Banned
1. social hubs ruin immersion
2. online games attract cheating and hacking
3. micro transactions are a waste of money for cosmetic content
4. loot boxes are basic gambling
5. bullet sponge enemies
6. grinding for points for various things
7. grinding for points to get better gear to enter areas you can't in an open world which make it semi open world till you rank up
8. grinding for points so you can unlock better weapons because you start out with junk gear
any other reasons?
Member
Social Hubs and always online appeal to certain kinds of gamers, but only work in certain kinds of games. I can't answer why anyone would think a Ghost Recon game should be one as narratively the social hub doesn't even fit in Breakpoint, and to be very childish, it has a silly name.
I can take a guess that the always online element isn't just as a way to discourage cheating, or to make it easier to update the game etc, but actually their effort to force a multiplay agenda - just look at the fact that PvE and PvP have been so intertwined with one another. The whole game is designed to detriment solo players. I'm not really certain who asked for that. I don't find it appealing to go the route of MMORPG Looter Shooter instead of the advertised Lone Wolf Tactical Shooter.
I don't want to sound like some crackpot and start talking about monetisation this and greedy corporation that, I'll leave that to the real crackpots, but you can't help but wonder.
Senior Member
Senior Member
Social hubs only work if they don't undermine the core game itself. If we expand this from simply social hubs we can refer to the whole games as a service model of post launch monetisation.
Clearly AAA studios want games to generate revenue beyond launch of the game so we're stuck with this for now, but studios need to implement these mechanics in a way that enhances rather than detracts from the game itself. It should be unintrusive and optional.
Wildlands was a great example of how to monetise a game in a way that wasn't intrusive. All the micro transactions in that game a) weren't part of the core game, b) increased immersion, fun and reward, c) were completely cosmetic and optional, and d) could be earned by playing the game without spending money.
That's why it was such a success and why people didn't mind spending money on stuff.
With respect to social hubs. The social hub in Division worked because it didn't detract too much from immersion. It was logical there was a division base in the whitehouse so it didn't feel quite so odd.
For Breakpoint, the location of the hub is at odds with the game. Erewhon should be a homesteader settlement and shouldn't be a hub.
A better idea for a hub in breakpoint would be either a) a ship offshore that you can travel to by boat or aircraft and land on, or b) a flying fortress way above the island that you can fly up to and land on, like an aircraft carrier in the sky. It would actually be fun to base jump off of this into the island. Both of these would have been more immersive and in keeping with the game world.
The games as a service model only works if the content it provides generates tangible value in the eyes of the customer/player, and it should never feel like content has to be bought or that they're being blatantly ripped off. I have argued that the best way to do this in games with strong solo elements is to provide modding tools so that the community can create it's own content - weapons, missions, gameplay, characters, vehicles, art etc. Ubi could sell modding tools. We could then have a community shop where players themselves can put their creations on sale for folks to buy, folks can rate stuff and leave reviews - actually create a community dedicated to supporting and improving the game. They don't have to monetise their work, they can offer content for free, but it's there as an option. Ubi could take a cut of this. The point is it's all optional, and helps the community self perpetuate. A strong modding community has always worked better than all this post launch content games as a service jazz in my humble opinion.
Senior Member
I have zero interest in social hubs. If I want to team up with randoms, I'd prefer to have a matchmaking feature like GRW had.
While playing the beta I had a group of idiots trying to block the exit from Erwhon or whatever they call that rat hole. Watching dolts running around trying to get your attention is not only annoying but totally breaks immersion in the game. I rarely play with randoms anyway as I prefer to coop / team up with friends. ......absolutely useless feature and the lag / loading delays going into that place is the icing on the cake.
Member
For me, this is the thing that is going to stop me from buying this game.
I don't like the tiered loot etc but I can live with it if the game is good, I don't like the bullet sponge enemies but pretty much every game does that now because they have some misguided belief that it's 'fun' or that body armor is some kind of impenetrable modern day Mithril that renders the wearer completely impervious to damage. I can even ignore the RMT as much as I don't like them.
The 'hub' is something I cannot ignore, who spends the first 15 minutes of a game trying to convince you that you have been shot down behind enemy lines and are totally alone, only to have you arrive at a huge shopping mall disguised as a cave teaming with other 'sole survivors'.
Talk about a convoluted narrative while simultaneously being very insulting to the player's intelligence.
It's a 'no sale' here.
A note to Ubi: There is still time to make the online component optional, don't make the mistake that other publishers make and try to push something out that people do not want, make it optional, because if you try to force it on people, it is going to garner a very unhealthy amount of negative attention.
The people who are going to turn the hub off are people who are not interested in 'peacocking', RMT et al so you will lose nothing by offering it as an option.
Junior Member
Senior Member
LOL! All I can say is it's a good thing those other players weren't rubbing up on me like that in real life or someone would have headed to the ER! And, it is horrendously immersion breaking from the game plot stand point of you and one other GRW Team Mate survived----and there are 20-40 suited up players in there!Originally Posted by Kean_1 Go to original post
My FAV part of Erewhon? Watching over a dozen players clustered around poor 'ol Mads Schultz trying to talk to him at once!
Senior Member
This is actually the thing I worry most about on launch. The inevitable Cluster-Fk of people trying to talk to quest givers. I remember it being quite bad in Division 1 too, so bad I believe it even crashed the servers a few times.Originally Posted by Flanker1Six Go to original postLOL! All I can say is it's a good thing those other players weren't rubbing up on me like that in real life or someone would have headed to the ER! And, it is horrendously immersion breaking from the game plot stand point of you and one other GRW Team Mate survived----and there are 20-40 suited up players in there!
My FAV part of Erewhon? Watching over a dozen players clustered around poor 'ol Mads Schultz trying to talk to him at once!
Fortunately I doubt I'll have time to play much on release day even if I do get it Day one. Tues-Wed are a busy day for me in other games and Irl.
Junior Member
These days you drop $60 just to get into a game. Then its piecemealed to you through grind and micro's. I have no problem with companies wanting to make more money after release but in the past it was always done with new content. Nowadays you get a pie that's cut up into a thousand pieces.
