Anthem (PS4, Xbox One, PC)

[Sheikah]

8 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

Most (non Nintendo) games are to be fair. You can buy Assassin's Creed Odyssey for £25 on Amazon, or Shadow of the Tomb Raider for £28. Great time to be a gamer, if you're trying to save money.

I can't wait to play it this Friday but these days unless it's Red Dead you might as well just wait and it'll drop in price pretty quick.

Yeah but I reckon this will discount much quicker and by more. You could already pick it up for something like 32 quid before it even come out and that's very unusual. It's by the same people who made Andromeda, an average game with problems that discounted quickly. Games like AC Odyssey, I know first hand did not discount nearly as quickly (I was trying to buy it!)

This game sounds like it's going to be mediocre too (vg247 review):

Quote

I went into Anthem with an open mind. It’s a game I wanted to succeed from a studio I’ve always been fond of. Unfortunately, it’s everything everyone feared at reveal. It’s a hollow experience that’s been designed to appeal to the widest market possible while squeezing more money out of those who are hooked in by its doggy treat design.

Edited February 19, 2019 by Sheikah

[Hero-of-Time]

7 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Yeah but I reckon this will discount much quicker and by more. You could already pick it up for something like 32 quid before it even come out and that's very unusual. 

Yeah, the warning signs were there when Shopto were selling it for around £30 the other week. I actually preordered it for that price but a combo of no longer having PS+, average reviews and none of mates being interested in it made me cancel my order yesterday evening. 

I'm still hoping the game does well. I want Bioware to land on their feet but I worry that the studio/employees may be for the chopping block if the game doesn't sell well.

[Ronnie]

 

12 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Yeah but I reckon this will discount much quicker and by more. You could already pick it up for something like 32 quid before it even come out and that's very unusual. It's by the same people who made Andromeda, an average game with problems that discounted quickly. Games like AC Odyssey, I know first hand did not discount nearly as quickly (I was trying to buy it!)

This game sounds like it's going to be mediocre too (vg247 review):

Hahaha, congrats you managed to pick the worst quote out there. And an ill-informed one at that.

Quote

while squeezing more money out of those who are hooked in by its doggy treat design.

Utter bullshit. All future story content is free, and the microtransactions aren't only harmless, all the purchasable cosmetics are earnable in-game.

Edited February 19, 2019 by Ronnie

[Sheikah]

15 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

 

Hahaha, congrats you managed to pick the worst quote out there. And an ill-informed one at that.

A strange response from someone who hasn't played the game (or even demo), dismissing the view of somebody who has...

Quote

Utter bullshit. All future story content is free, and the microtransactions aren't only harmless, all the purchasable stuff is earnable in-game.

Perhaps the review is worth a look, rather than going off on one? That comment is about the way the game is designed and how customising your javelins is clearly geared towards investing real money. I also disagree with your comment that microtransactions are harmless (they never are). For a full price game, I dislike that there are microtransactions at launch to make your javelin look (or perform? I don't know) half decent. It's not like these paid for items came out months down the line, where they could potentially try to justify why they weren't included with the game and required extra development to make.

In fact I actually found this review to be very frank and the reviewer called out things that absolutely deserved to be called out, and I don't have any reason to distrust that the things he's calling out actually aren't problems in the game. What stood out to me was how he said so many of the game's problems are not easily patchable.

There's also other negative to mediocre reviews out there, it's just that most other well known sites haven't gotten around to releasing their reviews yet.

Edited February 19, 2019 by Sheikah

[Ronnie]

5 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

That comment is about the way the game is designed and how kitting out your javelins is clearly geared towards investing real money

Again, that's utter rubbish. The only things real money will get you in Anthem are stuff like applying a diamond plate metal pattern on your javelin or a "gum on your shoe" emote. That's all. 100% cosmetic things. Kitting out your javelin with actual gear is done in game, no MTX, and all future story content and updates will be free.

3 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

What stood out to me was how he said so many of the game's problems are not easily patchable.

Funny, most of the reviews I've read said the foundation (the actual gameplay, gunplay, traversal, openworld) is excellent and very promising. It's the quality of life stuff and bugs that are getting in the way, the stuff that is absolutely patchable (and some of that is even done on the server side, as happened yesterday)

[Sheikah]

7 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

Funny, most of the reviews I've read said the foundation (the actual gameplay, gunplay, traversal, openworld) is excellent and very promising. It's the quality of life stuff and bugs that are getting in the way, the stuff that is absolutely patchable (and some of that is even done on the server side, as happened yesterday)

Again, from the vg247 review:

Quote

You fly to a mission, shoot stuff, occasionally hold X on something interactive, head back to the hub, swap your mech’s crotch from chrome to rubber, then head back out and do it again. Absurd levels of visual decadence aren’t enough to mask over Anthem’s deep flaws.

