True Ending Allegedly Locked Behind Grind Or Loot Boxes

[Senbon Kaguya]

I can't wait to pay for basic features in the near future.

[atlasxof-]

1 hour ago, ExHaseo said:

There are tons of games that require more work for a true ending. Some even need multiple playthroughs to get the full story. A few that come to mind are many of the Neptunia games, as you generally need to grind shares to get the true ending. Some Assassin's Creed games require 100% to get the true ending, which requires grinding out the same few missions types over and over. Tales of Xillia required two playthroughs to get the whole story, and it was definitely a grind, for me, having to do all of the same dungeons again. Chrono Trigger famously had a lot of different endings, and to get the true ending requires a lot more work and level grinding. Trinity Universe requires a lot of extra grinding by doing extra dungeons, getting the optional characters, and you even have to playthrough two times.

 

Ultimately, what counts as a grind will vary from person to person though. If it's enjoyable for one person the whole way through, it will just feel like a lot of content. If it's a drag for one person, it's going to feel like a grind.

 

Can't say a thing about Neptunia, Trinity and AC games, cause I never got interest on them. As for Xillia I would say it's more a personal opinion. 

Edited October 8, 2017 by Atlas

[KingGuy420]

So let me get this straight...

 

If a game makes you grind for a true ending without micro transactions available, it's fine. But if you get the option to do it faster for a couple bucks it's the devil?

 

Cause I'll tell ya, putting in more hours for a better ending is FAR from a new concept lol. Games have had this as long as video games have been around. How does an optional micro transaction somehow alter a 30+ year old concept?

 

Don't get me wrong, I have my own problems with this games micro transactions. WB is arguably the worst company when it comes to handling them. But blaming an ending grind on them is just ridiculous since games have been doing the true ending thing forever,

[SnowxSakura]

3 minutes ago, KingGuy420 said:

So let me get this straight...

 

If a game makes you grind for a true ending without micro transactions available, it's fine. But if you get the option to do it faster for a couple bucks it's the devil?

 

Cause I'll tell ya, putting in more hours for a better ending is FAR from a new concept lol. Games have had this as long as video games have been around. How does an optional micro transaction somehow alter a 30+ year old concept?

 

Don't get me wrong, I have my own problems with this games micro transactions. WB is arguably the worst company when it comes to handling them. But blaming an ending grind on them is just ridiculous since games have been doing the true ending thing forever,

Well, microtransactions have been around for about as long too, double dragon arcade had them to power up your character or get better weapons. 

[Lance_87]

6 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

Well, microtransactions have been around for about as long too, double dragon arcade had them to power up your character or get better weapons. 

 

B-but arcade games technically always had microtransactions just to play them lol.

 

*starts DD3 on MAME and bashes 5 on the keyboard to get 99 credits*

Edited October 8, 2017 by Lance_87

[KingGuy420]

10 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

Well, microtransactions have been around for about as long too, double dragon arcade had them to power up your character or get better weapons. 

 

Yeah, definitely. I don't think I said anything that goes against that lol.

 

I just think this whole "we have to hate micro transactions for X reason" is turning into a bit of a witch hunt. If you don't like them, don't like them, that's completely up to the persons discretion. I just hate when they try to force that opinion on me. MT haters are getting almost as aggressive about it as the damn vegan that shoots me dirty looks while I eat my steak lol.

 

Stating that it can get you to the true ending faster is redundant. MT's have mostly always been for shortcuts. You wanna get right down to it, they can get you to the regular ending faster too. Hell, a lot of the time they can get you through the tutorial faster. Saying that it can help you 100% the game faster is completely redundant.

[BENJAM1N_LINUS]

2 hours ago, ExHaseo said:

And you've played SoW to know this, right? I don't see it on your profile, did you play it on PC or something? Oh right, it's not out yet, so there's absolutely no way for you to know if it's actually unbalanced, or just reviewers getting butthurt.

Best buy shipped it out and I got my copy on friday

[Undead Wolf]

35 minutes ago, KingGuy420 said:

So let me get this straight...

 

If a game makes you grind for a true ending without micro transactions available, it's fine. But if you get the option to do it faster for a couple bucks it's the devil?

 

Cause I'll tell ya, putting in more hours for a better ending is FAR from a new concept lol. Games have had this as long as video games have been around. How does an optional micro transaction somehow alter a 30+ year old concept?

