SisterGoat wrote: »

I didn't realize you needed crown crates to progress in this game. I guess those hidden apex mounts are very crucial for PvP.

Haha, yeah no kidding. That and how you can't play anything unless you've paid and unlocked the warden via the Morrowind expansion.

What EA is doing via BF2 is selling gems to buy loot crates to make your characters better or unlock heroes. Now they had enough backlash to say hey we've removed this feature at this time. Which most likely they will try to get more people to buy the game at release to make their numbers look good, and then they'll had it back after the sucker folks in.

I haven't seen any weapon, armor, skill point, champion points that can be purchased to put me or anyone else ahead of the rest of the players on any system.

I'm actually kind of stunned at how many people can't see the difference.

MNsnowtaTy wrote: »

SisterGoat wrote: »

I didn't realize you needed crown crates to progress in this game. I guess those hidden apex mounts are very crucial for PvP.

Haha, yeah no kidding. That and how you can't play anything unless you've paid and unlocked the warden via the Morrowind expansion.

What EA is doing via BF2 is selling gems to buy loot crates to make your characters better or unlock heroes. Now they had enough backlash to say hey we've removed this feature at this time. Which most likely they will try to get more people to buy the game at release to make their numbers look good, and then they'll had it back after the sucker folks in.

I haven't seen any weapon, armor, skill point, champion points that can be purchased to put me or anyone else ahead of the rest of the players on any system.

I'm actually kind of stunned at how many people can't see the difference.

It's not just EA, but DICE that want crates in their game, and also limit offline gameplay to earn credits. If we could earn crowns in game and crown items gave us a major advantage over other players, then THAT would be the same thing.

The only thing I can think of that gives players an advantage in PvP is the riding lessons. Those do come in crates, and you can buy them with gold, but you can buy riding lessons outright instead of randomly.

vyndral13preub18_ESO wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

Understand that micro-transactions are more heavy because they have to make up for not having a required subscription. They need that money to deliver quality products. Future updates, DLC and Expansions.

There is a big jump from micro transactions to loot boxes.

Almost as big a jump as from lootboxes with purely cosmetic costumes and mounts to lootboxes with items required for character and game progression.

Zorvan wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Can't vote, not enough choices but leaning more towards the very different. To be similar they would have to do something like lock a character class behind a paywall. Maybe not quite that bad but worse than say locking a horse behind a paywall. ZOS does allow progressing your horse through the crown store though so some similarities there. Over all though, nah.

They did that with the warden and Morrowind.

No they didn't. Would have to be part of the base game for that to apply.

How so? It's a class that you can't play unless you purchase the dlc.

Base game. Darth Vader is a part of the base game that has to be unlocked. The Warden is not a part of the base game. It is a part of an expansion to the base game that came with a newly introduced class. Now if they sold the Morrowind expansion and you had to go purchase the Warden separate in the crown store you would be on to something.

Gotta compare base game to base game if you are going to be honest and fair.

How about putting a race with juicy stats behind a paywall? Remember good old Imperial? And that is base game. Regardless, your're arguing semantics in order to white knight. Not cool.

How about a class? A class that no less has been called out to currently be OP (Stam Warden) by the PvP community quite frequently.

Edit* Mentioned multiple times already, but well...

I have mixed views on this. Thare are a number of things at play.

1. Games keep getting more and more expensive to develop as tech improves and therefore the ability to add more detail/realism. This puts the companies in a difficult spot. Producing a game without using the latest tech will make their game look inferior next to their competitor's. But using it means that they need to charge more for that game to make any money. This is where all these extra revenue streams come from. They don't want to put players off by charging too much for the base game, so instead the spread the costs over dlcs, bought items etc.. Personally, I'd rather they stopped this race for better presentation and instead focussed on gameplay and value for money.
2. Multiplayer competitive fps games should never have added the concept of unlocking weapons with experience in the first place. Its an attempt of trying to add more to what is essentially a very simple game concept, but ends up destroying it. it makes what should be an even contest into an uneven one. I really don't get their thinking on this. Then making this stuff purchasable with real cash?? I think these companies have forgotten what an fps is all about.

Bring back quake1 team fortress!