Shadow of Mordor (Shadow of War)

Falthyron

I wanted to get it as I really enjoyed Shadow of Mordor. In fact, I am pretty sure I picked up Mordor on discount because I expected another film-to-game cash-in on par with the likes of other similar games. When I did play it, I was blown away by the quality and how much fun it was. Going in sort of blind and expecting a disappointment probably enhanced the sheer joy when I realised it was a very solid game. This time though, I am finding my expectations tainted by a nasty business practice that is unnecessary.

I agree with Penn to some extent as you could completely ignore the micro-transactions and still enjoy what could very well be an excellent game, much the same as Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. But... I sort of hope the game fails financially and this sends a message to other chancers who think you can get away with surreptitiously adding dodgy practices into their games.

Falthyron

Anybody else remember when micro-transactions (formally known as 'cheats') used to be free? Good times. :pac:

TitianGerm

Penn wrote: »

I don't know, to be honest. I might still get the game at launch, but just never buy any of the chests/microtransactions etc.

What's the release date for the game now? If there's other stuff to play around the same time then I'll hold off on this game.

I'll buy it eventually because I loved the first game. Argos will have it for €20ish in 6 months.

emmetkenny

emmetkenny wrote: »

I'll buy it eventually because I loved the first game. Argos will have it for €20ish in 6 months.

This is the correct approach. Have patience and wait it out. And correctly punish this type of practice from publishers at launch.

TitianGerm

M!Ck^ wrote: »

This is the correct approach. Have patience and wait it out. And correctly punish this type of practice from publishers at launch.

Theres no point because I could buy it at launch and not play it for 12 months.

I've only ever spent money on Micro-Transactions twice. Once in Destiny and once in Overwatch.

Billy86

Generic Dreadhead wrote: »

Can we add a poll to see how many of us have decided to not get the game at launch (at least) now, versus those who still want to get it Day-1 despite the recent developments

Count me down as another, and I basically never but on day one (only other game I can remember doing so for was Civ VI) but was prepared to here. Now, not a chance - will be doing a lot of looking at how MTs work in the game after it comes out before considering, to be honest.

Sephiroth_dude

Penn wrote: »

I don't know, to be honest. I might still get the game at launch, but just never buy any of the chests/microtransactions etc.

.

I'll probably end up doing this knowing me unless there is something better too play.

Generic Dreadhead

How about "Thank this post if you have decided to not get the game at launch now (either at all, or will wait till it's bargin bin/on sale/2nd hand"?

Generic Dreadhead

And... "Thank this post if you will still buy it Day-1 (or near launch) despite the recent developments"

Syphonax

Cant wait for this game. Think when SOM came out they had paid fake reviews bigging it up everywhere but it was a really good game anyways. Wont be pre-ordering or buying it till it drops way below the ridiculous 70 euro or more though

EoinMcLovin

Preordered it online with Gamestop when it was first announced only because they were selling it for the PS4 for only €39.99. I have South Park preordered as well and that's out the week after this so had no intention of playing straight away. Is it possible to cancel online GameStop preorders or would I be better off trading it in CEX a few days after getting it

Generic Dreadhead

When I checked last (2014), they allowed me move the €5 pre-order to different pre-order game

Mitch Connor

was listening to the GamesInformer podcast the other day (might have been IGN GameScoop) and they brought up an interesting argument, which also related to a similar argument I had heard previously with regards DLC and expansions.

Games are becoming much more expensive to create, while the price point of games hasn't moved almost at all in a decade - with inflation being ignored, never mind increasing AAA dev costs. DLC and Expansions help spread the cost of the dev time and recoup more money without changing the base price of the games, for the most part.

If you continue that thought (as Gamescoop i think did) you can apply the same thoughts to micro transactions - it allows the dev's to tie in to a monetary source that is freely available to multiplayer games and Games as a Service games, but has not really been available for expansive single player games.

Maybe microtransactions are required as a source of funding for them to even make the game in the first place.

Generic Dreadhead

My heart really bleeds for Warner Brothers
Don't make a product you can't turn a profit on, simple as that.

Many digital games cost €70 now, physical games cost no more than €60 (at a push) a decade ago
Game prices inflated, just like everything else. And selling digitally actually costs the studios less

If the price of development is reaching the stage where they want to charge (say) €85 for a game to recoup their costs maybe they should:
1) Not make the game
2) Change the scope, length, size, release date of the game
3) Look internally and start figuring out ways of reducing costs

I don't like how it's always in defence of the huge studios (EA, WB, Ubisoft et al) that these types of defenses are trotted out
Plenty of devs, publishers, studios and companies are making games and making money without these issues.
Look at Nintendo as an example, and if that doesn't suffice, look at bloody The Behemoth or Edmund McMillen or Ninja Theory or (if you want to include a studio who do have MT's) Respawn

And just so it's clear i'm not just down on AAA Devs coming with their cap in hand...
"Oh but I'm a gamer, I don't want to play low res, small, cr@ppy games like some of those!!!" - Well fine, go pay Bioware/Bethesda €85 if thats what it takes for them to pump out a game matching your requirements. Or don't.

