Sign on Options
Theme: [Light Selected] To Dark»
1Mar 13

With Dead Space 3's release, the hot-button topic of microtransactions in AAA titles has been resurfaced again by gamers. Yes, paying an extra dollar for a significant in-game bonus has stirred up more anger among gamers about the current state of their favorite industry (right when you thought nothing else could piss 'em off, too). I guess I can see why...people can now pay for what are essentially the new form of cheat codes. It's obviously a cash from the publishers who do it, but I seriously don't care. And I seriously don't see why other people do.

To understand my point, we should probably talk about the origin of microtransaction-based games; social networks. Games such as Mafia Wars and Farmville are completely free to play, and have a focus on social interaction with your friends who play the game. You can play them and be completely free of the worry of having to pay a dime to be successful, but there's a cost. In these games, you may have an energy bar that lets you perform X amount of actions when full, and once it depletes you must wait an hour or so before it fully regenerates. In others, you must wait for certain tasks to be completed, and if you wait too long to come back and collect on those tasks you may be punished. In order to offset those drawbacks, the game would offer players a chance to buy an item with real money that would make it easier for them to play the game and speed up their progress. The items are never expensive...usually costing around a dollar each...but if you have a game that, say, 50 million people play (I'm guessing here) and 5 million of them (10%) pay a dollar every day for a new item, you have some serious profit. That's why companies like the much-loathed  Zynga are so successful, they have a host of these games that have a large userbase, and even though the majority of players don't pay, the amount of people that do really adds up.

farmer.jpg?9707a5

That Windmill will take 24 hours to build, but if you pay $1 it will build INSTANTLY!

Now, while gamers hated games such as Farmville (because, really, what don't gamers hate?) for being obvious cash-grabs (although they probably didn't even bother with playing them), they didn't have as much of an effect on the industry until recently. EA, the big bad evil devil satan publisher of the video game world, has suddenly included microtransactions in many of their new games, and has announced that they intend to implement them into more, sparking an outcry among gamers.

My question is this: why? Why do they care?

Mass-Effect-multiplayer-1.jpg

Mass Effect 3's multiplayer has a microtransaction system that lets players pay for booster packs that include new armor, characters, and weapons, but they could just earn them from playing the multiplayer enough.

My thing with microtransactions is that they're completely optional and have no direct effect on the game if you decide not to use them. You want to look around for tungsten in Dead Space 3 for free? Go ahead! You'd prefer to grind up credits in Mass Effect 3? Sure! Go for it! Do it! The game is still there in its entirety, completely available to everyone who purchases it. Honestly. You can still craft the weapons and upgrades you need in Dead Space 3 without paying for extra tungsten, and you can still unlock every character and every gun in Mass Effect 3's multiplayer without paying a dime for a booster pack.

 These microtransactions are, essentially,  glorified cheat codes. Remember cheat codes? Those things that were really popular up until this generation? Did anybody else notice that, even in single-player games, cheat codes seem to have fallen off the map? Game Informer used to have a "CHEATS" section, but that was removed a few years back because there were simply no cheats to publish. G4 (may it rest in peace) used to have an entire television program dedicated to cheat codes called, you guessed it, Cheat! Now, one could argue that the rise of multiplayer made cheat codes obsolete (they would destroy game balance entirely), but even in most single-player games and campaigns they just up and disappeared.  

Now, let me ask you a question. If a game had cheat codes, were you a frequent user of them? If not, then what's bothering you about microtransactions? Just like you opted out of cheat codes, you're opting out of paying for bonuses. You still have your full-featured game. You can still play it and beat it however many times you want. You can still sell it second-hand (unless you bought it digitally). Really, these microtransactions have no effect on your game if you don't choose to use them.

If you were a frequent user of cheat codes, I still don't see the complaints of the prospects of maybe having to pay for them now. They've been largely absent from games over the past generation, and that doesn't seem to have stopped anyone from playing. They're back now in their cheating glory, but, guess what, now you'll have to pay some money to cheat.

And before you tell me that I'm an EA apologist and blah, blah, blah, I'm not. I'm just a rational thinker here. I absolutely hate what they did to Bioware and the ending of Mass Effect 3 and I don't like that they have a reactive business model, rather than a proactive one. I would like to see EA dissolve and release all of the developers under their umbrella, but until that happens we're going to have to put up with their money-grabbing.

Some of you will claim that the eventual result of EA's use of microtransactions will be full-fledged, AAA $60 games will have systems like those of Mafia Wars and Farmville. We'll only be able to play 2 levels of a game in 24 hours, and in order to play more we'll have to buy an energy pack for $.99.

