Devil May Cry 5 has multiplayer and microtransactions

[Feral]

It's a shocking revelation but just because a game has microtransactions doesn't mean you have to spend money on them.

[Guest]

Can’t Capcom just do what Naughty Dog pulled off with Uncharted 3 and release the online multiplayer as a standalone F2P release?

 

Also is Ninja Theory the developer of this entry in the DmC series or have they moved on from it making this the first game in the franchise not made by the original devs? I have no clue at all.

[SnowxSakura]

9 hours ago, Skeptical69 said:

Can’t Capcom just do what Naughty Dog pulled off with Uncharted 3 and release the online multiplayer as a standalone F2P release?

 

Also is Ninja Theory the developer of this entry in the DmC series or have they moved on from it making this the first game in the franchise not made by the original devs? I have no clue at all.

No, this is a direct sequel to devil may cry 4, so capcom is the developer, plus Microsoft owns ninja theory now. DmC is a completely different universe than the original devil may cry, it has nothing to do with this game or any of the previous capcom developed entries 

 

Also you guys are forgetting devil may cry 3 had a co-operative mode in it, so multiplayer in 5 isn't a new idea

 

Edited September 25, 2018 by SnowxSakura

[Mog]

7 minutes ago, Skeptical69 said:

Can’t Capcom just do what Naughty Dog pulled off with Uncharted 3 and release the online multiplayer as a standalone F2P release?

 

Also is Ninja Theory the developer of this entry in the DmC series or have they moved on from it making this the first game in the franchise not made by the original devs? I have no clue at all.

 

The title of the article is clickbait, the "multiplayer" is based off of the store listings saying that the game will have co-op, nowhere does it say it will have PvP.

 

Ninja Theory has nothing to do with this game. DmC Devil May Cry did however have a few Capcom developers overlooking the project, so it wasn't 100% "not made by the original devs".

[FawltyPowers]

I'm confused by this. They say the game is balanced well, without the need to buy red orbs, yet they are adding functionality to buy red orbs which will, as a consequence, affect how the game is balanced!

 

If the function is there to help those that are having trouble with the game then isn't that what difficulty modes are for?

 

Also confused why anyone would defend in game real money transactions in a game you've already paid for? Baffling.

 

As for anything multiplayer wise, if any of the trophies require being online then this game is gone from my list. I play DMC games because of single player.

 

Feeling disappointed with what I'm hearing right now, especially with the excellent footage I've seen but I'll reserve judgement until I know how this is going to play out.

[majob]

13 hours ago, jrdemr said:

 

There's a difference between being forced to buy the microtransactions and the entire game being rendered unbalanced because of their presence. That's what we're worried for, because if that is the case, then the game is unbalanced for everyone, regardless of who actually pays extra or not.

Also, there's literally no downside - to publishers, that is - to including the option to purchase things through microtransactions. Even if no one actually buys them, it's no real skin off the developers' back. It's not like they wasted a whole lot of time and money just implementing the microtransaction system, should be pretty simple. They have a whole lot more to win than they have to lose, so I don't see them going away soon - unless, that is, publishers grow an actual pair and start valuing their respect for their customers more than their wallets.

But make no mistake: in the majority of cases, whenever microtransactions are present in a game, you are being compelled to buy them. Not forced, but compelled. Most publishers wouldn't implement a system like that in a game and then put no incentive for people to use it.

Let's just hope this game is one of the exceptions...

To "compell" someone to do something means force or intimidation is involved and a developer is  not, nor able to, force you to buy their MCT. You spend your money on them or you don't, there are no reprecussions

 

I'd also say there's a difference between buying faster than levels and buying powerful equipment that can only be purchased with actual money when it comes to balance. Someone buying levels doesn't take away your ability to grind yours out for free. One took a shortcut, the other took a longer route.

