Support NeoGAF

[LegendOfKage]

Please note that none of these are supposed to be ideal. This is just an examination of a hypothetical question. Would you prefer to pay 70 dollars to skip the BS monetization schemes associated with modern games? Unfortunately we're already seeing examples of 70 dollar titles that include that sort of garbage, but I thought it still might make for an interesting thread topic. I was also wondering which people dislike more, always online or loot boxes, so I guess the poll could reveal that as well.

Your thoughts?

 

[jshackles]

I can't really answer that - every reason you've listed as a poll option has at some point been a reason that I've decided not to buy (or engage with) a game.

I suppose if someone put a gun to my head I'd go with the "$70 price but no microtransactions or always online" but in reality I'd just do what I do for every $70 game and wait for a sale. Honestly, if my favorite game released with a sequel in any of these scenarios, it would degrade my opinion of the original so much that it'd quickly lose that "favorite game" status.

 

[Graciaus]

I don't know about the rest of you but almost none of the games I buy have that crap in it. Except cosmetic DLC it's hard to get away from that these days but I ignore it.

 

[Husky]

$60 with no microtransactions. Not on board with this "$70" business. Only free-to-play games are allowed to have microtransactions. AAA publishers are scamming you by charging $70 for free games. Picture the size of the balls on those freaks.

 

[Y0ssarian]

$70 without the bullshit.

Being a patient gamer is cheaper in the long run anyway

 

[Catphish]

$70 with none of it, then I wait 6 months and get it on sale for $20.

 

[Three]

Or you can scam people into thinking they are getting a good deal and game prices haven't increased by separating the single player yet still charging full price for it.

Then have the multiplayer game be f2p with microtransactions up the ass. Like Halo Infinite did and TLOU2 will likely do soon.

 

[luffie]

No, I want ELDEN RING style, ER is none of this.

Full scala massive, flat 60, perfection.

I support ER styles, rather than scraping the player base, they expand their franchise "outwards" with different products and mediums. That way their fanbase will only grow and will be kept happy. Everything else is just a different form of nickle and diming that devs tries to sell you as "normal".

 

[SlimeGooGoo]

.

 

[dbilyliker]

I like 4x ,it's impossible for no dlc loool

 

[Guilty_AI]

meanwhile in reality:

70$ standard version and 120$ deluxe version with exclusive content, with macrotransactions, paid DLC, lootboxes, always online and still considerably shorter than the previous games without the DLCs

 

[ReBurn]

You forgot day 1 on gamepass for no extra cost as an option

 

[Halo is Back]

Flat $60 price with no extra bullshit.

 

[Three]

I forgot the opposite, don't make/remove single player entirely then have a full price online game with microtransactions anyway like BF2042, Sea of thieves, GTSport.

 

[Pantz]

$70 with swimsuit DLC microtransactions.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

I think bumping the entry price by $10, even if everyone paid that price, would not bring in as much money as selling at $60 + cosmetics, etc.

Probably most likely to see $70+ season pass + microtransactions.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

The correct answer is wait for Game Pass! /S

I actually chose the first one. I'll take full budget games at $60 US. I'm always hooked up online so really I shouldnt care about that part, but you never know maybe I'll bring my system to my bedroom one day while not wanting to do a wifi hook up. I remember getting Xbox One in my living room (wired to a router) and putting my 360 in my bedroom (wireless) and it was never stable. I dont know if it was my router range or shitty 360 wifi, but I just played offline SP games and indies as trying to play COD was a waste of time there.

Dont care if a game has mtx or loot boxes. If other gamers want to buy them let them. Online shooters I play are competitive enough it doesn't make any difference to me as I play them with zero mtx bought and still do well and have fun. So people buying loot crates or mtx cant be that bad for game balance (at least I never noticed).

F2P sounds great on paper as being dirt cheap $0, but most of these games I stay away from as they seem skewed to MMO hack and slash grindy games I never play, or BR modes I dont play much.

I trend to WRPGs, normal sports seasons, and traditional shooter modes which are full budget purchases. Now if any of these were were tested as F2P, I'd give them a shot.

 

[ParaSeoul]

• $70+
• With microtransactions
• Live service
• Always online
• With DRM
• With comestic DLC
• With loot boxes
• Grindy
• Pay to win
• Diverse cast with genders of the entire spectrum
• With NFTs
• With in-game ads
• Cinematic and game should play by itself

You forgot the last chapter and true ending locked behind paid DLC.

 

[kraspkibble]

crazy idea i know but how about $60 for the full game and no added shit?

 

[GeekyDad]

Buy game.

Done and done.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

crazy idea i know but how about $60 for the full game and no added shit?

That was during the 360/PS3 days.

At worst you got some optional map packs, dashboard themes, and cheesy stuff like horse armour. If you werent a hardcore shooter fan pressuring yourself to buy $15 map packs, everything else was skippable and not jammed in your face. A lot of people didnt even hook up their system to the net so they wouldnt even know what cosmetics were available to buy in the online store.

