2K have finally gone and done it, a $60 game you can't play without spending more money

[Big Head Tech]

2 hours ago, Fooshi said:

League of Legends is a horrible example. Being able to purchase in-game currency to then be used to unlock characters is still a shitty way of doing it. Doesn't matter that you can unlock them gradually by playing.

 

Dota 2 and CS:GO are probably the only games with micro transactions that has done it correctly. Cosmetics only, and in a game that doesn't give you an advantage at all when using said cosmetics. 

 

Once the micro transactions can be used to give you an advantage, be it by unlocking characters before others or cosmetics like camo that has such a bad design it will give you an advantage, it has gone pay-to-win. No matter what.

When I played, getting enough in game currency to buy champions every 2 weeks was not that hard.  Now they space them out so far if you play 2 games a day you'll get it  Sure it unlocks quicker but I haven't spent a dime on the game and had every character unlocked.

[KWelz]

2 hours ago, dragoon20005 said:

if you guys think that is bad imagine paying 300 dollars for being a founder of the Mechwarrior Online

 

and then paying 500 USD for the Clan mech packs

 

 

want that spanking new mech?

 

pay at least 30-40 dollars for a pre-order

 

want premium time?

 

pay for it

 

need consumables items, pay for them as well

 

https://mwomercs.com/store/

 

you can rack up at least 3000 dollars buying all the current mechs and pre-orders

 

 

Not a great example.   Played the game for a long time.  And while spending money gets you things sooner, all those things are eventually available for in game currency.   

 

 

Not near as good as the Warframe System but not as bad as the one in the OP.  

[dragoon20005]

3 minutes ago, KWelz said:

Not a great example.   Played the game for a long time.  And while spending money gets you things sooner, all those things are eventually available for in game currency.   

 

 

Not near as good as the Warframe System but not as bad as the one in the OP.  

some of the hero mech are only real money pruchases.

 

 

some are good, but others are just cash milking

[ApolloFury]

10 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

mmm, is pay-to-progress a thing now? My first encounter with it was the latter half of Spiral Knight's existence...

pay-to-progress always has been in mobile games. (though most of them are free to play anyway)

[dizmo]

Who cares? They're fully able to do whatever they want with a game that they've made. Don't like it? Don't buy it. Simple. 

[You_are_a_cunt]

Time to add 2k to the ban list.

*sigh*

First Bethesda now 2k. I'm slowly running out of developers and publishers that make games I like

[Master Disaster]

8 hours ago, NickTheMajin said:

2k literally already dealt with the issue. Hair, colors, and beards only cost 100VC now, and you earn 800-1000VC a game. The only people still mad are the ones who immediately want to be prime Michael Jordan their first season. 

 

Looking through Steam reviews and forums the game has received no patches yet and even as soon as 30 minutes ago the game has been receiving bad reviews for its microtransactions. Proof or it didn't happen.

[NickTheMajin]

2 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

 

Looking through Steam reviews and forums the game has received no patches yet and even as soon as 30 minutes ago the game has been receiving bad reviews for its microtransactions. Proof or it didn't happen.

 

The game has had two or three patches on PS4. No idea on PC. 

 

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, NickTheMajin said:

 

The game has had two or three patches on PS4. No idea on PC. 

 

OK so I've looked on Reddit and there has been a patch issued which does make SOME  items cheaper but the majority have remained the same plus the 850VC per game you keep talking about? Yeah thats a one time thing only. After you've recieved it your reward goes back to 500VC max per games.

 

They haven't fixed anything.

[NickTheMajin]

13 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

OK so I've looked on Reddit and there has been a patch issued which does make SOME  items cheaper but the majority have remained the same plus the 850VC per game you keep talking about? Yeah thats a one time thing only. After you've recieved it your reward goes back to 500VC max per games.

 

They haven't fixed anything.

 

I'm looking at my PS4 right now. All hair, facial hair and colors are 100 VC. Some clothing is expensive but its meant to be. You don't want every MyPlayer running around with rolex watches on. 

 

And yes, the least VC I've gotten this year in MyCareer has been 650VC. I've played 20 games. Depending on how well you do it goes up or down. Hell even if it was 500VC per game (which it isn't) you would max your guy in four seasons. That seems pretty damn realistic to me since NBA players typically hit their prime between the ages of 25-28. 