 

And I don't feel disrespected by MCT because I'm not forced to buy them, it's not disrespectful, it's business and that's what these companies are in it for. The very process of making the game itself is business, they're not doing it out of the kindness of their hearts, they want money. If a game has MCT and you're not on board, don't buy them, it's simple. There's choices here, not force and if you don't like the choice, don't buy, it's your money, the only way they get it is if you give it to them

Edited September 25, 2018 by majob

[Dark Layla]

20 hours ago, PermaFox said:

Honestly?  Will be interesting to see how well that is received.

It makes no difference to me.
It's not something that forces me to spend real money!
Uncharted 4 and the last of us also have microtransactions and i did everything at 100% without spending real money.
 

[Lance_87]

9 hours ago, SnowxSakura said:

No, this is a direct sequel to devil may cry 4

 

Direct sequel to DMC2, actually. DMC4 is set between 1 and 2. Yeah i know, DMC2 is ugly, it shouldn't exist and whatever.

 

DMC3 with coop... i love how they put multiplayer features and nobody remembers them. Does anyone remember "multiplayer" in FF4-5-6-9?

 

15 minutes ago, Nimera said:

It makes no difference to me.
It's not something that forces me to spend real money!
Uncharted 4 and the last of us also have microtransactions and i did everything at 100% without spending real money.
 

 

Yeah i also remember at least two Need for Speed games on PS3 which featured microtransactions but the games could be fully completed without them. They were more "early unlocks" though. Oh wait, DMC5's MTs are simply early unlocks.

Edited September 25, 2018 by Lance_87

[Dark Layla]

3 minutes ago, Lance_87 said:

Yeah i also remember at least two Need for Speed games on PS3 which featured microtransactions but the games could be fully completed without them. They were more "early unlocks" though. Oh wait, DMC5's MTs are simply early unlocks.

For those who play DMC4: SE for the first time also has this type of "early unlocks"
 

[SnowxSakura]

48 minutes ago, Lance_87 said:

 

Direct sequel to DMC2, actually. DMC4 is set between 1 and 2. Yeah i know, DMC2 is ugly, it shouldn't exist and whatever.

 

DMC3 with coop... i love how they put multiplayer features and nobody remembers them. Does anyone remember "multiplayer" in FF4-5-6-9?

 

 

Yeah i also remember at least two Need for Speed games on PS3 which featured microtransactions but the games could be fully completed without them. They were more "early unlocks" though. Oh wait, DMC5's MTs are simply early unlocks.

Wasn't referring to the timeline, was saying that it's a direct sequel from 4, rather than a sequel to DmC devil may cry

[Zenpai]

1 hour ago, majob said:

To "compell" someone to do something means force or intimidation is involved and a developer is  not, nor able to, force you to buy their MCT. You spend your money on them or you don't, there are no reprecussions

 

I'd also say there's a difference between buying faster than levels and buying powerful equipment that can only be purchased with actual money when it comes to balance. Someone buying levels doesn't take away your ability to grind yours out for free. One took a shortcut, the other took a longer route.

 

And I don't feel disrespected by MCT because I'm not forced to buy them, it's not disrespectful, it's business and that's what these companies are in it for. The very process of making the game itself is business, they're not doing it out of the kindness of their hearts, they want money. If a game has MCT and you're not on board, don't buy them, it's simple. There's choices here, not force and if you don't like the choice, don't buy, it's your money, the only way they get it is if you give it to them

 

I feel like I had a similar back-and-forth with someone a few months ago, but anyway...

To "compel" doesn't necessarily mean "to force", as in "putting a gun to your head", it can also mean "to strongly pressure into doing something". My fear is that this will be the worst kind of microtransaction system where you feel pressured by the game into buying red orbs with real money just because of how unbearable the grind is, like in Battlefront II and Shadow of War. Think of it as the game constantly whispering into your ear "hey, you get so few of these red orbs... I'm betting you want to just buy some and finally get all those juicy upgrades. Don't you? DONTCHA?!".

