EA Earns Most Downvoted Comment In Reddit History

SaiWa said:
Related to EA:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/11...edly-fired-by-ea-for-objecting-to-play-to-win

BY LUCY O'BRIEN The original creator of Plants vs. Zombies, George Fan, was reportedly let go by publisher EA several years ago after objecting to the pay-to-win model that was subsequently introduced into the series.

That pisses me off big time too. The first plants vs zombies game was one of my favorites. I was eagerly awaiting the sequel but when It was released I was extremely disappointed. It's like the game had lost its soul... Fuckin EA... I am really started to hate this company...
Click to expand...
Well, now I feel significantly less guilty about hacking the second game.

I'll look for your next work, and I'll be paying as I did to buy like I did with the first, Mr. Fan. Thank you.
 
mr.bigglesworth said:
The comment by EA was a response to the pay to win structure in Star Wars Battlefront II.

Article: https://www.pcgamesn.com/star-wars-battlefront-ii/battlefront-2-microtransactions-darth-vader

Reddit post(-151k as of OP):

Second most downvoted comment(-24k for ):


I really hope EA bows down because SWBF2 is a well made game mechanically and I want to like it, but it's unplayable due to the looting and crafting system, as well as the ridiculous grind to unlock everything(hundreds of hours are required).
Click to expand...

Good. Very good.
 
Gandzooka said:
https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/22/belgium-moves-to-ban-star-wars-battlefront-2-style-loot-boxes/


A politician calling Star Wars branded product "Star Wars-themed online casino, designed to lure kids into spending money” probably has Disney looking exactly how gigantic dildo they are going to shove up EA's butt.
Click to expand...

Holy hell.... Is it possible that paid loot boxes might eventually get banned? The other developers must be fuming at EA for going to too far and possibly killing their golden goose... lol

Maybe the solution is to keep free loot boxes, but then allow players to pay for the characters/skins/cosmetic items they actually want.

And absolutely keep any pay to win mechanics out of the game, but that would be a game developer decision.
 
Madmick said:
This has absolutely ZERO relevance to the cost model of videogames. VG prices relative to inflation is one thing; how much any other form of entertainment costs is 100% irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Not I sure I 100% agree. I've been able to successfully reply to my wife when she complains about the cost of a game by explaininghow many hours we get to play it. Especially when we just spent $50+ to see a movie as a family for a couple of hours. Anyway, that's a personal opinion and I understand if you don't agree.

While the cost/hr of gaming might be irrelevant (though important to me), the cost vs revenue of games versus movies(or other entertainment) is important to the industry's future success. I keep hearing that AAA's games are not making much money even when millions of copies are sold because development costs have skyrocketed. Yet games are still only $60 to buy for the most part. Especially games like Fallout/Skyrim which have little opportunities for extra revenue outside of the paid DLC.

Back to to the topic. Would gamers (or you) be willing to pay more for a game up front it didn't have microtransactions and/or offered future updates for free? Like maps or characters?

Like it or hate it... The paid loot box system in Overwatch is how they've been able to keep updating the game with new maps and characters. I don't mind the system in Overwatch because it's all cosmetic and has zero bearing on gameplay.

Now compare that system to a game like Injustice 2. Which is better?
 
Belgium kicking up a fuss now, the EU could legislate on it too. I generally don't want government interference/regulation but the big publishers have done this to themselves. Fuck em.
 
Scerpi said:
In a way, he does have a point. The $60 price point barrier must be back breaking to game developers. I think I was paying $40-$50 for a game in the 90's. I paid $30 (on sale) for X-Com (PC) a few years ago and I know I put in around 150+ hours on it. Yeah I was a X-Com junky... loved it. That's about $.20/hour. If you have a couch co-op game then the value is even better.

Add in the price for hosting services for the online games and the cost impact to the developers grows even more.

Movie prices have more than tripled since then and you watch them for 2-3 hours. Say for instance, when I take the family (5 of us) to see a Marvel movie. It's about $25 or more for 2.5 hours or $10-$15 per hour. A far cry from the $1 per hour (or less) that is paid for games.

Plus, you have to pay again to watch the movie or buy the DVD (if you're not a pirate :rolleyes:). Games are a one time purchase... forever reusable.

So what's the answer? Maybe one of them needs to go ahead and break the glass ceiling and charge $70. I doubt it would impact the AAA game sales. If the game is good, great even, people will pay. People just want to know if they are getting value for their money. They aren't going to pay $70-$100 for crap games, not matter the supposed extras getting thrown in.

Sure, there will be people who will decide to wait for the price drop, but that happens anyway. But there will be plenty of people who will want to buy on day 1 for the big games.

However, I think gamers are getting sick and tired of the microtransaction pay model. It's going to eventually implode on the game developers. I think it already has on IOS gaming. I don't know anyone who games much on their phones anymore. The FTP model killed the appeal for me. I'd rather pay money to just play the games up front and know what I'm getting.

Make the extra characters available by DLC if you have to, but fuck unlocking them through loot boxes, especially having to grind excessive hours just to get to them. From what I've read, it seems Destiny found a good balance between the two. I haven't played it yet.
Click to expand...

theatre ticket prices have gone up. Buying movies has not, it has gone down.

Theatres are the ones setting the price of movie tickets.

Also breaking it down into how much time you use it is completely illogical. A baseball bat isn't hundreds of dollars because I've used it for 10 years.
 