Except that won't happen. As soulless as EA is, it's aware that gamers will react extremely negatively to a $60 that employed such a model and would sell a miniscule number of copies. The microtransactions they currently employ are small little boosts that effect your game, and your game only. What's the issue?

And, let's be honest, I'm willing to bet that a lot of people who cry out against the microtransactions have used them at least once or twice. That's why EA will keep using them, gamers are purchasing them. Really, it's nobody's fault but ours that EA will keep this up. I admit, I have paid a grand total of $5 into Mass Effect 3's microtransaction system because I wanted to see if I could get a rare character without having to play 3 matches first. Does my getting a rare character hurt other players? No, the multiplayer is co-op, so, in fact, it almost helps my teammates if I get a rare character.

So, yeah, I don't see what the big deal is. Until a game like World of Warcraft offers legendary items for money, microtransactions can exist and I still won't give a single sh*t. 

130 comments
bobdimstar
bobdimstar

when companies add micotransaction into a free game,thats where they are getting their dollars,but when a company adds microtransaction to a full priced game,did they want to earn extra dollars or are they dumbing down the game?

for instance, in dead space 3 you can choose to grind or spend $ on tungsten or ration credits,the choice is there, but are you certain that they are not making it harder for you to grind tungsten or rations?so now they earn money from their full priced game and will try and earn more money by making rare items harder to get and impossible to win without em,and when youre playing in hardcore mode,grinding doesnt become an option for you,(or you can finish a 10 hour game in 50hours ~ Scavenger bots)

its true we can all buy the game and ignore all the microtransactions,but in the end what gaming experience you will you have?will it be a full priced game with microtransaciotns or a dumbed down full priced game with microtransactions?

Derugs
Derugs

Lol Ea doesn't get an extra dime from me...  Only thing I pay for is the game thats it.  Mass Effect didn't get one red penny.   :) 

pathosfire
pathosfire

I've never payed a dime in Mass Effect 3 and I have every single item possible.  I have no issue with microtransactions either as long as they remain entirely quality of life improvement possibilities and not necessary to enjoy the game fully.

AcidThunder
AcidThunder

oh you definitely are gonna care just wait for a couple of years

ceromaster
ceromaster like.author.displayName 1 Like

I loved your blog dude :)

I agree with everything you said, and I honestly don't see why pple get upset over optional micro-transactions and claims that companies are nickeling and diming, but I find it funny that no one bats an eye when Blizzard does it...hell..they've been doing it for years.

I sometimes enjoy micro-transactions, and if they have something reasonable to sell I will buy. I know alot of pple don't like EA..but I really don't care how they conduct business just as long as Bioware continues to make good games, and quite frankly I think it's a bit unfair to single out EA as the biggest bad guy around...pple can call me an EA apologist all they want..becus I believe that pple who vehemently hate EA but constantly brown-nose Bethesda, Valve, or Ubisoft are: A) full of it, B) heavily biased, C) blatant hypocrits, or D) all of the above

Sefrix
Sefrix ranger like.author.displayName 1 Like

 "And, let's be honest, I'm willing to bet that a lot of people who cry out against the microtransactions have used them at least once or twice. That's why EA will keep using them, gamers are purchasing them. Really, it's nobody's fault but ours that EA will keep this up."

You are correct that most everyone pays into the system they criticize. If gamers didn't put money into it then pubs wouldn't use it. They implement it because it works. That being said, I have never purchased a single DLC item so I can freely voice any opinion I have with integrity :)

Saketume
Saketume

@Sefrix I'll admit that when Magic the Gathering: Duels of the Planeswalkers came out on the PSS

I did buy it and all the extra card/mission packs (not the visual mods).

What I did was I played the demo. Loved it. Checked what it would cost to buy it all and saw that it was a reasonable price when combined. I still count it as buying a complete game because of that.

Then Sony changed their EULA to something I'd never agree to and I lost access to it all because I didn't accept the new terms.

After that I've never bought any downloadables anywhere.


I never bought any DLC before or after although I did buy some downloadable (complete) games before.

Never again will I pay for games I can't own.

Scarshi
Scarshi

I quite liked microtransactions in Just Cause 2. Rockets to attach to my paracute? Yes please. Certain weapon packs were awesome too. After I'd played through the game twice they just enhanced the game that bit more to keep playing. I've played for over 200 hours and those small purchases have more than payed for the extra hours spent.