From what I could gather throughout the internet, it seems like the game will be balanced just like all previous titles in the franchise, but again, from the moment they added the option to pay with actual money, Capcom lost all benefit of the doubt. If giving us "the option" to advance faster was all they really wanted, they could have just put an "ultra easy mode" with increased drops or have some cheat codes in there. I'm also not very fond of the way the revive feature seems to be implemented in the new game (where you pay for revives with increasing amounts of red orbs instead of gold orbs), looks like the perfect excuse to incentivize the purchasing of red orbs with real money.

And just because you don't feel disrespected doesn't mean this measure isn't disrespectful, the same way that if a person insults you and it's no skin off your back, doesn't mean that they weren't being disrespectful. Insults are always disrespectful and the same applies to microtransactions in games you already paid for. So I already paid for the full game and yet they still want more? That sure seems to me as nothing short of saying that the money I paid for the game isn't enough for them.

And sure, companies are in the business to make money, no doubt about that. But just because they can implement microtransactions, doesn't mean they should. There's a very big difference between something being legal and something being ethical. And to ask more of your customers after they paid for your full game doesn't seem ethical (or respectful) at all to me.

 

[Mog]

4 hours ago, FawltyPowers said:

Also confused why anyone would defend in game real money transactions in a game you've already paid for? Baffling.

Has anyone really defended microtransactions? So far what i've seen are just people accepting it because it's done well here, similar to the lootboxes in Overwatch, but not outright defending it. I don't think anyone defends DLCs or Season Passes either, who likes paying $20 ~ $40 after the base $60?

 

4 hours ago, FawltyPowers said:

I'm confused by this. They say the game is balanced well, without the need to buy red orbs, yet they are adding functionality to buy red orbs which will, as a consequence, affect how the game is balanced!

 

It doesn't affect the enemy balancing because the buyable moves won't be 1-shotting anyone, unless of course you are playing at a lower difficulty where this is natural.

 

There is however the option to respawn by using the Red Orbs now, this is the only thing i was skeptical about when i read about it. I've read that you can choose to respawn (with Red Orbs) at low, medium or full health, or if you don't have enough orbs, you can respawn at the last checkpoint. I wonder how that will play out? I'm assuming this "Red Orb respawn" works like the Gold Orbs in DMC3 where it spawns you back immediately where you died, and the "0 orb respawn" would be the Yellow Orb respawn, where it puts you at the start of the fight.

 

At the end of the day it works similarly to the other DMC games (Gold-Yellow Orbs in DMC3), so i'm not really worried, i believe people are only making a big deal out of this because it's happening after the EA fiasco with Star Wars (2017), Capcom has been adding these things to their paid games for a while now, even the DmC reboot (2013) had some DLC packs that gave you a Red Orb boost, yet nobody talked about it back then, RE Revelations 2 (2015) is even balanced around the microtransactions, where the game's mechanics are constantly trying to get you to buy the microtransactions in Raid Mode, and nobody says a word about it. ?

[Lance_87]

29 minutes ago, Ren said:

even the DmC reboot (2013) had some DLC packs that gave you a Red Orb boost, yet nobody talked about it back then

 

Nobody talked about it back then simply because they were in DMC4SE.

[Mog]

Just now, Lance_87 said:

Nobody talked about it back then simply because they were in DMC4SE.

 

DMC4SE came after DmC.

[Conor]

Honestly I'm quite shocked by the indifference to this crap ITT

 

These should not exist

 

Microtransactions in any form in a $60 game is bullshit. Doesn't matter if it affects the balancing of this particular game or not. This kind of complacency is how microtransactions, season passes and incomplete games cut up and sold to you in pieces for extra cash rose in the first place. I'd hate to be in a position where I look back in a few years and think "Damn, I should have spoken up and done whatever I could to discourage this crap".

[Mog]

21 minutes ago, LepreCon1991 said:

Honestly I'm quite shocked by the indifference to this crap ITT

 

These should not exist

 

Microtransactions in any form in a $60 game is bullshit. Doesn't matter if it affects the balancing of this particular game or not. This kind of complacency is how microtransactions, season passes and incomplete games cut up and sold to you in pieces for extra cash rose in the first place. I'd hate to be in a position where I look back in a few years and think "Damn, I should have spoken up and done whatever I could to discourage this crap".

