Microtransactions in Gaming

[Keth]

Just read that EA is going to put microtransactions into every game it makes from now on.

 

I think microtransactions work for free to play games. SOME free to play games. But on the whole I hate them. I think the game should be played as it was intended without having to spend money to have fun. I know it is totally optional, but something about it never set right with me.

 

I know we had a discussion on the day 1 DLC monster too, but I think this is a bit different than DLC.

 

Anyway, thoughts? Was this going to just be inevitable with the changing industry, or are MT's something that games can do without? Get as specific as you need to since I know this covers a broad spectrum of games.

[Iambaytor]

Free-to-play maybe I understand. It's more than likely the model that MMOs are going to take going forward rather than monthly fees. In that regard I suppose i grudgingly accept them (I still voted no) though I'd prefer ads to that. However, if I paid money for a game I had better get a full and complete experience. The only exception I would make to this is expansion packs (DLC), promotional materials (all the "free" shit you get when you pre-order with Gamestop, Best Buy, etc that has no measurable effect on game-play but a player may want anyway), or extras that in no way influence gameplay (best example of this is the sewers in Rage. (The game is entirely playable without having access to this area, it's basically just a place to get lots of money and maybe a few random extra things.)

 

I guess as long as EA keeps the micro-transactions for things like different costumes/paint schemes/non-game-breaking weapon mods/etc. I can accept this.

[Maldron]

I never wanted for resources in Dead Space 3. Never once. There were methods to farm infinite materials in that game, and EA said "we ain't gonna patch that." Microtransactions are all about exploiting lazy idiots with excess cash, and i haven't encountered a model yet that begged for my money.

 

When I think microtransactions in the current gen, I think resources in Dead Space 3, and battle packs in Mass Effect 3's co-op. Both EA games, both offering access to the same items through normal play, or through your wallet if you didn't want to spend a couple of hours playing the damn game to get the same result. There were people who bitched that they played for days and didn't see what they wanted, AND there were people bitching that they paid hundreds of dollars to the same end. It's all about putting a price on the temptation of a shortcut, which I'm fine with.

[Thrizzle]

Depends on the microtransactions.

 

The game I'm playing now, Path of Exiles, is chock full of them.

 

None of them confer any sort of gameplay bonus, the closest thing would be extra stash space (which you already have plenty of in the first place). None of them were things that must have purposefully been cut out of the game. It's stuff like special visual effects for your weapon, vanity pets, some things that turn your spells into spiders or dragons, flaming headgear. 100% optional cosmetic shit that ISN'T pay-to-win.

 

Guild Wars 2 did it right too, but ONLY because you don't have to pay actual money for any of it. You can transfer tokens you buy with real money into in-game gold, and gold into tokens. So absolutely anything in the microtransaction shop can be obtained without spending a dime, you can just play the game and earn it that way. The double edged sword here is that means you can literally buy gold.

This works for GW2, because gold isn't good for much.

 

Basically, I'm fine with it if it's extra shit. If I get the impression that they purposefully left it on the cutting room floor in order to squeeze another buck out of me, I'll resent it.

 

As far as competitive online games go, I don't like microtransactions that give the player any sort of advantage. Single player games, I couldn't care less.

[The NZA]

yeah, i don't mind. im with loggins on it being specific to the content, though.

 

throwback jerseys, skins of older characters (though i kinda get why people bitch when they're clearly on the disc), etc are fine, i don't mind if someone wants horse armor in their life. offhand, the only ones id be bothered by:

 

1) bioware type shit where a character/plot stuff that seems central to the experience

2) i'm okay with people breaking single player, but a hypothetical weapon (not unlockable by merits/playing) which breaks a MP experience, for obvious reasons

3) namco type shit where 4 levels from my katamari game are day-1 DLC, and not only are they on the goddamn disc, they're just lazily made from preexisting maps

 

now alternate costumes in street fighter games could be a # 4, depending on your take. entire characters would obviously trouble me more.

[Thrizzle]

No! It's as good as cheating in some instances. Just let the game stay as it is.

 

My view on this could have colored my vote as well. I really like cheating. There are games that I'm just done with, not enjoying at all. If I can hack a few lines of code and squeeze some more enjoyment out of it before it gets mothballed, then I certainly will.

