YongYea: Ubisoft Defends Loot Boxes in Dismissive Response to Backlash, Points Finger at Gamers

Deleted member 32561 · Nov 23, 2018

The fact there are still people who defend lootboxes in AAA games is astounding. It's predatory, period. Gacha games are only slightly better because they're generally free, but they still utilize that predatory practice which I can't condone. So they're both bad, but one requires an entry fee that starts you early in making you feel like you wasted money if you don't buy in, soooo...

Other microtransactions in general... Not so bad, I think. It's just slightly bending the truth of how much of a full experience you actually get. It's scummy and has the potential to ruin the integrity of a game, but not really morally wrong like lootboxes, I think. There are some exceptions like NBA2K1...8 I think it was? But overall, yeah, not anywhere as bad as lootboxes.

TheChungusAmongUs · Nov 23, 2018

BY2K said:
THIS is supposed to be dismissive and "point fingers at gamer"? Seriously?

The response to this has been the most ludicrous thing.

He is literally saying "VOTE WITH YOUR WALLETS" and people are acting like this.

Ichi · Nov 23, 2018

Sjay1994 said:
Hell even when I was a kid playing pokemon I understood I needed to grind to get past gym leaders and the elite 4. Honestly, I don't think people are mad about the idea of grinding. People are mad that ubisoft gave people the ability to pay to make grinding easier... when grinding in AC:O is already easy.

yeah and so what do these people care about others who wants to skip those crap? i mean, it seems to me they're more envious at the fact that other people can shell out more to skip content that both camps do not find enjoyable - guised as a rally for "consumer rights".

i would bet you that if the side content was compelling and good, that no one would be raising this much hell over ubisoft.

Shelbyville Milhouse · Nov 23, 2018

Dardan Sandiego said:
As I said before, the funniest thing about Odyssey's XP booster is that it's there for everyone to buy but you supposedly don't need it. But you're locked out of story missions if you don't have a high enough level so you have to do the side-missions, which aren't really side-missions but mandatory. Unless you pay, then they aren't mandatory anymore. It's literally the corporate snake sucking its own dick.

But.....that's how games work, RPGs in particular.
That's how they have always worked.

If you ignore every fight in Pokemon you are gonna get destroyed.
If you don't engage in any side content in Divinity 2 you will get destroyed.

That's game design.

Deleted member 8593 · Nov 23, 2018

Nooblet said:
That's just how every RPG out there worth its salt works. The RPGs where you can bum rush main quests without doing side content to level up are RPGs that are too easy or just not good. Can you give me an example of an open world RPG, that's challenging and good, where you can finish main quest without touching any side content? Even the paragon of great RPG that The Witcher 3 is, does this where you will be horribly underleveled if you don't do side content. You are never "locked out" you can start those missions but you'll just be extremely underleveld, but it's possible to tackle quests while being as much as 4-5 levels below the requirement. That's very generous by RPG standards. Infact you have to be doing absolutely nothing in the game except main quest to even be at a point where you feel like you cannot do anything in the game and as such forced to do side quests, in which case why would you even be playing a game like this?

And side content in Odyssey is actually good now with properly contained storylines, and a large portion of the side content is actually part of the main story itself (i.e. mythological beasts and cultists are all part of main story). Additionally every content in this game scales so even if you are level 40, that quest you got while at level 10 would still give you appropriate amount of XP to level up. This is unlike Origin where it was fixed, and that game didn't even have mtx. Lastly, I was able to level up at 1 level per hour for almost the entire game that's good progress.

I don't really have a problem with how the game is balanced or structured. I am just amused by the language people use to defend it. You could even lower the difficulty and it would become even more meaningless. The exp boost is basically there for suckers and people seem to like the idea of those people financing their AAA games.

TheChungusAmongUs · Nov 23, 2018

Mewshuji said:
The fact there are still people who defend lootboxes in AAA games is astounding. It's predatory, period. Gacha games are only slightly better because they're generally free, but they still utilize that predatory practice which I can't condone. So they're both bad, but one requires an entry fee that starts you early in making you feel like you wasted money if you don't buy in, soooo...

Other microtransactions in general... Not so bad, I think. It's just slightly bending the truth of how much of a full experience you actually get. It's scummy and has the potential to ruin the integrity of a game, but not really morally wrong like lootboxes, I think. There are some exceptions like NBA2K1...8 I think it was? But overall, yeah, not anywhere as bad as lootboxes.

