Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
16 days 18 hours
Dark Souls III
4 days 23 hours
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
4 days 9 hours
Sid Meier's Civilization V
3 days 5 hours
Bad news hits, as Mystery champion shards aren't purchasable unless there's enough unpredictability in the outcome... http://puu.sh/yqQlL/a3b93ecf9d.jpg
The new leveling system is dropping a champion crate each level right now (approximately 1000BE each crate) but that is going to slow down (higher levels taking longer to unlock + dropping fewer champs over skins). Seems like BE is going to be coming in slower than new champs are getting priced/released...
EDIT: This isn't even starting to talk about the costs to get Mastery 6 or 7 on champions (3250 and 3900BE respectively!). They're going to burn BE stores from everyone...
I wasn't aware of this when I wrote the article, and in fact only found out myself last night - there was no way for me to test this on either my personal or PBE account, and it's not been mentioned at all by Riot.
More has come out about the system in the last week, and it's very possible I revisit this article later when we know even more. I might suggest that events like the Zoe mission granting bonus XP is a step in the right direction, but Riot need to be doing significantly more at this point.
I'm not trying to defend the decision to put statistical buffs behind micro-transactions. They made BF2 the literal definition of pay-to-win (the main reason I haven't considered buying the game).
The decision to drop loot box sales (and income) to repair the community backlash though? I'll give credit where it's due. This was the best scenario possible for gamers at the moment. This is the end of my complements for EA though, and the beginning of my skepticism.
If you read my original comment you'll notice I still think they'll put themselves first in the long run, but they won't be as blatant as they were on release.
The entire idea of loot boxes over DLC is a good way for them to earn more money. More people will start to invest if the first barrier is lower (1, 5, I assume 10 loot boxes are still cheaper than an average DLC these days). The lower the price and the greater the reward, the more likely people return and pay more. Addicted investors will keep buying the loot boxes till they have everything (far more income than DLCs) whilst those that previously didn't want to invest £40+ on Expansion Passes will now be tricked into spending more slowly through £2-£10 packages.
Statistically speaking its a flat-out win for EA. It would have been a win for customers too, if only they hadn't imbalanced the game to give payers a literal advantage. Give them skins, or let them unlock kit faster. But don't allow their rockets to shoot further, to come off cool-down faster, or deal more damage. By giving abilities 'levels' to progress through forces people who dont want to invest to either specify into 1 roll or to be at a disadvantage to others. The ideal way to remove satisfying competition from the game.
We can hope customer complaints continue to the point that they re-balance to remove the stronger P2W aspects, but odds are against it. Either they find a way to earn their money, or costs will be cut with DLCs being shortened/rushed out the doors.
Somebody calculated that to get everything you would have to spend thousands of hours or 2100$. How is that a better deal than 50$ for last year's season pass?
They aren't putting the gamer first. If they were putting the gamer first they wouldn't have to try and put out this dumpster fire in the first place.
As far as I can tell, the 'random champion' token can only sell you champions you don't own, much the same as the re-roll system could only roll you champions you didn't own. It seems like a pretty good idea, especially for people who'll only want to buy the newest champ, but it's definitely annoying that they've removed re-rolls.
They left a note in the warning panel 2-3 days ago saying they raised the price of the mystery champion token, also raising the minimum IP value of these mystery champions. Whilst I can't remember the exact wording anymore, they said it in such a way as to clarify it's limited to champions you don't own. Good news.
The way league has worked before with these deals (previously if you re-rolled 3 champs when you owned all champs) is to give you an unlocked champion shard of a random champion that you do own. I've assumed it's the same with the mystery champion token in the store now, but after a BE spending spree I don't have enough to mess around buying champ tokens (Riot have previously stated champ tokens and boxes content are decided on moment of purchase, so buying a token now wouldn't get me Zoe come her release).
I feel more confident now that champs will still be cheap enough to keep unlocking on release, but I'll return and say for certain come her release.
Apologies but I’m not entirely sure if I follow you correctly, I presume when you talk about gameplay-less DLCs you mean patches/updates that add micro-transaction content to the game?
Whilst technically speaking skins or updates are a form of content, I’d argue that these micro-transactions are nothing more than that, places for people to invest into the game. These would include things like Destiny 1 (and 2 I believe)’s Silver, Star Wars: Battlefront 2’s loot boxes, AC Origins shops weapons/armour and League of Legends skins. It’d also argue they’re not DLC, as rarely do you have to download any files to open/use the microtransaction items (instead being locked files already in the game).
I’ve never really worried over these micro-transactions either, as I’ve managed to resist purchasing any packs I regret. There are always prices you look at and question ‘why’, but others who love the game decide they want to invest that much into the title they really enjoy. For purchasable rewards to exist at the higher boundaries makes sense for me, so long as they don’t disadvantage those that don’t pay (something that the community has recently picked up on and started to complain about).
I believed that the community (and gaming companies) had reached a consensus in this decision, and had also adjusted their usage of the term ‘DLC’, reserving it to cover ‘Expansion Packs’ only. Am I wrong in this assumption? Off the top of my head I can’t think of any companies that are happy to name their small updates and skins as DLCs, but I’m all-ears to titles or names.
I'm just going off that it's all categorised as "DLC" under Steam, and I know I've read news releases that will say "New DLC for [game]" and it's a skin pack (Rocket League is an example of this). I'm not aware that there's been some sort of official categorisation.
As to whether it 'actually' has to be downloaded or not is up to the developer, really, there are plenty of games that download the content regardless of whether you've paid to 'add' it, so I wouldn't think that's a good metric for classification. I believe Forza Horizon 3 does this with its expansions (could be wrong, I'll find out tomorrow), as an example.