I'm sitting here looking at Lawbreakers and Hellblade as my next 2 possible purchases, neither of them reached too far, aimed to high and as a result went "welp, now we need €30-€40 and MT's cause of all the bells and whistles we added".

It's Warner Brothers being greedy scumbags
This is not new territory for them, they just want to see how far they can go before it's "too far"
This for me, was too far.

Gamers have a choice in what they buy, who the support and how they deal with feedback they find disdainful.
Turtle Rock Studios no longer exists cause of the cr@p they tried to pull with Evolve

EDIT: And FWIW, the "Gold" edition of this game costs €109.99 on the PSN store. Don't expect to get €40 worth of value from the DLC and don't expect it to have taken 57% of the effort the standard edition took to make

Stone Deaf 4evr

emmetkenny wrote: »

Theres no point because I could buy it at launch and not play it for 12 months.

I've only ever spent money on Micro-Transactions twice. Once in Destiny and once in Overwatch.

once for me - halo 5, and that was only to use up credit in my account, although theres a rainbow 6 siege elite skin that is calling to me like a siren for one of my most used operators.

Falthyron

Jim really goes to town on 'Shadow of Warbucks'. :pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TXWdyrqFP8

wes

Falthyron wrote: »

Jim really goes to town on 'Shadow of Warbucks'. :pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TXWdyrqFP8

He is a 100% right about this nonsense. Micro transactions are going to destroy the gaming industry.

Potential-Monke

I'm getting the feeling that we're reaching the height of micro-transactions. There are too many games starting to implement it, so i think it will either level off or start to disappear in most games within the next few years. The online games will always have it, but this trend of putting it in SP games is worrying, but i don't think it will get out of hand. This game will notice the biggest impact i reckon, and hopefully it does cost WB, because seeing a big company lose out over micro-transactions will hopefully prevent it in the future.

One can hope!

Kiith

As others have said before, the only way this will stop is if people vote with their wallets. And that obviously doesn't happen, as they keep doing it.

I definitely won't be buying this, at least not until it's down to around €15-20.

Outkast_IRE

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I'm getting the feeling that we're reaching the height of micro-transactions. There are too many games starting to implement it, so i think it will either level off or start to disappear in most games within the next few years. The online games will always have it, but this trend of putting it in SP games is worrying, but i don't think it will get out of hand. This game will notice the biggest impact i reckon, and hopefully it does cost WB, because seeing a big company lose out over micro-transactions will hopefully prevent it in the future.

One can hope!

I will never forget Dragon Age, that was the first AAA title i came across to implement them and damn they did it in such a blunt and obvious way, it just pulled you right out form any immersion they built up.

jcd5971

I'm happy enough to buy day one, first game was great this looks better, happy with loot boxes as well should lessen the grind for those who play less, i don't see the issue

Stone Deaf 4evr

I've no problem with micro transactions for cosmetic items, but I do have strong feelings against loot boxes - let me buy the actual item i want - not a chance at an RNG to give me something good.

OptimusTractor

jcd5971 wrote: »

I'm happy enough to buy day one, first game was great this looks better, happy with loot boxes as well should lessen the grind for those who play less, i don't see the issue

Are the loot boxes rng? I'm really looking forward to the Reddit post: "I spent $60 on loot boxes on Day 1 and I didn't get the serpent dagger with life replenish." Or something similar.

Penn

OptimusTractor wrote: »

Are the loot boxes rng? I'm really looking forward to the Reddit post: "I spent $60 on loot boxes on Day 1 and I didn't get the serpent dagger with life replenish." Or something similar.

The loot boxes are RNG but with guaranteed level items, so different types of loot boxes, some of them will have guaranteed legendary items or epic items or whatever the different tiers or items are called. But the items themselves will be RNG.

Generic Dreadhead

jcd5971 wrote: »

I'm happy enough to buy day one, first game was great this looks better, happy with loot boxes as well should lessen the grind for those who play less, i don't see the issue

I'm not taking your bait! :P

Kimbot

jcd5971 wrote: »

I'm happy enough to buy day one, first game was great this looks better, happy with loot boxes as well should lessen the grind for those who play less, i don't see the issue

Wait, when did you get positive about a game coming out? :pac:

First game was class, will pick this one up but not for a while I would imagine.