Being honest, the conversation isn't about lootboxes anymore, but Microtransactions in general

Deleted member 43084 · Nov 23, 2018

When Jim did the first video about Odyssey's MTX, it was early and not much was known about the game mechanics in detail. Now that we do know, in addition to the post-launch changes, the MTX make even less sense and no sane person would buy them:

Drachmae (money) is bountiful after the early game and you will get more than you can spend.
Materials are bountiful; then a patch both increased material gain and substantially increased the upgrade discounts (from 20% to 50%) which is what you need the materials for anyways.
The loot box items actually suck. You want Legendary items for their engravings, and the loot box Legendaries have weaker engravings than those guaranteed as a part of the plot/side quests. (although with transmog now in the game, there may be another benefit to that)
The EXP booster only makes sense for Story Minimum Requirements; you quickly run out of good places to put the Ability points from getting levels, and due to level scaling, grinding levels doesn't mean much.

All of this seems like a miscommunication between the business and game design sides at Ubisoft.

Deleted member 13328 · Nov 23, 2018

Alexandros said:
We bother because publishers would really like us to not bother.

I used to bother, but it's kind if obvious that the majority of people have no problem with micro transactions, so they will keep on putting them in their games, and people will continue thinking it's fine. I will never think it's fine and I think it's ridicilous that there are people defending it.

But it gets old, people doesn't seem to have a problem with it even if a lot of games today are like mobile games with "time savers" and stuff like that.

If devs design their games with that in mind, if they inflate the grind or make stuff take longer? I don't know, but I'm a cynic so I think I know. But since I have no proof I'll hold my tounge.

Adamska · Nov 23, 2018

SG-17 said:
Microtransactions as a whole, especially those in singleplayer only titles and those that use virtual currency, are manipulative, exploitative, and predatory.

Uh, no they're not. They're just extra fluff, games still pack lots of content for $60 (or whatever their price might be). Heck, even free to play titles have crazy value without not having to spend a dime on them.

You might be of the opinion that games don't hold the same value to you, but you can't simply say that MTX are always predatory when no one's forced to buy anything to enjoy the games.

Alucardx23 · Nov 23, 2018

Dr. Mario said:
Well joke's on them. I didn't buy Assassin's Creed Odyssey in the first place. No $60 and no mtx from me.

I would have happily bought ASO at release if it was a 20 hour game. But I'm not buying a 100 hour game and then paying extra to get the chance to make it a 50 hour game. Fuck that noise.

And that's the thing with these threads. They're never starting out with "MAN I love paying extra for these games so you don't have to and get all the stuff for free. Don't thank me because I love doing it!"

They're always starting with "hey I didn't notice the microtransactions so you should be fine with them!". Which is one small step, or, judging by your post, not even an actual step, away from saying "hey fuck you mister married with children man, why don't you pay extra so I get stuff for free."

Well, excuse me for not playing along with this game. You and Ubisoft can go along with your spending war, where your extra spending means bigger budgets means more need for extra spending means bigger budgets, until one or both of you goes bankrupt. Meanwhile, I'll be out there supporting the more sustainable competition, with indeed more modest budgets and smaller games with less feature creep.

The highlited part made a lot of sense..... You don't HAVE to buy anything. If the base game is not good enough for you for US$60, then don't buy the game. If the base game is good enough for US$60, then buy the game. Don't get confused with anything else.

TheChungusAmongUs · Nov 23, 2018

Ichi said:
yeah and so what do these people care about others who wants to skip those crap? i mean, it seems to me they're more envious at the fact that other people can shell out more to skip content that both camps do not find enjoyable - guised as a rally for "consumer rights".

i would bet you that if the side content was compelling and good, that no one would be raising this much hell over ubisoft.

It is!

The side content in AC:Odyssey is good! They are fun side stories.

But I doubt the people complaining have even played it since they all have the hard "if MTX are there no buy stance"

saenima · Nov 23, 2018

Oticon said:
So last time this topic came up I actually cracked open Ubisoft's books since they are all public. Here's what I posted back then but I didn't get a response:

Anyone have thoughts on that?

