QDP2's Avatar

QDP2 profile

858

QDP2 has recently been playing PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

Currently Playing
Most played
Dark Souls III icon

Dark Souls III

4 days 22 hours


QDP2 Avatar
QDP2 responded to Ali Jones comment in
2 Days ago
You earn League of Legends' new currency faster than you thinkYou earn League of Legends' new currency faster than you think
Ali Jones Avatar

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.

QDP2 Avatar

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.

sign in to comment
Ali Jones Avatar
Ali Jones responded to QDP2's comment in
2 Days ago
You earn League of Legends' new currency faster than you thinkYou earn League of Legends' new currency faster than you think
QDP2 Avatar
They've successfully melted the pockets of heavy-LoL players. By offering high-priced Emotes, Wards, Skins, Chromas, random wards and icons; they're burning through most stockpiles that've been build. When combining that with the reduced income at higher levels, I presume they're hoping that the lack of IP will persuade people to spend money on similar packet drops like the Urfwick this year?

Owning all of LoL's champion pool, my main worry at the moment is the removal of champ shard re-rolls. I hadn't heard this till the patch hit unfortunately, so the 3 shards I was saving to reroll into Zoe were wasted shards now being worth less BE than before (note for those who didn't know, re-rolling 3 champ shards guaranteed a champion you didn't own, was the cheapest way to unlock any champion over 5100 IP). I hope that the 'random champion' bundle guarentees a champion you don't own, but I can't really check it until Zoe releases. If it's not the case then new champions will be more expensive for high-level players to unlock than before now. Maybe another money venture, hoping medium-level players will spend RP to play new champions now that they've burned there BE on wards icons and emotes? Only time will tell.Reply
Ali Jones Avatar

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.

sign in to comment
QDP2 Avatar
QDP2 responded to Anakhoresis comment in
3 Days ago
RPG players don't like paying for their DLC, according to a survey from ObsidianRPG players don't like paying for their DLC, according to a survey from Obsidian
Anakhoresis Avatar

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.

QDP2 Avatar

Steam often generalize their titles to categorize them together. There's only 1 place for additional transactions in steam games, so you also get micro transaction currency in the DLC tab (see PLEX purchases on EVE Online or Crown purchases in Elder Scrolls Online for examples).


Very valid point about downloads, I'd used a flawed argument myself and completely missed it! Total War series is another example of games that update/download the new content immediately, but then put a paywall behind it so that you can't play 'as' the new content until you pay for it; so I know where you're coming from.


Developers often do this for 2 reasons, 1) it helps increase sales of DLC if(competing against X you keep seeing new content behind the pay wall as you play new race who does Y different to everyone else, of course I want to pay to be able to play as them!), and 2) it avoids multiplayer segregation through patches. If everyone is playing off the same patch in Forza then everyone can race together still. I didn't think the later Forza games had any actual Expansion Passes or sizable DLCs, I thought there were content packs, maybe some skins but almost all (if not every) car was available through in-game currency.


Forza, there's a game that was happy to rip players money from the great grandchildren of their players. With some top-level cars costing hundreds of pounds in micro-transaction currency, it really is a joke. I've never been to much into racing games myself so I've never encountered that kind of price before, but if I were to play I'd rather not pay to unlock the content (even if it was only 10% of its current price) because it removes the feeling of progression. It would be just as bad as paying in Monster Hunter to unlock all of a creatures equipment before you can beat it.


Removes any satisfaction from winning, removing any value (through a sense of achievement) from the purchased car, reducing much of the enjoyment utilizing the car to work towards future vehicles. That's getting back into personal opinion though, so I'll stop there XD

sign in to comment
QDP2 Avatar
QDP2 commented on
3 Days ago
EA cut your Star Wars: Battlefront 2 campaign reward to account for cheaper heroesEA cut your Star Wars: Battlefront 2 campaign reward to account for cheaper heroes
QDP2 Avatar
I'm not sure what sense of achievement or satisfaction EA think you'll get in spending hours upon hours of gameplay currency on a hero that others could unlock in under 10 minutes with money.
I tried to find validity through comparison: League of Legends champions take similar lengths of time (would estimate anywhere between 3-20 hours for a specific champion). Main difference is that you cannot learn every champion in LoL, there is literally too much. You need to stick to a few, so limiting the play pool encourages mastery (also, from a personal perspective I held no sense of achievement unlocking a new champion in LoL, only excitement to get to play it).
How about CoD weapons? They're locked behind in-game levels so you need to work towards them. That said, there's no way (to my knowledge) to buy the leveling weapons. It also displays your rank/level so people can still see your investment into the game.
Theres only 1 category of items I can attach a sense of achievement too, end-game unpurchasable equipment. This pay-to-earn method would be like if Bungie made Destiny's latest veteran raid gear available in the shop for £15. Way to insult those who work hard for their gear by saying they're equal to those with deep pockets.
If you want to give a sense of achievement then put content behind quests, missions or actual achievements! EA know this but they'll ignore it for the basis of money. They won't change it much either, since they need this increased income to be able to give away DLC for free.
sign in to comment
Anakhoresis Avatar
Anakhoresis responded to QDP2's comment in
3 Days ago
RPG players don't like paying for their DLC, according to a survey from ObsidianRPG players don't like paying for their DLC, according to a survey from Obsidian
QDP2 Avatar

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.