 

The problem is not that it exists but that people buy it, as long as people are buying, companies will keep releasing DLCs, MTX and Season Passes. You've just got to hope they don't do it like EA did with Star Wars at this point. These 3 things are not going away any time soon unfortunately, if it sells, it will keep coming. :/ 

 

[majob]

3 hours ago, jrdemr said:

 

I feel like I had a similar back-and-forth with someone a few months ago, but anyway...

To "compel" doesn't necessarily mean "to force", as in "putting a gun to your head", it can also mean "to strongly pressure into doing something". My fear is that this will be the worst kind of microtransaction system where you feel pressured by the game into buying red orbs with real money just because of how unbearable the grind is, like in Battlefront II and Shadow of War. Think of it as the game constantly whispering into your ear "hey, you get so few of these red orbs... I'm betting you want to just buy some and finally get all those juicy upgrades. Don't you? DONTCHA?!".

From what I could gather throughout the internet, it seems like the game will be balanced just like all previous titles in the franchise, but again, from the moment they added the option to pay with actual money, Capcom lost all benefit of the doubt. If giving us "the option" to advance faster was all they really wanted, they could have just put an "ultra easy mode" with increased drops or have some cheat codes in there. I'm also not very fond of the way the revive feature seems to be implemented in the new game (where you pay for revives with increasing amounts of red orbs instead of gold orbs), looks like the perfect excuse to incentivize the purchasing of red orbs with real money.

And just because you don't feel disrespected doesn't mean this measure isn't disrespectful, the same way that if a person insults you and it's no skin off your back, doesn't mean that they weren't being disrespectful. Insults are always disrespectful and the same applies to microtransactions in games you already paid for. So I already paid for the full game and yet they still want more? That sure seems to me as nothing short of saying that the money I paid for the game isn't enough for them.

And sure, companies are in the business to make money, no doubt about that. But just because they can implement microtransactions, doesn't mean they should. There's a very big difference between something being legal and something being ethical. And to ask more of your customers after they paid for your full game doesn't seem ethical (or respectful) at all to me.

 

That's not really compelling, that's incentivsing and all companies do that. McDonald's tries to get you to buy a combo when you order a sandwich. An electronic store tries to get you to buy a warranty or a store tries to push you to get a store credit card. The final choice is still on you and no one else can compell you to do otherwise. If you think they're forcing you to do something then I'd say that's something entirely in your head.

 

 

Nothing ever ends with the final sale for a business, most of their money comes from the little things instead of the product purchase so why presume they're satisfied with the final sale? Doesn't change the fact that while they may want your money, it's entirely on you if you give it to them

 

And there's nothing unethical about MCT. Unethical is cheating payroll, performing illegal operations or shafting your employees out of a contract agreement clause. Andding additional points of sale in a product may be "unsavory" but it's not unethical. People make moutains out of molehills on this issue. Unless that company has somehow found a way to force you to pay for what they're pushing I feel there's no real issue. They tell you speak with your wallet for a reason

 

48 minutes ago, LepreCon1991 said:

Honestly I'm quite shocked by the indifference to this crap ITT

 

These should not exist

 

Microtransactions in any form in a $60 game is bullshit. Doesn't matter if it affects the balancing of this particular game or not. This kind of complacency is how microtransactions, season passes and incomplete games cut up and sold to you in pieces for extra cash rose in the first place. I'd hate to be in a position where I look back in a few years and think "Damn, I should have spoken up and done whatever I could to discourage this crap".

Games have been sold incomplete for decades. It didn't suddenly change when DLC became a thing

[Lance_87]

1 hour ago, Ren said:

 

DMC4SE came after DmC.

 

Yes, but they weren't in DmC.

[Mog]

6 minutes ago, Lance_87 said:

Yes, but they weren't in DmC.

 

Yes they were. Each skin pack DLC gave a different bonus, one of them was a Red Orb boost.