Graphics $200
Gameplay $150
Marketing $800
CEO $3,600
Sound $150

someone who is good at the economy please help me budget this. my company is dying

TheChungusAmongUs · Nov 23, 2018

minimaxir said:
When Jim did the first video about Odyssey's MTX, it was early and not much was known about the game mechanics in detail. Now that we do know, in addition to the post-launch changes, the MTX make even less sense and no sane person would buy them:

Drachmae (money) is bountiful after the early game and you will get more than you can spend.

Materials are bountiful; then a patch both increased material gain and substantially increased the upgrade discounts (from 20% to 50%) which is what you need the materials for anyways.

The loot box items actually suck. You want Legendary items for their engravings, and the loot box Legendaries have weaker engravings than those guaranteed as a part of the plot/side quests. (although with transmog now in the game, there may be another benefit to that)

The EXP booster only makes sense for Story Minimum Requirements; you quickly run out of good places to put the Ability points from getting levels, and due to level scaling, grinding levels doesn't mean much.

All of this seems like a miscommunication between the business and game design sides at Ubisoft.

I don't think there is miscommunication at all.

I play a lot of ubisoft games, and I look at a bunch of interviews. Everytime MTX is brought up, all the devs have an answer that boils down to "the higher ups just want MTX in the game, they don't really care what it is"

Like all the MTX's in the AC games are useless. The MTX in FarCry 5 is useless. Like it always feels like "MTX for the sake of having MTX and not something completely designed around MTX"

Adamska · Nov 23, 2018

Oticon said:
So last time this topic came up I actually cracked open Ubisoft's books since they are all public. Here's what I posted back then but I didn't get a response:

Anyone have thoughts on that?

I think it's good on them that they're making money out of the games they created, especially since Ubi has been making some great titles this gen.

BernardoOne · Nov 23, 2018

Deepwater said:
I don't think you really watched any of these videos. All of them are panelists/presenters from mobile and MMO developers. One is about payment methods (as in actual payment methods, technology adoptions rate across regions, etc)

Do you want me to make an addendum to my original statement and state that it's obviously influences mobile free games and MMOs?

Reminds me when some idiots that started spreading around that there was a GDC talk about "monetizing children"

Then when you actually looked at the talk, it was basically a ad for a payment processing service that has extra parental locks built in
So the literal opposite of what people claimed it to be

Deleted member 16876 · Nov 23, 2018

I mean if it wasn't profitable they wouldn't put that much effort into it. As long as whales and defenders of Microtransacions exist they wouldn't stop doing it because it is profit.

For me personally I hate microtransacions. The fact expansion packs died for this is really sad and I wish we would go back to that type of content.

Raw64life · Nov 23, 2018

tommyz2kool said:
Agreed. And lol at the argument video game companies use psychological tactics to get gamers to buy stuff. Like companies that sell physical products don't do the same. Auto manufacturers do this all the time.

Yes, because cars are targeted at children.....good lord, some of the attempts to rationalize this shit in here.

Dr. Mario · Nov 23, 2018

Oticon said:
So last time this topic came up I actually cracked open Ubisoft's books since they are all public. Here's what I posted back then but I didn't get a response:

Anyone have thoughts on that?

It's possible that if you have hundreds of developers making live content for games years after they released, that you need microtransactions to pay these developers.

FernandoRocker · Nov 23, 2018

I hope Nintendo never changes.

The lack of loot boxes and other predatory practices in their games are the reason why they are my favorite developer.

Quiksaver · Nov 23, 2018

SG-17 said:
Microtransactions as a whole, especially those in singleplayer only titles and those that use virtual currency, are manipulative, exploitative, and predatory. Ubisoft is one of the worst offenders up there with EA and Activision.

Also anyone who posts that shill "gamersriseup" meme is just trolling and shitposting with the only intention to derail and delegitimize consumer advocacy and downplay corporate malfeasance.

THIS THIS AND THIS

ezekial45 said:
What a shocker, this dude didn't learn anything from that chat he had with Schreier.

I watched the entire talk. Yong was fair and correct. Jason wanted to convict Yong and his audience without having any shred of reflection upon his own toxic attitude. I think he is a great writer, but he got himself up on a pedestal and kept trying to convert Yong into a lifestyle of hating his own audience. Should he have learned anything? Is this an out of season April Fools joke?