 

I get stuff like "NUUUUH that's not how the devs meant for it to be played", to which I say

 

 

I'll enjoy myself any way I please, thanks. I see it pretty much how I see everything else in life: if it ain't hurting anyone else, have a ball (I already formally apologized for fudging your Castle Crashers leaderboard, and if you're enjoyment of that game hinged upon said leaderboard, I owe you a Coke).

At the end of the day, I'm only hurting myself by cheating. Robbing myself of a rewarding gaming experience, which is why I have no desire to do it on things I'm finding rewarding (Hotline Miami/Binding of Isaac, etc)

 

But if someone wants to sell god mode or some shit, more power to 'em. I'll generally think it's kinda silly, but it doesn't bother me.

[Keth]

If you keep up with Jim Sterling you know that he has been waging this war against MT's since their inception. They have gotten a bit crazy lately.

 

 

 

 

 

The 2K games one is worth a watch just to see how much hubris those fuckers have.

[The NZA]

that 2k one was absolutely ridiculous

[Keth]

 

 

This Star Wars stuff has been a fucking mess.  

[Little Nemo McFly]

Wouldn't be surprised if all the good Spidey costumes are gonna end being DLC in the upcoming PS4 'Spider-man'.

 

ALSO wouldn't be surprised - w/ all this 'DLC' backlash - they're re-calibrating behind-the-scenes and end up having 'no-brainer' skins in-game now.

 

I hate when they charge for skin packs...that stuff is just cosmetic and it isn't like, huge...extra levels / campaigns.

 

I love alt. skins - it's a huge component for me...projecting yourself unto the character.  Kick-ass to swap n' mix it up.  I hate when they hold out on simple / basic stuff like that and then charge.

 

BotW had those classic tunics...locked to Amiibo.  Luckily, I already had 'em (Amiibo), but I'd have been pissed if I had to go out n' buy shit...knowing it's already in-game...and it's just a simple skin swap...aaand a dream skin.

 

I think everyone in the biz already feels like 'microtransactions' are tacky...save the "opportunity to purchase" for 'extra campaigns'...'new race tracks'.

 

(shrugs)  At the same time, people are more than willing to pay cash to 'level up' quicker or get more 'in-game' cash instantly.   I guess in the end it's a business.  Don't think anything will really change...except an emphasis on...

 

"...oooptionaaal..."

 

 

[Keth]

First Belgium, now EA is being investigated by Hawaii for 'predatory practices'

 

[The NZA]

related:

 

Belgium declares that loot boxes are gambling, will seek to have them banned in Europe

 

Last week, Belgium's Gaming Commission announced that it had launched an investigation into whether the loot boxes available for purchase in games like Overwatch and Star Wars Battlefront 2 constitute a form of gambling. Today, VTM Newsreported that the ruling is in, and the answer is yes. 

The Google translation is a little sloppy, as usual, but the message is clear enough. "The mixing of money and addiction is gambling," the Gaming Commission declared. Belgium's Minister of Justice Koen Geens also weighed in, saying, "Mixing gambling and gaming, especially at a young age, is dangerous for the mental health of the child." 



Geens, according to the report, wants to ban in-game purchases outright, and not just in Belgium: He said the process will take time, "because we have to go to Europe. We will certainly try to ban it." 

And now, things will start to get interesting. I've reached out to the Gaming Commission for more information, and will update if I receive a reply.

[Keth]

 

 

"It's a trap!"

Well played Representative. 

Edited November 22, 2017 by Axels
that's not the governor, silly

[Little Nemo McFly]

All eventually a balanced / fair / level playing field...w/ tons of free content and upgrades...then modders enter the arena - and completely break it for everyone.

 

[The NZA]

Activision Blizzard made over $4 billion in in-game/microtransaction rev this year (out of $7.16B)

Quote

Over half of Activision Blizzard's revenue, which hit record highs this year, now comes from microtransactions/in-game revenue.

It's worth noting that they own King (the mobile company) which accounts for $2 billion of this.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2017, Activision Blizzard's net bookingsB were a record $7.16 billion, as compared with $6.60 billion for 2016. Net bookingsB from digital channels were a record $5.43 billion, as compared with $5.22 billion for 2016.

• Activision Blizzard delivered a fourth-quarter record of over $1 billion of in-game net bookingsB, and an annual record of over $4 billion of in-game net bookingsB.

 

...so, maybe this trend isn't dying down any time soon 

[Keth]

 

 

 

There's a bit from this guy who spent a shitload on MTs and was actually addicted to it.

[Newtype]

Loot Box Regulation is "Censorship"