• echo64@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Honestly, everyone suddenly angry about this is asleep at the wheel, capcom has been doing this for years. And it never affects the base game, so I just can’t bring myself to care at all

    I do wish that internet communities were less focused on outrage. Lemmy was pretty good for that maybe 8 months ago or so, but that’s passed.

      • kromem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        In some cases yes, like Ubisoft. They do design the game around the transactions.

        In this case the transactions are clearly being added in at the end by the publisher and weren’t influencing the development itself.

        Like seriously - selling me a wakestone or ferrystone? A dozen or so hours in I had too many to carry and was putting them in storage for a rainy day. Literally just grabbing two starter pawns from others and camping out will get you wakestones in a few minutes.

        The port crystal is the only useful item in the store, and frankly if you buy it you ruin your gameplay curve.

        The base game without microtransactions is paced exactly like the first game. The microtransactions here ruin the gameplay design if bought in one case and are worthless in the other cases. The base game without buying anything is what it was designed around and is also going to be the most enjoyable way to play.

      • echo64@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        8 months ago

        Again, this stuff has been in multiple capcom games, and it hasn’t impacted anything. Nothing on re4 was devalued by its microtransactions either. It’s fine. For other companies that actually make things grinder sure, maybe. But this one just doesn’t do that. Which people might know if they paid attention.

        Honestly, people are just looking for an axe to grind. I’d love to see this effort towards companies that do mass layoffs or something instead. But this case is totally inconsequential

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          You claiming it didn’t affect anything doesn’t make it reality.

          It’s fundamentally not possible for it not to change the design process of a game. Literally every game ever made with micro-transactions has been affected in one way or another, unless the first time the idea was discussed was after the game was shipped. “Just cosmetics” guarantees cosmetics that would have been earned with gameplay get taken away to be put behind a paywall, and all of the exploration and discovery involved in earning them is gone.

          All microtransactions make games worse, and all microtransactions are bad.

          • echo64@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            it’s the same system that was in the first game they just let idiots buy a thing to skip the mechanic. Unless you think this future implementation of micro transactions affected the past.

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              It’s not the same system. It’s new code, built and tuned for the current version of the game. And it’s literally impossible for it not to be affected by the knowledge that microtransactions were going to exist.

              But let’s play make believe that it was theoretically possible for any microtransaction to not be actively malicious. Lying about it would still make everyone involved a bad person.

            • nac82@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              The first game had a built in eternal ferrystone when it saw most of its success.

              In no way is paying 3$ for every ferrystone except 5 the same as an eternal ferrystone.

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      They sent review copies without those features so they would get higher scores. It’s not a bunch of whiny nerds with nothing better to do, they literally pulled a bait and switch.

      Also if you think gaming news doesn’t belong in a gaming community you’re free to start your own instance.

    • nac82@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      People who say this are corporate bootlicking. They want to shame you for a natural response to a deceptive abusive tactic.

      https://readwrite.com/capcom-backtracks-quickly-and-removes-drm-after-players-rebel/

      The only way this shit gets fixed is by players being vocal and reacting appropriately to the issues.

      Intentionally fucking the game up to force people into microtransaction is clearly bad and should be shamed. It’s common sense.

    • stackPeek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m not sure if I agree on the microtransaction part, but I do agree when you say that internet gaming community have too much outrage now… Can’t people enjoy anything nowdays?