{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
5/24/2019 5:33:47 PM
12
Cosmetics are fine relax. Everyone wanted direct purchase and now that it's coming in Opulence ya"ll are still complaining?
English
-
We'd also like a way to get them WITHOUT them being silver exclusive
-
That’s mentioned too: every item is rotating for purchase with Silver Dust. Also, you get the engrams free.
-
Does this mean Items such as thunderlord, whisper, thorn and outbreak ornaments will be available for bright dust? If so, then I will be more than satisfied to lay down any grievances.
-
So you’re going to oppose an entire system of cosmetics being available for free because of the select cosmetics that aren’t free? Seasonal Eververse content can be acquired for free through Bright Dust. Limited Time Silver offers - Thunderbird Orbaments, Arc Week Emotes, Servitor Shell, etc. - are items that Bungie created with the intent to be purchase only. Non-intrusive, non-game breaking. If you want to continue to be mad about that, fine, but I suggest you don’t play any multiplayer game ever from this point on, because they all use this system, or some variation of microtransaction/loot box. Comparatively, Bungie’s formula is very generous.
-
[quote]So you’re going to oppose an entire system of cosmetics being available for free because of the select cosmetics that aren’t free?[/quote] Yes because there should always be two options in these games, the paid route and the free route. [quote]Seasonal Eververse content can be acquired for free through Bright Dust. Limited Time Silver offers - Thunderbird Orbaments, Arc Week Emotes, Servitor Shell, etc. - are items that Bungie created with the intent to be purchase only. Non-intrusive, non-game breaking.[/quote] Not to mention the fact that they already get sales from Base game, DLC, and Annual Pass purchases. This type of monetary practice should only be justified for a free to play title, Which Destiny is most definitely not. [quote]If you want to continue to be mad about that, fine, but I suggest you don’t play any multiplayer game ever from this point on, because they all use this system, Comparatively, Bungie’s formula is very generous.[/quote] And I have voiced my distaste for them as I do here. Comparatively, there are a lot more titles out there which do a much more fair take on monetary practices. Warframe I voice distaste for in other regards such as their whole chat moderator debacle however their monetary practices are more than fair even for free to play standards So to answer your question, yes. I do oppose this. Because either ALL of them are okay, or NONE of them are okay.
-
While in general I agree with the idea that microtransactions for cosmetics isn't a huge deal for me, when it comes to a game like the Destiny franchise where a large portion of the appeal of the game is the ability to customize your character the way you want including cosmetics, to charge money for cosmetic in-game content _on top of_ the initial game purchase price, cost of DLCs and annual passes, etc. is egregious double-dipping, considering that microtransactions were originally dreamed up for free-to-play games _in lieu of_ subscription costs or costs to purchase the game. And having a cosmetics store just incentivizes Bungie to restrict the best-looking gear and other cosmetics _to_ Eververse rather than putting the resources into making more and better-looking gear that isn't restricted to Eververse.
-
What you’re failing to account for is the rising cost of game development and the stagnant price of software, the reason all these companies are turning to in game transactions is because they have investors to answer to. If the don’t make enough money they don’t continue to exist, this is particularly true in the case of a company like Bungie who has a single revenue stream.
-
Oh please. This is just total bullshit. Case in point, when they removed lootboxes from Star Wars Battlefront 2, EA stated that it wouldn't even affect their earnings.
-
Yes, because they have several franchises they are making money from. Bungie only has one. Besides, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: don’t like micro transactions, then don’t -blam!-ing buy them - you’re not being forced to buy anything. It’s a choice; it’s your fault entirely if you’re going to keep spending money. I’ve spent so much money on eververse your eyes would pop out from your mind boggling. Don’t see me complaining.
-
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/10/31/why-have-video-game-budgets-skyrocketed-in-recent-years/#5dce5c073ea5 Also have a read.
-
So you’re saying that it costs the same to make games now as it cost 10 to 15 years ago? Maybe that every game costs the same to make? Could it be that maybe battlefront 2 was easier to developer than destiny 2 due to it being a battlefield real in and therefor requiring less effort? Ma vue that’s because the scope of battlefront 2 is smaller than destiny? No you’re right, every game costs the same to make.
-
EA is a little bit larger than Bungie, though.
