EA boss proudly refuses to publish single-player only games

KingGorilla wrote:

It is not just free to play ones. Borderlands, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, and Elder Scrolls also raked it in with small transaction expansion content. The season pass is here to stay. With many titles, there is 60 bucks and essentially subscription fees.

I don't have a ton of issue with Season Passes depending on what it gets you. In a lot of these cases it's basically a drip-fed expansion pack. Call of Duty's Season Passes I take offense at because they're basically leveraging the fact that their game has no editor which means you have to go through Activision for new maps. If id or Epic had ever tried that back in the day with Quake III or Unreal Tournament they would've been laughed out of the room.

I also stay clear of skins and micro-expansions unless they go on sale or it's an indie developer I want to support.

SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

uh...yeah right.

Potentially unpopular opinion:

Bring on the micro-transactions. AAA games and studios are failing/shutting down left and right. If BS micro-transactions that I won't pay for anyway will allow the companies to make a little more money, hopefully that will lead to more games and more stable companies and jobs. Clearly this didn't happen with Dead Space 3, since EA just shut down that studio, but maybe in the future?

SixteenBlue wrote:

Bring on the micro-transactions. AAA games and studios are failing/shutting down left and right. If BS micro-transactions that I won't pay for anyway will allow the companies to make a little more money, hopefully that will lead to more games and more stable companies and jobs. Clearly this didn't happen with Dead Space 3, since EA just shut down that studio, but maybe in the future?

At the same time... with every major studio that shuts down we get a handful of new indie projects (and IP) that spring from the ashes. AAA publishers aren't the only shop in town, and the current trend in that market is consolidation and contraction instead of courting new talent and expanding their software lineups.

I agree this is a necessary step by EA to save their bottom line, but it's not going to be the magic bullet that gets their share price back out of the pit they've been in since 2008.

SixteenBlue wrote:

Clearly this didn't happen with Dead Space 3, since EA just shut down that studio, but maybe in the future?

Correction: the Dead Space studio (Visceral Games) was not shut down. EA shut down Visceral Montreal, the makers of Army of Two.

Microtransactions and/or DLC are a really difficult thing to write on, as everyone wants to boil it down to a black or white situation. There's just so many ways they can be used and misused. I'm sure I've said this before but the point I get uncomfortable is when it starts being a consideration into the gameplay design, for example stretching out unlock progression when there's no real gameplay need to do so, but they oh so handily sell something to get around that.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
SixteenBlue wrote:

Clearly this didn't happen with Dead Space 3, since EA just shut down that studio, but maybe in the future?

Correction: the Dead Space studio (Visceral Games) was not shut down. EA shut down Visceral Montreal, the makers of Army of Two.

Oh well awesome, then hopefully my point stands even more now.

shoptroll wrote:
SixteenBlue wrote:

Bring on the micro-transactions. AAA games and studios are failing/shutting down left and right. If BS micro-transactions that I won't pay for anyway will allow the companies to make a little more money, hopefully that will lead to more games and more stable companies and jobs. Clearly this didn't happen with Dead Space 3, since EA just shut down that studio, but maybe in the future?

At the same time... with every major studio that shuts down we get a handful of new indie projects (and IP) that spring from the ashes. AAA publishers aren't the only shop in town, and the current trend in that market is consolidation and contraction instead of courting new talent and expanding their software lineups.

I agree this is a necessary step by EA to save their bottom line, but it's not going to be the magic bullet that gets their share price back out of the pit they've been in since 2008.

I agree, but AAA is cool too. I'd really like it if both AAA and indie could be healthy, you know?

Basically what I'm saying is that stuff makes A LOT of money. And by all accounts I've heard, DS3 was not at all worse for having them in there. So if they can provide me the same quality game for the same price, I have no problem with optional micro-transactions that make them more money (and I assume make the purchasers happy).

