Everyone?
Made me annoyed how people would buy that stuff and how much profit it makes for half a days (if that) work using reused work.
EA to include microtransactions in ALL future games.
- Thread starter Name
- Start date
Everyone?
Made me annoyed how people would buy that stuff and how much profit it makes for half a days (if that) work using reused work.
Many games would not exist in their current form if it wasn't for in-app purchases:
Tribes Ascend
Planetside 2
Team Fortress 2
DOTA 2
etc
All these games would not be free to play if it wasn't for in-app purchases. Also, the development of these games would not have continued if it was not for the in-app purchases - games like Tribes Ascend and TF2 have benefited greatly from this model which has allowed the developers to continue to improve the game over a far longer period. Their continued development would not have been profitable if it was a normal off-the-shelf pricing model, and therefore the games would have been abandoned long ago.
Last edited:
And Valve. But remember, EA BAD. VALVE GOOD.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 5,207
All this kind of thing has done is change my spending habits, I'm afraid I'm very old fashioned and used to want nothing more than to pay my £35 - £40 and get a game. However over the last couple of years as I've felt I'm getting less and less for the money, I'm just waiting longer and longer and picking more and more up in 'Steam sales' etc. Heck, most games now I get for between £4.99 and £14.99 and usually it is the 'Gold' edition with all the DLC and whatnot included for the price.
With regards to these specific 'In App Purchases' or whatever they are calling them, I've got no problem so long as they are optional, where I would have a problem is if they started blocking off progress unless you pay more money or go down the completely silly route of paying for ammo etc. It also raises concerns about future games being developed with a built in 'Grind' that can be tweaked to 'encourage' future in app sales, but then it comes back down to me simply not paying as much, if anything for their games if they get too silly.
Do I like it, NO, but I'll judge each game on it's own and one thing is for certain, EA, and any other company that do this, are unlikely to get any more money from me personally as I find it distastful and it is far more likely I will just avoid more games in the future if they start getting bad press for over embracing these in app purchases.
With regards to these specific 'In App Purchases' or whatever they are calling them, I've got no problem so long as they are optional, where I would have a problem is if they started blocking off progress unless you pay more money or go down the completely silly route of paying for ammo etc. It also raises concerns about future games being developed with a built in 'Grind' that can be tweaked to 'encourage' future in app sales, but then it comes back down to me simply not paying as much, if anything for their games if they get too silly.
Do I like it, NO, but I'll judge each game on it's own and one thing is for certain, EA, and any other company that do this, are unlikely to get any more money from me personally as I find it distastful and it is far more likely I will just avoid more games in the future if they start getting bad press for over embracing these in app purchases.
Everyone?
Made me annoyed how people would buy that stuff and how much profit it makes for half a days (if that) work using reused work.
Yeah perhaps not everyone, but the majority of OcUK still seem to absolutely hate EA for any reason that they can muster. Its a complete no-story and the type of rubbish that I'd expect to see on FOX news or something.
True
And Ubisoft...?
Also true.
Further proof that none of this is a new idea.
It's not a new idea, its just becoming a lot more mainstream, i personally hate the business practice of it, low on ethics - but EA are a business after all.
Im just going to ignore the store transaction ******** - course im still going to buy good EA titles, as long as they dont introduce a BF4 timed exclusive on XBOX i should be fine
Im just going to ignore the store transaction ******** - course im still going to buy good EA titles, as long as they dont introduce a BF4 timed exclusive on XBOX i should be fine
Nearly every game out there has micro transactions in one form or another and EA have usually been pretty good with it with a resonable balance. For example in Dead Space 3 if the buy resources pack never exsisted I bet no one would comment about the guns being too hard to craft/resources were a grind because they aren't to most gamers. The same with Mass Effect 3, if you couldn't buy the items packs in multiplayer for real money people probably wouldn't comment they are too expensive to buy with in-game currency (because they aren't).
I see it as a similar option to gold sellers in WoW but in an official capacity, not many people do buy gold but the people who want the quicker path or don't have the time will.
I can also understand it from EA's point of view and I think most developers might have to go down similar routes as games are going to stay at their £40 RRP price which they have been for yearsssssssss and gamers are become more wearying of spending their money or waiting for sales/second hand. On top of that even though games have been "around" £40 for years with teams of 20-30 people being able to make AAA title games before, it now takes studios of 80-150 to produce games of a similar spectacle.
I don't think the upfront sale of the base product is enough for developers or publishers to make investments, they need projects that would at least trickle over while they are working on their next project to keep their how many number of employee's paid. Also the drop on games these days is so quick, within a month you can sometimes find a title at 50% off and I bet the sales of these titles drop to almost zero after the first month of two with them only peaking back up during Steam Sales.