SG-17 said:
If they sold them directly on the platform store for a set amount of real dollars there would be more legitimacy to the point. As it stands, items being sold through a virtual currency, it is predatory. The currencies themselves are always sold at odd integers (1100 for $10) and item prices are always also at odd integers so you always have either just not enough or always have a little left over so you either need to buy more than you need (which then leaves you with leftover) or the leftover sits there wasting your money and manipulating you at a subconscious level to buy more to spend your virtual currency.

You are saving this thread, SG-17. PREACH!

BernardoOne · Nov 23, 2018

Oticon said:
So last time this topic came up I actually cracked open Ubisoft's books since they are all public. Here's what I posted back then but I didn't get a response:

Anyone have thoughts on that?

This has been known for a while. Which is why I always laugh at the idiotic argument "they make profit so they don't need to have MTX!!!!!!!!!" (Ignoring completely how said profits exist) . How the hell people are spouting that inane nonsense is beyond me.

GeoGonzo · Nov 23, 2018

Caio Loco said:
While I agree that MTX can break a game, I think we shoud point the guns to the reals culprits.

Odyssey is perfectly balanced to work without Xp Boosts, the game have tons and tons of content, and the post-launch support is excelent.

Ubisoft is not the villain here.

Being better than some is not the same as being good. They are not above criticism.

Also, I often complain precisely about the games I care about. Even if 2K is much worse, you wont find me complaining about their MTX in the thread about NBA 2K19 because I don't play that game. I happen to like most Ubisoft games, so... :thinkingemoji:

Nome · Nov 23, 2018

Can a mod change my title to "loot box predator"

Deleted member 32561 · Nov 23, 2018

Sjay1994 said:
Being honest, the conversation isn't about lootboxes anymore, but Microtransactions in general

True. I just feel like it's important to make a distinction that keeps getting lost in these topics. I've heard of people playing lootbox heavy or gatcha games gambling their bank accounts away (some selling their houses or cars). I myself nearly endangered myself in such a way too via Overwatch. I thankfully wasn't in deep enough to get desperate and sell vitals, but I was dangerously close to bankruptcy, and it wasn't even the threat of that which eventually stopped me.

I haven't, on the other hand, heard of people indebting themselves buying a bunch of shiny costumes for single player games or hyperleveling themselves in an MMO to keep up with friends who have more time.

So. Yeah.

Sheepinator · Nov 23, 2018

Danthrax said:
They do not need micro transactions and lootboxes to stay profitable. See: EA telling investors that profits will be just fine after Disney forced them to remove lootboxes from Battlefront 2

Watch a Jim Sterling video once in a while, OP

Yes, why worry about the truth if you can make shit up.

Demon Lizardman · Nov 23, 2018

I think is micro-transactions are part of a full price AAA game and are nearly essential for in-game progression, then it's a big fucking problem. If it's for cosmetic stuff, I don't like it but it's not nearly as bad.

Sheepinator · Nov 23, 2018

Boy Wander said:
Look at the profits of big publishers and this stupid "need microtransactions to maintain profitability" line of reasoning is exposed for what it is. Unadulterated bollocks.

lol you did not think that through. "Company with profits from mtx doesn't need mtx to have the same profits!", ugh what?

nintendoman58 · Nov 23, 2018

Jim Sterling's gonna have a field day with this one.

BernardoOne · Nov 23, 2018

FernandoRocker said:
I hope Nintendo never changes.

The lack of loot boxes and other predatory practices in their games are the reason why they are my favorite developer.

I'd rather have Ubisoft system than having cosmetics locked to poorly stocked expensive pieces of plastic garbage.

Deleted member 888 · Nov 23, 2018

minimaxir said:
When Jim did the first video about Odyssey's MTX, it was early and not much was known about the game mechanics in detail. Now that we do know, in addition to the post-launch changes, the MTX make even less sense and no sane person would buy them:

Drachmae (money) is bountiful after the early game and you will get more than you can spend.

Materials are bountiful; then a patch both increased material gain and substantially increased the upgrade discounts (from 20% to 50%) which is what you need the materials for anyways.

The loot box items actually suck. You want Legendary items for their engravings, and the loot box Legendaries have weaker engravings than those guaranteed as a part of the plot/side quests. (although with transmog now in the game, there may be another benefit to that)

The EXP booster only makes sense for Story Minimum Requirements; you quickly run out of good places to put the Ability points from getting levels, and due to level scaling, grinding levels doesn't mean much.