Yes I understand taking my money for stuff that "should" have been in the final product is wrong. But if microtransactions are done properly they can enhance games for those that can't play enough to earn the rewards and give something more to the game once you've played through normally.

But I only agree with microtransactions when playing alone, single player. Multiplayer is a very fine line indeed.

Bayonetta2013
Bayonetta2013

I can already tell this poor soul is going to get shit for his avatar being Hope. Ah, well, that's the pathetic gaming world we live in now for ya. 


Thunderstarter
Thunderstarter like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

@Bayonetta2013 My posts usually clash with popular opinion anyway, I get a lot of shit for that ;)

Hope is a great character, I don't care what anyone else thinks :D

LordBranStark
LordBranStark

@Thunderstarter @Bayonetta2013 Hope was, in my opinion, one of the least 2-dimensional characters in 13.  None of the other characters really changed that much.  Snow was still a knuckle-head throughout, Lightning was still cold, Fang was always looking out for herself first, Sazh was just there for his kid, while Hope loses his mom, is separated from his father, thrown into a world in which everyone wants him dead...all while he's 13.  And while he did whine and his thoughts were not exactly constructive or even rational at first, by the end he was essentially mimicking Lightning as best he could. Carl Grimes sorta reminds me of Hope (or Hope Carl, since I think the Walking Dead comics were out first,) and both are children having to deal with things way over their heads.  

While that's off topic, I simply couldn't resist.  :p  I get some flak around the net for liking Bran Stark.  I love GoT, and Bran is honestly the character with the most redeeming qualities about him.  But that's for another discussion.  Maybe I should start blogging.....

In any case, love reading your thoughts on stuff Thunder.  

JukedSolid
JukedSolid

you want cheat codes?   Just watch Seb and Cam on Skyrim Mods of the Week and I'm sure it will get your creative juices flowing :)

Blazember
Blazember like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 5 Like

"I like paying for cheat codes that were free" "I like pay-to-win games"  "I want to encourage game devs to make every game about grinding so everyone will NEED to pay to compete" "I like paying for 'extra' pieces of a game that should've been there in the first place" 

Absolutely retarded, people accepting and defending sucking the industry's balls only hurts us consumers

Thunderstarter
Thunderstarter

@Blazember Except I never said any one of those things. You can't quote something someone never said. 

ceromaster
ceromaster

@Blazember 

Technically, if you've ever bought a videogame you've already done it.

timdogg42069
timdogg42069 like.author.displayName 1 Like

This reminded me of the Game Genie, wow I'm old.

Saketume
Saketume

@timdogg42069 Yeah? "The Final Cartridge"

"Action Replay"

Building your own Commodore 64 reset button... Maybe I should just go to one of those mythical elephant's graveyards and lie down.

TenraiSenshi
TenraiSenshi like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

In the end, it's all about implementation and how the micro-transaction system works. I've seen some examples where you hardly notice their effect on a game, but I've also seen some cases where the advantage of paying for extras holds a clear advantage over grinding for them.

One good example of how pay to win can ruin a game can be seen with Diablo 3. At first, I wasn't against the real money auction house because I thought the same thing you've mentioned in this article - that I could simply ignore it if I wanted to and that it wouldn't affect my personal experience with the game. That, unfortunately, was completely false, because the drop rates on the game were so bad that I was eventually forced to use the auction house just to have any hope of getting semi-decent gear without grinding for hundreds of hours. This essentially took the fun out of finding loot in a game that was essentially built around loot. In this case, it was painfully clear that the game design itself was molded specifically to push users into spending real money and to me, that can suck the life right out of a game.

02050muh
02050muh like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

nowadays, money can buy u everything! not only giving u an edge in real life, but also give u better advantage in virtual reality!!!

Rheinmetal
Rheinmetal

You have many valid points in your article. My main objection could be summarized into this phrase: "but until that happens [EA collapses] we have to put up with their money grabbing". My suggestion isa always react, boycott, vote with your wallet, do anything that will show them what the limit is.

Edit: I'm so tired of posting with an 8 font and then be given ONE chance and 6 minutes each time to correct the typos. It's retarded Gamespot! can't you understand it?

Meta-Gnostic
Meta-Gnostic like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 9 Like

Game developers will require you to grind like crazy to succeed in a game unless you pay for the microtransactions to either boost your level automatically, up your stats, give you free gold, or better weapons, etc. They make the game pay to win essentially because otherwise you're going to sit there for 10 hours grinding. Before the era of microtransactions that amount of grinding would've been 1 hour at most. And you sit here and try to say it's completely optional. 