I see it as a similar option to gold sellers in WoW but in an official capacity, not many people do buy gold but the people who want the quicker path or don't have the time will.
I can also understand it from EA's point of view and I think most developers might have to go down similar routes as games are going to stay at their £40 RRP price which they have been for yearsssssssss and gamers are become more wearying of spending their money or waiting for sales/second hand. On top of that even though games have been "around" £40 for years with teams of 20-30 people being able to make AAA title games before, it now takes studios of 80-150 to produce games of a similar spectacle.
I don't think the upfront sale of the base product is enough for developers or publishers to make investments, they need projects that would at least trickle over while they are working on their next project to keep their how many number of employee's paid. Also the drop on games these days is so quick, within a month you can sometimes find a title at 50% off and I bet the sales of these titles drop to almost zero after the first month of two with them only peaking back up during Steam Sales.
Only if you're expecting an armageddon level event in the near future (that whole Mayan thing was so anti-climactic
).Make a good game and people will buy cosmetic stuff to support it. Shaft gamers left right n centre and release pay to win stuff, some people will still lap it up but only the ones who don't give a crap and will have absolutely no loyalty to your company at all.
Take Path of Exile. Free to Play. Zero Pay to Win content. Stash slots, character slots (of which you already get 24 by default), animations, mini-pets, alternative skill effects. Already spent $60 worth on the game just because I enjoy it.
EA are evil, end of.
Can't wait to see how they've messed up the new SimCity. It had so much potential as well.
I'll leave it until the youtube/independent reviews are in and it's on offer.
Valve? If you're refering to tf2 items then that doesn't count at all. I'v won every item i could have brought simply playing the game... Buying the unwinnable items only makes a difference if you're stupidly good at a certian class anyway. They've found a great balance imo.
You're completely wrong on the basis we're talking about singleplayer games which have no place for microtransactions. Look at what I'm quoting before you quote me.
I prefered Tribes 1/2, you bought the game and had everything at your fingertips, Planetside 1 had a more forgiving way of leveling and acquiring weapons and managed to make it far enough. TF2 for me personally went to hell after the first medic update then it became the vain persons game, social items galore, it's stupid now.
To be fair, I don't care if they didn't exist, I hate the direction they're going, although not all of them. Some games it make you wonder why it's even free if you don't even need to buy anything. That's right, they live off people who just have to look different, or feel special. D: I'd rather pay for some of these games outright than spend two, three or five times as much on getting the same experience.
Lastly, while it's not bad now this just the intermediary period in which publishers and devs tread the water lightly seeing what crap the masses will buy next.
I cant wait till we get microtransactions in our microtransactions.
I'm betting having this in every game is going to compromise the design of at least some of those games.
I dont want to see a microtransaction store in an single player RPG, where it has advertisements/reminders. You've paid for the game and look at what your still missing out on.
I'm betting having this in every game is going to compromise the design of at least some of those games.
I dont want to see a microtransaction store in an single player RPG, where it has advertisements/reminders. You've paid for the game and look at what your still missing out on.
So we can agree that microtransactions are okay if they get the balancing correct? I.e. TF2?
The development of single player games are also driven by microtransactions. Take Diablo 3... That can be played completely single player and it's continued development is driven by the fact that Blizzard want to carry on making money from the auction house.
And if we are only talking about single player games - what's the problem? Your free to carry on playing without buying anything if you want to. This is just the same as paying for cheat codes, which has been done before. Some games even used to advertise premium rate phone numbers which you could phone up for hints and tips.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2009
- Posts
- 2,742
Diablo 3 isn't a good example of good microtransaction use.
Ugh, read my previous posts as to why.
You're the problem, the people who think "Don't buy it if you don't want to".
That is so beyond the point you'd have to be trolling to not see the issue or you just want to argue and win that you won't admit it.
Yes, games have cheats built it, wow... I totally didn't know that 20 years ago
but what they're doing is actually bringing in full-featured reasons for people to spend money on something that was and still is, free.The problem is people will pay for it showing devs/pubs they can go further and further with payment systems until we're both 40-50 years old(or lets say, 20 years later I don't know how old you are not that it matters) and all the people our age now will be like "yeah so what, you've always had to pay for this/that/other". Except no, you didn't and while some will say "the times have changed" it will have been in the benefit of those receiving the cash and not the end user receiving a good honest game that isn't trying to do everything possible to make as much money as possible. Thankfully such people still exist, BIS for one.
I need to ask, you don't care at all do you?
Last edited: