The VC issue - perfectly put in words

[ILLSmak]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

The issue is that VC has no value and cannot be refunded, to me. I think that's what I would focus on if I were making a petition.

It's basically not an investment as it should be. In most other things, you can probably sell your account or sell what you bought with money, or trade it for something else, but since it's bound to your psn, it's not really like you can sell 'a max player with all badges.'

It has no value at all to anyone except you. No value to 2k, either.

The game would make prolly legit 50% less money on VC if we were able to refund the VC we've spent, which we *should be able to do.* I really feel bad for people who made the wrong player, or made a player that sounded good in theory but once they played it, they don't want it anymore. That's not fair to them that they can't make another dude and use the VC they bought to flesh him out.

Edit: And @ Forbes article, another problem with MyCareer is how much the story line is based on subliminal advertising (like Orange Juice for instance); they plug stuff more than they try to make a good story and that's very unsettling.

-Smak

[keshunleon]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

The only issue I'm having is when I earn VC I can't collect because 2K's servers crash too much.

I've earned about 3500 VC after about 4 games but it takes forever to try to connect to 2K's server then I get an error.

As a result I get nothing at all, this has happened about 5-7 times since game release but has happened 4 times the past 3 days.

I want my VC 2K!

[Jrocc23]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

I bought VC and I bought the game. But, it's still not enough. I have to either buy more VC to compete with people in the park or not play My Park at all at this point. This was the best part of My Career/My Player going back to 2k10.



So with everyone okay with this it simply means one thing. Either pay $100+ dollars on top of $60 or dont play My Park mode. How fun is it to go to My Park and see all 80+ player first week of release? Where is the fun in watching a 3 point contest and everyone doing dunks left and right because they decided to spent all this extra money.



The whole point of My Career was to play seasons, grind, and get to high level after hours of play. If you had no time you had a bad rated player simple as that. You can probably count in few minutes how many people actually play a entire season on my player now. No one gives a damn about those pointless cut scenes or story or any of it. All that production cost or money spent is useless if you can just buy everything and skip right to My Park.



VC ruined My Career.

I agree. 2K10-2K11 was the GOAT All-Around for MyCareer. The bad thing was the hacking to 99 and stuff but VC basically replaced the hacking and players just have to pay for it now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FerdBrown]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

Something to think about: if the game remains as it is now and no VC to buy, well I think everyone will grind. No choice. Considering honest play and no so-called glitches. But if someone is able and willing to "buy" and shortcut earning VC, any marketing grad would see business opportunity. Now it's not about breaking the game. No one's "forced" to buy VC. But it's there as an option for those target market willing and able to spend real dollars. Make no mistake, there are many ways to earn VC. You don't need to buy it.

[SirGaryColeman]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

Something to think about: if the game remains as it is now and no VC to buy, well I think everyone will grind. No choice. Considering honest play and no so-called glitches. But if someone is able and willing to "buy" and shortcut earning VC, any marketing grad would see business opportunity. Now it's not about breaking the game. No one's "forced" to buy VC. But it's there as an option for those target market willing and able to spend real dollars. Make no mistake, there are many ways to earn VC. You don't need to buy it.

The topic was more about them designing a game to promote paying for more VC versus designing a game to promote a fun experience.

If you take away VC, then you'd take away the Grind (Grinds are the marketing tool to create addiction/VC Purchases) and you focus on fun again. Maybe only the people that played the game before VC was invented would understand?

[JJRuelz]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

We live in the the age of pay-to-play...it is what it is.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Yeah we bought the game. We buy the games every year. And the consumers control the product, so if we don't speak up about this crap that they do, then it will never end.

Just because they want to make money, it doesn't mean that they have to be unfair to the point where it takes hundreds of hours to achieve some thing without using money.

[Saxongirl]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KO5ddKDNQ00

Check it out

[Glenn33]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

The topic was more about them designing a game to promote paying for more VC versus designing a game to promote a fun experience.

If you take away VC, then you'd take away the Grind (Grinds are the marketing tool to create addiction/VC Purchases) and you focus on fun again. Maybe only the people that played the game before VC was invented would understand?

I disagree completely. The grind IS the fun. You want a career mode where your player starting out is already rated 70 or higher? You want a franchise mode where you can do anything you want with no penalty, no build up?

For example - lets look at MLB: The Show. The grind from lowly minor league player to MLB star is the whole point. That was there model LONG before microtransactions was a thing...and the mode was GREAT. The only thing VC[micro transactions] does is facilitate those who don't want to grind. But the grind was present long before microstransactions were.

