DLC and microtransactions are ok. Change my mind.

[Ryan]

This will be fun. Please don't get too serious about it. I know it's a sensitive topic for some people.

I feel Microtransactions are fine in games. As long as they are not implemented in a way that impacts one's ability to beat a game beginning to end, I don't see an issue with them. It's a fair way for developers and publishers to fund a rather stagnant industry while still giving us the games. I know it's a hard concept for us "oldies" (I'm 34) to sometimes accept, but it's really not a problem when handled correctly. And yes, I would argue there are companies, even amongst the hated ones, that handle it properly. For example, Ubisoft's handling of them in AC Origins (I haven't played the latest, so maybe it's changed). I beat the game from beginning to end without ever buying any kind of boosts. I never felt shorted, I never felt the game progression was artificially stymied in favor of boosters, etc. The store was pretty out-of-sight. I think that is a fair way to implement the feature.

I feel DLC, in general, is acceptable. Most DLC is garbage like a few extra side quests or missions thrown into the open-world, but it's all optional. There are honest packs out there though that legitimately lengthen the time with the game. I don't see how that's a bad thing getting more time with something you enjoy with fresh content. I would rather have the option to pay $90 and extend my game than to be forced to always pay $90 regardless of getting DLC or not. I think it is a fair way to keep games at $60 while giving developers/publishers more streams of increased revenue to offset the difference in stagnant prices and rocketing overhead. After all, I quite clearly remember with just about every platform generation came an increase in MSRP on games. We are now heading into a third generation, possibly, without a base-rate increase since the last generation when games hit $60 MSRP on average. That's pretty good.

I also believe that nobody is entitled to the labor of others. When I purchased the game, I went into a contract with the creators agreeing to pay X amount of dollars for what it shipped as. Anything they do afterwards is outside that original contract and I should have to pay for that extra stuff if I want it. Unless of course, they want to give it away - then that's on them.

I'm not denying there aren't predatory practices out there, primarily in mobile and F2P. I'm only looking at premium, $60 games.

Change my mind.

[Matias]

My point was that what u used to get as a part of sims2 basegame would be dlc for sims3 and what used to be a part of sims3 basegame would be dlc for sims4, Or what used to be a single dlc pack for a previous title would be two different dlcs for newer title

[DGCae]

I don't think this is really a DLC issue more so than an EA being greedy issue though. They have done a good job at continuing support for their game and giving those who enjoy it something to keep playing with, they just went about it in a money-hungry way. It'd honestly be an amazing example of DLC if they knocked off about 50-60% but EA is gonna EA, which is why I still have yet to purchase a single Sims 4 DLC pack.

[DGCae]

If all it does is just change the look then I don't see a problem with it. If it happens to have the same stats as a weapon that unlocks at say level 50/50 but you're only level 1 then I would consider it an advantage but if they require you to be at a certain level to use it then I feel it would solve that problem.

[Ryan]

Mtxs aren't going anywhere, that's for sure. I would be on the side, for now, that most games implement them fairly in relation to the KIND of game they are (premium or F2P, for example). I know people like to complain about their existence, but I haven't seen anything too crazy yet. I know some people felt dismayed by grinding... but I dunno, I played games like that and I never felt the difference. It just took what it took - I eventually beat the games.

[Ryan]

What if it's new weapons, but they are of the same-class and don't offer any advantages over things already in the game that maybe you just haven't acquired yet?

[Ryan]

It seems like most companies do it properly. Maybe it's different on PC, but on consoles I don't see a lot of games I play have MTXs that create a P2W environment. I saw people complaining about AC Odyssey, but unless it drastically changed from Origins, I don't see the problem. I never felt my progression was stifled and there were plenty of great weapons and armor available without paying a penny. Even with Destiny 2 and that whole XP thing, I never felt shorted because the reward for leveling up that bar after your cap was so irrelevant I never cared - I actually found it annoying because it was just more useless crap for me to dismantle whenever I filled it up.

[Saskia]

I don't care how long the game has been out, there is no justification for having to spend $740 to get all the content for a SINGLE game, that's just insane. A good portion of this should have been reduced substantially already, but that would be expecting too much from EA. This a good reason why people pirate games.

[Ryan]

Someone was pointing out earlier -- with Sims that was support over the past 4-5 years. It wasn't the game releasing with $700 worth of add-on. I've never bought DLC that "completed" (with exception to some fighting games I suppose that had a ultimate pack with all the characters) a game, but that could just be my experience. I've never bought a game with known DLC where I was unable to start and finish the game without buying the DLC. I would say most of the time the DLC doesn't add much, of course there are exceptions though. I can't stand the F2P model. They feel like games where you have to dive in at the ground level with everyone else and grow with the game, otherwise you will jump in so behind that you are almost forced to pay for things to "catch up" with everyone else.

[Ryan]

I already go to burger places that charge $10 for the burger, $6 for the fries and $3 for the drink though. They also charge for cheese, depending on the burger. I think people need a new rebuttal lol.

[Ryan]

I agree with Slvrbuu -- you're making an example of something that has been out for years and is actually a positive representation of continued support. Now, if all that was released in a single year, maybe there is some concern. I would also wager most people are probably not going to buy most of those at a time so they won't be spending anywhere near the $740.Those are pricey too, I agree -- I wouldn't bite. :P

[Ryan]

I don't think any government is looking at microtransactions -- only lootboxes.

[Slvrbuu]

Initial release date: September 2, 2014 - so you are paying for continued support. Stuff packs are optional. What I don't like is EA's refusal to reduce prices. Half of those should have reduced prices due to their age.

[Indigetes]

If you are looking for an example, The Sims 3(2009) is over 500$ right now if you buy all dlc.

[GrumpySanta]

I feel as if this has already been brought up, but seeing as i'm momentarily way too lazy to read all the comments made, here I go: DLC's done properly is a non issue. Take one of my personal favourite games of the "modern era": Witcher 3, where they released Heart of stone for a measly $9.99 usd and Blood and wine for $19.99 usd. Where the cheaper one is an amazing quest line and the more "pricey" one is an entire new map with a f**k-ton of content. I didn't hear anyone complain about DLC's or coughing up extra money to the developer there, why? Well because you got your moneys worth and then some.

Whereas the majority of other $60 usd AAA titels often release some crappy content for a far too high price. That's when I personaly start to have an problem with the whole DLC "issue".

Microtransactions isn't going away, no matter what we think or want they are here to stay. I wish they would keep it to a cosmetic only, non intrusive, non gambling (what you see is what you get) mechanic with a neat little store that doesn't market itself in every single pause menu. And I would love to have games that aren't deliberately made grindier just to make you go and buy whatever it is you're working towards, be that a new pice of item or title or whatever. But that is probably just wishful thinking..