GWJ Conference Call Episode 576

Until Dawn, Total War: Warhammer 2, Guild Wars 2, Gamers With Hope, Your Emails and More!

Click here to download!

This week Shawn, Amanda, Karla and special guest jdzappa talk about gamers with hope!

To contact us, email [email protected]! Send us your thoughts on the show, pressing issues you want to talk about or whatever else is on your mind.

  • Subscribe with iTunes
  • Subscribe with RSS
  • Subscribe with Yahoo!
Download the official apps
  • Download the GWJ Conference Call app for Android
  • Download the GWJ Conference Call app for Android

Comments

00:03:36 VR Games
00:09:05 Total War: Warhammer II
00:17:30 Until Dawn
00:27:03 I Became a Dog
00:29:31 Guild Wars 2
00:34:50 Crescent Loom
00:37:28 Gamers With Hope
00:53:07 Your Emails

I don't have a problem with microtransactions in multiplayer that don't affect gameplay.

I don't like the idea of microtransactions in single player games because they will likely negatively influence the design of games in the future. The developers are presenting the problem 'the grind' and the solution 'shortcuts' via in game purchases. I suspect that the temptation to up the grind in games in order to sell more of the solution will be irresistible for developers who have shareholders to keep happy.

You may well be right Certis that games have to be fun in order to sell in the first place and this will be a restraining factor. There will, inevitably, be games that go too far. Games with great potential that would have been amazing if only the developers had restrained their averice but that is the nature of games and gaming. There have always been near misses with interesting games that fell flat because of a foolish decision somewhere along the line.

As you say there are hundreds of great games coming out at the moment. There are so many amazing indy developers now that, if the AAA companies insist on indulging their worst impulses, others will step into the gap and give us games that aren't about squeezing the last dime (or penny) out of the player but are all about having a fun, relaxing time playing games.

In an age when we have a game like Player Unknown's Battlegrounds the AAA developers can no longer dominate the market place. Those who want a shooter without overly oppressive microtransactions will have quality games like PUBG, Insurgency and Escape from Tarkov to satisfy them.

------ Edited from here down ------

In the end I suspect, to use one of my usual food based analogies, we will end up with 'fast food publishers/developers' who are all about minimal iteration, production efficiency over inovation and prominent in game systems for gleaning more money from their customers and 'Restaurant publishers/developers' who are all about giving a high quality, creative and innovative experiences with more gentile ways of offering paid additions to a game. We'll then be able to pick and choose according to our mood or preference. It could be that the 'fast food' type games stay relatively cheap and the 'restaurant' games come at more of a premium.

It'll also be interesting to see if games from Japanese publishers have a resurgence caused by too many western games adopting intrusive microtransactions.

Edit: I've edited the last paragraph a little after a nights sleep and added a sentence at the end.

7 Boy names:

<---- Ness
Chrono
Cloud
Titus
Sid or Cid
Marth
Frog

That is hard...

Glad I’m not the only person who hates learning new games. I definitely feel it’s in an “old person problem “ because I don’t remember that from when I was young at all. Although to be fair back then I was only playing with the control pad and two buttons. I think it’s an objective statement of fact the games are more complex these days so that’s definitely a factor

Marcus?

Ryder.

Thanks Shawn and crew for having me on and sorry for the audio screw up. Unfortunately I installed what I thought was a safe add on for my son and it wiped out a bunch of my files.

The science game Crescent Loom sounds amazing (especially bc of my neuroscience background) but it's not on Steam and the link from this page goes to an already funded Kickstarter. Gotta actually look for it,

Sorry! We mentioned it was available on itch but didn't put that particular link in the notes. I think I also might have called him "Wink" because I was going off the cuff instead of off notes. Apologies! Here goes! https://wick.itch.io/crescent-loom

Guh, why didn't I think of this baby name sooner? Dorian!

Wrex

Good strong name. When spoken aloud, sounds like Rex.

A week ago, Bill Harris at Dubious Quality wrote about game designers modifying their games to sell more in-game items. The jumping-off point for his post was a Rolling Stone article about Activision getting a patent to use matchmaking tricks to sell more items (although they claim they haven't used this tech in games yet).

I told him that I had drifted away from Rocket League not long after they added crates to the game. I think I left more for time reasons, but the crates somewhat soured me on the game. Before the crates, I had actually bought most of the DLC they had released if only because I enjoyed the game so much.