Here is gamesradar saying a similar thing about repetition, and also a very similar comment about the good looks not being enough to distract you from it:

Quote

It doesn't help that the mission structure is also incredibly repetitive. The mass of loading screens are interspersed with fetch quests, small enemy settlements that you'll have to kill your way through, and a plethora of puzzles that ask you to either collect a number of parts or light orbs that then have to be returned to a central point. Even Anthem's good looks aren't enough to distract you from the repeat ad nauseam of it all.

I'm not interested in counting sites and reviews here, I want to know in your opinion how patching the game can solve the issue of tedious game design. I have no reason to distrust that the above quotes are reasonably accurate descriptions of the game.

Edited February 19, 2019 by Sheikah

[Ronnie]

12 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Again, from the vg247 review:

Here is gamesradar saying a similar thing about repetition, and also a very similar comment about the good looks not being enough to distract you from it:

I'm not interested in counting sites and reviews here, I want to know in your opinion how patching the game can solve the issue of tedious game design. I have no reason to distrust that the above quote is a reasonably accurate description of the game.

I've been watching a lot of impressions and reading a lot of comments on message boards and Twitter. The consensus is that the foundation: the actual gameplay (flying around and shooting enemies) is a lot of fun.

Glad we're agreed on the bullshit comment about how the game "makes you invest real money" though, a review to be discounted for sure.

[Sheikah]

 

9 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

I've been watching a lot of impressions and reading a lot of comments on message boards and Twitter. The consensus is that the foundation: the actual gameplay (flying around and shooting enemies) is a lot of fun.

I was specifically talking about game design and not gameplay. Do not confuse the two points. The feel of shooting and flying might be fine, however the game design sounds to be heavily flawed. If what you're doing is repetitive and menial, it won't make for a fun game. And this is exactly what the reviews are saying.

Quote

Glad we're agreed on the bullshit comment about how the game "makes you invest real money" though, a review to be discounted for sure.

This kind of comment is not conducive of good discussion.

Edited February 19, 2019 by Sheikah

[Mandalore]

Cancelled my pre order this morning. Take away the Bioware name and it's not a game I'd have any interest in probably.

I'll just look forward to Dragon Age 4 instead, hopefully EA don't kill Bioware in the mean time.

[Ronnie]

42 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

This kind of comment is not conducive of good discussion.

Neither is ignoring when you and the review you keep quoting have been proved wrong instead of saying yep, fair enough, maybe you're right.

[Sheikah]

39 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

Neither is ignoring when you and the review you keep quoting have been proved wrong instead of saying yep, fair enough, maybe you're right.

See, I reckon you're getting confused here because the review quote wasn't wrong. Here's what you said:

Quote

Glad we're agreed on the bullshit comment about how the game "makes you invest real money" though, a review to be discounted for sure.

But...go read the actual review. Here's the link. Nowhere does it say you are made to invest real money. In fact, here is the actual point the review makes:

Quote

If you pre-ordered, you get some free parts and can swap out your Javelin’s legs, arms, head, and body for some different armour. Outside of that, you only have a couple of other choices and they’re all locked behind an absurd amount of in-game currency. The customisation is clearly designed to push you towards spending real money. Even then, there’s barely anything to tempt you.

That's contrary to what you're saying Ronnie. The review states you can buy the items with in-game money, just it costs an "absurd" amount.

This is the same kind of thing employed in the EA-published Star Wars Battlefront 2, and in many mobile app games. You can unlock those things without paying real cash, just the game is designed in such a way to be tedious and take a crazy number of hours to do so. Not saying it's as bad in Anthem as Battlefront 2, in fact surely not, just that this is a tactic we've seen before and that's what the reviewer is referring to. I am guessing the reviewer knows how long it takes to earn in-game currency after playing the game.

Aaaanyway. I think we are focusing way too much on a point of minor significance in the grand scheme of things. Probably the microtransactions won't do a thing to this game; it's the other issues that I think could cause this to bomb.

Edited February 19, 2019 by Sheikah

[Dcubed]

This game has bomba written all over it.

 

I'd be very surprised if Bioware don't get shut down by EA after this game's inevitable critical and commercial failure...

 

... No doubt the Microsoft vultures are already circling their HQ...

Edited February 19, 2019 by Dcubed

[Ronnie]

23 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

See, I reckon you're getting confused here because the review quote wasn't wrong. Here's what you said:

I'm not getting confused. I'm replying to what you said:

2 hours ago, Sheikah said:

That comment is about the way the game is designed and how customising your javelins is clearly geared towards investing real money.

