• [email protected]A
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Classic cash grab, not too surprised.
    Yet people keep buying these games.

    • loobkoob@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Despite some of the players complaining, a lot of the audience likes the pay-to-win mechanic. It’s not a game funded purely by whales; a lot of average players will spend money on the loot boxes. “I like that it means I don’t have to grind for ages, I don’t have time for that” and “it feels like the sports trading cards I had when I was a kid” are a couple of the reasons I hear somewhat regularly. The idea that it could be designed to not be grindy in the first place doesn’t even occur to them.

      • [email protected]A
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Very true.
        It’s also kinda sad.

        The idea that it could be designed to not be grindy in the first place doesn’t even occur to them.

        Orphan crushing machine vibes.

        • calewerks@fanaticus.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s also still a sizable chunk of the audience who doesn’t even engage with Ultimate Team, and just wants to play all of the other game modes.

    • whereBeWaldo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am trying to convince my best friend to not buy the same cashgrab game every year but my mans just can’t stop himself. At least he doesn’t partake in any microtransactions.

  • Blizzard@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    The fact that they artificially boosted all women stats to unrealistic levels and then allowed to mix them with men players is simply ridiculous.

      • Blizzard@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are multiple things ridiculous about ultimate team and the game in general, I just added another one.

    • Globulart@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The fact that this bothers you says everything.

      Seriously though, what does it matter? Like at all?

      • Blizzard@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The fact that this bothers you says everything.

        Says what exactly?

        What’s wrong with what I wrote? A football simulation that’s trying to accurately reflect players’ skills for men, gives an unrealistically boosted skills to women players. Why?

        • Globulart@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Because what does it even matter? We should be encouraging women’s football to continue to grow, part of that is making sure it’s fun to play in games as well as competitive on the pitch.

          It’s come so far in recent years, and when we’re talking about a game which is designed primarily for fun, being unhappy that women’s stats aren’t an apples and apples comparison to the men’s stats is just silly.

          It says that you have an issue with the women’s game being treated in the same way as the men’s game. Video games are designed for fun, not for simulation, and there are plenty of good reasons to have women be comparable with men in a computer game.

          You’d have been upset when Tony hawk games had women skaters that could ollie as high as the men too huh? Or got upset when Chun Li won in street fighter games?

          • Blizzard@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re stating your subjective opinions about topics unrelated to the game and comparing a simulation game to some unrelated arcade games.

            It says that you have an issue with the women’s game being treated in the same way as the men’s game.

            This is the exact opposite of what I’m saying. Men’s stats have been reflected with due diligence while women’s stats have been artificially upscaled - how is that being treated the same way?

            If a core system of the game “doesn’t matter” to you then why do you even play the game?

            • Globulart@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              They’re treated the same because they’re all applied to have maximum fun for the players and to encourage spending. You can also play as Zico or Pele and their stats are reflective as if they played a modern game even though it just wouldn’t work that way. But it’s done that way because people have fun (or more accurately, spend money) playing as a legend, even if they wouldn’t be the same player in today’s game as they were in their day.

              Simulation games aren’t striving for maximum realism, they’re striving for maximum engagement and enjoyment. Although defining games strictly by genres is kind of pointless these days because almost everything straddles so many of them.