EA Sports UFC 3 Egregious Implementation of Microtransactions

[ItsMitch]

Just now, -BirdiE- said:

I can react with "like", "informative", "funny"..

But I feel for this situation I really need a "face palm" to convey my feelings.

we really need more emotes for this kind of situation, or just a specific emote like "Oh EA"

[Marcodian_Elite]

I really want a new Fight Night game, have done for a while, but I'd say there is a really high chance I'd hate it because it'd be littered with micro-transactions just like this :-/

[NoxiousOdor]

EA is trying its best to work its way to losing another several billion 

[michaelocarroll007]

1 hour ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

wow, even after the stock price tumble they did it again!

 

At first I thought they just didn't care about gamers and were doing it for money, but now I see the truth, and it's actually stranger than that.  They don't even care about money, they just want to see the world burn, even if they go down with it.

 That stock price drop in relative terms is nothing.  looking at the 3 month chart & year there is no clear Hit of Oh shit terrible news.  it looks like a small correction of the market on a stock thats up over 500% in the last 5 years of growth. and on top of that the stock wont really be truly effective unless the quarterly profits come in and it took a hit. as that will confirm or deny how EA is doing with this. 

 

@WhisperingKnickers

Edit: Also EA didn't loose 3 billion dollars of cash or lost money. its stock value changed completely different things. 

[-BirdiE-]

10 minutes ago, michaelocarroll007 said:

 That stock price drop in relative terms is nothing.  looking at the 3 month chart & year there is no clear Hit of Oh shit terrible news.  it looks like a small correction of the market on a stock thats up over 500% in the last 5 years of growth. and on top of that the stock wont really be truly effective unless the quarterly profits come in and it took a hit. as that will confirm or deny how EA is doing with this. 

 

@WhisperingKnickers

Edit: Also EA didn't loose 3 billion dollars of cash or lost money. its stock value changed completely different things. 

Well, the EA bank account didn't lose cash, but the owners collectively lost $3b in assets.

 

The thing EA has to worry about is panic. There may or may not have been causality there, but if investors perceive it as causality (and trust me, "we might loose our $800m stream of revenue due to government regulation" is enough to potentially cause panic) it might lead to people starting to dump EA stock. Especially when the reason it went up was from all their earnings in things like Ultimate team.

[NoxiousOdor]

9 minutes ago, michaelocarroll007 said:

@WhisperingKnickers

Edit: Also EA didn't loose 3 billion dollars of cash or lost money. its stock value changed completely different things. 

I know and that is arguably worse

[vanished]

10 minutes ago, michaelocarroll007 said:

 That stock price drop in relative terms is nothing.  looking at the 3 month chart & year there is no clear Hit of Oh shit terrible news.  it looks like a small correction of the market on a stock thats up over 500% in the last 5 years of growth. and on top of that the stock wont really be truly effective unless the quarterly profits come in and it took a hit. as that will confirm or deny how EA is doing with this. 

Well if they keep this up I think they can expect to see it make additional "small corrections" until they realize they're actually in a downtrend because of it

10 minutes ago, michaelocarroll007 said:

@WhisperingKnickers

Edit: Also EA didn't loose 3 billion dollars of cash or lost money. its stock value changed completely different things. 

yeah I know

[paddy-stone]

2 hours ago, sof006 said:

Thats the point i'm trying to make. If all they do is make games based around the inclusion of Microtransactions then people need to stop buying the games with them in. 

Done!  I won't give any non-sensical, money grabbing company my money.. it's clear they don't give a shit about gamers and their enjoyment of a game.

[ATFink]

3 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

ya, but the people that are ok with it support them more then the people that don't. the vavlue of a whale and/or dolphin could easily be worth 10x more then the average gamer. meaning that even if we might need sales drop to 20-30% of what they are now to have enough of a impact.

 

The people that spend 200+ are the people we need to have stop buying the game, some people spend more the $1000 on a single game.

Don't give EA ideas. If they release games that are free to play and pay to win (with some ok mechanics and a theme(s) people enjoy) it will be horrible. All games will become the same thing with different skins.

[The Benjamins]

44 minutes ago, ATFink said:

Don't give EA ideas. If they release games that are free to play and pay to win (with some ok mechanics and a theme(s) people enjoy) it will be horrible. All games will become the same thing with different skins.

to late they are already doing that, that is their business model 

[ATFink]

38 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

to late they are already doing that, that is their business model 

Maybe I'm just an idiot, but what free to play games does EA host for microtransactions?