You're now shifting the argument to what the review actually said. In no way does the game push you to spend real money. The javelin customisation that comes included in the game is INSANELY in depth.

21 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

That's contrary to what you're saying Ronnie. The review states you can buy the items with in-game money, just it costs an "absurd" amount.

An absurd amount? The game gives you starting 40,000 cash that lets you buy most things and 2/3 of an armour pack, without even doing anything. Everything I've heard from reputable sources who've sunk dozens if not hundreds of hours into the game leading up to release says you earn money very quickly, especially if you play multiplayer, to the point where after you're done with the campaign you have more money than you know what to do with.

I know it's hard for some people to believe, but not every single game that has microtransactions is the work of the devil. There are plenty of games that do it right, like Anthem. A game as service where the entire lifespan of it's story add-ons will be 100% free of charge, and the only MTX are cosmetic and will help fund development.

[Ronnie]

9 minutes ago, Dcubed said:

This game has bomba written all over it.

Wtf is a "bomba"? Sounds like some delicious desert.

The mature as ever and not at all hyperbolic gamers seem to be making 100% sure it fails. Just coz EA. Many seem to enjoy a game failing more than they enjoy a game succeeding. Realy sad.

Edited February 19, 2019 by Ronnie

[Sheikah]

1 hour ago, Ronnie said:

You're now shifting the argument to what the review actually said. In no way does the game push you to spend real money. The javelin customisation that comes included in the game is INSANELY in depth.

Ehm...I'm not shifting the argument? You typed the following: "Glad we're agreed on the bullshit comment about how the game "makes you invest real money" though, a review to be discounted for sure." But at no point did either myself, nor the reviewer, say the game makes you do anything! The review said the game/economy is designed to squeeze money out of those who are hooked...this is a common (and shitty) microtransaction model, and I wouldn't have thought it'd be a point of contention?

The point is that the the things you can buy for real money in the game are sold for silly amounts of game currency to encourage people to spend real cash. It's what EA did with Battlefront 2. It's what they're seemingly doing here if we take the reviewer's words to be true. In a full price game.

Quote

An absurd amount? The game gives you starting 40,000 cash that lets you buy most things and 2/3 of an armour pack, without even doing anything. Everything I've heard from reputable sources who've sunk dozens if not hundreds of hours into the game leading up to release says you earn money very quickly, especially if you play multiplayer, to the point where after you're done with the campaign you have more money than you know what to do with.

I know it's hard for some people to believe, but not every single game that has microtransactions is the work of the devil. There are plenty of games that do it right, like Anthem. A game as service where the entire lifespan of it's story add-ons will be 100% free of charge, and the only MTX are cosmetic and will help fund development.

I've looked into this a little more now and I can say without doubt the pricing of their store stuff is steep. 40k wouldn't even buy you just the one on the left:

 

Then, the biggie; the shop's contents reset every 10 days. Adding up the total value of the contents on that screenshot, that's 176,000 coins for everything. Suddenly 40,000 seems like very little.

Let's say you've spent your 40,000 coins and the shop has reset. I found a post over on GameFAQs that linked a YouTube video which reported in about 6-7 hours of play, the guy playing earned 20,000 coins. We can extrapolate that - in order to buy everything (176,000 coins), assuming 20,000 coins earned every 6.5 hours, you'd need to grind 57.2 hours every 10 days. Which is indeed absurd - almost 6 hours a day, including weekdays!

Now you might not want everything, sure, but the way these goods are priced in-game is so that spending real money becomes an attractive alternative. Or in some cases, a supplement for people without the total amount of in-game funds to buy everything. At the very least, this cost breakdown supports the reviewer's initial comment regarding absurd pricing; the one which you strongly called out as "bullshit".

Edited February 19, 2019 by Sheikah

[Ronnie]

53 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

The review said the game/economy is designed to squeeze money out of those who are hooked...this is a common (and shitty) microtransaction model, and I wouldn't have thought it'd be a point of contention?

The review is wrong. The only complaints being levelled at the game by those that have sunk lots of time into it are that there aren't enough cosmetics for the amount of in game currency the game gives out so freely. Once you finish the main campaign you're apparently rolling in coin.

Regardless, the game 100% isn't designed to squeeze money out of those that are hooked, so please stop spreading this bullshit. The base javelin customisation in the game is ridiculously in-depth. This is just an added extra.

53 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

The point is that the the things you can buy for real money in the game are sold for silly amounts of game currency to encourage people to spend real cash.

