's and 90's) and get some errands run, or some shopping done, or whatever.
The reason I bring up arcades is simple. Developers have figured out how to get back to the money making scheme that arcades represented. Bear with me.
You see, for 25¢ at a time, I could play a game, right up until it got hard enough that I couldn't, but alas, I could continue for another 25¢. And I did so readily, pumping in quarter after quarter.
Want to take a guess as to how much I spent on games like Donkey Kong, Street Fighter 2, Mortal Kombat and Tekken? I would put the estimation in the thousands. That's not exaggeration on my part. I'm being literal. Now, want to know how much I payed for Street Fighter X Tekken? $19.99
This is the problem facing developers today. They can charge you one price for the original and like so many gamers, I'm only interested in a select few DLC offerings. I certainly don't buy all of them, and I'm certain that I'm not the only one, so that $19.99 (that went into Gamestop's pocket not Capcom's since the game was purchased used) is all I will ever spend on that game. Let's say I go all out, and pay full price and even preorder (Tomb Raider was awesome, by the way), even then I won't necessarily buy the DLC, so that $59.99 is all they will ever get from me. EVER.
The money men (check any of the developers' CFO's out and see if they are actually gamers) know that this business model is limited, because you will usually only get a single purchase per customer. This is unacceptable to them. They want you paying again, and again, and again, for the same content.
It's just like being in the arcade again. Yeah, it only costs a quarter, but multiply those quarters by several years, and you start talking in terms of thousands of dollars. Multiply that by millions of customers...
Yes. THAT much money.
And make no mistake, companies like Zynga aren't charging you quarters. They're charging dollars upon dollars. EA got bit in the ass with their approach to Dead Space 3, and layoffs ensued because the customer s spoke out, and didn't even hesitate to let EA know that they thought this was a bullshit way to deal with loyal patrons. OF course all anyone wants to talk about is how outrageous it is that EA was voted worst company 2 years running. Maybe instead of making excuses, they should take a step back and realize that people aren't nearly as stupid as they thought, and that we DO know when we are getting screwed.
I know. That argument is WAY too logical. It has no place in the Game Business world.
The fact is, the gaming companies that are using this business model are no longer nickel and diming you, or even quartering you - no they're now 5 and ten dollaring you.
Let me know how that tastes, because I want none of it.
Why the mixed feelings? Well, because they knew they were going to shill out some cash when we saw one, but at the same time, for a few quarters they could leave their kids unattended (yeah they did that in the 80's and 90's) and get some errands run, or some shopping done, or whatever.
The reason I bring up arcades is simple. Developers have figured out how to get back to the money making scheme that arcades represented. Bear with me.
You see, for 25¢ at a time, I could play a game, right up until it got hard enough that I couldn't, but alas, I could continue for another 25¢. And I did so readily, pumping in quarter after quarter.
Want to take a guess as to how much I spent on games like Donkey Kong, Street Fighter 2, Mortal Kombat and Tekken? I would put the estimation in the thousands. That's not exaggeration on my part. I'm being literal. Now, want to know how much I payed for Street Fighter X Tekken? $19.99
This is the problem facing developers today. They can charge you one price for the original and like so many gamers, I'm only interested in a select few DLC offerings. I certainly don't buy all of them, and I'm certain that I'm not the only one, so that $19.99 (that went into Gamestop's pocket not Capcom's since the game was purchased used) is all I will ever spend on that game. Let's say I go all out, and pay full price and even preorder (Tomb Raider was awesome, by the way), even then I won't necessarily buy the DLC, so that $59.99 is all they will ever get from me. EVER.
The money men (check any of the developers' CFO's out and see if they are actually gamers) know that this business model is limited, because you will usually only get a single purchase per customer. This is unacceptable to them. They want you paying again, and again, and again, for the same content.
It's just like being in the arcade again. Yeah, it only costs a quarter, but multiply those quarters by several years, and you start talking in terms of thousands of dollars. Multiply that by millions of customers...
Yes. THAT much money.
And make no mistake, companies like Zynga aren't charging you quarters. They're charging dollars upon dollars. EA got bit in the ass with their approach to Dead Space 3, and layoffs ensued because the customer s spoke out, and didn't even hesitate to let EA know that they thought this was a bullshit way to deal with loyal patrons. OF course all anyone wants to talk about is how outrageous it is that EA was voted worst company 2 years running. Maybe instead of making excuses, they should take a step back and realize that people aren't nearly as stupid as they thought, and that we DO know when we are getting screwed.
I know. That argument is WAY too logical. It has no place in the Game Business world.
The fact is, the gaming companies that are using this business model are no longer nickel and diming you, or even quartering you - no they're now 5 and ten dollaring you.
Let me know how that tastes, because I want none of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)