J. Marston

Where would you go if you wanted to question the warnings on game boxes? PEGI or some Irish censorship board?

I'd love to see any game with a lootbox system have a gambling warning on the back of the box. You won't get rid of lootbox systems but you can make sure it's highlighted properly.

Fifa is 3+ but the main mode in the game completely revolves buying packs that are randomised. In-game is littered with advertisements to buy said packs and there's no gambling warnings anywhere. I'm far from a Helen Lovejoy but kids shouldn't be exposed to that slot machine bullshít in games.

Potential-Monke

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

I will never forget Dragon Age, that was the first AAA title i came across to implement them and damn they did it in such a blunt and obvious way, it just pulled you right out form any immersion they built up.

Slightly OT, but there were micro transactions in Dragon Age? I don't remember them...

Outkast_IRE

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Slightly OT, but there were micro transactions in Dragon Age? I don't remember them...

Think it was Dragon Age Origins the standalone add on to the first game.
So maybe a couple of hours in on your travels you approach a camp fire and there are a few people gathered about it and they spin you their epic tale of woe, and as with any good bioware game, you ask questions, and they respond, the story sounds interesting and cool, then at the end of their story there is a clickbox to purchase that mission to help them :eek:

Penny Arcade did a joke on it - Thats 2009, thats the first time microtransactions hit home for me. With oblivion they werent in your face or anything like that.

https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/11/06

Shiminay

It's Warner Bros, you'd want to be a head case to pre-order anything they make after the farce that was Batman Arkham Knight (aside from the fact that it was definitely the worst of the series in my opinion) and the game breaking bugs that came out on launch in Arkham Origins too.

There's a fair argument and discussion to be had about the price vs cost of games, but maybe, just maybe, if publishers didn't demand half of the budget for advertising (all of which causes huge knock on effects of forcing massive crunch for the developers and immovable release dates because the media spend has been so high ahead of time), and they let the people who actually write the software decide when to release the thing, then they'd stop having such problems.

Mitch Connor

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

Think it was Dragon Age Origins the standalone add on to the first game.
So maybe a couple of hours in on your travels you approach a camp fire and there are a few people gathered about it and they spin you their epic tale of woe, and as with any good bioware game, you ask questions, and they respond, the story sounds interesting and cool, then at the end of their story there is a clickbox to purchase that mission to help them :eek:

Penny Arcade did a joke on it - Thats 2009, thats the first time microtransactions hit home for me. With oblivion they werent in your face or anything like that.

https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/11/06

thats not microtransactions, that is poorly implemented DLC.

Billy86

I bought Arkham Knight and actually had zero issues apart from one crash and some occasional jitters/poor frame rates in the hour or two on the airship. Mind you I bought it a few months ago, long long after the mess that was the opening few months - just throwing that out there in case anyone is thinking of buying (I really enjoyed the game).

Falthyron

Billy86 wrote: »

I bought Arkham Knight and actually had zero issues apart from one crash and some occasional jitters/poor frame rates in the hour or two on the airship. Mind you I bought it a few months ago, long long after the mess that was the opening few months - just throwing that out there in case anyone is thinking of buying (I really enjoyed the game).

On par with Arkham City? I hear the driving parts are tedious... I really enjoyed Asylum and City even though I wouldn't be a comic book fan.

ERG89

Shiminay wrote:

It's Warner Bros, you'd want to be a head case to pre-order anything they make after the farce that was Batman Arkham Knight (aside from the fact that it was definitely the worst of the series in my opinion) and the game breaking bugs that came out on launch in Arkham Origins too.

Your right about Knight's quality. Didn't they ignore the game breaking bugs in origins (despite it literally reusing most of Arkham City's map) & focus on making the DLC instead....
Too much about this stinks for it to not be affecting the final product. The sexy Shelob thing is from the moon from my perspective anyway.

Taylor365

wes wrote: »

He is a 100% right about this nonsense. Micro transactions are going to destroy the gaming industry.

I don't know.

I think the cream will rise to the top naturally, aka indie stuff.

Outkast_IRE

Mitch Connor wrote: »

thats not microtransactions, that is poorly implemented DLC.

Honestly i dont accept there being a difference. Anything that is seperate to the original hefty AAA title purchase price is an additional transaction. Its pure marketing spiel to try and label them differently.

If you look at the likes of Total War Warhammer - there are different factions available as DLC or small items like additional Lords. But its all handled through the steam page, once you are in game there is no hints to buy xyz.