If they base the game around constant motivation for micro-transactions, that sucks, but I'm (strangely) giving EA the benefit of the doubt here, based on DS3.

shoptroll wrote:

It used to be the case that 1 million sales meant you were a huge hit. Nowadays, 1 million sales is barely enough to ensure a sequel. You have to be hitting home runs or you're out of the rotation.

Or 5 million in the case of Dead Space.

SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

I don't think that's the point really. The point is now it's going to be in everything that we do and will take away from the immersion of the game. Instead of the game being designed then micro-transaction and DLC around that, it will become DLC and micro-transactions with a game designed around them.

In my opinion (and I've been saying this for years), this will be the downfall of games for many people. When you can pay to level, pay for weapon/characters that is something you should be getting within the game, it's just a money grab and not fun anymore. If you are purchasing micro-transactions on a game like Dead Space (in my opinion)you are part of the problem and the reason why games are the way they are nowadays. I can find another hobby, but I suppose those willing to support this can enjoy forking over the money to a snowball.

The Conformist wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

I don't think that's the point really. The point is now it's going to be in everything that we do and will take away from the immersion of the game. Instead of the game being designed then micro-transaction and DLC around that, it will become DLC and micro-transactions with a game designed around them.

It's an interesting conclusion, given the ACTUAL implementation of it resulted in someone saying "I couldn't even find them."

Hard to say it broke the immersion when they never saw it. Hard to say it was designed around that.

This speculation was all well and good when EA hadn't actually done it, now that they have...you have to actually take that into account.

TheGameguru wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

uh...yeah right.

I meant to put 'should':).

SixteenBlue wrote:

It's an interesting conclusion, given the ACTUAL implementation of it resulted in someone saying "I couldn't even find them."

Hard to say it broke the immersion when they never saw it. Hard to say it was designed around that.

This speculation was all well and good when EA hadn't actually done it, now that they have...you have to actually take that into account.

Presumably EA or any other company actually want you to buy them, seeing as it took a non-zero amount of effort to put the system in place. Like advertising, I can't imagine they want them to be ignored. One point of data does not make a trend.

The Conformist wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

I don't think that's the point really. The point is now it's going to be in everything that we do and will take away from the immersion of the game. Instead of the game being designed then micro-transaction and DLC around that, it will become DLC and micro-transactions with a game designed around them.

In my opinion (and I've been saying this for years), this will be the downfall of games for many people. When you can pay to level, pay for weapon/characters that is something you should be getting within the game, it's just a money grab and not fun anymore. If you are purchasing micro-transactions on a game like Dead Space (in my opinion)you are part of the problem and the reason why games are the way they are nowadays. I can find another hobby, but I suppose those willing to support this can enjoy forking over the money to a snowball.

What a shame to write off a great hobby on principle when in practice your fear proves unfounded.

Scratched wrote:
SixteenBlue wrote:

It's an interesting conclusion, given the ACTUAL implementation of it resulted in someone saying "I couldn't even find them."

Hard to say it broke the immersion when they never saw it. Hard to say it was designed around that.

This speculation was all well and good when EA hadn't actually done it, now that they have...you have to actually take that into account.

Presumably EA or any other company actually want you to buy them, seeing as it took a non-zero amount of effort to put the system in place. Like advertising, I can't imagine they want them to be ignored. One point of data does not make a trend.

Neither does hypothetical speculation.

I have not heard a single person who played DS3 say it was worse for having them. Not one.

Scratched wrote:

Isn't this old news? I remember one of the EA execs saying a few years back he went around bothering developers to think of ways to shoehorn online into all their games if it didn't have it.

It is, but it's good for another round of winging and crying from the internet.

SixteenBlue wrote:

I agree, but AAA is cool too. I'd really like it if both AAA and indie could be healthy, you know?

To be honest, I think we're approaching some sort of event horizon where there's not enough consumers to sell AAA games to in order to have a decent ROI based on the size of the budgets going into these projects. That's the core problem and is why we've seen game prices go up $10 at the start of the current generation and near-constant hand-wringing about used game sales. Not to mention subscription services, online passes, season passes, and micro-transactions to try and wring more money out of the consumers they do get.