Reply
Anakhoresis Avatar

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.

sign in to comment
Adarion29 Avatar
Adarion29 responded to QDP2's comment in
4 Days ago
Assassin's Creed Origins' anti-tamper tech has "no effect" on performanceAssassin's Creed Origins' anti-tamper tech has "no effect" on performance
QDP2 Avatar

Cracks bypass features. Being encoded in binary there's no way to literally remove the DRM (short of hacking into Ubisoft's servers and stealing a DRM-free version of the game). Instead it'll do the same as all the rest of the Denuvo-cracked titles, avoid the security switch from picking up the copy is stolen. It'll still run in the background and slow down the PC just as much as it does in a legitimate copy of the game. Whether or not that is the suggested 40% is hard to tell.


Entertainingly Ubisoft replied saying there's no problems for frame-rate when accounting the games goal of a steady 30fps experience (which is true, most CPUs rarely hurt the frame-rate further than an average 30fps). At the same time they posted on the Bugs post that they're researching into the CPU consumption and are looking into/working on a fix.


Not sure why it's setting out to contradict itself, saying there's no problem but we're working on it anyway. Their approach feels like a car mechanic telling the owner that the tire hasn't got a puncture, the car still drives perfectly fine at 30mph. We'll send out a mechanic next week to take a look anyway, but I don't see any problems.

Reply
Adarion29 Avatar

I Guess we have to wait for physical decacore processor, this optimisation is a shame. Ac origin is one of the few recent games that can crash your entire pc (personnally it happened to 4 or 5 times mostly because I was playing a video at the same time) , so Ubisoft's post is a really bad joke

sign in to comment
Anakhoresis Avatar
Anakhoresis responded to QDP2's comment in
4 Days ago
RPG players don't like paying for their DLC, according to a survey from ObsidianRPG players don't like paying for their DLC, according to a survey from Obsidian
QDP2 Avatar
People's opinion in paper and statistics behind them do vary quite heavily. Take Question 5 from the report; "How important is each of the following factors in your decision to purchase a given DLC?", Over 60% of players state that a "Short time between base game launch and DLC release" is not important to them. But statistics say otherwise. There's a reason large companies plan out small DLC packs so soon after release. It drags people back into the game if they'd turned away for a bit. Notable DLCs get media-space, increasing sales where the game already holds lots of popularity and attention.

Larger companies realised that time-restricted content is an even better way to hook players. There's a reason AC;Origins has the Trials of the Gods so soon after launch. Not only does it give a reason for people to buy the game now, but it gives retention to the playerbase of the game. It makes owners desire to continue playing regularly enough to beat all the time-exclusive bosses, by which point there'll be paid DLC out. If DLC releases for a title you're actively playing, you are far more likely to be willing to shell out cash to enjoy it, rather than wait 6 months for it to turn up on discount.

I reckon (although I can't back the following up with any data or facts) that the DLC complaint is also just as flawed as the DLC-delay question. I mean when you ask the public about there ideals and desires, they'll always tell you that they want a fully-fleshed out game, lots of content to enjoy and expansion passes to be offered free. Being a single-player and RPG-heavy review crowd, I'd suggest there dislike for DLC is based off the genre's almost-enforcement of DLCs over the last few years. Players are split whether or not they want it (good games get arguments over why there isn't DLC, vs poor games get shredded for charging too much in expansion passes). When looking generally people will always say that prices are too high and content is too little, but that's how greed works.

Being in the UK, I personally relate game-value to its hour count. I get that length does by no-way mean that I'll enjoy a video game any more, but it allows me to stop myself from buying games too short to feel satisfied from (if I'll get fewer hours of fun than pounds I spent, I'll generally avoid it until it's on discount within my desires). The other advantage of this viewpoint is it lets me directly compare value of game to DLC. Sure, it may not cost the same to make 20 hours of DLC onto a 20 hour-long game (the former costing more to design the game-engine, sort shaders, lighting, development tools, etc.) but from a player perspective it is literally twice the game. By definition games are designed to be enjoyed, should a developer add 20 hours of content to their title (and reviews read positive) I will feel confident that it will be 20 hours of fun with the level of entertainment being at the least equal to the main game's offering. With this it's easy again to draw a line and say the DLC is worth X much then, and over the last year I've personally found DLCs and Expansion Packs to be fairly good value. Especially when you account for the discount purchasing game + DLC together. There are always outliers to this general opinion, some companies will keep trying to abuse wallets with a quick cash-grab, but in general I'd argue we're in a satisfactory place for content prices at the moment.

