{rant} A short commentary on Artificial Value in games

I am a strong believer that upgrades in games can fuck off in a lot of cases. Or item drops, or DLC, or unlocks. Some games are built around this sort of thing, battlefield for example. While I enjoy battlefield, why is there not a buy system in the game to let me get my loadout instead of playing for 3 months to get anything at all?

I love Quake. Quake did items correctly. Things are where they should be and its a race to be in the better position. Other games, TF2 for example, have an interesting dynamic in items where even if 1 scout has a different shotty from another, its a shotgun. Maybe the demoman has a sword and is a melee character and that changes that dynamic but the game is still balanced around this. Your play style is based on what you do, not where the game puts arbitrary bullshit.

With battlefield, CoD, even RTS games, look! You spent 40 dollars on something that no one else can fight against! You're basically jesus! In other words, you bought the progression. Pay to win.

Now I'm looking at CSGO, current TF2, games with skins. Blue to Red. Incentive to play is to get the "More Valuable" skins, not being better than other people. This is seen as a very old world way of wanting to play games (being better than everyone) and instead of having interesting gameplay in a game now we put arbitrary value on things. Hell the only reason to play league, unless you're actually into league, is to get all the champions. Maybe not that way to you reading, but when I started playing league of legends thats the only reason I had to play.

To put it simply, I am annoyed that devs cannot be bothered to make a game anymore. They can't. They aren't making something interesting; they aren't making a new starcraft or AoE2, they aren't reinventing the wheel we've exhausted the wheel and turned to seeing how many times we can mold a brick to throw at each other. No no no, now we code ad campaigns for Coca-Cola or whatever. Or we try to sell items in a game that sparks a gambling economy. Where did the skill go? I don't play CSGO for the skins I play it because my 1.6 CD died. Hell the reason I even got a steam account WAS that my CD died and I was just going to buy it, then I bought TF2 instead before it went free because I wanted a change for a bit. To be honest, CSGO is kind of shit. No... No actually its really shit. Its not the quirky quake 3 mod anymore now its call of dooder: look at the duct tape on my gun edition. The skill play is still there, but its over run with bots and hackers that the only joy to get out of it is "Well at least I haz a dragon lore LOLZ". Now TF2 is getting a very real comp scene, less grass roots and more baked in which is GOOD for the game, but its getting that arbitrary bullshit plugged in that NONE of the players want. Now, to be clear, TF2 had items yes, but there wasn't a tier of blue to red bullshit. Thats from CSGO so valve can make more money (as they hadn't actually paid attention, nor are they still, to TF2 and its still very huge community). Where the dynamic ends and the bullshit begins is where CS is getting the problems it has I'm scared TF2 will have those issues as it climbs up the ranks in popularity outside of steam, though I have more faith in its community.

I am scared that all the stuff I remember as a kid and the reason that I got into PC gaming, the general fear of a server of "Oh fuck its that guy he's way at the top of this leader board in skill" is going to be gone. eSports is something I REALLY enjoy because it sorta holds that "oh fuck" feeling I remember from Quake 3 but its... well a sport. Its less public now, but its there I guess. Only problem is that now everyone is compared to the Koreans in a game and no one is paying attention to the fact that this guy in my CS game is BHopping around legit and knows enough about the game to be 2nd frag.

I'm sad that I'm losing what used to be the gaming community as I knew it. Change is good, but theres a lot of shit in it that no one needs and a very loud niche group is excited about.

2 Likes

That's it? OK, i like how that basically means all of gaming...

No... You lost the passion for gaming if this is your incentive to play games.

If you are not into league you shouldn't play league. Having all the champions will not get you into league if you are not into league.

OK, i get what you mean...

The correct part is exactly this:

For example:
Ubisoft can't allow themselves to make a good game. They don't have time. If they don't release it now, they will lose money. So they repaint and change couple things and off the game goes. This is why all AC games are the same. This is why all FarCry games are the same. New coat of paint - out the door you go to make money. They can't make Beyond Good and Evil 2 if they want to make money.
EA are the same. Battlefield is the same game since 3 with tweeks and fresh paint.
COD - well it's cod.
Progression system is easy and makes money. Build a small base and gate progression behind pay wall...
You should fully understand that. You are not a 12yo xbox user... Why aren't you playing loadout? It's a fairer game than 90% of the others. You keep playing the AAA crap they give us all and then you are not happy. The last AAA game i really enjoyed was Skyrim. Since then - all indie games. They are WAY fairer on that kind of things and they are better designed overall...
Seriously. Hand of fate is way more inovative than anything in the last 5 years. Banished is better made city builder than SimCity was. Cities Skylines is an indie game... I mean Jesus Christ.... My favorite game this year is Aragami. Small single player stealth ninja game.
Don't complain that the AAA crap is crap. Stop playing crap. As we like to say - vote with your wallet.