 

In MyGM the reward is 500VC per game for a loss and 650VC per game for a victory with no way to change it and I haven't tried myleague this year yet. 

 

You seem like one of those guys who wants to be Michael Jordan in their first season. Go be casual somewhere else. 

[KWelz]

4 minutes ago, NickTheMajin said:

Go be casual somewhere else. 

Yes how dare filthy casuals sully your game with their peasant ways.  

 

Only the truly hardcore video game basketball players are worthy to buy and play the most holy of holy games.   Shall we all bask in your greatness now?

 

[NickTheMajin]

2 minutes ago, KWelz said:

Yes how dare filthy casuals sully your game with their peasant ways.  

 

Only the truly hardcore video game basketball players are worthy to buy and play the most holy of holy games.   Shall we all bask in your greatness now?

 

Well the only people complaining are the ones who can't max out their stats at age 21 in their first season. Seems pretty casual to me. 

 

That was line was also meant to be a joke but whatever. 

[Klovnious]

Reminds me of FUT (Fifa Ultimate Team) where you can pack players, but most of the time you get shit, even if you buy alot 24 000 points to open packs with.

Players like Ronaldo and Messi were worth millions of coins, and if it were a special version of that card (In-Form, TOTY, TOTS, Hero (purple card)) they were easily worth 8 million+++++.

 

You used to get 500 coins each game you won.

Do the math, and it's one of the most insane grinds ever.

[Carclis]

12 hours ago, Snaeb said:

To this day, league of legends seems to be the best example of implementing free to play with micro transactions.

That depends on how patient you are and if you're happy to get crushed for buying champions over runes. Basically it's pay to win for a few months if you want to actually enjoy the game and play the champions that are fun. Oh and don't expect any customer service at all even if you do spend money (everyone does).

As for the original topic, this is old news. GTA V also by 2k Games, came out two years ago and has been unplayable since then (unless you cheat) without spending money on online credits.

[dragosudeki]

6 hours ago, NickTheMajin said:

- snip -

Agree with most things you've stated, but the overall ranking system is still stupid for MyCareer. It makes sense that a rookie is usually not 80 overall to start, but what doesn't make sense is how they determine your overall rating in this game. I'm not sure if you've noticed but your overall ranking in MyCareer is based on the number of upgrades of your stats you have bought. It literally has nothing to do with your actual stat values in proportion to your position. So, the best way to improve overall rating is just to keep buying the cheapest upgrade.

 

I think they also removed the difficulty multiplier, where playing on highest difficulty usually granted 2x multiplier. Though, VC has always been a problem for ALL NBA2K games (2K14 being earliest I've played). I still find it easier to improve your player statwise this year compared to older 2K games. Plus, the best way has always been to AFK grind the Simcast Live in MyLeague at 6x speed for VC when you're not actually playing the game.

[ZestyJalapeno]

I've had every 2k since 2k10. I've personally witnessed the slow takeover of greed on the best basketball game franchise on sale. What pissed me off is the removal of the 2x multiplier for HOF difficulty, playing on HOF was already painful enough for anyone not willing to spend another AAA game on VC alone to upgrade speed and lateral quickness so you don't get burned on every possession. Not to mention, the animations you need also need a lot of VC so your player doesn't trip over himself when you move the stick.

 

The simple thing is there shouldn't be this much microtransactions on a AAA game which will become obsolete in 1 year. If 2k wants to be a microstransaction-based esport, then get rid of the annual AAA releases and just release patches every so often which improve the game, such that grinding is meaningful and rewarding in the long-term, and people who've played for 6 years have an advantage over 13 year olds who get the Legend Edition gifted to them on Christmas. A la EVERY SERIOUS esport title. 

 

Other than that, gameplay I say is about 20% improved. MyGM is fun and immersive, and is really the singleplayer experience to go for. The new motion engine has somewhat improved the way the bodies interact, but it's just not realistic yet, Chris Smoove highlights on this quite a lot. Animations chain together in a way that's just physically impossible for the human body to do.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

16 hours ago, NickTheMajin said:

It's a sports game. It would make no fucking sense if the game got harder the better your player got. Obviously it's hardest right when you start as a rookie and gets easier the better your player gets. 

It's far from obvious, and being a sports game has nothing to do with it.

