Konami Adds "Paid" Insurance "Service" to Metal Gear Solid V Mulitplayer

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Konami Adds "Paid" Insurance "Service" to Metal Gear Solid V Mulitplayer

Fans of The Phantom Pain can now pay real-world dollars to protect their in-game assets from other players.

Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain has largely been counted by the gaming public as one of 2015's most tremendous successes. Blowing gamers away with its open vision of stealth action gameplay, many fans have spent and continue to spend countless hours sneaking through its world. Not all of The Phantom Pain's features have been a hit, however. The game's multiplayer-focused Forward Operating Bases, for instance, received something of a lukewarm reception from many critics and gamers. That in mind, Konami used today's launch of Metal Gear Online to bring some improvements to the FOB experience. Unfortunately for the publisher, some of the improvements have left gamers rolling their eyes.

Take, for instance, a new "insurance service" that Phantom Pain players can purchase to protect the assets in their FOBs. For those not in the know, the Forward Operating Base mode involves building installations that can serve as additional resource farms and development areas to aid your efforts in the main campaign. The catch is that your FOB can be raided by other players who can steal resources and personnel for their own bases that you, in turn, can also raid. Players who spend real-world dollars on the new insurance however, will have (most of) their losses from these invasions re-imbursed. "Your FOBs are always at risk of coming under attack. Now, you can rest easy with FOB insurance (paid service)," said Konami, in its announcement. "If you sign up for insurance, then during the insurance period you will be compensated for any materials and staff lost due to rival infiltrations." Players interested in buying FOB Insurance will able to do so by purchasing and spending MB Coins.

While some gamers may actually enjoy the opportunity to protect their in-game assets with this new option, we can imagine that there will be more than a few who find the whole thing kind of shady. And, honestly, it's not hard to see why. While Konami would likely argue to the contrary, it's not hard to stretch "pay us to protect your stuff" into "don't pay us and see what happens." For extra insidiousness, just imagine the whole thing being described by a cliché film mobster. "Just grease our gears a little and we'll make sure nobody bothers you!" The real shame of it is that other components of the update actually do improve on the FOBs with things like new missions, improved rewards and more. Here's hoping those aren't soured by the questionable nature of the insurance policy.

Source: Konami

Permalink

So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?

Colt47:
So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?

And now you can pay for the privilege of ensuring that said multiplayer antics don't interfere with your singleplayer experience.

I get the feeling this will probably show up at the end of the next Jimquisition during the "Fuck Konami News" segment.

Oh, so basically we just need to play the game without any forward bases to avoid this mafia style "protection insurance" shit. 10-4.

RJ 17:
I get the feeling this will probably show up at the end of the next Jimquisition during the "Fuck Konami News" segment.

I'd be amazed if he didn't mention it in his next Jimquisition. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if this ends up being the central subject of the next episode. This isn't just Konami being their usual scummy selves. This is completely uncharted territory for shitty microtransactions, a new low. It'd be newsworthy even if it weren't Konami.

P.S. Thanks

I'm starting to get the impression that Konami is trying to ruin Kojima's reputation by salting the earth with MGS5, just making it as horrible as possible to spite him.

Hey, best explanation I can come up with.

Wow. So they decide to go into gambling hardware manufacture, and now they're basically shaking down gamers.

I guess Konami got taken over by the Yakuza.

Lightknight:
Oh, so basically we just need to play the game without any forward bases to avoid this mafia style "protection insurance" shit. 10-4.

the situation is that getting that first FOB adds valuable staff slots. The staff cap with just motherbase is too small to make reaching late/final tiers of upgrades reasonable without ~100 A++ rank people in a single category, which I've yet to do after 100+ hours so far. So that first FOB is practically necessary, and they know it, which is why the game just gives it to you. And then people have no choice but put up with it and it's risks.

Funny how I saw the thread for this news in Gaming Discussion first (over 6 hours in advance) (over a solid DAY in advance; Jesus). Makes me question why I even bother with the news room section of this site at all.

OT: I'd almost applaud Konami for being the first major game publisher to include literal protection racketeering in their game, if not for the fact that they're deliberately trying to piss their fanbase off and make money in the process.

