DLC plans + pay to unlock

[C-Sword]

From IGN

Injustice 2 will feature plenty of additional characters following the game's launch, as NetherRealm creative director Ed Boon has confirmed the studio is taking a "more aggressive" approach when it comes to DLC.

"One of the things we’ve been doing, trying to do more and more with every game… is to support it for a longer period of time," Boon told IGN. "With DLC characters, we’ve had four with Mortal Kombat, six with Injustice, eight with Mortal Kombat X, and with Injustice 2 we plan on continuing that pattern," he added, noting "it will certainly be more aggressive than we’ve been in the past."

Boon also spoke to the game's new gear system—which allows the player to customize their character—suggesting the team is considering a pay-to-unlock model for those who don't have the time to earn all of the rewards by just playing the game.

"We have ideas in our head of the things we’d like to consider but certainly haven’t like nailed down this is going to be the way to do it," he explained. "Ideally to me the whole purpose of this feature is customization, longevity and ongoing molding of your character so to speak."

Taking into account the fact that some players likely "won't want to invest months and months of their time" in order to gain the rewards, Boon said they're looking for a way to "cast the biggest net possible to get as many players into it as possible."

http://ca.ign.com/articles/2016/06/20/netherrealm-taking-more-aggressive-approach-to-dlc-with-injustice-2

 

[QUAN-FUSION]

This is exactly what I have been complaining about.

Just greedy money-whores.

It has nothing to do with enabling people with less time to keep up.
They design it in such a way that grinding is monotonous and incompletable so you feel inclined to pay.

 

[thesacrifist]

Stop being so dramatic. The gear isn't for competetive play.

It's merely a pay-to-get-things-faster-model, not P2W. Jeez.

 

[DDutchguy]

So basically how krypt unlocks worked, but more substantial seeing how the gear system actually influences gameplay as opposed to it being just fatalities and brutalities.

I mean if the gear system turns out relatively balanced, the pay-to-win nature if the model remains to be seen. I think NRS is competent enough to not let things get out of hand, but we'll see what the gear will be like in practice one the game is out.

 

[shura30]

just dish out an igau2 full ultimate ultra edition xxl with everything available from the start
it'll save time

 

[trufenix]

it's cool that gamers now know more about games in development than the people making them.

 

[MK_Al]

They design it in such a way that grinding is monotonous and incompletable so you feel inclined to pay.

You seriously think they are making bad content on purpose?

 

[QUAN-FUSION]

You seriously think they are making bad content on purpose?

I didn't say bad content, I said design.
I believe that they make the process of unlocking everything intentionally difficult to persuade you to pay.
It's the illusion of choice.
To make you feel like it was your decision to spend your money.
I will cite COD and GTA as examples.

 

[trufenix]

I didn't say bad content, I said design.
I believe that they make the process of unlocking everything intentionally difficult to persuade you to pay.
It's the illusion of choice.
To make you feel like it was your decision to spend your money.
I will cite COD and GTA as examples.

So, a hundred years ago when people were tracking down hidden packages, prestige guns, and pieces of gear by grinding with no dlc option, was that better or worse?

 

[QUAN-FUSION]

So, a hundred years ago when people were tracking down hidden packages, prestige guns, and pieces of gear by grinding with no dlc option, was that better or worse?

Yes, it was better. Because it was attainable in a reasonable amount of time and didn't effect how you played the game.
That was the golden age, when the games were designed for fun, not profit.
And there was no easy mode.

 

[DDutchguy]

I didn't say bad content, I said design.
I believe that they make the process of unlocking everything intentionally difficult to persuade you to pay.
It's the illusion of choice.
To make you feel like it was your decision to spend your money.
I will cite COD and GTA as examples.

Call of Duty and GTA are games that are pretty much made for casual gamers; easy to learn and easy to be good at. They are also far more popular than Injustice 2 could ever hope to be, as fighting games have a decent learning curve to new players, as opposed to CoD and GTA. With the numbers those games attract, it's far more likely that players buy DLC / in-game money. In GTA, the entire game is built around earning money, which is why buying money for the game is an attractive offer.

Injustice 2 is a fighting game and is built around the skill that players attain. You could argue that with the gear system, players could potentially 'buy skill', but that will only be the case if NRS screws up big time and the gear turns out to be OP.

 

[trufenix]

Yes, it was better. Because it was attainable in a reasonable amount of time and didn't effect how you played the game.
That was the golden age, when the games were designed for fun, not profit.
And there was no easy mode.

You really think that shit is HARDER to unlock now than it was 10 years ago? You have never played a GTA before 5 or Call of Duty before Black Ops II, have you?

 

[Daemantalo]

I don't have a problem with NRS doing this, so long as I'm able to play online in a mode where gear isn't a factor, similar to a tournament mode where you only have the defaults. I'm not crazy/sold on the gear gimmick anyways. I didn't waste a dime on the Krypt, and I most likely won't waste a dime unlocking the gears either.