[335TDC]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KO5ddKDNQ00

Check it out

Great point he makes that I haven't seen made before: double depreciation of VC. It costs more to buy (you get less for your money) and upgrades, etc., cost more to purchase (you get less for your VC). A double whammy.

The only VC I've bought this year is that special they ran, 10,000 VC for $0.99. Not a penny more.

[Glenn33]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

The topic was more about them designing a game to promote paying for more VC versus designing a game to promote a fun experience.

If you take away VC, then you'd take away the Grind (Grinds are the marketing tool to create addiction/VC Purchases) and you focus on fun again. Maybe only the people that played the game before VC was invented would understand?

I disagree completely. The grind IS the fun. You want a career mode where your player starting out is already rated 70 or higher? You want a franchise mode where you can do anything you want with no penalty, no build up?

For example - lets look at MLB: The Show. The grind from lowly minor league player to MLB star is the whole point. That was there model LONG before microtransactions was a thing...and the mode was GREAT. The only thing VC[micro transactions] does is facilitate those who don't want to grind. But the grind was present long before microstransactions were.

BY the way - I'm 46. Been gaming for a while well before VC. I completely understand...I just don't agree.

[335TDC]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

I disagree completely. The grind IS the fun. You want a career mode where your player starting out is already rated 70 or higher? You want a franchise mode where you can do anything you want with no penalty, no build up?

For example - lets look at MLB: The Show. The grind from lowly minor league player to MLB star is the whole point. That was there model LONG before microtransactions was a thing...and the mode was GREAT. The only thing VC[micro transactions] does is facilitate those who don't want to grind. But the grind was present long before microstransactions were.

I disagree completely.

Just because it's a career mode doesn't mean that you have to start as a lowly scrub. A lot of people, myself included, would like to take a Jamal Murray type player and build a career for him. So you can be a 6th man or starter right off the bat but not dominate and then perhaps build up your player slowly during the season and in the offseason.

The problem, especially with 2K, is that they build a narrative around your player being God's gift to basketball and then start you off in the 50's. It's RIDICULOUS and a blatant attempt -- emphasis on "tempt" -- to lure you into purchasing VC (other than the 10k/dollar promo, I haven't).

Career mode does NOT necessarily have to be grind from scrub to star. That it is in MLB and 2K shows a failure of design imagination, that's all. And in 2K's case, it creates a laughably self-contradictory narrative. Hell, even Madden, which has a bad career mode, allows you to pick a starting trajectory.

And on a larger scale, I'll say this: GRIND is the bane of video games, period. It's infested/infected all genres (the deplorable "crafting" craze in so-called rpg's) and it has to be the bastard child of the WoW crowd -- those who would dedicate their lives to games. A grind in the current sense models addiction: it gives you less and less payoff for each completed grind. I miss the good old days when you couldn't open a door in Metroid until you obtained a certain item, or in Zelda when a part of a dungeon was JUST out of reach until you, yep, got a certain item. BIG payoff, minimal grind, excellent game design = respect for the gamer AND for the entire concept of life-friendly fun.

[Glenn33]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

I disagree completely.

Just because it's a career mode doesn't mean that you have to start as a lowly scrub. A lot of people, myself included, would like to take a Jamal Murray type player and build a career for him. So you can be a 6th man or starter right off the bat but not dominate and then perhaps build up your player slowly during the season and in the offseason.

The problem, especially with 2K, is that they build a narrative around your player being God's gift to basketball and then start you off in the 50's. It's RIDICULOUS and a blatant attempt -- emphasis on "tempt" -- to lure you into purchasing VC (other than the 10k/dollar promo, I haven't).

Career mode does NOT necessarily have to be grind from scrub to star. That it is in MLB and 2K shows a failure of design imagination, that's all. And in 2K's case, it creates a laughably self-contradictory narrative. Hell, even Madden, which has a bad career mode, allows you to pick a starting trajectory.

And on a larger scale, I'll say this: GRIND is the bane of video games, period. It's infested/infected all genres (the deplorable "crafting" craze in so-called rpg's) and it has to be the bastard child of the WoW crowd -- those who would dedicate their lives to games. A grind in the current sense models addiction: it gives you less and less payoff for each completed grind. I miss the good old days when you couldn't open a door in Metroid until you obtained a certain item, or in Zelda when a part of a dungeon was JUST out of reach until you, yep, got a certain item. BIG payoff, minimal grind, excellent game design = respect for the gamer AND for the entire concept of life-friendly fun.

First off - Let me just say this is healthy conversation. We just debating - I'm not mad at you and hopefully you are not mad at me.