Another example is Elite: Dangerous, which sells only cosmetic items in their store. You can buy paint jobs for your ship, flight suits, trinkets for your dashboard, etc., but nothing that affects your performance or abilities. I definitely buy something from them every month or so, just because my dollars per hour cost for this game must be just a handful of pennies.

Higgledy wrote:

You may well be right Certis that games have to be fun in order to sell in the first place and this will be a restraining factor. There will, inevitably, be games that go too far.

I think this says what I said above, but more concisely.

Aristophan wrote:

Wrex

Good strong name. When spoken aloud, sounds like Rex.

Shepard...

I bought 20$ worth of unlocks for Wildlands when it launched. I didn’t buy the guns but I got all the scopes, stocks, attachments, and mags.

I didn’t get anything that wasn’t in the game and available to me with effort. I just chose to balance my time in favor of not getting every piece through a few extra schmekels.

I don’t regret it.

I also do not regret not buying the DLC or season pass. There was nothing in either that interested me or seemed like a worthy investment.

As gamers age into a more mature consumer base, having a pricing scheme that captures the demand curve more evenly is a natural result. This happens in every major consumer segment relating to hobbies. I do not have a problem with microtransactions in games. Even if you're a huge whale in mobile game microtransactions, it is cheaper than golf.

Thanks for the link, Amoebic. Now I've got to figure out what Itch is.

I think the logical step curiously missing in the discussion about microtransactions in single-player games was or will be when developers are making progress on a potentially great game and then realize that the some-cool-extra-thing will only be bought by some players, and then readjust the game balance *a bit* (roll your eyes) so more will buy it. For example, in a world where people thought horse armor was awesome, changing the code so that using an unarmored horse meant running slower or teleporting half distance or something.

Keithustus wrote:

Thanks for the link, Amoebic. Now I've got to figure out what Itch is.

I think the logical step curiously missing in the discussion about microtransactions in single-player games was or will be when developers are making progress on a potentially great game and then realize that the some-cool-extra-thing will only be bought by some players, and then readjust the game balance *a bit* (roll your eyes) so more will buy it. For example, in a world where people thought horse armor was awesome, changing the code so that using an unarmored horse meant running slower or teleporting half distance or something.

I think one thing that already exists and will increase is the patient gamer.
There are so few games that you NEED to have day 1. I realize there will always be those that just have to have it right away, maybe they run a podcast ;), but other customers will just learn to check on the reviews and just ignore the ones with problems.
Ok, it's a pipe drram, but maybe this time we'll learn.

I'm frankly baffled by the hate for microtransactions, in a world with orders of magnitude more games than I can possibly play.

Feels like complaining that the grocery store sells guacamole because I really hate guacamole, despite the fact that it still sells all the other things I like.

I have warm feelings towards all the games that don't have microtransactions or loot boxes. It's made me appreciate them more.

Jonman wrote:

I'm frankly baffled by the hate for microtransactions, in a world with orders of magnitude more games than I can possibly play.[/i].

It's about being nickel and dimed. If you've already spent $50 or $60 for a standard game, or $10 and $20 more for a special edition, you want the whole game. Engineering the game so that you don't get the full or ideal experience unless you pay $1 or $2 or $5 at a time multiple times is a way to feel cheated.

Also, Richard Garfield (Magic: The Gathering) had a great post on this kind of pricing scheme last year that's well worth the read. There was a good forum discussion about his essay and its and his relation to CCGs on Neogaf.

I’m unreservedly chuffed that my donut graphing got a shout out on the conference call

lunchbox12682 wrote:
Aristophan wrote:

Wrex

Good strong name. When spoken aloud, sounds like Rex.

Shepard...

Wrex.

wordsmythe wrote:
lunchbox12682 wrote:
Aristophan wrote:

Wrex

Good strong name. When spoken aloud, sounds like Rex.

Shepard...

Wrex.

Janet!

lunchbox12682 wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
lunchbox12682 wrote:
Aristophan wrote:

Wrex

Good strong name. When spoken aloud, sounds like Rex.

Shepard...

Wrex.

Janet!

Brad!

Amoebic wrote:
lunchbox12682 wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
lunchbox12682 wrote:
Aristophan wrote:

Wrex

Good strong name. When spoken aloud, sounds like Rex.

Shepard...

Wrex.

Janet!

Brad!

Dammit!