Then there's microtransactions that destroy the level playing field of multiplayer games. And other reasons I can't think of right now because I'm too pissed off there's ignorant people like you in this world.

ceromaster
ceromaster like.author.displayName 1 Like

@Meta-Gnostic 

You've had to grind to beat a game? How sad. If microtransactions bother you, there's the option of ignoring them..

and maybe if the game is hard you should lower the difficulty? 

Meta-Gnostic
Meta-Gnostic

@ceromaster @Meta-Gnostic I'm used to grinding in RPGs for an hour between plot points where there is a perfect balance to the gameplay and story. What I find annoying is if a developer decided hmm let's ruin the balance of the game and make him grind for... hmm... 10 times as long! If he doesn't want to he can just pay us more money! Brilliant! 

Obviously you're incredibly ignorant to what a well balanced game is, what a good game is. Having the game ruined unless you pay up money for microtransactions is not anywhere near the same as just having the option to ignore them. What you really are saying is ignore them and suffer. 

How does having to grind for 10 hours in a game equate to the game being too hard? Man you fail on so many levels haha.

Master_Vexov
Master_Vexov like.author.displayName 1 Like

@Meta-Gnostic Yep, didn't read much of his post, I started feeling sick right away.

The industry will only continue to crumble unless people care, just wonder how many sheeps there are populating the gaming industry, likely the majority which will end up supporting anything the dev's do.

RedLegZeff
RedLegZeff

I generally don't mind the microtransactions that don't change the game, that is you can do everything in the game normally, microtransactions just save time. Unless they're balanced around microtransactions. A couple free to play games take so long doing stuff without microtransactions it becomes game breaking. I also don't like microtransactions with stuff that changes game mechanics, like special items that you can't get normally. Particularly pay to win stuff really gets on my nerves too.

gamerboy100
gamerboy100 like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

"My question is this: why? Why do they care?"

"These microtransactions are, essentially,  glorified cheat codes."

In the second quote, I think you answered the question you asked in the first one. Yes, microtransactions are glorified cheat codes, but they can turn any multiplayer game into a pay-to-win game, giving players with more money an unfair advantage.

Sikrion
Sikrion like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

I care because if micro transactions are successful enough games will be designed around them, either requiring absurd amounts of time grinding for something that really only should take a few minutes. Video games are a business and right now companies are testing to see how much they can get away with before people stop buying the product at all.

freedomspopular
freedomspopular like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 11 Like

If you care about gaming you SHOULD care. Look at all these kids nowadays playing stupid Facebook and mobile games that revolve around the free-to-play/microtransaction model. What's gonna happen when this generation grows up? All they've ever known is crap, and that's exactly what the industry is going to produce for them. It may not a big deal NOW...but it's the precedents that are being set and this growing trend that's only going to get worse that worries a lot of us. Crytek is transitioning to a completely free-to-play model for all their games. EA just stated that all their games from now on will include microtransactions. This doesn't concern you at all? You honestly don't believe that publishers are gonna push it as far as they can and go and start charging for essentials?

You may be too naive/small-minded to see the big picture, but those of us that do see it and have grown up gaming can't stand the thought of seeing our favorite hobby go down the toilet.

danielwd
danielwd

@Thunderstarter

Well here is my response to your editorial. Before I start though I'd like to say that your editorial is good and that I hope you make more. Now I'll rip into your valid opinions.


You have likened micro transactions in single player games to cheat codes. I agree, they are indeed cheat codes that you pay for. I feel that I am being treated unfairly because something that used to be free now isn't. You also pinpointed the ability to opt out of cheat codes just as you opt out of micro transactions, well it is not at all the same. Cheats were not marketed at you or forced down your throat, but micro transactions are, this not only encourages you to cheat thus taking away some of the feeling of accomplishment of finishing the game but ruins the immersion. (Especially of something like dead space.) Micro transaction also have the problem of day one dlc, the stuff they sell should either be in the game for free, or it shouldn't be in the game at all.


I hope I don't make you think differently about this topic but that you explain to me why I'm wrong.

jinzo9988
jinzo9988

Micro-transactions in games like Dead Space 3 and Mass Effect 3 don't bother me.  I've personally worked in the free to play MMORPG industry and I've seen people drop thousands in a month on a single game.  -That's- what bothers me, from the standpoint of game addiction and balance-screwing, and the standpoint of companies looking at that and thinking that's the way to go and we as consumers potentially miss out on something great because they chose to go that route.

