Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What game takes the prize for having the worst micro-transactions.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I was pretty shocked by The Quartering's video about CoD's colored reticle microtransaction, but that was just aesthetic.

    I made the mistake of buying Fortnite when it came out and you could only buy better weapons if you were lucky enough to get it in paid lootboxes. It was a disgrace and never touched the game again after finding out how it worked.

    So, in short: I paid 60 bucks for a game that was going f2p soon after , plus I couldn't get weapon upgrades because it was behind a paywall.
    Last edited by Astraea; 01-03-2019, 07:15 PM.
    Currently playing 'Vermintide 2'
    Currently reading 'The Blade Itself'

    Comment


    • #17
      I'm pretty sure the Dungeon Keeper mobile game is designed around basic mechanics where you're trying to do something that in a game should take a second, in real life would take 30 minutes, but in that game takes 24 hours real time. You're supposed to pay to skip those waits. Imagine if EA made a Sims game where building a 1m section of a wall takes 12 hours. Yeah it doesn't even take that long to build a real piece of wall.

      Comment


      • #18
        Black Ops 4 has that $1 red dot so it's worse than the Horse Armor from Oblivion.

        Comment


        • aileron
          aileron commented
          Editing a comment
          Wtf? Any chance that they've been taking mods made for free by fans on PC and selling them for $$$ on consoles?

      • #19
        For me it has got to be Call of Duty. I love the franchise and they got micro transactions in Black Ops 2 I believe but those were pretty nominal. Now its absolutely insane the amount of stuff they monetize and put in loots boxes and micro transactions. I mean in Black Ops 4 they are selling a red dot for the reflex sight which already has a read dot as default. Like wow, it just blows my mind that they are basically taking every aspect of the game and trying to sell it to you again on top of already buying it. Oh and it has a season pass too in case you wanted to give them more money. And as the cherry on top, my copy on PS4 has a tendency to lock up my console when trying to start the game since it starts by showing you the new ways to loose your money. Quality at its finest right there.

        Comment


        • #20
          If we aren't including mobile games like Dungeon Keeper, and Final Fantasy All the Bravest, then I would probably say Star Wars Battlefront 2. The whole progression system was created around pay to win mechanics, and it was so broken, they were forced by Disney to pull them from the game for fear of damaging the Star Wars brand. How much worse than that can it get?

          Comment


          • #21
            From the recent(ish) games that I have played or wanted to buy I would have to say the most scummy are Black Ops or SW Battle front 2, I know they fixed it later but that was too little too late for me. I know people have moaned about the last 2 assassins creed games but I genuinely havent found that I had to use micro transaxtions to enjoy the game.

            Luckily for me I tend to mainly play single player games where MT arent so vital I tend to avoid FTP games like the plague sadly my son is fortnite obsessed.

            I wish more companies would have the ethos of CD Projekt Red

            Comment


            • #22
              If you would search up the definition for "badly done freemium" it'd be lotro.
              goddamn how i miss those dollars that i spent into that game.
              pay for zone, pay for questpacks, pay for this, pay for that.
              the game is so extremely limiting that it's completely non enjoyable free to play.
              and the new mordor expansion was a joke when it comes to pricing, one of the biggest selling points was that they added a new race, a first time ever thing for lotro. *
              You could only get it via buying the 80$ version of the expansion pack with vague promises on it being possible to get at a later date separately.
              That insulting joke of an expansion cost them two customers (me and the wife) and no-doubt a lot of others.


              Look at the picture i included as a link, can you honestly....honestly tell me this makes any sense at all?

              Standing stone has been behaving completely ridiculously when it comes to value.

              i could go on and on about how much i dislike what they've done to it, what my thoughts are about the horrible non-vanilla vanilla server ideas they have etc....
              .... if only we could get old codemasters style vanilla lotro back, i miss the good ol times.

              *edit : I forgot about beornings, they were more of a class in my mind but they're a race as well. Still.... that was a huge selling point for them and it's barely anything at all. it's mostly aesthetics...
              Last edited by Hingadingadurgen; 01-07-2019, 04:09 AM.

              Comment


              • #23
                Originally posted by Hingadingadurgen View Post
                ...

                Look at the picture i included as a link ...
                For some reason that didn't work, it cut out the rest of the link... here's the pic

                Comment


                • #24
                  I would've thought any of the latest FIFA games (esp. UT) would take it by a country mile... I don't actually play it (and I bloody well thank Scyrah/Toruk that I don't), but AFAIK, it's one of the most egregious instances of microtransactions, and the game is updated and released as full priced every freakin' year with minimal actual changes and a story mode that damn near no-one has any interest in, and yet it pretty much completely invalidates previous iterations for multiplayer/competitive. What's worse is that pay through the nose for 'better' editions and you get in-game players LOANED for a laughably short amount of time.

                  Comment


                  • #25
                    Metal Gear Solid Survive is a serious contender for charging $10 for an extra save slot. When you start charging money for vital game functions, you know you've reached a new level of greed.

                    Comment


                    • #26
                      Obviously it's those arcade games from way back which charged you to continue playing on the next level. Talk about a rip-off...

                      Comment


                      • #27
                        those NIS America games are pretty bad

                        Comment


                        • #28
                          I mean EA's Star Wars Battlefront II started a legit movement that changed the laws in some countries, and it got so bad that the US government is now taking a serious look it as well. To boot, EA is even getting in trouble in Belgium for Fifa 19, and other governments around the world are still considering updating their gambling policies due to pressure from voters and concerned officials. Whether or not another game has worse microtransactions or not, the impact of Star Wars Battlefront II is the most severe so it's hard to argue they weren't the overall worst.

                          Comment


                          • #29
                            Halo 5 gets my vote.

                            With its it’s misleading ad campaign and shortest ever solo campaign and no split screen co-op, they then added in $1100 worth of cosmetic micro transactions.

                            I know “it’s just cosmetic” but this is Halo. It was the reason people bought an Xbox. It didn’t need to be loaded with this like some sort of mobile game.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X