1 Like

Could you have not format your post better? Like once you got to the fifth paragraph, it was hard to follow what kind of point you are making.

I have to ask what kind of games have you been playing lately and games you have played in the past in order to give a proper assessment on why you are feeling this way.

I haven't played TF2 since late 2013 so I don't know all the changes made since then but what is wrong with some people wanting to play the game to collect cosmetic items? It's not the main objective of the game from what I can tell nor I would imagine that is the gameplay meta but something a player can optionally invest in. I'm sure there are plenty of people who do not give a damn about a pink flamingo for a hat as it will not change how a sniper or soldier behaves in gameplay.

So you do not like progression systems? Well, same here because I find them flawed for many reasons. However, not all modern games have this. Have you played something like Insurgency, Toxikk, Rocket League, Overwatch, ARMA 3,? They give you all the items at the start and don't block anything from you other than cosmetics, which do not affect gameplay. Everyone is on an equal playing field with the only difference being is skill.

Which devs are you talking about? What games have you been playing to make that assertion? There is a huge load of games that get released every day. Obviously Sturgeon's Law applies like any other market, but if you take the time to look, you might find some games that are worth playing and made by developers that care about their craft.

Who is they? If you mean AAA publishers/developers, then that is basically what happens when you revolve your business around appealling to a broad audience and betting everything on one horse. Your average schmuck isn't going to care about something like say System Shock 3 or a Real Time Strategy game. Also, since most people in a broad audience don't spend much money on games, they want to use it on something they will know that will give them a good time like Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto. They don't want to risk their hard earned cash on something new they may not like.

That being said, AAA are not the only developers. There are a bunch of great independent games out there that are doing interesting and creative new stuff. While I think originality is long gone since every idea is derived from other ideas, you can remix different ideas together from different places to bring something fresh to the table.

Your comment reminds of the video, "If DOOM was done today". (NOTE: THAT IS A PICTURE AND NOT A VIDEO SO DO NOT CLICK ON IT TO PLAY)

I do not think I have seen any signs of being a better player gone so far. Do understand that gaming is much bigger than what it was during the late 90s/ early 2000s so you will have many different perspectives.

Can you please define this gaming community and what it composes of?

Its a rant, it was like 3 AM, I needed shit off my mind so I could sleep. I don't care.

2 Likes

Competitive,

Btw I feel the same way as I have completely stopped playing competitive and lost that simple strive to win, although I'd still end up playing amusing tricks as always. That's who I am. :D

For me at least these types of games have become at their best these two week things with 1-2 friends, or opportunity to jump into PGP stream match. So, nope I don't think I should give even cent for these developers.

It just now occurred for me that the lifespan is same as how long hype can be pushed.
- aka, Launches, News, Political fodder.

True, obviously as thats what people do.

The quality is shitty outside Visual Novels or similar story games and haven't so far seen even one solid 8/8 Indie Shooter, Action, or RPG game. Not sure about Strategy, maybe? But there are many brilliantly ugly sandboxes everywhere.

Charming very late SNES style RPG, definitely the best looking RPGMaker game.

You can buy the singular class unclocks separately as well, $7 individually if you don't have a Origin Access.

Indeed

I don't like that the games industry is becoming based on "Buy all the extra gaff!!" and such. I like the ranked modes and shit, but I also like having a challenge.

I want to punch some dumb motherfucker knowing that trash is getting pushed into BF.

I play competitive arena shooters like Quake and CS (not a fan of GO as you move around like a mountain erupting from the earth). I also play RTS Games such as Age of Empires. My main points are that rather than seeing games improve code wise we have buggy messes that are kicked out too early that the devs whine that they need DLC to fund the rest of the development process. I know not all games are like this, example being Titanfall 1 was shoved out too early and patches were thrown in as the devs got money from sales (though other problems were in the game as well plus the timing of launch). If I wanted to play Age of Empires 2 HD I would have the problem of not being able to buy the DLC all at the same time as the game and if I ever play online, which is the reason to play it nowadays, I will get steamrolled most likely by a civ I cannot counter.