Wango_Tango
Wango_Tango

I couldn't care less about micro transactions. I play a few MMO's that include them and if I want to buy them I do. I don't care whether other people have. Every item in the games I play is available either through money or time. If you're one of the people who prefers to sacrifice money for said items, super. If you'd rather sacrifice time, also super.

oSoLucky
oSoLucky

@Wango_Tango Or people could always not care about what the other guy does unless its competitive, but then I guess they'd have to think for themselves about what issue to complain about next.

RapidFirE53211
RapidFirE53211 like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

You should care, you damn fool. Microtransactions  in multiplayer games that allow players to quickly obtain the best items, weapons etc. completely throw off the balance of the game.

ernelson1976
ernelson1976 like.author.displayName 1 Like

Microtransactions are great--they give me choice. I get to choose what extras I want. If I want them all, I pay. If I want none, I don't. Just one? I pay a small amount. Most DLC is crap, and I'd never pay for it, but some of it is actually worthwhile. And because tastes differ, we all get a little bit of something we like, and not all of us have to pay for it.

As for whether some DLC packs should have been part of the retail game--it's silly. When we buy a game, we judge its value based on what's in the box. If it's not worth it, don't buy it. Arguing after the fact that you should have gotten more for your money is ridiculous. Most DLC is produced after the game has gone gold or released. It's usually not critical to the main story. The problem is that gamers are chronic whiners about nearly everything. It's becoming tedious. Years ago I thought maybe the community would mature as it gradually aged. It hasn't happened yet. I wonder if it ever will.

rogue81
rogue81

@ernelson1976 There's a difference between DLC and microtransactions. DLC adds levels and areas that are tacked on after the initial games release. I've bought all the DLC for the Mass Effect series and I love that I've gotten to spend more time with my favorite series. Microtransactions, are in game purchases that give you power/health/raw materials that you would otherwise have to spend hours/days farming yourself. Right now, microtransactions aren't much of an issue in AAA games but it isn't much of a stretch to imagine being blocked by a door that you need to buy a key to open (see Dead Space 3)

oSoLucky
oSoLucky

@ernelson1976 Thank you, you have summed up all 9 of my posts on this topic in 2 paragraphs. Tears flow hard from these "entitled" people that buy games that wish they hadn't then cry about them later.

TacticaI
TacticaI like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

You've got to be delusional to think going forward the aim isn't to start nickel and diming players. EA has a plan, Activision has a plan and god knows where they see themselves a couple years from now, 5 years from now, working micro-transactions into every single facet of every one of their games. It's going to have an effect on the industry as whole. It has nothing to do with entitlement. There's a time and place for that argument, but it isn't here.

There are corporations that only exist to generate and increase revenue at play in the industry. They aren't going to draw the line for you, people have to speak up, "vote with their wallets" and ''whine'' about being ''asked'' to spend more money on their gaming experiences.

The developers are going to follow the money, there's plenty evidence of that already, so you have to know there are going to be more and more developers that will be groomed to build games that are nothing more than cash-grabs. It's going to get ugly.   

Clynol
Clynol like.author.displayName 1 Like

I would only ever use cheat codes once I had already completed the game, as some cheats can add re-playability and a different fun aspect to a previously explored/completed game but like you mentioned cheat codes don't really appear in most games these days which is a shame, for example I completed Demon Souls when it was released it was difficult and fun but I managed to do it but id gladly play it again if I could cheat like god mode etc which would then encourage me to explore the world more because I then wouldn't be worried about dying and having to start the entire level all over again but as it stands with out this option I have no desire to revisit the game any time soon.

oSoLucky
oSoLucky

Most commenters don't seem to understand the nature of DLC. DLC that is developed after a game has gone gold, is all extra and isn't inherently evil as some seem to think(prices may be too high but that's another discussion). Also, if the microtransactions from the giant publishers becomes problematic, all you really can do is boycott. Ubisoft/EA/Activision don't give a shit what any of us think as long as their games are selling millions, and unfortunately there are always going to be millions of sheep that buy their stale rehashes and incomplete products every year.

I guess we can all hold hands and feel self righteous together and keep raging on GameSpot forums though.

oflow
oflow like.author.displayName 1 Like

You have a lot more faith in publishers like EA than most people do.   Saying that microtransaction wont happen with AAA games is idealistic at best.  They are already trying to push people into cloud gaming and charging microtransactions for everything isnt that much of a step further, especially in an age when big developers dont want you to be able to play used games.