It used to be the case that 1 million sales meant you were a huge hit. Nowadays, 1 million sales is barely enough to ensure a sequel. You have to be hitting home runs or you're out of the rotation.

AAA is collapsing under its own weight. Time to let the forest burn.

It seems pretty straightforward. If the gameplay is hurt by the monetization (see: Diablo 3) then it's bad and should be killed with fire. If it's incidental or even nearly invisible (see: Plants vs Zombies) then who cares?

The Conformist wrote:

If you are purchasing micro-transactions on a game like Dead Space (in my opinion)you are part of the problem and the reason why games are the way they are nowadays.

There are so many good games released each year that I don't have enough time to play all of them. Um, thanks, people buying micro-transactions?

SixteenBlue wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

I don't think that's the point really. The point is now it's going to be in everything that we do and will take away from the immersion of the game. Instead of the game being designed then micro-transaction and DLC around that, it will become DLC and micro-transactions with a game designed around them.

It's an interesting conclusion, given the ACTUAL implementation of it resulted in someone saying "I couldn't even find them."

Hard to say it broke the immersion when they never saw it. Hard to say it was designed around that.

This speculation was all well and good when EA hadn't actually done it, now that they have...you have to actually take that into account.

I'm more pointing out the future of gaming, not how it currently is. And I'm going off of this statement.

"The next and much bigger piece is microtransactions within games. We're building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way, either to get to a higher level, to buy a new character, to buy a truck, a gun, whatever it might be, and consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of the business."

The implementation of micro-transactions on a game that you already pay $60 for is sketchy at best. We don't know how they will be implemented yet but the pay to "get to a higher level" doesn't fill me with a whole lot of confidence.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
The Conformist wrote:

If you are purchasing micro-transactions on a game like Dead Space (in my opinion)you are part of the problem and the reason why games are the way they are nowadays.

There are so many good games released each year that I don't have enough time to play all of them. Um, thanks, people buying micro-transactions?

There were plenty of great games that came out every year before micro-transactions. I would think there would be plenty of different areas for the developer to explore before they start adding micro's to every game they ship.

The Conformist wrote:
SixteenBlue wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

I don't think that's the point really. The point is now it's going to be in everything that we do and will take away from the immersion of the game. Instead of the game being designed then micro-transaction and DLC around that, it will become DLC and micro-transactions with a game designed around them.

It's an interesting conclusion, given the ACTUAL implementation of it resulted in someone saying "I couldn't even find them."

Hard to say it broke the immersion when they never saw it. Hard to say it was designed around that.

This speculation was all well and good when EA hadn't actually done it, now that they have...you have to actually take that into account.

I'm more pointing out the future of gaming, not how it currently is. And I'm going off of this statement.

"The next and much bigger piece is microtransactions within games. We're building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way, either to get to a higher level, to buy a new character, to buy a truck, a gun, whatever it might be, and consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of the business."

The implementation of micro-transactions on a game that you already pay $60 for is sketchy at best. We don't know how they will be implemented yet but the pay to "get to a higher level" doesn't fill me with a whole lot of confidence.

What about splitting the difference? What if the game was $30, and they tried to make up another $30+ via micro-transactions and DLC?

McIrishJihad wrote:

What about splitting the difference? What if the game was $30, and they tried to make up another $30+ via micro-transactions and DLC?

I don't think many would mind that, I just expect them to try and make the standard price $70 (have their cake) and put microtransactions in (eat it). Why would they try and reduce the price?

More realistically, microtransactions are an expansion of "project ten dollar", where they get money out of you however you got the game, new or used, cheap or expensive. All the charges after the base game go straight to them.

McIrishJihad wrote:

What about splitting the difference? What if the game was $30, and they tried to make up another $30+ via micro-transactions and DLC?