 

Don't get me wrong, I have my own problems with this games micro transactions. WB is arguably the worst company when it comes to handling them. But blaming an ending grind on them is just ridiculous since games have been doing the true ending thing forever,

 

>Completely ignores the fact that the only reason this grind exists in the first place is because of the microtransactions

 

There's a difference between "putting more hours" into a game for a better ending and making you grind for one, all the while dangling that carrot on the end of a stick in the form of microtransactions. That's just insulting. Of course people have a problem with that...  And as far as I know, the first Middle-earth game didn't force you to grind an excessive amount, so what, should we now be thankful to WB for the inclusion of these "optional" microtransactions? Hell no.

 

I get tired of all these bullshit excuses that you "aren't forced to buy them", etc, etc. The game and its mechanics are literally designed around microtransactions. Simple fact of the matter is that there would be no reason to have this grind if they didn't exist. They don't put them there for show; they want you to buy them.

 

There is no place for an end-game grind like this in a game like Shadow of War. Comparing it to old school RPG's of the past is ridiculous.

[AJ_Radio]

We shall see if this game lives up to expectations and delivers on a good note.

 

If Shadow of War doesn't live up to my standards, there are plenty of other games I can play and enjoy.

 

I'm having a real field day reading all these comments on the microtransactions for this game all over the internet. Not just here.

 

Even if these microtransactions are the worst possible ones, I doubt Warner Bros is going to do much of anything to hear our cries. WB, Activision, EA, Ubisoft, Capcom and Konami are all in the same boat, they're all in it for the money. Nothing else.

 

They have to watch over their investors who have stock in the companies and come up with ways to yield the highest possible return for the lowest effort. It's today's business, it's dirty, it's mean, but that's how it is. The best we can do is try to get off petitions to the point where the companies notice them. The problem is these companies have such a huge share of the market that it doesn't matter if they ignore a large portion of their fan base. They will still make money.

Edited October 8, 2017 by Spaz

[Caesar Clown]

1 hour ago, Cielle said:

 

The Prince of Persia reboot sold you an epilogue. I dunno if its as bad as buying an ending but its a shady road games have been going on.

 

It didn't. It was called "epilogue" but all it did was end with a "To be continued". The sequel (which was on Nintendo DS) was a side-story that again, ended with a "To be continued" since the main plot from the first game hadn't been resolved. And well, there was never a 3rd game, so the whole storyline was just abandoned.

 

Lots of games sell DLC that give you an ending to the game. This one is in-game and lets you just spend time to get it. There's a different between grinding and having to pay $20 for a DLC that's released months after the game was released. Even worse is the games that leave content out and then sell it as DLC later on (Assassin's Creed 2 with the "missing" sequences or Mass Effect 3 and the various DLC like Leviathan which explains the Reaper history or Citadel which provides closure).

[Senbon Kaguya]

8 minutes ago, Caesar Clown said:

 

It didn't. It was called "epilogue" but all it did was end with a "To be continued". The sequel (which was on Nintendo DS) was a side-story that again, ended with a "To be continued" since the main plot from the first game hadn't been resolved. And well, there was never a 3rd game, so the whole storyline was just abandoned.

 

Lots of games sell DLC that give you an ending to the game. This one is in-game and lets you just spend time to get it. There's a different between grinding and having to pay $20 for a DLC that's released months after the game was released. Even worse is the games that leave content out and then sell it as DLC later on (Assassin's Creed 2 with the "missing" sequences or Mass Effect 3 and the various DLC like Leviathan which explains the Reaper history or Citadel which provides closure).

 

I don't mind paying for content that either was made after the game or things like that. Its stuff like you said that has been a problem with me, but will it stop? Most likely not.

 

When you actually cut out story content just to meet the deadline and then sell it later for a higher price or just toss it in the beloved season pass, that's when it becomes a problem for me. But people will keep spending even though it seems the best way to make a change would to be stop buying games or supporting practices like this. It seems when a huge vocal outcry goes out, they try to change it but not to the fullest. I know game developers have to go through a lot now but damn.

 

I just hope it doesn't end up going too far.

Edited October 8, 2017 by Cielle

[KingGuy420]

48 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

The game and its mechanics are literally designed around microtransactions. 

 

Oh so you already played the game? Guess it's hard to debate with time travelers lol.

[Wavergray]

Looking at the quotes from the neogaf thread. It really just sounds like people who are not used to plating/100% games, complaining about stuff.

Make a huge time investment by hunting down orcs in your game world and earning chests via vendetta missions. = Playing the game for a while.

