What's new

Multiplayer only games should not be $60

  • Thread starter VinnyHaw
  • Start date
  • Views 479
VinnyHaw

VinnyHaw

Se7enSinner
Mythical Veteran Trifecta End of the Year 2015
Messages
14,055
Reaction score
5,501
Points
2,755
Sin$
7
I came up with a theory on this last week. Let me try to explain.
(So for this explanation lets just say all games were always $60)

So let’s look at older games and see that they were primarily single player. You paid the $60 and got 100% of a game with single player.
So in this case $60 = 100% of a game

As time went on multiplayer started to be introduced, now let’s say the game was 90% SP and 10% MP. Because that adds up to 100% the games were still $60.

Now let’s look at COD that focused a lot more on MP. Let’s throw some numbers out and say COD is 50% SP and 50% MP. Still warranting that $60 USD.

Now we have 2 new games to look at. Battlefront 3 and Rainbow Six: Siege.

Now both of these games are 100% MP. So to warrant the $60 price tag would still be alright, but are they really 100% MP?


If you look at what Battlefront has to offer it just seems like the MP part of any Battlefield game. So if battlefront mp = the same amount of battlefield 4 mp (battlefield 4 is 50% MP and 50% SP) then that means battlefront is only 50% MP and 0% SP. That does not = the 100% we need to warrant the $60 price tag. Even with DLC that will bump the game to 100% MP the ratio is still broken. Because remember $60 = 100% game. If you were to sell a $30 season pass then the game should now be at 150%.
How to fix this? There are 2 ways:
1 - Offer the game at $30
2 - Offer free DLC that will eventually bump the game to a true 100% MP

Now let’s look at Rainbow Six: Siege. R6 is in the exact same boat in terms of the MP/SP ratio. Except there’s one HUGE difference. At first glance you can see the there’s a season pass. So you figure well, to get the 100% MP just like in Battlefront we have to pay extra.

Except the season pass for R6 only gives you premium weapon skins/extra in game currency/5% exp boost/1 week use of new operators (characters) before non season pass owners/operators are automatically unlocked.
While non season pass owners will still get the new maps/operators (though they must be purchased with the in game currency). So, because R6 is giving out the maps/characters for free, eventually the game will be at the right $60 and 100% game ratio.



Writing this came to me after Kotaku published their article:
http://kotaku.com/multiplayer-only-games-shouldnt-cost-60-1747182497
 
R

Requiem2016

Newbie
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Points
45
Sin$
7
I agree. I don't have Xbox Live yet so I can't play some of these multiplayer games in the first place. Paying sixty bucks for Black Ops three makes no sence. No campaign mode? Ridiculous. Some of us can't afford an Xbox One yet.
 
Life

Life

Graphics Are Life
Artist Reporter A Milli
Messages
11,261
Reaction score
4,459
Points
1,680
Sin$
7
To be honest you are right, there's no need to pay full price for a 100% MP only game. That's forcing you to play only mp and nothing else. It should at least be $30 for just a MP only game.
 
VinnyHaw

VinnyHaw

Se7enSinner
Mythical Veteran Trifecta End of the Year 2015
Messages
14,055
Reaction score
5,501
Points
2,755
Sin$
7
I agree. I don't have Xbox Live yet so I can't play some of these multiplayer games in the first place. Paying sixty bucks for Black Ops three makes no sence. No campaign mode? Ridiculous. Some of us can't afford an Xbox One yet.

It was 50 for last gen. But instead of buying that game why not save for an x1 or ps4? Or for $380 you can make a gaming computer.

To be honest you are right, there's no need to pay full price for a 100% MP only game. That's forcing you to play only mp and nothing else. It should at least be $30 for just a MP only game.


My biggest issue is that once the servers are down we can never play these games again.
 
R

Requiem2016

Newbie
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Points
45
Sin$
7
It was 50 for last gen. But instead of buying that game why not save for an x1 or ps4? Or for $380 you can make a gaming computer.




My biggest issue is that once the servers are down we can never play these games again.
To be honest I am not great about saving money. I haven't really tried. It runs in my family lol. I also have problems choosing which bundles that I would want or which system would benefit me.
 