Tons of sports games, for ages, consisted on your skills, as in, the skills of the real person controlling the in-game character, improving through practice, without the game ever giving you additional advantages. Simultaneously, getting better meant reaching higher competition levels, as the difficulty of the opponents increased as you advanced through tournaments, etc. Typical arcade soccer games would make you play a world cup, with increasingly difficult opponents as you advanced, eventually facing the top team in the final. The in-game characteristics of your players remained the same, it was you getting better to defeat tougher opponents as you progressed. And of course it made absolute sense.

 

What you describe has nothing to do with being a sports game: it's just an RPG mechanic, present in all such games, despite them not having anything to do with sports. In those games, skill levels can act as a lock for certain parts of the game, and they generally improve your effectiveness at everything in the game. Realistic or not, this creates a big problem from a gameplay perspective, as skill levels increase together with the player's own ability, making everything super easy. Hence, part of game design is to make quests increase in difficulty accordingly, so the game remains challenging as your player levels up and you git gud (they typically fail, and games become less and less challenging, or at least that's my limited experience).

Taking that to a sports game context, if you want to import the RPG mechanics to it (no need to), you also need to add some form of increased challenged, over and above the traditional arcade progression (mind you, less arcade, more home computer style games had a less linear progression, but the fact remained that in order to achieve the highest in-game success, you needed to overcome the toughest of rivals, which was typically unfeasible as a rookie). Eventually, any game can get easy enough by sufficient increase in the human player's ability. That's also when the game becomes boring.

 

So no, there is nothing obvious, nor good, about a game systematically becoming easier as you play, even if your own ability remains constant, as an intended feature of game design.

 

 

18 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

 

Now one has shown it's possible they all will follow suit. Mark this game down as the game which finally broke the AAA gaming industry forever.

 

They haven't shown it's possible - they can't ever show that. It's consumers, through their purchase choices, that will show this to be possible or not.

[NickTheMajin]

3 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

It's far from obvious, and being a sports game has nothing to do with it.

Tons of sports games, for ages, consisted on your skills, as in, the skills of the real person controlling the in-game character, improving through practice, without the game ever giving you additional advantages. Simultaneously, getting better meant reaching higher competition levels, as the difficulty of the opponents increased as you advanced through tournaments, etc. Typical arcade soccer games would make you play a world cup, with increasingly difficult opponents as you advanced, eventually facing the top team in the final. The in-game characteristics of your players remained the same, it was you getting better to defeat tougher opponents as you progressed. And of course it made absolute sense.

 

What you describe has nothing to do with being a sports game: it's just an RPG mechanic, present in all such games, despite them not having anything to do with sports. In those games, skill levels can act as a lock for certain parts of the game, and they generally improve your effectiveness at everything in the game. Realistic or not, this creates a big problem from a gameplay perspective, as skill levels increase together with the player's own ability, making everything super easy. Hence, part of game design is to make quests increase in difficulty accordingly, so the game remains challenging as your player levels up and you git gud (they typically fail, and games become less and less challenging, or at least that's my limited experience).

Taking that to a sports game context, if you want to import the RPG mechanics to it (no need to), you also need to add some form of increased challenged, over and above the traditional arcade progression (mind you, less arcade, more home computer style games had a less linear progression, but the fact remained that in order to achieve the highest in-game success, you needed to overcome the toughest of rivals, which was typically unfeasible as a rookie). Eventually, any game can get easy enough by sufficient increase in the human player's ability. That's also when the game becomes boring.

 

So no, there is nothing obvious, nor good, about a game systematically becoming easier as you play, even if your own ability remains constant, as an intended feature of game design.

 

 

They haven't shown it's possible - they can't ever show that. It's consumers, through their purchase choices, that will show this to be possible or not.

 NBA 2k is not an arcade basketball game like NBA jam. It’s a simulation game and as such is meant to be realistic. 

 

It will kill immersion if you make a guy and he gets worse the more you play it. Plain and simple. At the end of day that’s the only way to achieve what you are saying. The game doesn’t even have a true end. You play until you decide to retire and go into the HOF if you  earned it. 

 

The Golden State warriors are probably the toughest team in the game to play against. Since 2k uses the real nba schedule you may play them early and often or only twice a season later on. Your progression wouldn’t work. 

[Guest]

So.. don't but it/play it? 