[vanished]

I've been thinking about this a bit more and I came to the thought of eventually every company jumping on this bandwagon in order to make more money off the gamblers who get hooked on this, leaving no company actually making proper games anymore, but then I thought that this probably wouldn't actually happen.  You might think "if there's a more lucrative market, wouldn't every company just target that?" but I don't think so because there can only be so many games, so many companies doing the same thing before it becomes saturated.  Furthermore, that market for real games will always exist, so even if it's a bit less profitable, someone is going to try going after it eventually since doing so will be easier than trying to compete in the microtransaction world.

 

So maybe, we just need to let EA go.  They will become a company targeting a different market/demographic, but so what?  We will get others... I mean, how long have people hated EA for other reasons anyway?  Just set them free, we don't need them any more

[ItsMitch]

Just now, Ryan_Vickers said:

Just set them free

but.. BUT.... BUUUUUUUUT

[vanished]

Just now, SC2Mitch said:

but.. BUT.... BUUUUUUUUT

It could be a good thing.  We will left with only companies truly interested in games and gamers left making games for gamers, and the others will be off doing their own thing rather than fighting with gamers over what we wish they would do instead.  I also suspect that there will be a sort of rolling cycle, where companies get big in the real game market and then once they have the capital to compete, they "switch sides" and start doing microtransactions, but there will always be more new startups to take their place

[PhantomJaguarr]

1 hour ago, ATFink said:

Maybe I'm just an idiot, but what free to play games does EA host for microtransactions?

There used to be a MMO called Need for Speed World that had that model. It lasted five years before it got the boot. Shame really, IMO that game had potential. I played it all those five years, for the most part.

[The Benjamins]

3 hours ago, ATFink said:

Maybe I'm just an idiot, but what free to play games does EA host for microtransactions?

they do have some mobile games. but isn't it arguable worse to have payed games structured as free to play games which all their new games are.

[samcool55]

4 hours ago, WhiteJaguar77 said:

There used to be a MMO called Need for Speed World that had that model. It lasted five years before it got the boot. Shame really, IMO that game had potential. I played it all those five years, for the most part.

You can still play it tho. There's a need for speed world offline version somewhere on the internet. I have it as well.

It basically runs a local server and you can change how much money and speedpoints you have and basically everything is free and unlimited

It's nice to play it from time to time tbh, worth checking out

[PhantomJaguarr]

36 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

You can still play it tho. There's a need for speed world offline version somewhere on the internet. I have it as well.

It basically runs a local server and you can change how much money and speedpoints you have and basically everything is free and unlimited

It's nice to play it from time to time tbh, worth checking out

I knew about that since the game's shutdown. 

[Master Disaster]

Will someone please time travel back to Australia in 1973 and stop Andrew Wilson's parents from having sex thereby saving the entire gaming industry from the bullshit he single handedly forced upon us.

 

That would be amazing.

[alphaproject]

A pay to win UFC game.... Where do I sign up?   To throw this in the garbage?

[Myxzoid]

18 hours ago, Dissitesuxba11s said:

So how much do I have to pay to have Mayweather fight McGregor in the octagon?

You have to buy all the microtransactions then pay $150 for the Mayweather DLC.

 

[Cookybiscuit]

Not sure why anyone would buy this game knowing this, unless you didn't care about the online. Asymmetrically balanced gameplay can work (e.g. Red Orchestra 2 and its derivatives), but putting it behind a paywall pretty stupid, like if in CoD you could only use pistols unless you paid another $15.

[ItsMitch]

Thing that also concerns me that EA can try and pull the bullshit over our eyes, look at Red Dead Redemption upcoming next year, they even went on record to say that LB are "fine"

[ATFink]

11 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

they do have some mobile games. but isn't it arguable worse to have payed games structured as free to play games which all their new games are.

Arguably yes, but ultimately it depends on the structure of the game.

 

For example, if you had a free to play game with the option to purchase a monthly subscription for some benefits, but once you purchase the monthly subscription only then do you have the option to pay more for options previously unavailable to the free player that would suck. Toss loot boxes with purchasable in game currency into that formula to include a gambling effect for those that are willing to spend money and everything starts to turn a little sour.

 

However in basic principle I agree with you, it's not like you lost anything if you step away from a free to play game, but you lose your money if you buy a game and then can't play it due to excessive micro transactions.

[ZestyJalapeno]

It's probably an intended feature, last time I watched MMA it had to be 10 of us chipping in because of the ridonkadonk PPV price, so we, ahem, streamed it.