Then point is people already feel they are being overcharged paying $60 for games as is, nickel and diming you to death isnt helping.  Gaming for a lot of people isnt just playing the game is the sense of achievement they get by earning things in the game.  When big companies allow people to just buy their way into good items/gear, it negates the feeling of achievement a lot of gamers have. I'd say that makes people more upset than the  charges themselves.

Personally, I havent bought a AAA title in months. In the last year most of them have sucked and I'm glad I dont waste my money paying for BF premium, unlockable content included with games (Which *is* BS) or other pay 2 win fiascos.  I play mostly indie games nowadays since they are primarily the only ones pushing creativity and actually making good games.

Blank2k2
Blank2k2

I'm glad others have noticed the micro-transaction trends, on a F2P game its fair enough.. they need to make money somewhere, but when I've just handed out out £40 for Battlefield 3 / Fifa 13 / Mass Effect / Dead Space etc and they expect me to hand over another £5 for some perks that'll entice me to hand over another £5, or where I've played for 180 hours to unlock all guns/camos & everything in between but someone can hand over £10 and unlock everything before he's even played 1 round - that stuff needs to be banned from retail gaming.


Fair enough keep it for F2P, but stay the hell away from our hyped up triple A rated titles....I'm really looking forward to Sim City 5 personally, but I'm positive EA are going to ruin that with micro transactions as well -.-

RobertAgius
RobertAgius like.author.displayName 1 Like

My mother plays Bubble Witch Saga on Facebook, and she has got to a point where the levels are so difficult that without any sort of power ups obtained through mircrotransactions, she has to spend a week at times on the same level just to beat it. What if games are made similarly ridiculously difficult to push micro transactions on a $60 game in the future?  Now granted that it is a free Facebook game but if it is a game I actually paid for, I do not want to spend more than the $60 I already paid for the game just to progress through. If people complain now while mirotransactions offer seemingly redundant items it will send a clear message that gamers do not like the practice and that is why people should care.

bmart970
bmart970 like.author.displayName 1 Like

I just think micro-transactions defeat the idea of the game. I want to earn what I use, but people can do micro-transactions if they want, I just won't buy them.

rogue81
rogue81 like.author.displayName 1 Like

Free to play, pay to win.  In a game like "World of Tanks", it is possible to earn your way to the top. You just need to be prepared to dedicate your life to the game, and be prepared to lose most of the time to people who paid for better gear right off the bat. Microtransactions that offer a competitive edge in combat have no place in multiplayer gaming. It's tantamount to publisher endorsed cheating. 

In a game like "Dead Space 3", microtransactions are limited to seemingly innocuous items. Things like raw materials for crafting other useful items. Having said that, have you had enough tungsten to make a lever to pry those special doors open? How many have you been able to make? I haven't been able to make a single one. I get close, but then I decide to make a better weapon instead. However, I could easily alleviate that problem by purchasing tungsten from EA. How generous of them. I'm already pissed off that I can't access the whole game unless I have a buddy to play with. To make it worse, they throw in a raw material requirement to access other secret rooms in a game that I already paid for. So when I hear that microtransactions are going to become the norm, I do get upset. It's nothing more than another way for publishers to nickle and dime us.

TacticaI
TacticaI

I don't get this blog at all to be completely honest. You have to understand if you remain silent on the issue or 'don't care', you're only opening the door to them charging you to pick up health or ammo, much in the way a simple game like Temple Run offers you the option to pay for the power ups and abilities. You may have the choice today of not paying, but do you really think you have some sort of birth right to that choice?

Sorry, I'm being dramatic, but of course the gamers who hate Farmville didn't bother to play it, they don't want to be apart of the problem or help the industry down that road, but apparently that's not enough because you had guys in the industry talking about how the mobile platform is hurting AAA console game profits and people jumping ship to go work on projects for mobile (you can find articles of that nature right here on GS). 

WTBG
WTBG like.author.displayName 1 Like

This article completely overlooks the problem with pay to win. Micro transactions are no big deal in single player games, but when introduced into the online space they can completely ruin the game. 

Baelath
Baelath

The only issue is when microtransactions begin to give players more definitive advantages. At the moment, most microtranscactions are about aesthetics and extended customization, over real blunt power or mechanical advantage. I'm just worried that we'll see microtransactions begin to become -mandatory- to be -successful- or -competitive-. It might not happen, ever, but there always seems to be this lurking corporate money-grab in the back of publisher's minds.

Conversation powered by Livefyre