Let's all be honest and see the clear writing on the wall/ Konami is about to die. it's following Acclaim and similar once great publishers into the great digital abyss. Kojima simply saw the writing on the wall and got the hell out of dodge. I'm betting when everything leaks much of the creative disagreements kojima has had with Konami will come down to a matter of actually getting paid. In money and not accounting fluff. That seems to be the way these things go. Every bit of news coming out of or about Konami these days screams Death Rattles. This particular one just shouts "We need cash now! Right Now! Give US MONEY PLEEEAAASSEEEE!"

Needless to say there will NOT be a MSG VI until everything gets passed through and parceled out by the Bankruptcy courts.

Not a new idea in games...but definitely pretty gross in a bought game.

fucking hell, just make a pachinko machine and kill us already.

faefrost:
Let's all be honest and see the clear writing on the wall/ Konami is about to die. it's following Acclaim and similar once great publishers into the great digital abyss. Kojima simply saw the writing on the wall and got the hell out of dodge. I'm betting when everything leaks much of the creative disagreements kojima has had with Konami will come down to a matter of actually getting paid. In money and not accounting fluff. That seems to be the way these things go. Every bit of news coming out of or about Konami these days screams Death Rattles. This particular one just shouts "We need cash now! Right Now! Give US MONEY PLEEEAAASSEEEE!"

Needless to say there will NOT be a MSG VI until everything gets passed through and parceled out by the Bankruptcy courts.

I wish this were the case, but they have their hands in a lot of pots. Gambling machines, sure, but other areas of business as well. They could cut their whole games division and still be okay.

Which is what they seem to be doing. Someone up there wants to take the business in a new direction. One that doesn't include video games. And normally that would be fine, fuck 'em. But they'll drag their IP's with them. We won't see any good Silent Hill or Metal Gear Solid games anymore. But much worse, the old classic titles will probably be buried away and forgotten. It's like if a company owned Citizen Kane, but refused to ever make new physical or digital copies for copyright reasons. They're holding an important part of our gaming heritage hostage, and since they're doing fine financially, we don't even have the hope of seeing their IP's get bought out by other companies.

So, they're evil, sure, but they've won all the same. And we can't even do anything about it as consumers, because we're not their target demographic anymore. They don't need us.

#Fuckonami

So pretty much they added the multiplayer in knowing that it might interfere with singleplayer and then instead of adding an offline mode they are charging for the privilege of not having to be effected by the multiplayer? Yeah...I was considering buying MGSV at some point, but I think I'll just wait a few more months for a sale or something

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Dark Souls the first major title to do this? Not to try and racket you out of your money but to ruin your single-player experience with mandatory multiplayer functionality, whether you want it or not?

RJ 17:

Colt47:
So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?

And now you can pay for the privilege of ensuring that said multiplayer antics don't interfere with your singleplayer experience.

I get the feeling this will probably show up at the end of the next Jimquisition during the "Fuck Konami News" segment.

Damn beat me to the Jimquisition prediction.
#Fuckonami

Fulbert:
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Dark Souls the first major title to do this? Not to try and racket you out of your money but to ruin your single-player experience with mandatory multiplayer functionality, whether you want it or not?

Yeah, but in both cases you can just play offline... I mean... that's what I've been doing.
Seems cheaper than insuring my digital shit.

Well, the free version would be to just not go online at all. Bam. Done.

I mean, why should I pay for playing offline when I can just... go offline straight up?

...Ok, so Konami is doing this now just to mess with people, right? This has ceased being just tone-deaf business practices. This is just flat out trolling what's left of their customer base.

Is Konami running some sort of massive social experiment to see just how far they can push things before they've lost any possible good will anyone might have ever given them so that they can concentrate on their pachinko machines in peace?

For everyone who says "Just stick to single player then", you have to understand that they specifically designed the game to be incredibly obtuse and grind-y to purposely test your patience and make you more susceptible to forking over "just a few dollars" to make the game less aggravating. This is the same thing free-to-play mobile games have been doing for years.

While I've managed to complete games like CSR Racing without paying a single cent, not everyone has that level of patience. Constructing FOB's exponentially increases resource gains in single playr, but you absolutely have to buy MB Coins on order to build more than one. They also allow you to send more combat units out on missions. Again, in single player.