Doctor Nick

Personally loved Arkham Knight. Although I got it on PS4 and game breaking bugs were PC only? It's still no excuse, shouldn't have been released on PC if it was so bad. If I ever buy this (big if) , it will be when it's cheap and second hand

Potential-Monke

Falthyron wrote: »

On par with Arkham City? I hear the driving parts are tedious... I really enjoyed Asylum and City even though I wouldn't be a comic book fan.

I was a late adapter to the Knight game, mainly because i played the first 3 on PC so wanted to continue on that. I did pre-order the GOTY edition or whatever it was called. Got it with all future DLC. But i didn't install it until months after release, and similar to Billy86 above, aside from the odd crash and frame rate drop, it played fine for me! Medium-High settings.

And i enjoyed it, was a bit worried about the vehicle parts, but they weren't very often and didn't take long to do. And they're not the worst, i've had worse driving in games.

Falthyron

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I was a late adapter to the Knight game, mainly because i played the first 3 on PC so wanted to continue on that. I did pre-order the GOTY edition or whatever it was called. Got it with all future DLC. But i didn't install it until months after release, and similar to Billy86 above, aside from the odd crash and frame rate drop, it played fine for me! Medium-High settings.

And i enjoyed it, was a bit worried about the vehicle parts, but they weren't very often and didn't take long to do. And they're not the worst, i've had worse driving in games.

Cheers! Gonna try and pick it up when its back on sale. I think it goes for around 12 euro including all the DLC.

Billy86

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I was a late adapter to the Knight game, mainly because i played the first 3 on PC so wanted to continue on that. I did pre-order the GOTY edition or whatever it was called. Got it with all future DLC. But i didn't install it until months after release, and similar to Billy86 above, aside from the odd crash and frame rate drop, it played fine for me! Medium-High settings.

And i enjoyed it, was a bit worried about the vehicle parts, but they weren't very often and didn't take long to do. And they're not the worst, i've had worse driving in games.

I would say similar, enjoyed the game quite a lot (though never bothered finishing the 7 million Riddler trophies), was playing on ultra on a 970/i5 6600K.

jcd5971

Generic Dreadhead wrote: »

I'm not taking your bait! :P

so if someone disagrees with you its baiting then?

if you dont want to buy stuff then dont its hardly blocking off content.

Generic Dreadhead

jcd5971 wrote: »

so if someone disagrees with you its baiting then?

No.

It was a light hearted comment based on the fact I'd made 2 fairly detailed posts against the entirety of this debacle just previous to your post.

Generic Dreadhead

The tiniest of polls from 2 weeks ago has come back with a result

Warner Bros have successfully turned 75% of us off their product.

15 people (incl me) decided to not get the game at launch now (either at all, or will wait till it's bargin bin/on sale/2nd hand"?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=104334393&postcount=159

And 5 will Thank this post if you will still buy it Day-1 (or near launch) despite the recent developments
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=104334405&postcount=160

With this sample size it's safe to say they may as well put the company into liquidation now

J. Marston

I'm surprised the dislike bar isn't longer and the Youtube comments aren't that negative.

"Am I out of touch? No, it's the children who are wrong."

YouSavedMyLife

J. Marston wrote: »

I'm surprised the dislike bar isn't longer and the Youtube comments aren't that negative.

"Am I out of touch? No, it's the children who are wrong."

johnny_ultimate

Was never a major fan of the first game - interesting systems restricted by a dull-as-anything open world game. Solid effort and all that.

So I'm not paying a whole lot of attention to the sequel, but it does appear as if they're going out of their way to make something emblematic of everything that is ****ty and shifty about AAA games in 2017.

Billy86

Outside of Zelda (or RE7 if we're counting it, though it was a very short game) are there going to be any AAA title in 2017 that don't wind up disappointing and/or resulting in a 'meh'?

Billy86

Billy86 wrote: »

Outside of Zelda (or RE7 if we're counting it, though it was a very short game) are there going to be any AAA title in 2017 that don't wind up disappointing and/or resulting in a 'meh'?

Wolfenstien II

kunst nugget

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Was never a major fan of the first game - interesting systems restricted by a dull-as-anything open world game. Solid effort and all that.

So I'm not paying a whole lot of attention to the sequel, but it does appear as if they're going out of their way to make something emblematic of everything that is ****ty and shifty about AAA games in 2017.

I just finished the first game there and really enjoyed it. I'm looking forward to having a crack at this. The handy thing about all this bad publicity is that the second game is sure to drop in price very rapidly.

Billy86

I hope so, trailer does look very good for it at least! Picked up New Order & Old Blood so will try get them done at some point this year and pick it up maybe after Christmas.