But combine bigger HDD and mandatory online and it gave game studios opportunity to infuse mtx everywhere hoping people bite. And with big patches, game updates, store updates etc.... the game maker can constantly add or promote new mtx hoping you bite a second or third time.

 

[MrTentakel]

crazy idea i know but how about $60 for the full game and no added shit?

But how else do we normalize predatory business practices for multi billion dollar corporations?

 

[KiteGr]

70€
It's not like I'll pay that price anyway. I'll just get it used and/or discounted.

 

[Three]

But combine bigger HDD and mandatory online and it gave game studios opportunity to infuse mtx everywhere hoping people bite.

Those things played little part in the proliferation of mtx. What gave rise to it was the digital storefront. Then we slowly had mtx on the digital storefront to unlock things shipped on the disc (No HDD required) then slowly online games where selling hats were making a lot of money. Then full out GaaS, f2p, engagement numbers and subscription services. The $60 complete game on a disc became less and less popular.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

70€
It's not like I'll pay that price anyway. I'll just get it used and/or discounted.

Home sharing too. I split all digital downloads with a buddy. We dont buy mtx either. Most of the time we wait for a game to go on sale but sometimes it'll be a day one game. And with Game Pass, our purchases have dropped too unless it's something like COD we know isn't coming.

Better the game maker only gets one $$$ from us than both of us buying it separately.

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

My favourite type of "monetization": Buy the game to own it. Done.

 

[balls of snow]

They making The Darkness 3 and going open world urban environment. Shiiit i'll pay more than 70.

 

[Dream-Knife]

Any of those and I'm not paying and/or playing it. I'd just consider the series dead.

Well $70 is fine if it's my favorite. Usually buy the Xeno collectors editions anyway.

 

[Laptop1991]

None of the option's, I'll wait for price drops and hopefully bug fixes and pay a reasonable non greedy amount, i don't feel sorry for billionaire companies who plead poverty just to raise prices for mostly buggy games constantly, i'll shop around for cheaper keys as i've always done.

 

[brian0057]

None.
Because Splinter Cell is my favorite series and I'd rather it stays dead.

 

[Swift_Star]

Disgusting.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Elden Ring shows how it's done.

 

[ZywyPL]

70$ 40$ without any added BS.

 

[AJUMP23]

Give me the game and leave me alone about it

 

[German Hops]

damn, those are my only options?
Let me add another one to the fray:

-Jump off a cliff.

 

[SteelCurtain 59]

I forgot the opposite, don't make/remove single player entirely then have a full price online game with microtransactions anyway like BF2042, Sea of thieves, GTSport.

I'll never understand this train of thought, single player only games are worth full price but multiplayer only games need to be a lower price?

 

[iHaunter]

All options you posted are terrible and are not the only ones. How about like Elden Ring? $60 and I just play the whole game the way I want.

 

[Three]

I'll never understand this train of thought, single player only games are worth full price but multiplayer only games need to be a lower price?

Where do I say that?

In the past: single player and multiplayer/online game. No microtransactions. One price

Now: multiplayer/online only game with microtransactions. Same price.

Can you see where the effort was reduced and the profit increased?

 

[SteelCurtain 59]

$70 with none of it, then I wait 6 months and get it on sale for $20.

So you don't want them to have any monetization, and then you still won't buy it until it's on a massive sale? Gee it's a wonder why developers felt the need to add other forms of monetization beyond just buying the game

 

[STARSBarry]

You should add an option for 70$ games which include loot boxes, micro transactions and always online so that any modern day AAA marketing manager on the forum have a button to click.

 

[Modrot]

Yeah all these are crap.

Trying to prove a point without giving people actual options, eh?

 

[Catphish]

So you don't want them to have any monetization, and then you still won't buy it until it's on a massive sale? Gee it's a wonder why developers felt the need to add other forms of monetization beyond just buying the game

 

[Skull-Knight]

Flat $60 price with no extra bullshit.

this one

 

[Rest]

Interesting apologism for "hypothetical" anti consumer fuckery.
I'm not going to pick a lesser of the evils here. I don't willingly eat shit, and corporations trying to force me to aren't going to get any co-operation from me. Fuck them, fuck the idea, fuck nickel and diming, fuck it all.

 

[CuteFaceJay]

Buy game as completed product that's it. I think last time that happened was Maybe Halo 3 or GTA IV?

 

[reforen]

where is the 60dlls no BS? don't try to justify the 70dlls price tag

 

[Ghost of Caelid]

Elden Ring 2 , lemme buy runes on new game +. I don’t wanna have to farm when I’m just experimenting with new builds.

 

[Fbh]

Out of those options I'd go with $70 and no bullshit. Prices drop, but shitty game designed built around micro transactions doesn't go away.

With that said, for most games I'd rather have them staying at $60 and have devs design them to be profitable for that price. I don't need the balls of my horse to shrink in cold weather, or for the pebbles on the floor to have 4K textures, or 30 hours worth of repetitive bloat in what would have been a nicely paced 20 hours long game

 

[Fart Knight]

Poll lame as hell

 

[Toots]

The sane choice is 70$ no mtx or online.
But then you buy the game at half the price 3 month after release, so it's really 35$ with no hassle.