 

I'm confused. 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 minutes ago, NickTheMajin said:

 NBA 2k is not an arcade basketball game like NBA jam. It’s a simulation game and as such is meant to be realistic. 

It has nothing to do with being arcade or simulation. You missed the point. I used a straightforward example from the arcades. Being an arcade it's not the argument itself.

There are tons of sports simulations. Manager games are simulation games. Becoming less challenging as you play is not a necessary feature of them (although some have it). PC Fútbol would be an example. Having success as a manager lead to better teams, which in principle made it easier to win, but better teams were more demanding, and more likely to fire you for a couple bad results. So, you got to play with bigger guns, but were asked to deliver more as well.

Being a simulation doesn't require that particular RPG mechanic.

 

3 minutes ago, NickTheMajin said:

 

It will kill immersion if you make a guy and he gets worse the more you play it. Plain and simple.

So don't do it. Who is asking for that to happen?

 

3 minutes ago, NickTheMajin said:

At the end of day that’s the only way to achieve what you are saying.

I'm saying the game could become more challenging, instead of less. How is this achieving what I say?

3 minutes ago, NickTheMajin said:

The game doesn’t even have a true end. You play until you decide to retire and go into the HOF if you  earned it. 

Well, if it's about simulation and realism, the player should age as well, so it definitely would become more difficult as you play - phyisical decay should push you into retirement, unless you are capable of overcoming it.

 

3 minutes ago, NickTheMajin said:

 

The Golden State warriors are probably the toughest team in the game to play against. Since 2k uses the real nba schedule you may play them early and often or only twice a season later on. Your progression wouldn’t work. 

You are wrong again: if you want to become NBA champion, you have to defeat every team in your path to the finals. Sure, in group stage you play everyone, but eventually you play only those good enough to make it through the playoffs. Of course the progression would work.

 

Now, that's from a team's perspective. If you truly want to simulate the career of an individual player, you should use the actual challenges of an individual player. So, even with the RPG mechanics in play, the game could become more challenging by realistically getting you traded to better teams, teams in which you need a higher performance for the coach to field you instead of other, more competitive team mates. Meaning you need to perform better the higher the expectations on you, or your risk going back to weaker teams. And if the game is realistic, being in a weak team would preclude your chances of actually winning the ring.

The way I see it, it is very easy to have increasing challenges for an individual player, because that's what' is realistic.

[Ryujin2003]

This is why the only basketball game I play is NBA Jam. Sega Genesis FTW.

[WereCat]

So... what's next 2k?

Artificial loading screens bloated with commercials alongside all this other crap?

[Taja]

12 hours ago, Fooshi said:

League of Legends is a horrible example. Being able to purchase in-game currency to then be used to unlock characters is still a shitty way of doing it. Doesn't matter that you can unlock them gradually by playing.

 

Dota 2 and CS:GO are probably the only games with micro transactions that has done it correctly. Cosmetics only, and in a game that doesn't give you an advantage at all when using said cosmetics. 

 

Once the micro transactions can be used to give you an advantage, be it by unlocking characters before others or cosmetics like camo that has such a bad design it will give you an advantage, it has gone pay-to-win. No matter what.

 

15 hours ago, apm said:

no its dota 2. you dont even have to buy heroes.

Dota 2 is gret at it, BUT I have criticisms. They are now exagerating the arcanas, with a lot of particle effects and shit, to the point I feel its starting to make the game a bit more confusing (I havent played in 2 years, but I always watch the majors)

 

 

7 hours ago, revsilverspine said:

Time to add 2k to the ban list.

*sigh*

First Bethesda now 2k. I'm slowly running out of developers and publishers that make games I like

Well, thats not very smart. I know maybe it is like a "moral" stuff, but the ONLY ONE getting consequences is yourself. I wouldnt stop playing a game I REALLY like even if the developers were rapists.

[AlwaysFSX]

They created a way to really have you play the game a lot over a year and now people are salty. Progression curve might be a bit much but c'mon people.

[MeDownYou]

20 hours ago, Snaeb said:

To this day, league of legends seems to be the best example of implementing free to play with micro transactions.

Totally agree, the other model I like was locking members servers in MMOs for additional content pay 5 bucks a month and you unlock them. It only really works because you essentially get a free start in the game and pay for it later if you enjoy the game, provided the game doesn't have micro transactions.