VinnyHaw

VinnyHaw

Se7enSinner
Mythical Veteran Trifecta End of the Year 2015
Messages
14,055
Reaction score
5,501
Points
2,755
Sin$
7
To be honest I am not great about saving money. I haven't really tried. It runs in my family lol. I also have problems choosing which bundles that I would want or which system would benefit me.

this is definiteyl the last cod on last gen. 360 just turned 10 years old. as for bundles the One and 4 are both dropping their prices like crazy this holiday season.
 
R

Requiem2016

Newbie
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Points
45
Sin$
7
I might as well get one. Maybe a PS4 instead of Xbox for a change.
 
Aghast

Aghast

Retired
Retired
TotM Stickied Beginning of An Odyssey
Messages
2,426
Reaction score
1,553
Points
790
Sin$
7
If they were to do this. what price would it be? I doubt they would cut the price in half.
 
VinnyHaw

VinnyHaw

Se7enSinner
Mythical Veteran Trifecta End of the Year 2015
Messages
14,055
Reaction score
5,501
Points
2,755
Sin$
7
If they were to do this. what price would it be? I doubt they would cut the price in half.

realistically I would hope to see a $40 USD price tag. But even with that I want a good chunk of game. Not this battlefront bs where in all honestly it felt like it has less content that bf4
 
Cakes

Cakes

お前はもう死んでいる
VIP
Retired
Mythical Veteran Platinum Record End of the Year 2017
Messages
20,705
Reaction score
20,272
Points
3,870
Sin$
-7
I think games should be priced individually tbh. Some games aren't worth nearly the price you have to pay. And some are worth way more than what we do actually pay.

For example, I don't think CoD games should be $60 +tax, but games like Fallout and Tomb Raider should be. And my reasoning being that the level of content, playability and actual honest to god community involvement makes it worth that money.
 
Atlas

Atlas

С.Т.А.Л.К.Е.Р.
VIP
Retired
Hidden Devils
Mythical Veteran Trifecta TotM
Messages
16,791
Solutions
4
Reaction score
13,970
Points
4,722
Sin$
-7
If you look at what Battlefront has to offer it just seems like the MP part of any Battlefield game.
I do agree with the main premise of the thread. I mean, a purely multiplayer game should not really be $60.

One disagreement I have is that I don't think Battefront's MP can really be compared to Battlefield. I know some people have been saying to play Battlefront as if it was a Battlefield game insofar as using cover and advancing as a team as opposed to an arcade-shooter style.

I am currently a level 45 (of 50) on Battlefront, and one thing I can say with over 26 hours of gameplay is that I do not play it like I play Battlefield at all. I don't see them as very similar. At best, I could say Battlefront plays like Red Faction Guerilla without the fully destruct-able structures (keep in mind this destruction was way beyond any destruction Battlefield had, including Bad Co. with terrain as an exception).
Now let’s look at Rainbow Six: Siege. R6 is in the exact same boat in terms of the MP/SP ratio
IIRC, you can play Terrorist Hunt offline in single player. What I am a bit distraught about is that you can't split screen on it. I can't begin to fathom how many hours I spent on Split-screen Terrorist hunt in R6V2.
 
VinnyHaw

VinnyHaw

Se7enSinner
Mythical Veteran Trifecta End of the Year 2015
Messages
14,055
Reaction score
5,501
Points
2,755
Sin$
7
I do agree with the main premise of the thread. I mean, a purely multiplayer game should not really be $60.

One disagreement I have is that I don't think Battefront's MP can really be compared to Battlefield. I know some people have been saying to play Battlefront as if it was a Battlefield game insofar as using cover and advancing as a team as opposed to an arcade-shooter style.

I am currently a level 45 (of 50) on Battlefront, and one thing I can say with over 26 hours of gameplay is that I do not play it like I play Battlefield at all. I don't see them as very similar. At best, I could say Battlefront plays like Red Faction Guerilla without the fully destruct-able structures (keep in mind this destruction was way beyond any destruction Battlefield had, including Bad Co. with terrain as an exception).

IIRC, you can play Terrorist Hunt offline in single player. What I am a bit distraught about is that you can't split screen on it. I can't begin to fathom how many hours I spent on Split-screen Terrorist hunt in R6V2.


T Hunt is like that horde mode in Battlefront. I was talking about a full blown campaign. These 2 modes are (imo) just random multiplayer match types that they decided to allow to work in offline mode).
 