Even if one were to ignore the online component completely, it doesn't change the fact that they fundamentally changed some aspect of the single player experience to accommodate their nickel-and-dime scheme. Otherwise, you can just replay Mission 8 and Mission 9 for hours until you hit the resource cap, and then have to do it all over again when after upgrading.

Hell, they even made the maximum amount of GMP low enough to make you have to grind more for really expensive stuff. Without the cap, you could just farm GMP for a single day and be set for the rest of completion, but when you're capped at $5 million, you have to go back to farming often.

But going back to FOB's for a second: even if you're not playing, any FOB's you construct are still "online" to their servers, so anyone can attack them at any time even when you're not playing. So if you want to build your one free FOB, you still have to connect to their servers to collect the rewards/losses. You can't just build one and let it farm resources for you.

This was an absolutely absurd addition to an otherwise excellent game, and it's a real shame Konami is going so far to screw over their customers this way, and this is on top of cutting the ending out of the game, and their upcoming cosmetic DLC (The Tuxedo, goddamn Horse Armor, EVA outfit for Quiet, and probably more to come). I'm genuinely surprised they haven't tried putting the bandanna and stealth camo behind a paywall.

I think that every announcement from Konami lately sounds like an April's Fool joke.

That's a nice FOB you have there, it'd be a shame if something happened to it... *cracks knuckles*

Nothing Konami does surprise me anymore, sadly.

The next update will grant konami the rights to clean your house of valuables if you dont buy their insurance.

Colt47:
So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?

you can disconnect from the servers in the pause menu, and don't have to do any multiplayer stuff.

Eh. Vote with your wallet.

Fulbert:
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Dark Souls the first major title to do this? Not to try and racket you out of your money but to ruin your single-player experience with mandatory multiplayer functionality, whether you want it or not?

And there you run into the biggest issue with any attempt to get change in the industry. It's okay when someone we like does it.

Scrythe:
For everyone who says "Just stick to single player then", you have to understand that they specifically designed the game to be incredibly obtuse and grind-y to purposely test your patience and make you more susceptible to forking over "just a few dollars" to make the game less aggravating. This is the same thing free-to-play mobile games have been doing for years.

And something paid games have done for years, as well. And people said it wasn't a problem then, too. So at least they're being consistent.

Bindal:
Well, the free version would be to just not go online at all. Bam. Done.

I mean, why should I pay for playing offline when I can just... go offline straight up?

Yeah, I was about to say that. Can't you literally just turn the online component off? And then you can't get raided?

CaptainMarvelous:

Fulbert:
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Dark Souls the first major title to do this? Not to try and racket you out of your money but to ruin your single-player experience with mandatory multiplayer functionality, whether you want it or not?

Yeah, but in both cases you can just play offline... I mean... that's what I've been doing.
Seems cheaper than insuring my digital shit.

If anything playing MGS5 offline is basically entirely positive for me.

For one...I don't have PS Plus. Which means, as I understand it from reading the details when I started the game, I CAN'T take advantage of raiding other people and playing the multiplayer but they will still be able to raid me.

For two playing online seems to slow down the menus quite severely with extra loading time. So turning it off actually makes my game run smoother.

Disclaimer: I've not actually unlocked FOBs yet. So I dunno how significant the addition is. But thus far I've just been playing the entire thing with online turned off.

This is bloody disgusting. Whose house do I throw my poo at to make this go away?

What is there to say that hasn't been said already?

All I know is if I hear about Konami dying or dead, I'm throwing a big party at mine, and you're all invited.

The past six months I've had my PS3's network settings turned off. It's working out great.

The game though...

image
Nobody will notice if there's nobody to notice >.>

Scrythe:
For everyone who says "Just stick to single player then", you have to understand that they specifically designed the game to be incredibly obtuse and grind-y to purposely test your patience and make you more susceptible to forking over "just a few dollars" to make the game less aggravating. This is the same thing free-to-play mobile games have been doing for years.

While I've managed to complete games like CSR Racing without paying a single cent, not everyone has that level of patience. Constructing FOB's exponentially increases resource gains in single playr, but you absolutely have to buy MB Coins on order to build more than one. They also allow you to send more combat units out on missions. Again, in single player.

