Jump to content

Microtransactions Are Here to Stay; It's How Deal With Them That Matters.


TheLiamK

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, theSpirae said:

@ProfBambam55 Following your logic, it should be pretty reasonable to pay $50 for a loaf of bread, because why not. 

People don't like paying $80 for a game, then $40 for a season pass, then another $20 for extra DLC, and then another XX$ for maps/gun/whatever. 

 

So... you don't want to pay more money, for more stuff.  You want more stuff for free.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely love it if everything were free.  Heck, make the games free too.  Why not.  I think what @ProfBambam55 was trying to say, is that isn't a very realistic way of looking at it... not in this day and age where the platform exists to continue making/releasing new content after a games release.  Within reason, the developers deserve money for their post-release support efforts.

Edited by Dreakon13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dreakon13 said:

 

So... you don't want to pay more money, for more stuff.  You want more stuff for free.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely love it if everything were free.  Heck, make the games free too.  Why not.  I think what @ProfBambam55 was trying to say, is that isn't a very realistic way of looking at it... not in this day and age where the platform exists to continue making/releasing new content after a games release.

For free? Of course not. What people don't like is paying for a game full price and not getting everything.

One thing is releasing expansions, another is day one dlc and having tons of stuff in the game locked behind microtransactions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, theSpirae said:

For free? Of course not. What people don't like is paying for a game full price and not getting everything.

One thing is releasing expansions, another is day one dlc and having tons of stuff in the game locked behind microtransactions.

 

Let's say tons of stuff is locked behind microtransactions, but it's largely content added after the games release.  Do you expect to get that for free?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Expansions, DLCs after release is fine. Day one DLCs, stuff obviously cut out from an already finished game and sold separately, microtransactions tied to a progression in a singleplayer game? That is not acceptable.

I love the way Blizzard and Steam handle it. Overwatch, HotS, Dota 2, that's a perfect system for lootboxes and MTs. They generate tons of money, it's all cosmetics, and in Blizz's case, you can actually get all that stuff by simply playing the game.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, theSpirae said:

Expansions, DLCs after release is fine. Day one DLCs, stuff obviously cut out from an already finished game and sold separately, microtransactions tied to a progression in a singleplayer game? That is not acceptable.

 

 

I don't disagree... but feel like the bolded is awfully open to interpretation.  What tells you something was "obviously cut out from an already finished game" exactly, unless they flat out tell you?  Microtransactions tied to progression in a singleplayer game is offensive sure, in the sense that it implies they could've intentionally changed the mechanics to encourage you to buy it (though that's more of a paranoid assumption than any kind of guarantee)... but it's not withheld content like we were talking about.

 

Seems like the kind of thing where if people like them... say Blizzard or Valve... some might "love the way they do it"... and if they're already harboring a grudge or a bias against a publisher, they'll assume they're the devil and everything is broken mechanics and withheld content, etc. xD

Edited by Dreakon13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its the natural evolution, besides people just randomly bitch when everything was going this way.

 

  • Back in the day costumes unlocked via completing challenges. Everyone is happy, except people who don't have tie to get that good.
  • DLC costumes, but its ok because its nothing that effects gameplay
  • DLC stories to extend shelf life of game, split opinions people argue content held back, people say I paid for the game already, Nintendo fans rejoice Nintendo will never do it
  • Nintendo Mario Kart DLC, Nintendo fans claim its cool this is DLC done right
  • Zelda hard mode DLC appear, a lot of people unsure but try to legitimise it
  • Cosmetics in Loot crates you need to pay keys, its ok guys it doesn't effect gameplay
  • Loot crates may effect gameplay, but essentially save time say devs, all content will be accessible now we don't need to charge for DLC. Universe goes mad

Fact is this was going to happen and more bullshit will follow, we've done teh same song and dance and complained and it didn't work previous times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, theSpirae said:

@ProfBambam55 Following your logic, it should be pretty reasonable to pay $50 for a loaf of bread, because why not.

well bread was 5 cents/loaf about 75 years ago...let's call it 100 years for the sake of your example...we're now at what about $3/loaf here for pretty generic stuff...that's an increase of 6000%!...another 100 years and who knows could be up to $50 yes, but why worry about it?...and no, it's not because why not, it's how economies evolve...perhaps you haven't noticed...perhaps you have...perhaps you choose to ignore it...regardless it's how things are and have in fact evolved...wait, were you dropping a subtle hint suggesting we should invest in bread?...haha...

