Where did you get I said otherwise? I didn’t say the marketplace wouldn’t exist. I meant timing, prices, currency exchange scheme could be different if the game was a blockbuster.
That’s honestly the height of conjecture. There’s no evidence to suggest any of that would be different.
Players reaction is the best evidence. Why do you need to piss off your customers when you are already making tons of money? They are not EA.
What really has no evidence is that statement of yours:
Who cares what the original plan was? Situations change and it’s rather tone death to ignore the current atmosphere and keep plowing through with a plan you drew up months or years ago. Battleborn is in a precarious position with complaints about the size of the playerbase and long-term viability. Now is not the time to risk angering the remaining players.
2 Likes
He’s rather well known for his bias. I think its a safe assumption.
Anyway, at this point, tone deaf or perfect pitch, it is too late.
LOL, do people still play that game? I played like 15 mins of the beta and it was boring as hell.
Kind of weird to join the forums afterward
1 Like
Apparently it still has an enthusiastic community of 40 or 50 people. 
LOL, that game died off super quick.
If this game is dead, then I’m a really happy Battleborn Zombie that hungers for more content! 
Give me Pendlessssss and new modessssss and every hater’s brainssssss (if they have some cough)
6 Likes
a game with an already dwindling player base doesn’t need Microtransactions it needs a strong influx of new players… On the PC things are dire, you have less than a thousand people playing at peak times… 20 - 30 minutes or longer que for matches during off peak times…
This is what you’d expect from a long dead game… Battleborn came out little over 2 months ago… These types of numbers suggest by the time the game hits the 3 or 4 month point it’ll be completely and utterly deserted…
Instead of Microtransactions in a full priced game, how about giving the game a nice hefty price cut and hoping it draws in players… 60 dollars for an amazing game like Battleborn or 40 dollars for overwatch, the choice becomes obvious to the cheap peasants out there…
1 Like
Actually, it’s been 49 days, it launched May 3rd.
This is an insane way to view the issue. The company has already been compensated with the $60-80 cost of the game.
2 Likes
He also fails to mention how titles like Overwatch and PvZ offer microtransactions, neither are locking the content behind pay-walls.
Boths titles (Which are pay to play) offer microtransactions in order to allow you quicker access to content that is already available in the game, rather than just grinding for it.
Battleborn doesn’t offer this, rather than giving you the option of buying these skins/taunts with in-game currency, if you want them, you HAVE to spend extra money ontop of what you already payed.
Overwatch is a totally different game though.
And you’re equating season pass content as being something you’ve already paid for, which simply isn’t correct. And heroes can be purchased with earnt (free) ingame currency anyway…
You don’t NEED to buy any ingame currency with microtransactions.
You will need to buy the season pass for instant access to some new aspects of the game. Your statement that BB doesn’t offer that is actually wrong. And to be fair if you can compare BB to say Heroes of the Storm - a much closer comparison, Blizzard charged per hero, and charged considerably more than the season pass price when you break it down by heroes.
Also some aspects of the game are earnt and some are bought. One of the HUGE criticisms of microtransactions is that it allows people to buy everything.
You are actually arguing that that should be true, which goes against the prevailing opinion about the system for basically all gamers.
TLDR your actually wrong with almost all your statements, and the system in place in BB is a good compromise. If you really have a problem with DLC or a season pass, that’s an entirely different system to microtransactions, and is fair enough, but don’t confuse the two, it renders your argument very weak.
Microtransactions are a stupid tax. Most people have paid it, I certainly have for some games. But as long as you can play without needing to use them the system is fine.
Also Overwatch and BB were about the same price. Overwatch arguably has about 1/3 the actual content, although replayability comes down to personal preference. Arguing OW offers better value than BB is a VERY weak argument.
So basically, ignore what I posted, comment on other things to make it look your right and im wrong without actually raising the issues I mentioned. (not without spinning them, anyway)
TLDr - Your pretty much wrong with almost all YOUR statements because you didnt bother reading.
Before things derail: Please talk about the game, not about the forum users. Thanks!
1 Like
BB is in a very bad position right now.Even if they had planned to add microtransaction.It should have been delayed until the game is in better state.We still barely get any content from season pass and they are already asking for more money.Just like how league of legends sell their ultimate skin for like 30-40 usd.Overwatch can get away with anything as long as its still popular.
These MT created nothing but more negative behavior on these forums. They should of just given 2 options to acquire these skins and taunts. In-game currency for those who want to grind and MT for those who don’t. Nobody can complain this way.
Last night I went into a game with 4 people that were grouped together and oh man i felt bad for the Benedict on the opposite side, He of course had the flashy Mericaw skin and my team took a vendetta against the guy, ended up getting 0 kills and 16 deaths before he quit.
That Benedict skin is pretty brilliant though. I’m not too fussed about most of them but there are a few that I really like, thst one included.