That said - with 2K - I never understood the complaint about the rating. The game is geared [even now] that any decent player can get good stats and be a starter before the end of year one. That's without any VC boost whatesoever. It's not that difficult. The offense kinda runs through you and if you are a guard you can dominate the ball to get your touches. I never had any issue doing this and I play as a big man. I find by the time I reach level 80 I can really do anything I want. The higher attributes are just "extra."

Do you want to be a 6th man ultimately? I'm not being funny - I am seriously asking. Because to me - and maybe I'm part of the problem - I don't want to be a "good" player. I want to be a superstar. I don't find the forced narrative a problem at all. This is about my path the greatness. Now it could be improved - I won't argue with you about that at all. But I don't believe VC is the issue in that regard.

Now your complaint about the Grind in general is valid and in some ways I agree. But again - I don't think microstransactions are the cause of that issue. As you pointed out it's everywhere. But the issue we are taking about in this thread is concerning how VC is detrimental to the 2K series. I can't follow how a genre encompassing gameplay design is accentuated by VC. If anything I think it's the opposite. It just gives a way to circumvent that grind - which would still be there if VC were not.

[hanzsomehanz]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

The harder, longer, more grueling the grind is: the more enticing and incentive the VC offers become.

I understand that principle in the conversation here. That's where people feel "played" - they feel "too much" emphasis is put on valuing VC purchases.

In respect to My Career.. breaking John Stockton record to unlock HOF Dimer is quite much. If I can get 300 assists in 20 or less games.. what more do I need to further prove? I'd appreciate the objectives being more meaningful during the grind.

I personally made a one time purchase of 75k VC and that's enough for me. I didn't have to or need to but it was worthwhile. It worked out as it was supposed to.

For myself, I'm not fit to win on HOF with a low rated Playmaker while at the same time get the badges I need to compete with my counterparts in Park and Pro Am.

The majority fall into my bucket for Career. They are grinding on Rookie and losing VC for their efforts but it's the easiest and most efficient way to balance the grind for badges.

You can later have a career reserved for HOF which is usually a big man (SF, PF, C) career and you can farm VC on that career. Some also opt to just run 1 career for majority of the term until the next 2k series arrives.

My observation is I find fault in the structure. I understand 2k will marginalize the system to benefit their profits more than our profits. I have already paid $100 however so I feel there is a line between fair and just and unfair and unjust that encroaches upon greed and corruption inn the system.

I don't pay a $100 entry fee at the casino.

In 17 I am being charged more for accessories, animations, clothing, upgrades and even the payout per game is less on each difficulty for Career. The prices have gone up but the VC sale is the same. I'm charged 7.5k for custom shoes which are no longer offered free for Park use under a shoe Sponsorship deal. We do however earn earn Sponsorship VC bonuses that can range from 150 coins to as much as 6k VC.

The Sponsorship VC helps but not enough to strike a fair balance in respect to the overpriced hype in the Store. It's to the point many things will in the store will become neglected and folks will become more frugal with their spending. It's like VC becomes a standalone purchase for "Clothing", "Boosts", "Animations" - all in separate bulk purchases. So sure, I've earned 6k extra VC and it just covered an upgrade to Gold for 1 badge; I spent the remaining VC on animations. I'm back to the grind and I still have needs and still cannot afford any decent leisure purchases without breaking my bank of savings that will pay for these needs.

These schemes blatantly tell me the plan is to have us earn less and pay more for the same product value while being demanded more effort. This doesn't sound like a fair and just structure for any system be it: video game economy design, client & agency partnerships, or business commerce in general.

It's further insult to injury when your Archetype value is diminished on badges that do not yield HOF effectiveness, ratings that do not yield HOF effectiveness. You essentially are bagged a hand of defective / damaged goods. You're compelled to start a new grind and the process continues in a vicious cycle.

In other cases it's the game play that diminishes the value of your investment. In all cases we should consider the return on our investment of time, effort and money. I personally cannot afford to grind for the highest rep status at the pace many of these go getters are at. It will simply come at the expense of too many other things that I value. The grind in 17 for rep is another absurd painstaking trial. You're again demanded more effort but do the rewards fairly compensate you for the grind? Are the rewards really that much improved or improved at all from 16?

I consider more than just VC sales when I consider my value of the grind and the value of the game itself. I'm also considering costs not related to goods such as work, family, social activities, proper diet, sleep, and ultimately mental and emotional health. So what really makes such a grind so worthwhile and rewarding when it costs so much real sacrifice in return? It's a video game at the end of the day and shouldn't be put on the same level as life goals and life grinds that actually impact your circle and your society and your future.