"Doing tons of tedious busywork" = Has never plated a assassin's creed game.

There are more things I could say about those quotes, but you get the idea.

 

Saying stuff like "The grind is only to make people buy the loot boxes" or similar stuff while ignoring the fact that games like assassin's creed whichever and most games in this genre tend to have gameplay cycles like this during the endgame, really makes it seems like people are jumping of the hate bandwagon about stuff again.

 

Yes loot boxes can be trash, but to try and say that it's the loot boxes fault that a game in this genre has this type of gameplay cycle is dumb. 

 

[AndresLionheart]

3 hours ago, ExHaseo said:

I'd like to point out that the grind is there either way. Buying loot boxes can make it easier, as you'll have better stuff. This is absolutely no different than every other game out there that sells DLC weapons or buffs. Like the Tales or Neptunia series. Don't get me wrong, I hate this in all series, but I just wanted to point out that this is by no means a new concept. 

 

I once went through what Tales had for DLC and I laughed my ass off at being able to buy levels or herbs because that stuff is completely worthless. Its so easy to obtain in game and its not needed at all to beat the game with ease. Especially in the latest one, Tales of Berseria, which includes a "Simple" difficulty that basically lets you win by mashing a button or letting the AI do all the battles.

In the case of Shadow of War we are talking about a 40 hour grind to be able to see the true ending, a main part of the game, when Tales only gives you a Trophy for getting a character to max level (which can still easily be done on a second playthrough with 10x exp that is unlocked for NG+, you know, FREE cheats!)

 

2 hours ago, ExHaseo said:

 Tales of Xillia required two playthroughs to get the whole story, and it was definitely a grind, for me, having to do all of the same dungeons again.

 

It doesn't require 2 playthoughs to see the ending, though. You just get some different scenes at some points when the characters are split, but unless you are going for the plat there is no point playing both characters.

 

There is a definition for "Grinding", its not something that is subjective. Grinding means repeating the same action again and again in order to gain something. Doing the same type of quest 20 times in grinding. Playing through a game a second time is not grinding (especially when there are differences in that other playthrough).

 

3 hours ago, madbuk said:

In Tales games, you can buy 2X XP, 2X Gald, etc., but the game without them isn't exactly unbalanced and requiring of a large RNG grind just to see the ending.

Shadow of War, however, is unbalanced in a way that is constructed solely to get you to buy their loot boxes just to see the ending cutscene of a game.

 

This is nothing like Tales.

 

Not to mention that you can plow through the game on the easier difficlties and that you can get 2x to 10x EXP on NG+ with very easy to obtain Grade.

[Cobby]

As long as it's not locked behind a deadlock seal ... Not even a sonic screwdriver can open those. 

[atlasxof-]

34 minutes ago, soultaker655 said:

Looking at the quotes from the neogaf thread. It really just sounds like people who are not used to plating/100% games, complaining about stuff.

Make a huge time investment by hunting down orcs in your game world and earning chests via vendetta missions. = Playing the game for a while.

"Doing tons of tedious busywork" = Has never plated a assassin's creed game.

There are more things I could say about those quotes, but you get the idea.

 

Saying stuff like "The grind is only to make people buy the loot boxes" or similar stuff while ignoring the fact that games like assassin's creed whichever and most games in this genre tend to have gameplay cycles like this during the endgame, really makes it seems like people are jumping of the hate bandwagon about stuff again.

 

Yes loot boxes can be trash, but to try and say that it's the loot boxes fault that a game in this genre has this type of gameplay cycle is dumb. 

 

 

They have value for games such as Overwatch, can't be all that trash yo. 

[damon8r351]

42 comments in only a few hours...

 

Is this game even out yet?

[ExHaseo]

3 hours ago, AndresLionheart said:

I once went through what Tales had for DLC and I laughed my ass off at being able to buy levels or herbs because that stuff is completely worthless. Its so easy to obtain in game and its not needed at all to beat the game with ease. Especially in the latest one, Tales of Berseria, which includes a "Simple" difficulty that basically lets you win by mashing a button or letting the AI do all the battles.

In the case of Shadow of War we are talking about a 40 hour grind to be able to see the true ending, a main part of the game, when Tales only gives you a Trophy for getting a character to max level (which can still easily be done on a second playthrough with 10x exp that is unlocked for NG+, you know, FREE cheats!)