Honestly I wouldn't mind that as much. Depending on how much actual game you get for the $30, but yeah I could see that being a great way to handle it. But why would they have the incentive to do that when they already know people are willing to spend $60 and + some already?

The Conformist wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

I don't think that's the point really. The point is now it's going to be in everything that we do and will take away from the immersion of the game. Instead of the game being designed then micro-transaction and DLC around that, it will become DLC and micro-transactions with a game designed around them.

In my opinion (and I've been saying this for years), this will be the downfall of games for many people. When you can pay to level, pay for weapon/characters that is something you should be getting within the game, it's just a money grab and not fun anymore. If you are purchasing micro-transactions on a game like Dead Space (in my opinion)you are part of the problem and the reason why games are the way they are nowadays. I can find another hobby, but I suppose those willing to support this can enjoy forking over the money to a snowball.

Speaking as part of the problem... Thanks for playing and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

TheGameguru wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

I don't think that's the point really. The point is now it's going to be in everything that we do and will take away from the immersion of the game. Instead of the game being designed then micro-transaction and DLC around that, it will become DLC and micro-transactions with a game designed around them.

In my opinion (and I've been saying this for years), this will be the downfall of games for many people. When you can pay to level, pay for weapon/characters that is something you should be getting within the game, it's just a money grab and not fun anymore. If you are purchasing micro-transactions on a game like Dead Space (in my opinion)you are part of the problem and the reason why games are the way they are nowadays. I can find another hobby, but I suppose those willing to support this can enjoy forking over the money to a snowball.

Speaking as part of the problem... Thanks for playing and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Since you've actually purchased things from DS3, would you say the game was skewed in a way that encouraged actually buying the micro-transactions? Was it balanced differently than DS2?

Unknown Soldier wrote:

If it's incidental or even nearly invisible (see: Plants vs Zombies) then who cares?

Huh?! Is that a phone-only thing for PvZ?

McIrishJihad wrote:

What about splitting the difference? What if the game was $30, and they tried to make up another $30+ via micro-transactions and DLC?

People will still complain at $30. You can get some really good and complete experiences from the indie sector for less than $30.

J Allard's 2005 GDC keynote/XBox 360 reveal talked about micro-transactions (mostly cosmetic and small perks like new car engines). Going full micro-transaction has been in the cards for a while and if the publishers were interested in trading up front cost for a longer product tail, they would've done so by now.

Also, I think it's worth noting that this sounds like EA trying to make another big lurch to keep shareholders happy. Before "microtransaction all the things" it was "facebook all the things" which didn't exactly go so well, and before that it was "multiplayer all the things" which was kinda successful.

SixteenBlue wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I will just say that I had a hard time even finding the micro-transactions in dead space 3. They were so inocuous and missable, that if every game had that kind of micro-transaction there would be no cause for comment.

I don't think that's the point really. The point is now it's going to be in everything that we do and will take away from the immersion of the game. Instead of the game being designed then micro-transaction and DLC around that, it will become DLC and micro-transactions with a game designed around them.

In my opinion (and I've been saying this for years), this will be the downfall of games for many people. When you can pay to level, pay for weapon/characters that is something you should be getting within the game, it's just a money grab and not fun anymore. If you are purchasing micro-transactions on a game like Dead Space (in my opinion)you are part of the problem and the reason why games are the way they are nowadays. I can find another hobby, but I suppose those willing to support this can enjoy forking over the money to a snowball.

Speaking as part of the problem... Thanks for playing and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Since you've actually purchased things from DS3, would you say the game was skewed in a way that encouraged actually buying the micro-transactions? Was it balanced differently than DS2?

Like said before I think DS3 was a stepping stone or experiment. While DS3 may not be imbalanced or skewed, doesn't mean that future games wont be, or at least attempt to be. Now if they can keep the DS3 formula and have micro's not effect the core play then no sweat, but businesses will try to make some money and go that extra mile.

**Edit** Not worth it. No need to be rude though.