Video games should always value the fun side that satisfies our leisure time. You can never over value that and the VC purchases are more loyal and rewarding when founded on pleasing the user with a fun time first. Value challenges in the grind but keep it in perspective. Don't let VC profits corrupt the system of balance and fair reasonableness.


Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[335TDC]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

First off - Let me just say this is healthy conversation. We just debating - I'm not mad at you and hopefully you are not mad at me.

That said - with 2K - I never understood the complaint about the rating. The game is geared [even now] that any decent player can get good stats and be a starter before the end of year one. That's without any VC boost whatesoever. It's not that difficult. The offense kinda runs through you and if you are a guard you can dominate the ball to get your touches. I never had any issue doing this and I play as a big man. I find by the time I reach level 80 I can really do anything I want. The higher attributes are just "extra."

Do you want to be a 6th man ultimately? I'm not being funny - I am seriously asking. Because to me - and maybe I'm part of the problem - I don't want to be a "good" player. I want to be a superstar. I don't find the forced narrative a problem at all. This is about my path the greatness. Now it could be improved - I won't argue with you about that at all. But I don't believe VC is the issue in that regard.

Now your complaint about the Grind in general is valid and in some ways I agree. But again - I don't think microstransactions are the cause of that issue. As you pointed out it's everywhere. But the issue we are taking about in this thread is concerning how VC is detrimental to the 2K series. I can't follow how a genre encompassing gameplay design is accentuated by VC. If anything I think it's the opposite. It just gives a way to circumvent that grind - which would still be there if VC were not.

All good, my friend. And big of you to make that clear on a topic that has caused so much bickering and in a medium where it's difficult to infer tone/intent.

I guess I'll say that the VERY FACT that you can dominate with garbage ratings is a huge problem itself. At core, a large part of the appeal of a career mode is "buffing your stats," so to speak, just like building up an RPG character. And if THAT doesn't matter, then a lot of the impetus for "grinding" becomes meaningless. You used the word "circumvent" in your post, and to me and a lot of others out there, dominating with crap ratings circumvents the whole point of a career mode (especially one with such a defined narrative). I don't want to be a superstar with crap ratings; I want my guy to improve and be a superstar when his ratings indicate he should be. I honestly think almost everyone out there feels the same way.

And sure I want to be the star, but not always in my first year. How many MJ's or Shaqs have there been, really? Look at Steph's arc, look at KOBE's arc, look at Russ's arc, look at a pre-injury D Rose's arc -- MOST superstars don't dominate year one, but within 2-3 years. (Take Kevin Love's pre-Cavs arc -- decent rookie to superstar last year in MN!) I personally think a career mode would be much more satisfying if you COULDN'T just dominate in the first year...or, at the very least, have that "Madden option" to define how you enter the league. I would LOVE to look back 4 years in and see my stats show a great rookie campaign, an all star year 2, and an MVP candidate year 3 -- to me, that would be a realistic career arc for this mode that would feel satisfying and keep me interested longer.

The other thing I'd say about being able to dominate with low ratings is that (from my understanding) lots of the best animations are ratings-based. I want to enjoy the game by BEING GOOD, not by simply filling stats with vanilla play and taking advantage of the cpu.

[335TDC]

Re: The VC issue - perfectly put in words

I consider more than just VC sales when I consider my value of the grind and the value of the game itself. I'm also considering costs not related to goods such as work, family, social activities, proper diet, sleep, and ultimately mental and emotional health. So what really makes such a grind so worthwhile and rewarding when it costs so much real sacrifice in return? It's a video game at the end of the day and shouldn't be put on the same level as life goals and life grinds that actually impact your circle and your society and your future.

Video games should always value the fun side that satisfies our leisure time. You can never over value that and the VC purchases are more loyal and rewarding when founded on pleasing the user with a fun time first. Value challenges in the grind but keep it in perspective. Don't let VC profits corrupt the system of balance and fair reasonableness.


Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

Well said, and perhaps THE major problem for me in sports games recently, with 2k being the worst of them all: the games are trying to dominate your lives with collectibles, earnings, MyTeam, Ultimate Team, etc.,...

It's been easy enough for me to ignore in other games since I'm an offline franchise guy, but in 2K all systems are tied together through your player and VC.

I had to step back from the Show because I love the card collecting, but I don't have the time to grind and am not willing to spend extra money and time playing the market (you NEVER get good cards in packs or by earning them). So the most appealing part of the game is off limits to me because I will not revolve my life around it -- ESPECIALLY since it will all start again next year...!