 

It doesn't require 2 playthoughs to see the ending, though. You just get some different scenes at some points when the characters are split, but unless you are going for the plat there is no point playing both characters.

 

There is a definition for "Grinding", its not something that is subjective. Grinding means repeating the same action again and again in order to gain something. Doing the same type of quest 20 times in grinding. Playing through a game a second time is not grinding (especially when there are differences in that other playthrough).

 

Not to mention that you can plow through the game on the easier difficlties and that you can get 2x to 10x EXP on NG+ with very easy to obtain Grade.

 

The point isn't that it's not possible without the DLC, or how difficult it is with or without the DLC, it's that it exists, and has existed for a long time. It is optional DLC that makes the game easier. It is in effect exactly the same as this Shadow of War DLC. Both were put in to make the game easier. It's not needed in either case, but it makes both easier. Both are the same in principle, that's the main point I'm trying to make. This kind of thing has existed for a very long time. If it's escalating to the extent that these reviewers claim, then it's no one's fault except those that have supported and defended that kind of DLC for years.

When I looked up the definition for "Grinding", I got "(of a state) oppressive, tedious, and seemingly without end". When it comes to gaming, anything can feel like it's tedious and lasting for a long time, seemingly without end. It all depends on the person. That may be YOUR definition of grinding, but that's not how a lot of people feel. I've seen people talk about grinding playing through games like Banjo Kazooie, and even the Call of Duty story mode. If it feels like it's tedious and taking a while, it could be considered grinding to someone. Which is why grinding is subjective.

 

I'm not going to argue the other stuff, because I honestly just don't have time to argue with someone who's obviously biased.

[Paige-ID]

So again, the game is simply grindy, but you can spend money to make it go faster.

 

A few more games that require lots of grinding for 100%/true ending.

 

GTA 4

GTA 5

Tales games/most JRPGs

Final Fantasy 13

Battlefield Bad Company 2

Battlefield 3 (either grind to get your loadout or just buy the weapons unlocked, your choice - nobody said a word)

Battlefield Hardline

Assassin's Creed

Cross Edge

etc.

 

Even Pokemon was incredibly grindy to get the true ending (lol), AND you had to use either a friend or buy both versions!

 

The game being grindy is a complaint that I find valid. Having the option to (maybe, if you're lucky) make it go faster? I wish most of the aforementioned games allowed me to spend $5 to make the grind go away. It would've saved me from having to play them far beyond their welcome.

 

Edited October 9, 2017 by Paige-ID

[Maxie_M0us3]

I’ve never been interested to Middle-Earth or LOTR games and it’s better staying this way.

 

As everyone said, I’m a 101% proud anti-microtransaction activist. I’ll never EVER purchase a single loot box or any form of microtransaction with real money! (loot boxes earned by natural playtime can be okay, but still the intention behind it is sick...)

 

You should feel ashamed of yourselves you guys who support this disgusting greedy trend! You’re now happy that the true ending is now hiding behind a paywall?!?!?! Thank you very much guys! Shame on you!

Edited October 9, 2017 by Maxie Mouse

[audiopile]

So they program in grindy to encourage us to pay for shortcuts. You do realize there is no way to win this fight?

 

We do it to ourselves people.  Racing to be the first cattle to slaughter. I shake my head. 

 

Simple rules that will make change for our benefit:

Never preorder, don’t buy new or day one, don’t purchase microtrans or shortcuts and do your best to avoid purchasing DLC at release or for full price. All games should be acquired at a discount.

 

Why does a physical copy cost the same as a digital?  Think about it. Digitals should be 5-10$ cheaper all day every day.  Don’t tell me it’ll kill the brick and mortar. That’s BS. 

 

Sadly there are too many dumbies in this world. (also our fault and completely avoidable but an entirely different topic)

[AJ_Radio]

1 hour ago, damon8r351 said:

42 comments in only a few hours...

 

Is this game even out yet?

 

If you're one of the lucky few who got the game early. Shadow of War doesn't officially release until this Tuesday.

 

People are butthurt because Shadow of War and Shadow of Mordor are for the most part, single player. They say microtransactions are fine for a multiplayer game or a free to play game any moron can get through their smart phone. But when they see it being done for a single player game they go ass over tea kettle.

 

We'll see how this game will fare. The people who already own and play this game are being silent about it, though I won't blame them since it's not technically out just yet.