 

[QUAN-FUSION]

Call of Duty and GTA are games that are pretty much made for casual gamers; easy to learn and easy to be good at. They are also far more popular than Injustice 2 could ever hope to be, as fighting games have a decent learning curve to new players, as opposed to CoD and GTA. With the numbers those games attract, it's far more likely that players buy DLC / in-game money. In GTA, the entire game is built around earning money, which is why buying money for the game is an attractive offer.

Injustice 2 is a fighting game and is built around the skill that players attain. You could argue that with the gear system, players could potentially 'buy skill', but that will only be the case if NRS screws up big time and the gear turns out to be OP.

Yeh, coz COD doesn't have a multi-million dollar pro league..

While fighting games are less popular they are still accessible to casuals and becoming even more so ( regrettably ).
And let's be real, pro players make up probs less the one percent of the player base.

Black ops 3 introduced an extremely dodgey pay to win scheme that has been highly criticised by anyone with a brain that can see past the fanboy bias.

GTA release dlc with insanely high in-game price tags so you can grind for months doing the same old mission, or pay now.

Both these companies have made well over a quarter of a billion dollars doing this.

It is my presumption that WB will force NRS to follow suit.

(And jam your 'disagrees' up your anus pls.)

 

[Euphoric]

That pay to unlock option isn't for you. There are actually people in the world who have lives and still play video games that don't have tons to time to invest.

Also, how do you think post release companies make money while other games are in development? For free?

DLC is a model to get more revenue otherwise there wouldn't be more games.

 

[DDutchguy]

(And jam your 'disagrees' up your anus pls.)

It's not easy for me to have an opinion.

 

[The Lone Wolf]

This is exactly what I have been complaining about.

Just greedy money-whores.

It has nothing to do with enabling people with less time to keep up.
They design it in such a way that grinding is monotonous and incompletable so you feel inclined to pay.

Exactly, and look how they handled MKX Krypt.

 

[MK_Al]

Yes, it was better. Because it was attainable in a reasonable amount of time and didn't effect how you played the game.
That was the golden age, when the games were designed for fun, not profit.
And there was no easy mode.

Except for the 80ties, when designing a video game took hardly some days, every game and every business is about making money. You as the costumer have the choice to buy or refuse the product.
And there's nothing wrong in giving the player a good challenge. It's rather a modern thing that in todays games you only have to invest time to beat it or to get special achivements.

 

[EdenianWarrior]

Call of Duty and GTA are games that are pretty much made for casual gamers; easy to learn and easy to be good at. They are also far more popular than Injustice 2 could ever hope to be, as fighting games have a decent learning curve to new players, as opposed to CoD and GTA. With the numbers those games attract, it's far more likely that players buy DLC / in-game money. In GTA, the entire game is built around earning money, which is why buying money for the game is an attractive offer.

Injustice 2 is a fighting game and is built around the skill that players attain. You could argue that with the gear system, players could potentially 'buy skill', but that will only be the case if NRS screws up big time and the gear turns out to be OP.

GTA is a lot easier than fighting games, but it ain't easy.

 

[Fred Marvel]

im still wondering how the "tournament mode" will work, the simple answer is no gear but no gear means youre using an incomplete character and wont have access to their entire moveset which would suck imo

 

[QUAN-FUSION]

That pay to unlock option isn't for you. There are actually people in the world who have lives and still play video games that don't have tons to time to invest.

Also, how do you think post release companies make money while other games are in development? For free?

DLC is a model to get more revenue otherwise there wouldn't be more games.

Please. They make a friggin fortune on initial sales alone.
Dlc is just so the CEO can buy his daughter a pink labourghini for her sweet sixteenth.

And it doesn't have to take tons of time! They intentionally make it extensive to persuade you to take the easy option.

 

[DDutchguy]

im still wondering how the "tournament mode" will work, the simple answer is no gear but no gear means youre using an incomplete character and wont have access to their entire moveset which would suck imo

We'll have to wait until more definite info is given about how the gear system will work. If NRS handles it wrong, it could screw up the competitive scene and perhaps the game as a whole.

 

[Fred Marvel]

We'll have to wait until more definite info is given about how the gear system will work. If NRS handles it wrong, it could screw up the competitive scene and perhaps the game as a whole.

i honestly like the gear idea a lot, i dont like the leveling up though i think thats what screws it up, i think if it was just gear everyone had access to then it would be just like variations in MKX and be no issue

 

[Euphoric]

Please. They make a friggin fortune on initial sales alone.
Dlc is just so the CEO can buy his daughter a pink labourghini for her sweet sixteenth.

And it doesn't have to take tons of time! They intentionally make it extensive to persuade you to take the easy option.

You are pulling shit out of your ass and sound bitter

http://jabronireport.blogspot.com/2010/08/post-in-which-i-defend-mk-dlc.html

^ Dev post

 

[QUAN-FUSION]

You are pulling shit out of your ass and sound bitter

http://jabronireport.blogspot.com/2010/08/post-in-which-i-defend-mk-dlc.html

^ Dev post

Fuck oath I am bitter. I hate to see the slow death of something I love.
If you think DLC profits go back into making future games and not into the pockets of the owners you are seriously delusional.