"“615 SC for a primary weapon is straight-up ridiculous,” wrote user Goopmaster_ in a top-upvoted post on the Helldivers subreddit. “”
This is what passes for news today… Holy shit.
“Commenters online are SLAMMING pcgamer’s article on the Helldivers 2 controversy - click for more details”
slaacaa destroys PCGAMER’s coverage of the helldivers2 microtransaction implementation.
“First time?”
They released the rest of the kill zone stuff for free
Who the fuck is complaining? All the players I’ve played with think the armors awesome
Helldivers players have no idea how good they have it. What a bunch of whiny entitled losers lmao
Just because others have it worse, doesn’t mean you should settle for slightly better than terrible.
Your dev team and management cares about the players, that’s much better than terrible already
let’s make sure we keep them to that standard then.
I don’t get the bitching. Is it brutally expensive? Yes. Do you have to buy it? No. In terms of stats the gun is nothing special, the armor is quite good, but not essential. For a one time crossover, it’s fine.
It generates FOMO though. I remember when you didn’t have to pay for stuff in games, so I personally still find it very shitty to have to buy skins etc.
Yeah, I can see that one. Using dark patterns is not ok
I’m still a bit unsure how plausible it is to make a multiplayer game, keep it updated, and not sell content within the game.
The good devs restrict it to cosmetic options, but I can’t say I’ve moralistically stuck to that kind of perfection - I’m okay with new weapons/characters as long as they stay balanced against old ones. It becomes a sort of hazy issue.
Halo 3 and other games of it’s time did well enough, and the multiplayer for them lasted way longer than most live service games.
Actual DLC was better than FOMO cosmetics in my opinion.
Hello? Halo 3 sold map packs, and possibly other things I’m not remembering.
That’s setting aside that Halo 3 was an exclusive. It wasn’t made to sell itself - it was made to sell Xboxes.
Yep, map packs are dlc. And it wasn’t alone. Every multiplayer game worked like that at the time. Exclusive or not.
If you’re too weak to resist FOMO, maybe stay off the internet
Even so. There was once a magical time when games did not have FOMO at all.
Yes they did, not owning the game was FOMO, and they weren’t free at the time.
I’d much rather buy a full game from the get go and have everything available with no time limit on when i need to buy it.
There is no FOMO if you can leave it for years, actually get the game with all dlc cheaper second hand for a couple of quid and still finding a thriving community online that isn’t focused on completing timed challenges for various currencies to get cosmetics you like the look of before they disappear from the store or the deal for the cheaper price runs out.
Is it brutally expensive? Yes. Do you have to buy it? No.
Will people buy it? Yes.
Will there be more brutally expensive items because of it? Yes.
Can you easily farm SC in the game? Yes.
Will people still bitch about the price? Yes.
They hire psychologists to explicitly figure out how to better make sales. Logical thinking will not win. Microtransactions, which consists of crap you don’t need, is a billion dollar industry and has bankrupted numerous homes.
Nobody is forcing people to buy anything, you CAN resist.
Thats true in a surface level way. Buts its equally true about cigarettes, heroin any other adictive substance you can think of.
In-app purchases and limited time game passes are hardly heroin
No but your argument that no-one is forced to buy cigarettes is equally valid to arguing that for micro-transactions. One is chemically adictive, the other uses physchological tricks and is almost entirely unregulated.
“This doesn’t affect me therefore it should be a non-issue for everyone else.”