All of this seems like a miscommunication between the business and game design sides at Ubisoft.

It's not a miscommunication, it's a tactic.

For all the length of time most of this forum has been involved with games, if we consider this is basically NeoGAF 2.0, most of you should be well aware of how normalization works.

You do it slowly, bit by bit and year by year.

Last year IIRC there weren't XP boosters in AC. Now there is. It's largely been waved off as "not really needed", so now, AC will forever have XP boosters. It's now in the series, most of the Ubisoft fanbase has told everyone to STFU and sit down, so +1 to slow creeping monetization tactics.

Onto the next thing to add the following year. All while slow changes/tweaks here and there can potentially be tried with gameplay whilst the core "micro"transaction is already in the series and has been for x amount of years now.

This is like boiling a frog in water. You put it into cold water first and it acts like nothing is going on. Slowly turn the heat up each year. Then in X amount of years your game is boiling to the brim with season passes, pre-order bonuses, 6 special editions, full on F2P like MT store in the SP portion, "time-savers" and the list goes on.

Yukinari · Nov 23, 2018

FernandoRocker said:
I hope Nintendo never changes.

The lack of loot boxes and other predatory practices in their games are the reason why they are my favorite developer.

Nintendo's only issue so far is not just selling digital DLC versions of amiibo unlocks. Much like Starlink is doing since the toys to life aspect is a dying concept.

Otherwise yes their DLC pricing and content has been good. (Except for Fire Emblem)

TheChungusAmongUs · Nov 23, 2018

Mewshuji said:
True. I just feel like it's important to make a distinction that keeps getting lost in these topics. I've heard of people playing lootbox heavy or gatcha games gambling their bank accounts away (some selling their houses or cars). I myself nearly endangered myself in such a way too via Overwatch. I thankfully wasn't in deep enough to get desperate and sell vitals, but I was dangerously close to bankruptcy, and it wasn't even the threat of that which eventually stopped me.

I haven't, on the other hand, heard of people indebting themselves buying a bunch of shiny costumes for single player games or hyperleveling themselves in an MMO to keep up with friends who have more time.

So. Yeah.

Oof. Well its good you saved yourself from that.

I also spent quite a bit on OW lootboxes, but then I realized I was only playing the game for the lootboxes and didn't care for the actual game and I eventually stopped.

Sheepinator · Nov 23, 2018

Audioboxer said:
It's not a miscommunication, it's a tactic.

For all the length of time most of this forum has been involved with games, if we consider this is basically NeoGAF 2.0, most of you should be well aware of how normalization works.

You do it slowly, bit by bit and year by year.

Last year IIRC there weren't XP boosters in AC. Now there is. It's largely been waved off as "not really needed", so now, AC will forever have XP boosters.

Onto the next thing to add the following year. All while slow changes/tweaks here and there can potentially be tried with gameplay whilst the core "micro"transaction is already in the series and has been for x amount of years now.

AC has had time savers since Black Flag 5 years ago. Meanwhile the games keep getting bigger and better, and cost the same without even going up in price with inflation. But never mind that, the sky is falling etc. etc.

saenima · Nov 23, 2018

We could have recordings of Bobby Kotick telling his minions to skin the customers alive to make him a leather jacket and people would be asking where to insert their credit cards for that sweet 0.01% M4 +1 drop.

Oticon · Nov 23, 2018

saenima said:
Graphics $200
Gameplay $150
Marketing $800
CEO $3,600
Sound $150

someone who is good at the economy please help me budget this. my company is dying

You do know that CEO compensation is also public information right? No need to pull shit out of your ass when it's available for you.

Dr. Mario said:
It's possible that if you have hundreds of developers making live content for games years after they released, that you need microtransactions to pay these developers.

I can't tell the stance of this post. I think it's a good thing that these companies are providing post-release content even if it is being subsidized by microtransactions.

BernardoOne said:
This has been known for a while. Which is why I always laugh at the idiotic argument "they make profit so they don't need to have MTX!!!!!!!!!" (Ignoring completely how said profits exist) . How the hell people are spouting that inane nonsense is beyond me.

I just think people are misinformed and too lazy to actually look up the publically available information. Then content creators like YongYea and Sterling take advantage of that ignorance and spout of nonsense that their audiences eat up. I am a fan of Sterling but sometimes the guy just take a stance for the sake of his audience/character and not based on actual data.