Last edited:
Scerpi said:
Not I sure I 100% agree. I've been able to successfully reply to my wife when she complains about the cost of a game by explaininghow many hours we get to play it. Especially when we just spent $50+ to see a movie as a family for a couple of hours. Anyway, that's a personal opinion and I understand if you don't agree.

While the cost/hr of gaming might be irrelevant (though important to me), the cost vs revenue of games versus movies(or other entertainment) is important to the industry's future success. I keep hearing that AAA's games are not making much money even when millions of copies are sold because development costs have skyrocketed. Yet games are still only $60 to buy for the most part. Especially games like Fallout/Skyrim which have little opportunities for extra revenue outside of the paid DLC.
Click to expand...
This is the topic, and no, just because it settles your wife down, it still doesn't matter. 100% irrelevant. This would be like Refried Bean producers saying, "Well, if you look at the calories per dollar, you're really getting a huge value under the cost of red meat."

Who cares what Refried Beans cost? That doesn't bear at all on the cost of production for beef (or the demand for it).
 
Scerpi said:
Yet games are still only $60 to buy for the most part. Especially games like Fallout/Skyrim which have little opportunities for extra revenue outside of the paid DLC.
Click to expand...

This is hilarious. Skyrim is 6 years old and Bethesda is still eating off it today.
 
Madmick said:
This is the topic, and no, just because it settles your wife down, it still doesn't matter. 100% irrelevant. This would be like Refried Bean producers saying, "Well, if you look at the calories per dollar, you're really getting a huge value under the cost of red meat."

Who cares what Refried Beans cost? That doesn't bear at all on the cost of production for beef (or the demand for it).
Click to expand...

Fuck by wall streets standards I should be paying 10x the price for my PC hardware with all the hours of gaming, photo, and video editing. Some of the hardware is over 5 years old I should pay more thats not right.
 
Madmick said:
This is the topic, and no, just because it settles your wife down, it still doesn't matter. 100% irrelevant. This would be like Refried Bean producers saying, "Well, if you look at the calories per dollar, you're really getting a huge value under the cost of red meat."

Who cares what Refried Beans cost? That doesn't bear at all on the cost of production for beef (or the demand for it).
Click to expand...

I'm with you on this. They are trying to use the price of a relative alternative to justify the gauging. Their problem is that gamers do not view movies or other entertainment as a relative alternative. They have to keep it apples to apples.

That said I feel the the fight against GaaS is a losing battle.
 
RJ43 said:
I'm with you on this. They are trying to use the price of a relative alternative to justify the gauging. Their problem is that gamers do not view movies or other entertainment as a relative alternative. They have to keep it apples to apples.

That said I feel the the fight against GaaS is a losing battle.
Click to expand...

The fight isn't against games as a service. It's against the corporations who take it too far. MMO's are amazing and work that way. Path of exile has a fantastic model and I give them lots of money to support them. The fight is very directly against Corporations exploiting the psychology of gambling. The Joe Camel reference is spot on... trying to normalize this addiction early to create lifelong addiction to their money making scheme. It's messed up.
 
When I buy a game and pay almost a hundred dollars for it, I am straight-up fucking offended when they lock content and try to squeeze more money out of me. I won't be buying this game, you can bet. You fucking pricks (Developers) are releasing games with half the content locked up behind a paywall? How about I give you ZERO dollars then...
 
Bob Gray said:
How do you keep reading and missing the point?

The point isnt that its OK, its that if you care about addiction, then games themselves are worse than loot boxes.
Click to expand...

No.
You are going on and on and on in this thread, but you're skirting around the real issue:
- Gaming companies are releasing incomplete products, but they are marketing them as complete products.
- Kids (and parents) are buying these incomplete products, expecting to own complete products.
- enter the RMT scams.

I know you'll come back with some page-long post defending it all, but it's absolute bullshit and it has to stop. Even "buyer beware" is bullshit because for every active videogamer posting and reading on the internet, there are X-amount or gamers that do zero reading or community socializing who don't even recognize the fact that Loot boxes and RMT are skillfully crafted system to ply you (or your parents) of your money.
 
StabbyMcHatchet said:
No.
You are going on and on and on in this thread, but you're skirting around the real issue:
- Gaming companies are releasing incomplete products, but they are marketing them as complete products.
- Kids (and parents) are buying these incomplete products, expecting to own complete products.
- enter the RMT scams.

I know you'll come back with some page-long post defending it all, but it's absolute bullshit and it has to stop. Even "buyer beware" is bullshit because for every active videogamer posting and reading on the internet, there are X-amount or gamers that do zero reading or community socializing who don't even recognize the fact that Loot boxes and RMT are skillfully crafted system to ply you (or your parents) of your money.
Click to expand...

The course of the conversation has pretty much run out, so theres no need to keep rehashing it. But, no, this hasnt been what Im saying at all. Theres a difference between defending EAs practices of the content within their loot boxes, which Ive never done, and the nature of loot boxes themselves, which is specifically the quote and conversation that I originally responded to. The first post I responded to in regards to loot boxes had nothing to do with EA.

But lets just drop this, shall we?
 
Bob Gray said:
The course of the conversation has pretty much run out, so theres no need to keep rehashing it. But, no, this hasnt been what Im saying at all. Theres a difference between defending EAs practices of the content within their loot boxes, which Ive never done, and the nature of loot boxes themselves, which is specifically the quote and conversation that I originally responded to. The first post I responded to in regards to loot boxes had nothing to do with EA.

But lets just drop this, shall we?
Click to expand...
Can't all us cunts just agree that EA are a massive bunch of cunts?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,982
Messages
55,459,306
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top