{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/7/2015 2:11:07 AM
4
Damn millennials and their micro transactions.
Nah, click bate,
Though I'm curious to see if age (when you got involved in gaming) has a correlation with ones opinion on micro transactions and DLC.
I'm in the 30+ bracket and I'm incredibly disheartened with the way the gaming industry has been going since online connectivity for console games became common place. While I can't deny there is a definite up side, I am finding that getting nickle and dimed for additional content has been slowly pushing me away from this hobby for the last generation or so. I have simply avoided purchasing product, two recent examples being The Evil Within and Alien Isolation, due to the amount of DLC slated for release after launch. I figure I'll just wait until the definitive edition is released.
I grew up in the era where you bought a game, put in in you console and that was it. No update, micro transactions or DLC. I'm sure that's why I rarely have any interest DLC and have none whatsoever in micro transactions, especially in the regard to game currency. I should note here that I don't consider DLC synonymous with expansions. For example; Crota, House of Wolves and Taken King I considered to be expansions because they contain game play. DLC, as I am referring to it, consists of mainly of game play modifying items, such as weapons, equipment, skins, character classes, etc. (Just clarifying where I'm coming from on this.)
Anyway, that's just my opinion and if those whose opinion differ ends up dictating industry practices, I guess I'll just have to get myself an other hobby. :)
So, for the purpose of science. Whats your age bracket and are you fore or against DLC and micro transactions.
English
#feedback
-
I think stores should stay out of games you paid for. They used to be used to fund their projects when they made the game free. Bungie has made a lot of money on this product. Their "need" is "greed". I've seen games work this model well. Guild Wars 2 is fantastic example. You just buy the game and then you have the store to maintain their costs. They employ a lot more stuff, dedicated servers, 3 server PVP worlds, and the like and they don't charge you a monthly fee to login. Wildstar (Made by same pub as GW2) is the same way. Then you have the F2P model, like Planetside 2. Does everything right. Has dedicated servers, provides an MMO game with no cost to you for anything useful in the game. They make their money selling skins for guns and vehicles. Same with games like Dirty Bomb and TF2. Destiny on the other hand, doesn't provide anything like any of the games mentioned but they still want that piece of the pie. I think it's ridiculous to see that people are upwards to 200 bucks now invested in their product and they still try and get more out of you. For what, their advertising? They don't provide dedicated servers, nor do they give the base for free. Therefore, I see it as nothing but greed. I think F2p, P2W, P2P, all have their place. Destiny doesn't fit any of those places though. It's a AAA game with a premium price tag.