AntiMacro · Nov 23, 2018

Mewshuji said:
True. I just feel like it's important to make a distinction that keeps getting lost in these topics. I've heard of people playing lootbox heavy or gatcha games gambling their bank accounts away (some selling their houses or cars). I myself nearly endangered myself in such a way too via Overwatch. I thankfully wasn't in deep enough to get desperate and sell vitals, but I was dangerously close to bankruptcy, and it wasn't even the threat of that which eventually stopped me.

I haven't, on the other hand, heard of people indebting themselves buying a bunch of shiny costumes for single player games or hyperleveling themselves in an MMO to keep up with friends who have more time.

So. Yeah.

But you HAVE to conflate the two because who's really all that mad that people with money can pay to make their single player games easier? To get the outrage you have to constantly bring up lootboxes, even about games that don't allow you to pay money for lootboxes.

Then when people point out how ridiculous you're being, call them a shill and pretend THEY are the ones being disingenuous with their arguments.

I mean the thread starts with a first reply shitpost that sets up anyone who doesn't blindly agree microtransactions as a whole are predatory and exploitative as a shill. What kind of reasoned discussion do you expect to get out of the thread after that?

Deleted member 888 · Nov 23, 2018

Sheepinator said:
AC has had time savers since Black Flag 5 years ago. Meanwhile the games keep getting bigger and better, and cost the same without even going up in price with inflation. But never mind that, the sky is falling etc. etc.

I said the XP booster is new. Time savers cover a broad range. So yeah, that's exactly what I spoke about. You start out with 1 time saver, then each year you keep adding more. Then by year 4/5 your game has a whole page if not pages of time savers.

Never spoke about the sky falling, just explained how these tactics work. Good to see your name again.

SprachBrooks · Nov 23, 2018

Ubisoft is giving us a 100+ hour game? Hahahaha. Shit I better get on my knees and suck them off then.

Sheepinator · Nov 23, 2018

FernandoRocker said:
I hope Nintendo never changes.

The lack of loot boxes and other predatory practices in their games are the reason why they are my favorite developer.

The same Nintendo where the Smash Bros director was critical of dlc, then they released hundreds of dollars worth of dlc, which wasn't even cross-buy between Wii and 3DS, and they never had a GOTY/Complete edition.

TheChungusAmongUs · Nov 23, 2018

BernardoOne said:
I'd rather have Ubisoft system than having cosmetics locked to poorly stocked expensive pieces of plastic garbage.

Not to mention that those pieces of plastic are long term microtransactions and you need them for certain things in the game.

JK-Money · Nov 23, 2018

Izzard said:
If I want to buy a unicorn that leaves pink trails as it runs then why can't I? Who is anyone to tell me what I can and can't spend my money on? MTX in single player games is just fine as long as it's clear what you're buying.

Sure but that follows under my cosmetic part where i dont care as much and also you cant think of yourself in a situation like this sadly you have to think of the masses where some people consider this gambling and addicting etc esp when it involves youth. All aspects have to be looked at but cosmetic is fine with me

BernardoOne · Nov 23, 2018

SG-17 said:
If they sold them directly on the platform store for a set amount of real dollars there would be more legitimacy to the point. As it stands, items being sold through a virtual currency, it is predatory. The currencies themselves are always sold at odd integers (1100 for $10) and item prices are always also at odd integers so you always have either just not enough or always have a little left over so you either need to buy more than you need (which then leaves you with leftover) or the leftover sits there wasting your money and manipulating you at a subconscious level to buy more to spend your virtual currency.

Is PSN/XBL/Steam allowing you to top up your account with a 5$ predatory because nothing in these stores really cost exactly 5.00$?

Dr. Mario · Nov 23, 2018

Sjay1994 said:
WTF is this.

Why does it sound like you feel personally attacked by the idea that Ubisoft made a 100 hour game and someone dared to like it?

Well that's because the only way for them to get a 100 hour game apparently is for me to pay extra, not for them to do that. And this is portrayed in this thread as a good thing, which is insulting my intelligence.

And it would be fine to ignore the insult if weren't for the fact that these monolithic games only exist by virtue of getting enough critical mass. And without growing the industry, because you need creativity and branching out to grow an industry, and not to consolidate in fewer core games, they achieve critical mass by sucking all the adjacent space dry from cash. So the amount of games these publisher release has been decimated, but also the AA and AAA space around them have been decimated by this model of oligopoly consolidation. I'm not going to sit here and cheer it on.