[Lance_87]

50 minutes ago, Ren said:

 

Yes they were. Each skin pack DLC gave a different bonus, one of them was a Red Orb boost.

 

Oh, ok, but that wasn't a microtransaction. There are many games with DLC that give a little boost for experience, upgrade points, or whatever. Some are even exclusive to DLC in the form of in-game items unobtainable otherwise.

Edited September 25, 2018 by Lance_87

[Zenpai]

1 hour ago, majob said:

That's not really compelling, that's incentivsing and all companies do that. McDonald's tries to get you to buy a combo when you order a sandwich. An electronic store tries to get you to buy a warranty or a store tries to push you to get a store credit card. The final choice is still on you and no one else can compell you to do otherwise. If you think they're forcing you to do something then I'd say that's something entirely in your head.

 

It's a bit different, because in those cases, all I have to do is say "no" once and nobody will bother me again, but in this case, if the entire game is balanced around microtransactions (i.e. the red orb drops are purposefully made excessively low), then every time I play it, the game design itself will be constantly telling me how many more red orbs I could be getting in comparison if I just paid up.

Anyway, not saying that's what will happen for sure, just what our collective fears are, but I don't really want to get into a semantics discussion here.

 

1 hour ago, majob said:

Nothing ever ends with the final sale for a business, most of their money comes from the little things instead of the product purchase so why presume they're satisfied with the final sale? Doesn't change the fact that while they may want your money, it's entirely on you if you give it to them

 

I buy tons of stuff that don't require me to pay a single penny afterwards. Whenever I buy a book, I don't have to make any additional expenses. I just... buy a book and that's it.

 

I do realize that some things do require you to make additional investments, but to say that everything does... bit of an overreach there. And even when something does require you to make an additional investment, most of the time it's just because things normally wear down and break down with time, not because your product is purposefully made incomplete so as to make you spend the extra cash. There are cases like the ones you mentioned, but not only are those few and far between, I will also call bullshit on those. I mean, the Nintendo 3DS shipping without a charger just because it's the same one as the DSi? Get the fuck outta here.

 

1 hour ago, majob said:

And there's nothing unethical about MCT. Unethical is cheating payroll, performing illegal operations or shafting your employees out of a contract agreement clause. Andding additional points of sale in a product may be "unsavory" but it's not unethical. People make moutains out of molehills on this issue. Unless that company has somehow found a way to force you to pay for what they're pushing I feel there's no real issue. They tell you speak with your wallet for a reason

 

I KNEW I had this exact argument not that long ago.

You're mixing up "unethical" with "illegal".

 

 

       

 

 

Something being ethical doesn't necessarily mean it's legal, nor vice-versa. There were a ton of laws during Nazi Germany that were entirely unethical, yet perfectly legal at the time. The same way, black people only won a lot of rights back in the 60s because they broke a lot of laws for something that was (and is) entirely ethical.

 

1 hour ago, majob said:

Games have been sold incomplete for decades. It didn't suddenly change when DLC became a thing

 

Games not only came fully complete back before the end of the 7th generation, they even frequently came with a lot of bonus features and sometimes even full games as an extra (I remember, for instance, Tekken 5, which came with the arcade modes for Tekken 1, 2 and 3 included in the disc). I wonder if you could say the same thing about any game released in the last... 5 years or something.

 

 

To be honest, you just look like you're scrambling for defensive arguments just because you really want to be excited for this game and don't want people to rain down on your parade. And I get it. I bought every single DMC game and am excited as hell for this one. But I'm not going to pretend that this doesn't worry me, nor am I going to defend a practice that I would absolutely condemn were it present in games I had absolutely no interest in whatsoever. As I said before, just because you're not actually told at gunpoint to buy the microtransactions doesn't mean the game won't be designed around them - and hence rendered an unbalanced grindfest - for everyone, regardless of who pays up or not. And that's what we're worried about. We're not saying that this is what will happen, we're worried because this opens up the door to the possibility that it might happen.