 

1 hour ago, ExHaseo said:

 

The point isn't that it's not possible without the DLC, or how difficult it is with or without the DLC, it's that it exists, and has existed for a long time. It is optional DLC that makes the game easier. It is in effect exactly the same as this Shadow of War DLC. Both were put in to make the game easier. It's not needed in either case, but it makes both easier. Both are the same in principle, that's the main point I'm trying to make. This kind of thing has existed for a very long time. If it's escalating to the extent that these reviewers claim, then it's no one's fault except those that have supported and defended that kind of DLC for years.

 

The Tank Suit in Dead Space is DLC that makes the game easier, and you have to pay for it. Dead Space released in 2008, nearly a decade ago. If people were going to complain about DLC and microtransactions, it should of been then.

 

But from my experience on the internet, going back a good 15 years or so, people are easy to forget things.

 

30 minutes ago, Maxie Mouse said:

I’ve never been interested to Middle-Earth or LOTR games and it’s better staying this way.

 

I guess you're not into the lore or the story to these games. Oh well. You can't please everyone.

 

26 minutes ago, audiopile said:

So they program in grindy to encourage us to pay for shortcuts. You do realize there is no way to win this fight?

 

We do it to ourselves people.  Racing to be the first cattle to slaughter. I shake my head. 

 

Simple rules that will make change for our benefit:

Never preorder, don’t buy new or day one, don’t purchase microtrans or shortcuts and do your best to avoid purchasing DLC at release or for full price. All games should be acquired at a discount.

 

Why does a physical copy cost the same as a digital?  Think about it. Digitals should be 5-10$ cheaper all day every day.  Don’t tell me it’ll kill the brick and mortar. That’s BS. 

 

Sadly there are too many dumbies in this world. (also our fault and completely avoidable but an entirely different topic)

 

It's been going on for a very long time my man. People complained about DLC when it first surfaced because they felt that they weren't getting the full package. In some cases yes, some developers/companies are scumbags and lock a piece of content behind a DLC, when it is actually on the game disc or copy of the game you purchased.

 

Nobody is telling you to buy this game or buy any DLC. If you don't want to get any DLC that's completely up to you. The fact is, we lost this fight over a decade ago.

 

I barely preorder anything anymore because I simply don't have the money to buy every single game coming out that's priced at $59.99. Doesn't mean that won't stop people from buying games they've been looking forward to for months, sometimes years in some cases.

 

There are plenty of options to buy cheaper. I get my physical copies used off of Amazon, but there are other websites that sell used copies of games you want. You can even shop around on eBay, or do a trade in with someone.

 

Unfortunately for digital you have to go through the PSN store. Understandably a lot of the games they offer are over priced. Only ways to get around that are to buy the game at it's listed price, or wait for a sale.

 

People are sheep. Our current White House administration and state of affairs in America pretty much proves this. But I'd rather not get into any politics.

Edited October 9, 2017 by Spaz

[DF007gamer]

It's simple. Vote with your wallet.

[Cleggworth]

1 hour ago, audiopile said:

 

Why does a physical copy cost the same as a digital?  Think about it. Digitals should be 5-10$ cheaper all day every day.  Don’t tell me it’ll kill the brick and mortar. That’s BS. 

 

They cannot undercut retail partners because without retail partners who is going to sell their hardware? You cannot buy a PS4 digitally. Digital on PC has taken off because there is no hardware for them to push.

 

Personally I don't see the point behind refusing to buy a game because it has microtransactions. I don't think you'd be sending them any message, at least not the message you want. If you play the game as normal and don't buy any lootboxes you're letting them know that '"yes I like this game but no I do not wish to spend any money on lootboxes". If you don't buy it all they are just going to hear "Well this game didn't sell great, let's can the series and come up with something else". Their sales numbers aren't going to differentiate between a lost sale due to "microtransactions protest" or just general lack of interest in the game. A sale and no lootbox purchases is going to show up in their figures though

 

 

Edited October 9, 2017 by Cleggworth

[Lance_87]

5 hours ago, Spaz said:

The Tank Suit in Dead Space is DLC that makes the game easier, and you have to pay for it. Dead Space released in 2008, nearly a decade ago. If people were going to complain about DLC and microtransactions, it should of been then.

 

Really? Well i have the game for PC and DLC never existed for this game and the sequel lol.

 

5 hours ago, DF007gamer said:

It's simple. Vote with your wallet.

 

"Vote with your wallet"

"Don't buy DLC so they'll stop making them"

 

Now we have like 700% more DLC than a decade ago...

Edited October 9, 2017 by Lance_87