EDIT: Oops, I realise now I wrote more than the article itself :P Shout out to those who read this in it's entirety and apologies to any comments that get hidden behind this Thesis of a post. Maybe a suggestion to a future comment update: Hide parts of comments when they're too long (and add a 'Read More' button)? Not exactly important a feature, but could be a good QoL improvement to the website.Reply
Anakhoresis Avatar

When you say "DLC" are you only including content that adds to gameplay? Because I feel the opposite, that the majority of DLC isn't good, because a lot of it is just skins or minor tweaks or additions and such.


Obviously though it's going to vary by the type of game though.

sign in to comment
QDP2 Avatar
QDP2 commented on
6 Days ago
Here's every new rune coming to League of LegendsHere's every new rune coming to League of Legends
QDP2 Avatar
AP champs feel broken this patch thanks to MR runes being so expensive to spec into. My last game I was up against a 4-AD team (with only a Sona support) yet she could do 1/3+ of my health bar with A Q-AA against my HP-scaling Camille build (all the damage she had was Ardent...)

It was bad enough mid-late when you had 45-50MR, now ADCs average 37 with MR being so expensive to place points into. Add Sorc. boots and that drops to 21 (with Void staff + Sorc boots effective MR drops to 4; basically dealing true damage!)
sign in to comment
QDP2 Avatar
QDP2 commented on
1 Week ago
"The future of Mass Effect is really bright," say BioWare on 10th anniversary"The future of Mass Effect is really bright," say BioWare on 10th anniversary
QDP2 Avatar
Was it just me, or was this the smallest N7 event since Mass Effect 3 released back in '12? Each year since then there've been a set of livestreams building up to the event. Postings on social media. Comments about DLCs, notes on characters, and clips of ME:A in the later sessions.

This time N7 passed and I didn't even realise it was ME day. Wasn't until a live-stream was happening the day after the event that it even reached me. These comments from development teams feel more like they're filling text out of necessity than they are achieving progress internally.
sign in to comment
Firepistol95 Avatar
Firepistol95 responded to QDP2's comment in
2 Weeks ago
Monster Hunter: World won’t have loot boxes - devs don’t want players to “skip the experience”Monster Hunter: World won’t have loot boxes - devs don’t want players to “skip the experience”
QDP2 Avatar
A quick look at the Japanese game 'Monster Hunter Online' will show you Capcom aren't afraid of paywalls. Being a free-to-play title, you can't use your box without paying a monthly subscription. Certain items can't be crafted or used without another subscription cost. Another bill if you want to play past 3* quests. Money will get you strong health potions and other buffed items you can carry alongside your Free-earned gear to help the longer/harder hunts.
They'll happily rake every penny they can get away with, but I think they know when selling to the world market that people will be against the micro-transactions included in previous titles. I'd be shocked if they removed all micro-transactions from this game, since they'll want to keep making money off this release. We can hope they do this through Season passes and large DLCs, but interviews at the moment suggest they'll be focusing on short-term small quests, free missions much closer to Hitman's exclusive targets. It's going to be interesting to see how they deal with this one, trying to keep the publics peace whilst still earning money.Reply
Firepistol95 Avatar

thanks for intentionally misinforming urself. Their is NOT gonna b any micros in World. They havent said it once! and no Capcom isnt the one tht added the micros, loot boxes, etc. into MH Online, tht was Tencent, the main devs of the spinoff. Capcom only had say on wht is and isnt allowed in the game. Maybe do some research sometime, hm? (source: Ive been playing MH Online for months)

sign in to comment
QDP2 Avatar
QDP2 replied to 8 questions on the Surgeon Simulator 2013 Review
1 Year ago
Surgeon Simulator 2013 review snippet How gory is Surgeon Simulator 2013?
Not bad after the 1st couple of transplants.
sign in to comment
QDP2 Avatar
QDP2 replied to 8 questions on the League of Legends Review
2 Years ago
League of Legends review snippet Which characters would you recommend to starting players?
Support is great if you have a friend who can play a crucial and talk you through your mistakes, but you'll have to be good friends and willing to accept where you're wrong to learn fast.
sign in to comment
QDP2 Avatar
QDP2 replied to 2 questions on the Broforce Review
2 Years ago
Broforce review snippet Does Broforce respect the military?
If you are questioning this game being offensive you probably shouldn't be playing it, as it certainly isn't meant to be taken seriously, or ever to be considered like real-life xD
sign in to comment
QDP2 Avatar
QDP2 replied to 9 questions on the Antichamber Review
2 Years ago
Antichamber review snippet What are gamers first impressions of Antichamber
By far my favourite mind game, brilliant challenge!
sign in to comment