Wait, it's $100 real money for 8 million GTA money?

#51Lexandra1Posted 5/18/2014 8:49:52 AM
Claimh_Solias posted...


Here's the thing, you're obviously not reading. This isn't about the short term, this is about long term effects described in mine and others' posts, why cant people like you grasp that? Honestly is it really hard to comprehend?


Actually it is hard to comprehend. Just as now it's only optional, no one is really forced to, that means, other companies WILL take it as a whole thing, they'll go like, "hey, R* did that and it worked, let's go charge people for any content from now on!" Like really? What do you clever boys not understand by OPTIONAL? Even if it would be taken over to other companies, how can they make it from optional to fully necessary? Or more specifically, how would people take it as bait simply? If you don't like that content/game/whatever, take the hands of yours away from it. Simple as that.
---
I'm not allowed to talk to ya, all i can say, that I'm not allowed to talk to ya.
#52SchoolRumblePosted 5/18/2014 8:52:21 AM
Y'all are broke aint ya, did mom not let you use her credit card. get a job you bums what are you playing video games for?
---
PSN: BlindyTwo
Gamertag: Blindy II
#53mikemikePosted 5/18/2014 9:05:54 AM
Claimh_Solias posted...


Here's the thing, you're obviously not reading. This isn't about the short term, this is about long term effects described in mine and others' posts, why cant people like you grasp that? Honestly is it really hard to comprehend?


But I am reading. Long term effects on what? You and I can obtain a super gun whether or not a Shark Card is involved. As long as everyone can obtain the same things, then it's fair. Me buying a Shark Card won't give me an advantage over you. I'm talking about the perks one can get that another can't because real money was paid.

Call of Duty had map packs. If you paid to have the extra maps and I didn't, then we couldn't play together, thus effecting the fun of the game.

People grind on Rooftop Rumble because they want the super car, they don't need it to progress and continue playing with others.

If there was something in a game that's only attainable if I pay real money or that gives me an advantage over another player, then yes, that's sucks. Just be patient and you can have what the other guys who uses Shark Cards have.

You're discussing Shark Cards in general, I'm discussing Shark Cards in regards of effecting players in the game with extra perks that no one else can obtain because they didn't want to pay real money.

I think people got spoiled with the payout for Rooftop Rumble and are now playing the game to get the latest stuff as opposed to just playing for fun.

.
---
We play for fun not to ruin the online experience for others. Join us for a non back stabbing good time http://socialclub.rockstargames.com/crew/deluxe_revolver
#54mikemikePosted 5/18/2014 9:14:18 AM(edited)
ThrillKillFan posted...

Hell. THQ did that and it was proven that the Professor Genki island in SR3 was already in the game, .......................So that content was already ON the disc but you had to pay to unlock it. To me that was garbage.


You're discussing content being withheld like a ransom per say. I'm talking about something else.

The thing with Saint's Row and GTA are different. In Saint's Row I can only get to the island if I pay. That sucks! But if I had to do missions or whatever to rank up to get to the island then that's ok. We both get the same thing, it's just that paying for it will get it to you a little quicker (but won't give you an unfair advantage).

.
---
We play for fun not to ruin the online experience for others. Join us for a non back stabbing good time http://socialclub.rockstargames.com/crew/deluxe_revolver
#55TheLostLegendPosted 5/18/2014 9:45:31 AM
Claimh_Solias posted...
I can't believe that some of you don't understand, despite being told what...five times through this thread?

If enough people buy these things at the prices they're at, that's telling Rockstar and there fore other companies that this sort of thing is acceptable, which will in turn lead to other game companies doing it. This will lead to this sort of pricing shenanigans on DLC for more necessary DLC.

The people that are complaining about this are the ones that are intelligent enough to have the foresight to see what kind of impact accepting Rockstar's Shark Card shenanigans could potentially cause. I'd advise those of you that are complaining about those complaining to stop and at least try to understand.


Is this the comment you speak of? I read it, it hasn't answered my question.