Nope. Not silly amounts of in game cash. Maybe you're thinking of Battlefront II, not Anthem.

53 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Now you might not want everything, sure

No one is going to want everything, because that would be stupid. Do you look at the Apple App Store and add up the cost of every single app to illustrate the cost of the games? No, because that would also be stupid.

These cosmetics in no way whatsoever change the game, all they do is look different to the armor sets you have in game. I couldn't care less about a gum on the shoe emote ffs. Haven't you noticed how there's been zero MTX controversy from this game since it released, that should tell you something. You can put your pitchfork down I'm afraid, everyone else has.

Finally... all future story content will be free of charge. If they want to make a few extra pennies to fund development by selling some meaningless textures and emotes, then that really, really isn't a problem.

 

 

Edited February 19, 2019 by Ronnie

[Ronnie]

Look it's very simple, look online. NO ONE is up in arms about the Anthem microtransactions, because they're completely fine. That tells you all you need to know.

At least try and be even-handed with complaining about MTX and admit when a game does them right, or when they're harmless. That'll then give more weight to when you do have a point, like in Battlefront II.

[Sheikah]

2 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

Look it's very simple, look online. NO ONE is up in arms about the Anthem microtransactions, because they're completely fine. That tells you all you need to know.

It sure does. That the rest of the game is such a mess that nobody is batting an eyelid over it.

[Goafer]

Remember when we all laughed at the horse armour in Oblivion. Good times.

[Dcubed]

Never forget the golden rule.  A game that has microtransactions is always designed in such a way that they want you to buy them instead of going for the free option.

 

No publisher ever puts microtransactions in a game without the express desire for you to want to skip the in-game grind and buy them with real money.  That is literally how they work.  You either pay with time or money.

 

How much of a mug the publisher thinks you are? Well, that depends on the game itself (and this example looks pretty egrigious really; but then again, it is EA, so that doesn't surprise me in the slightest), but the golden rule is always true.  No matter your opinion of the game itself.

Edited February 20, 2019 by Dcubed

[Glen-i]

15 hours ago, Ronnie said:

Look it's very simple, look online. NO ONE is up in arms about the Anthem microtransactions, because they're completely fine. That tells you all you need to know.

That's precisely the kind of attitude that let's developers get away with them in the first place.

[Sheikah]

That's precisely the kind of attitude that let's developers get away with them in the first place.

The dangerous thing about the complacency that Ronnie points out more or less shows how conditioned people are coming to this kind of practice, to see it as just a normal part of big games these days.

[Ronnie]

3 hours ago, Glen-i said:

That's precisely the kind of attitude that let's developers get away with them in the first place.

I don't understand. What attitude, that something everyone with an ounce of common sense agrees is absolutely fine?

If it's a choice between paying for future content expansions and splitting the userbase, and no MTX ... or all future content expansions being free of charge and totally optional microtransactions for useless stuff like skins and emotes ... I choose the latter, and I'm glad Bioware/EA did too.

I'm sure some people on here want everything for free, but life and business doesn't work like that sadly.

Edited February 20, 2019 by Ronnie

[Dcubed]

I'd rather pay for the expansions.  At a basic, ethical, level, it's wrong to exploit a vulnerable minority to subsidise the majority.

 

It is never justifyable and it's disgusting that anyone would be ok with exploitation.  It's even worse when you consider the insidious damage it also does to the inherent game design (as it inevitably turns into an endless grind that is purposely designed to suck the fun out of the game unless you pay up).

 

Why anyone would even want to play a game that is fundamentally designed to be unfun is beyond me really ; but it is the acceptance of exploitation of a vulnerable few that really irks me.  The Fuck You, Got Mine mentality is absoluttely toxic, insufferable and should not be tolerated.

[Aperson]

5 minutes ago, Dcubed said:

I'd rather pay for the expansions.  At a basic, ethical, level, it's wrong to exploit a vulnerable minority to subsidise the majority.

 

It is never justifyable and it's disgusting that anyone would be ok with exploitation.  It's even worse when you consider the insidious damage it also does to the inherent game design (as it inevitably turns into an endless grind that is purposely designed to suck the fun out of the game unless you pay up).

 

Why anyone would even want to play a game that is fundamentally designed to be unfun is beyond me really ; but it is the acceptance of exploitation of a vulnerable few that really irks me.  The Fuck You, Got Mine mentality is absoluttely toxic, insufferable and should not be tolerated.

This is EA we're talking about here. It should come as no surprise, they found a model that works on FIFA and so they want ALL their games to be like that. Other companies either have similar ideas or are having to do so in order to compete and gaming as a whole is worse for it...