Deleted member 888 · Nov 23, 2018

BernardoOne said:
Is PSN/XBL/Steam allowing you to top up your account with a 5$ predatory because nothing in these stores really cost exactly 5.00$?

Minimum purchase is gone now

Someone tag rjejr into this article to make sure he sees it because he's been ranting about this on Push Square for as long as we can remember: Sony has removed the $5 funding charge from the PlayStation Store. This used to be a thing in Europe as well, but it was dropped in most countries at the start of the generation.

So for those of you who don't have a clue what we're talking about, previously you'd have to add $5 to your account's wallet even if the item you wanted to purchase cost less. So, let's say you wanted a neat new PlayStation Network avatar, and it cost $0.50 – well, Sony would charge you $5, and keep $4.50 in your wallet.

It was all a bit dumb, and the company's excuse was credit card fees or something. But, as corroborated by a dozen or so Reddit and ResetEra users, it's gone. Now, whenever you want to spend less than $5, you'll only be charged the amount for the item that you want to buy. Which is great, isn't it? Seriously, someone tell rjejr.

http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2018/07/sony_removes_usd5_requirement_from_playstation_store

XBL never did it after they ditched the stupid points system.

iamandy · Nov 23, 2018

Audioboxer said:
I said the XP booster is new. Time savers cover a broad range. So yeah, that's exactly what I spoke about. You start out with 1 time saver, then each year you keep adding more. Then by year 4/5 your game has a whole page if not pages of time savers.

Never spoke about the sky falling, just explained how these tactics work. Good to see your name again.

Origins already had XP Boosters.

BernardoOne · Nov 23, 2018

Raw64life said:
Yes, because cars are targeted at children.....good lord, some of the attempts to rationalize this shit in here.

Considering this is about Ubisoft, where the fuck do they target children? You can just use the shitty "think of the children" shit without actually backing up they are specifically targeting children.

Audioboxer said:
Minimum purchase is gone now

http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2018/07/sony_removes_usd5_requirement_from_playstation_store

XBL never did it after they ditched the stupid points system.

That's irrelevant. They still allow you to top up 5$ of their virtual currency

gremlinz1982 · Nov 23, 2018

Ichi said:
someone never played a jrpg. bruh even in pokemon you can't just go to the gyms, yknow.

I actually don't play JRPG's. Tried them on the original Playstation back in the day and it was not my thing.

Caio Loco said:
Since when side-quests add nothing to gameplay? How someone even buy an massive Open World RPG, with tons and tons of content, if they don't want to do side-quests?

Well, I ignore as many side quests as I can. This might be the reason GTA and Red Dead Redemption rule this genre.

And I actually like what CD Prokekt Red does. Side quests actually are different and they have stated that in their upcoming title they want to make sure that those side quests feel like they belong as opposed to something that was just added in.

Deleted member 888 · Nov 23, 2018

Caio Loco said:
Origins already had XP Boosters.

A $10 XP boost? Or are you talking about buying maps and other things which may lead to XP being accrued?

I'm certain the $10 XP boost was new for Odyssey. Even if it was Origins, well, that's when it was added. My point still stands. These things slowly get put in year on year, normalized, and they are then forever in the series.

BernardoOne said:
Considering this is about Ubisoft, where the fuck do they target children? You can just use the shitty "think of the children" shit without actually backing up they are specifically targeting children.

That's irrelevant. They still allow you to top up 5$ of their virtual currency

It lets you spend what you want. Many of these game space bux stores do not. You HAVE to buy a set amount of crystals/coins.

So no, it's not irrelevant being able to spend what you need to spend rather than being forced into an arbitrary amount.

Sheepinator · Nov 23, 2018

What was wrong with the $5 min charge? Do people not understand how credit card and PayPal fees work, and why many retailers have minimum charges? Were those people never going to buy anything on Live or PSN ever again?

juliamcardinals · Nov 23, 2018

Stop giving this pos a platform

YongYea: Ubisoft Defends Loot Boxes in Dismissive Response to Backlash, Points Finger at Gamers

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Designer / Self-requested ban

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Attempt to circumvent a ban with an alt account

User requested account closure

User requested account closure