None of this actually explains HOW Shark Cards and other options are some huge danger to the gaming industry. You basically said that if Rockstar get enough sales from Shark Cards then other companies may think this kind of thing is acceptable. News flash, companies have been doing this LONG before Rockstar had their evil Shark Cards. Sleeping Dogs, for example, has around about $50 (real money) worth of DLC you can purchase. Do you have to purchase it? No. Does it affect anyone else playing the game? No. It simply enhances your own experience if you so choose to pay for extra content. Shark Cards are no different in this respect.

So again, I ask, how does Shark Cards and other pay-to-win options affect the gaming industry negatively? As long as people don't have to pay to advance with the actual game itself (whether it be involving a storyline, unlocking a character, getting to a certain area or anything else that pertains to 100% game completion) then there is no issue. Rockstar are trying to make a little extra money by offering those that have limited time to play the option to pay-to-win. Where is the harm in that?
---
PSN: TheLostLegend69
3DS Friend Code: 2294 - 3345 - 4513
#56Xkrillex101Posted 5/18/2014 9:47:20 AM
[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]
#57TheLostLegendPosted 5/18/2014 9:51:57 AM(edited)
I've never bought a Shark Card, I've never felt the need to. I wouldn't have played the game nearly as long if I had everything instantly at my fingertips.
---
PSN: TheLostLegend69
3DS Friend Code: 2294 - 3345 - 4513
#58Fatal LightningPosted 5/18/2014 9:59:44 AM
seriously...
---
PSN:fatallightning
ME: http://s237.photobucket.com/albums/ff17/fatal_lightning/
#59CODYQX4Posted 5/18/2014 10:15:17 AM
TheLostLegend posted...
Claimh_Solias posted...
I can't believe that some of you don't understand, despite being told what...five times through this thread?

If enough people buy these things at the prices they're at, that's telling Rockstar and there fore other companies that this sort of thing is acceptable, which will in turn lead to other game companies doing it. This will lead to this sort of pricing shenanigans on DLC for more necessary DLC.

The people that are complaining about this are the ones that are intelligent enough to have the foresight to see what kind of impact accepting Rockstar's Shark Card shenanigans could potentially cause. I'd advise those of you that are complaining about those complaining to stop and at least try to understand.


Is this the comment you speak of? I read it, it hasn't answered my question.

None of this actually explains HOW Shark Cards and other options are some huge danger to the gaming industry. You basically said that if Rockstar get enough sales from Shark Cards then other companies may think this kind of thing is acceptable. News flash, companies have been doing this LONG before Rockstar had their evil Shark Cards. Sleeping Dogs, for example, has around about $50 (real money) worth of DLC you can purchase. Do you have to purchase it? No. Does it affect anyone else playing the game? No. It simply enhances your own experience if you so choose to pay for extra content. Shark Cards are no different in this respect.

So again, I ask, how does Shark Cards and other pay-to-win options affect the gaming industry negatively? As long as people don't have to pay to advance with the actual game itself (whether it be involving a storyline, unlocking a character, getting to a certain area or anything else that pertains to 100% game completion) then there is no issue. Rockstar are trying to make a little extra money by offering those that have limited time to play the option to pay-to-win. Where is the harm in that?


You seriously don't think pay to win is unfair? That people who play without doling out cash can be one upped by some scrub with money to burn or some spoiled kid?

That is the F2P industry right there, and could be the future of gaming if enough people pay to win, every single game would be F2P AKA Pay to Win.

They've gone so far in some games as to charge for the ENDING FFS.
#60TheLostLegendPosted 5/18/2014 10:26:57 AM
No I don't, at least not in respect to GTA V online. As has already been mentioned in this thread, someone could have a trillion dollars online but they still have to rank up to be able to unlock and purchase items, the better weapons still can't be obtained until work is done to unlock them. On top of that, they are spending their own real money to be afforded the money they receive from Shark Cards.

Now, if the Shark Cards offered RP for real money then, yes, it would be unfair to players. Whether paying for RP justifies someone to be deserving of it or not, it disadvantages other players who do not purchase it. Pay-to-win in which gives one player an advantage over another isn't fair, but most pay-to-win options I have seen do not offer that.
---
PSN: TheLostLegend69
3DS Friend Code: 2294 - 3345 - 4513