Aghast

Aghast

Retired
Retired
TotM Stickied Beginning of An Odyssey
Messages
2,426
Reaction score
1,553
Points
790
Sin$
7
realistically I would hope to see a $40 USD price tag. But even with that I want a good chunk of game. Not this battlefront bs where in all honestly it felt like it has less content that bf4
$40 dollars does sound reasonable. It doesn't sound smart that they even make multiplayer only games when some people don't have internet
 
Atlas

Atlas

С.Т.А.Л.К.Е.Р.
VIP
Retired
Hidden Devils
Mythical Veteran Trifecta TotM
Messages
16,791
Solutions
4
Reaction score
13,970
Points
4,722
Sin$
-7
T Hunt is like that horde mode in Battlefront. I was talking about a full blown campaign. These 2 modes are (imo) just random multiplayer match types that they decided to allow to work in offline mode).
I'll have to play Terrorist Hunt and see then. I mean, I can tell you easily I would never spend as much time in Battlefront's "Horde" modes as I did on terrorist hunt in R6V2. I feel like I'd spend more time on Terrorist Hunt on Siege than I would in Battlefront's non-MP modes. I'll keep you posted.
 
Stoner

Stoner

THC is a natural medicine
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
1,217
Points
500
Sin$
0
I agree. I don't have Xbox Live yet so I can't play some of these multiplayer games in the first place. Paying sixty bucks for Black Ops three makes no sence. No campaign mode? Ridiculous. Some of us can't afford an Xbox One yet.

Yeah man that sucks I did hear the xbox 360 didn't have a campaign but wasn't sure


I came up with a theory on this last week. Let me try to explain.
(So for this explanation lets just say all games were always $60)

So let’s look at older games and see that they were primarily single player. You paid the $60 and got 100% of a game with single player.
So in this case $60 = 100% of a game

As time went on multiplayer started to be introduced, now let’s say the game was 90% SP and 10% MP. Because that adds up to 100% the games were still $60.

Now let’s look at COD that focused a lot more on MP. Let’s throw some numbers out and say COD is 50% SP and 50% MP. Still warranting that $60 USD.

Now we have 2 new games to look at. Battlefront 3 and Rainbow Six: Siege.

Now both of these games are 100% MP. So to warrant the $60 price tag would still be alright, but are they really 100% MP?


If you look at what Battlefront has to offer it just seems like the MP part of any Battlefield game. So if battlefront mp = the same amount of battlefield 4 mp (battlefield 4 is 50% MP and 50% SP) then that means battlefront is only 50% MP and 0% SP. That does not = the 100% we need to warrant the $60 price tag. Even with DLC that will bump the game to 100% MP the ratio is still broken. Because remember $60 = 100% game. If you were to sell a $30 season pass then the game should now be at 150%.
How to fix this? There are 2 ways:
1 - Offer the game at $30
2 - Offer free DLC that will eventually bump the game to a true 100% MP

Now let’s look at Rainbow Six: Siege. R6 is in the exact same boat in terms of the MP/SP ratio. Except there’s one HUGE difference. At first glance you can see the there’s a season pass. So you figure well, to get the 100% MP just like in Battlefront we have to pay extra.

Except the season pass for R6 only gives you premium weapon skins/extra in game currency/5% exp boost/1 week use of new operators (characters) before non season pass owners/operators are automatically unlocked.
While non season pass owners will still get the new maps/operators (though they must be purchased with the in game currency). So, because R6 is giving out the maps/characters for free, eventually the game will be at the right $60 and 100% game ratio.



Writing this came to me after Kotaku published their article:
http://kotaku.com/multiplayer-only-games-shouldnt-cost-60-1747182497

I think it's bulls*** how a lot more games now are just going multiplayer but could have such a awesome campaign but I agree If they are just going to give us multiplayer the game should be half the price
 
VinnyHaw

VinnyHaw

Se7enSinner
Mythical Veteran Trifecta End of the Year 2015
Messages
14,055
Reaction score
5,501
Points
2,755
Sin$
7
Yeah man that sucks I did hear the xbox 360 didn't have a campaign but wasn't sure




I think it's bulls*** how a lot more games now are just going multiplayer but could have such a awesome campaign but I agree If they are just going to give us multiplayer the game should be half the price


what sucks are the 2 games that could have had awesome stories don't have them. Battlefront could have easily had one (though they obviously don't have it because they wanted to finish the game before the release of the movie) and Rainbow 6 always had awesome campaigns. Vegas 1 and 2 were both awesome games in that respect.
 
Top Bottom
Login
Register