Even if one were to ignore the online component completely, it doesn't change the fact that they fundamentally changed some aspect of the single player experience to accommodate their nickel-and-dime scheme. Otherwise, you can just replay Mission 8 and Mission 9 for hours until you hit the resource cap, and then have to do it all over again when after upgrading.

Hell, they even made the maximum amount of GMP low enough to make you have to grind more for really expensive stuff. Without the cap, you could just farm GMP for a single day and be set for the rest of completion, but when you're capped at $5 million, you have to go back to farming often.

But going back to FOB's for a second: even if you're not playing, any FOB's you construct are still "online" to their servers, so anyone can attack them at any time even when you're not playing. So if you want to build your one free FOB, you still have to connect to their servers to collect the rewards/losses. You can't just build one and let it farm resources for you.

This was an absolutely absurd addition to an otherwise excellent game, and it's a real shame Konami is going so far to screw over their customers this way, and this is on top of cutting the ending out of the game, and their upcoming cosmetic DLC (The Tuxedo, goddamn Horse Armor, EVA outfit for Quiet, and probably more to come). I'm genuinely surprised they haven't tried putting the bandanna and stealth camo behind a paywall.

Welp. That does it then. I didn't know about any of this multiplayer garbage until just now. What was a must buy this holiday season for myself just became a must avoid. So bummed. #Fuckonami

Fox12:
It's like if a company owned Citizen Kane, but refused to ever make new physical or digital copies for copyright reasons. They're holding an important part of our gaming heritage hostage, and since they're doing fine financially, we don't even have the hope of seeing their IP's get bought out by other companies.

At what point does something become abandonware?

I'm not stupid enough to advocate piracy but it shouldn't be the only way to get your hands on an old game.

WouldYouKindly:

Fox12:
It's like if a company owned Citizen Kane, but refused to ever make new physical or digital copies for copyright reasons. They're holding an important part of our gaming heritage hostage, and since they're doing fine financially, we don't even have the hope of seeing their IP's get bought out by other companies.

At what point does something become abandonware?

I'm not stupid enough to advocate piracy but it shouldn't be the only way to get your hands on an old game.

I'm not sure how it works in Japan, but in America it's absurdly long, because Disney throws a fit every time Steam Boat Willy is about to enter the public domain. Historically, though, when the rights of a corporation come into conflict with the cultural heritage of the people, the corporation always wins. Konami could essentially hold onto this forever, if they so desired.

The thing is that companies routinely sit on copyrights they have no intention of ever using, just to guarantee other companies can't use them. It's a pretty common business routine. But they'll jealously pursue legal action against anyone who infringes on those copyrights, on the off chance that they want to use it later. The best chance we have is if Konami were to sell it to another interested Japanese company. I think it's illegal for them to sell to an American company. This seems unlikely, but it is possible.

I'm not a fan of piracy, but in situations like this...

CaptainMarvelous:
Yeah, but in both cases you can just play offline... I mean... that's what I've been doing.
Seems cheaper than insuring my digital shit.

Bindal:
Well, the free version would be to just not go online at all. Bam. Done.

I mean, why should I pay for playing offline when I can just... go offline straight up?

martyrdrebel27:

Colt47:
So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?

you can disconnect from the servers in the pause menu, and don't have to do any multiplayer stuff.

Lil_Rimmy:

Bindal:
Well, the free version would be to just not go online at all. Bam. Done.

I mean, why should I pay for playing offline when I can just... go offline straight up?

Yeah, I was about to say that. Can't you literally just turn the online component off? And then you can't get raided?

To all of the above: no, there's no way to dodge being raided. Even when you're offline, your FOBs can and will still be raided, and whatever you lost will be subtracted from your game the moment you log back in.

The catch is that while you most certainly can turn the online mode off in the pause menu, the very first thing you do when you turn on the game is log into the servers. As such, the moment you turn the game on your status is updated and you lose everything that's been stolen.

martyrdrebel27:

Colt47:
So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?

you can disconnect from the servers in the pause menu, and don't have to do any multiplayer stuff.

Even if your disconnect and not playing online you can get raided by other players. Plus by not using the FOB it makes it significantly harder to impossible to develop the best weapons and items in the game.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.