And we're also just pissed that one of the games we're most excited for decided to implement a feature that should never be present in a full-priced title. If we buy a full game, we expect it not to have features designed for free-to-play games, especially when those features are frequently associated with turning those games into unbearable grindfests.

[Valyrious]

Kind of like the idea of doing Bloody Palace with my best friend. Will it make it easy? I don't know, it's not like bloody palaces are the pinnacle of difficulty... but they do take at least an hour, and that hour of play would be more fun if spent with a friend, so I'll be interested to see how it ends up.

Microtransactions to speed up player growth is simply for gaming journalists that suck at the game. If you whine about that, you may as well whine about GTA V as well, which for some reason has never gotten any sort of online backlash for its microtransactions.

2 hours ago, LepreCon1991 said:

Honestly I'm quite shocked by the indifference to this crap ITT

 

These should not exist

 

Microtransactions in any form in a $60 game is bullshit. Doesn't matter if it affects the balancing of this particular game or not. This kind of complacency is how microtransactions, season passes and incomplete games cut up and sold to you in pieces for extra cash rose in the first place. I'd hate to be in a position where I look back in a few years and think "Damn, I should have spoken up and done whatever I could to discourage this crap".

They don't need to exist. Don't buy them and surprise surprise, they don't exist. It's not a PVP type thing where you will face an opponent that could have spent hundreds or thousands of dollars to be more powerful than you. 

If you think this is an issue... I dunno what to tell you. Don't buy them. I don't buy them either; by the way. The difference is I realize that I don't have to buy something if I don't want it. Just like how I don't care about games having season passes. Some games have DLC that I want, and many others do not. Just because it's there doesn't mean I feel like I have to buy it.

[SnowxSakura]

10 minutes ago, jrdemr said:

 

 

Games not only came fully complete back before the end of the 7th generation, they even frequently came with a lot of bonus features and sometimes even full games as an extra (I remember, for instance, Tekken 5, which came with the arcade modes for Tekken 1, 2 and 3 included in the disc). I wonder if you could say the same thing about any game released in the last... 5 years or something.

 

 

Knights of the Old Republic 2 says hello

[Doomsdayman]

14 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

Knights of the Old Republic 2 says hello

That's 2004.

 

Link

Edited September 25, 2018 by Doomsdayman

[FawltyPowers]

3 hours ago, Ren said:

Has anyone really defended microtransactions? So far what i've seen are just people accepting it because it's done well here, similar to the lootboxes in Overwatch, but not outright defending it. I don't think anyone defends DLCs or Season Passes either, who likes paying $20 ~ $40 after the base $60?

 

It's this acceptance that bothers me, first of all introducing a concept that on the surface doesn't seem so insidious and then pushing those boundaries.

 

I have always been against loot boxes even when cosmetic, I am fundamentally against the gambling of money in the hope that you will get an item you want in a game you've already paid for. All that started off with "it's just cosmetic", "you don't have to buy them". There was the acceptance, then with acceptance companies thought "if we made x million by doing this then we can tweak it some more so it makes x million more" and I get this, it's what a business is there to do, make as much profit as possible while pretending they have our interests at heart. The boundaries get pushed that little bit further each time until we went from "just cosmetic" to a backlash when greed took over and them now being investigated by 16 countries, one of which has outright banned them.

 

Similarly I am against microtransactions in games, it starts with cosmetic, moves onto progression, we all accept it, the boundaries will get pushed, the grind for example will then become greater the longer it goes on, to make microtransactions feel more and more appealing until it feels obligatory. Either spend £5 to get this upgrade or grind it out for 10 hours, leaving you trying to decide the cost / time benefit when all you want to do is have fun.

 

I may be wrong, this is just where I see it heading and it's why I never find these practices acceptable. The warning signs are there.

 

The hilarity of it all for me though is that according to game developers they don't need the money microtransactions and loot boxes make, they are only put into games for our benefit. We need them not them. They really do think we're that stupid.

 

As for this game I can't pass judgement yet but I will be extremely curious on release the time it will take to 100% the game without microtransactions and the time it will take with using microtransactions.