 

side note,: if people don't want to pay for extra stuff then don't pay...as I said, seems like purely a personal finance issue here...

Edited by ProfBambam55
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find this more prevalent in free mobile phone games that have a lot of in-game purchases, and mobile games are generally targeted at the casual gamer. A FF games like Mobius, BE, Record Keeper, and Kingdom Hearts X are all like this.

 

As far as consoles go, Tales games seem to go really heavy on microtransactions. I used to buy a couple of the outfits but after doing it once for one game (Tales of Vesperia), I realised what a total waste of money it was and never did it again. Also, Tales heavily market their characters with a number of players being die hard fans of specific characters, so Namco target these by releasing all kinds of cutesy outfits like swimwear and the like, selling them at £3-5 for just one outfit, which is indeed ridiculous but fans buy it anyway. They also sell levels, gald, items, exp multipliers and other game breaking stuff for anyone who wants an easy ride I guess.

 

Besides Tales, all the other games I've played didn't really have microtransactions, but I've mostly played JRPGs and VNs. The memorable one for me was FFXIII-2 making you purchase the Lightning DLC along with all the colosseum monster battles which I indeed fell for. 

 

I never buy dlc and always buy games when they drop in price, in used condition of course as I'm kind of a penny pincher. I think DLC is ok provided it's optional, but what I hate is when you have to buy parts of the story like FFXIII-2 and Tales of Zestiria.

 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think all of my DLCs either are given to me free from the developer, free in the PS store, or if I really want to play them, pay $15 US for 1 month of ESO and enjoy all of the DLC for a month.  Other than that, not really interested.  Of course, hate it if it prevents me from getting 100% trophies because of some small assed DLC you had to pay for.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've become resigned to them, as much as I find them distasteful. For every person who refuses to get them, there are like 1,000 sheeple who do. And, as long as it doesn't negatively impact the game, I'm fine with it. Like take AC Origins for example. It's mainly for cosmetic stuff and things you can unlock in game if you don't want to pay up. If it makes a game pay to win, like Battlefront II, then it's a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/11/2017 at 8:13 PM, Jigglypuff said:

I've become resigned to them, as much as I find them distasteful. For every person who refuses to get them, there are like 1,000 sheeple who do. And, as long as it doesn't negatively impact the game, I'm fine with it. Like take AC Origins for example. It's mainly for cosmetic stuff and things you can unlock in game if you don't want to pay up. If it makes a game pay to win, like Battlefront II, then it's a problem.

 

Kind of my opinion. If the game is good enough and the microtransactions are not intrusive, I don't care and I ignore them anyway. I still buy Assassin's Creed games, and I cancelled Battlefront II. Assassin's Creed Origins was great, Battlefront was a trainwreck. If the single player campaign of Battlefront II had had the length, variety and overall quality of Rogue Squadron 1, you bet I'd have still bought it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't run into a game where microtransactions have caused a problem for me so I'm indifferent. While MSGV did have microtransactions they didn't affect story progress, as long as that continues to be the case I'll keep on doing what I'm doing. I fail to see any good reason on my part as to why I should have to pay to finish a game, if that ever happened I simply won't buy the game. Now DLC I don't mind, the DLC I have bought for my games have usually been good value since they were either fairly cheap for the amount of extra playtime and features I was getting, that's not something I'd expect to get for free so I don't mind splashing out for that if I think it's worth it. 

 

To expand further this is the difference between the two for me. The DLC I've bought have enhanced my experience of a game, through extra storylines, character development, new locations, features and items and is optional, that's a positive thing. Microtransactions on the other hand, may possibly have the potential to halt my progress in a game if anyone was ballsy enough to do it but as I said, as far as I'm concerned if I've paid for the base game, I should be able to finish it without further investment. If they want to try and charge for stuff like new costumes, maybe a new item or level up, fine, as long as I can finish it without that stuff. If story progress was locked away until I paid up, I'd simply take my money elsewhere because there's no game in the world I'd want to play so badly that I'd be held to ransom to finish it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I'm not bothered by microtransactions existing in SP, I won't buy extra in-game money, a super weapon, or a quick level-up.  It's not so much the thought of paying for it, but rather that it feels like cheating.  Extra outfits for a character are fine, but they shouldn't cost more than $2 each.

 

MP pay-to-win is simply wrong, and Battlefront II does deserve the flak it is getting.  There should be no shortcuts for anyone.

 

Witcher 3 does DLC right.  The base game has a decent length already, so the DLC packs feel like truly worthwhile expansions, not something that was held back for a cash grab.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...