Opposite of gameplay, a game I am more at home with such as CS doesn't have an active community in 1.5 or 1.6 anymore and source is only populated on surf and bhop maps. To play at the level I want to play I have to play go. CSGO has the bugs, botters, and hackers shoved behind the LOOK AT THIS 90 DOLLAR SKIN GAIZ bullshit. Instead of making the game a better experience to play, the focus is drawn onto menial bullshit that no one needs to have in the game to make it fun. Yes, skins are fucking bullshit. Anyone who says otherwise can put a plunger up their butt. Then because all the focus is drawn to the shiney skins and the prize pool of the competitions, no one at valve is fixing the game.

What I would like to be the norm is that devs actually work on games, not on DLC or skins. That bugs are fixed and that content is well done. I miss when games had the reward of getting better and it seems the only games that have that are Squad/ARMA and Starcraft 2. I can't play arma and squad isn't as fun as starcraft to me but I can't play starcraft competitively and go anywhere. I miss the days when one guy would join the server and everyone would scatter in a frenzy because they were the best of THE BEST and feared as such.

Hopefully that makes more sense. @anon69321716

Dude this has been in the game forever, but EA doesn't push it and the price keeps 99% of people from buying it. But you did say

Which makes it sound like you wanted this...

I do and I don't. Again it was 3 AM. I'll say that it's a bit of a steep price and no one commonly buys them most likely like you said, but I've never seen that before. If it was like... A dollar, 2 dollars, whatever per class or like 15 to get EVERYTHING then that is completely legit. At least if it was reasonable and not an obvious cash grab.

I do have to also state the counter argument that putting a price wall in for things like this isn't necessarily a bad thing. If it was a dollar or two, everyone would buy it. You make it 6 or 7 dollars, and well now there is only a small niche group that will purchase these and thus the effect is minor and doesn't have the perception of degrading people's accomplishments of unlocking everything in the game.

This is what we call, "pay to win." If there is some kind of rest XP system, the grind can be minimized for people who work that obviously can't play as much as kids. But what company is going to pass up the opportunity for a quick buck?

I whole-heartedly agree. And that is never clearer than in FPSs. I mean you can't even see yourself, so why the hell would a skin matter? (OK, I'm aware there are some exceptions, such as in Planetside 2, certain camo skins actually do help you blend into your surroundings better.) You're never going to see it. It doesn't help with your immersion. Oh yeah, I see my hands on a frickin' gun...big--fucking--deal. Some games don't even show your corpse when you die!

Now MMOs...it's still bullshit, if that's all the devs focus on is cosmetic gear (and then just color swaps of mostly the same gear) and not content, gameplay, and quality of life updates. Many do sure as hell like customizing their character's appearance though.

2 Likes

Its pay to win when the guns in the game aren't all just marginal changes, none that really stands head and shoulders above the others. Tbh the best guns in battlefield games are usually the default or within the first 3 unlocks. Its not planetside where a higher tier gun is substantially better than the base gun, no the base gun and the last gun you unlock are within margin of error in terms of their usability. I mean hell look at battlefield 3, the best gun in the game was in-arguably the M16a3, and that was the default unlock.

Why is it terrible in other games, when its completely cosmetic and optional, but is kinda-okay in Planetside where that it's actually kind of pay-to-win? I mean shit, you yourself said it helped you blend into the surroundings which is definitely beneficial...

I never said I used camo. I had no job then. I'm going to pay? I have higher priorities. I'm not condoning paying for cosmetics that give the player an advantage. I'm just stating the facts. It's not OK.

Other games are able to stick to this design rule, so when it was discovered camo gave a tactical advantage, they should've made those patterns that did available to be unlocked without paying real money. I stopped playing long ago, due to the grind, but I'll bet you still have to pay for those patterns that are tactically superior. They also have some solid colors you can earn now, but whether they are better than the patterns, I don't know.

I'm willing to give the devs of Planetside 2 the benefit of the doubt. They probably didn't intend them to have a tactical use, but players found out they did. The philosophy was supposed to be you must play for the gear that affects gameplay (weapons, armor, etc) and cosmetics you would have to pay for.

Paying for an advantage is never OK. And the same rule applies: developing cosmetics take time away from more important things that need to be addressed.