Microtransactions in games

[TY]

Microtransactions in video games have been existing for quite some time. Whether it be cosmetic, or giving a straight up advantage over someone else, they appear in more and more video games as time goes on, even in triple A games.

Best example right now would be Shadow of War and Star Wars Battlefront 2's loot boxes, especially the latter making the progression revolve around it, at least from what's seen in the beta.

What is your opinion about microtransactions in games? Do you think they should only belong in F2P games? Is the whole lootbox/microtransaction thing going too far these days?

Discuss!

 

[Sawsbuck]

They should only be in F2P games and it should only be cosmetic stuff, because it isn't fair to everyone else if you can afford to waste spend thousands of dollars on stuff that gives you a huge advantage

 

[Desert Stream~]

I feel it should only be cosmetic, and you should be able to get the stuff ingame. Like overwatch, those I don't mind.

 

[pkmin3033]

Indefensible, unless you don't have to pay anything at all for the base game. Microtransactions do not belong in video games that have an upfront cost and are supposed to be complete experiences in and of themselves. It's corporate greed, plain and simple.

They already overcharge us for miserably short experiences with outrageously priced season passes and snippets cut out here and there as DLC, to charge us even further for in-game currency or randomised items or whatever else they think they can get away with is just plain disgusting. It is not OK in ANY circumstance save for when the game is free-to-play.

 

[El Héroe Oscuro]

I feel it should only be cosmetic, and you should be able to get the stuff ingame. Like overwatch, those I don't mind.

Overwatch is still kindove shitty with loot boxes though, don't you think? Yeah everything's cosmetic, but your chances of getting x item gets marginally smaller with each update as replications aren't taken into consideration. That's why I stopped buying OW lootboxes awhile back cause I just kept getting duplicates every time.

 

[Desert Stream~]

Overwatch is still kindove ****ty with loot boxes though, don't you think? Yeah everything's cosmetic, but your chances of getting x item gets marginally smaller with each update as replications aren't taken into consideration. That's why I stopped buying OW lootboxes awhile back cause I just kept getting duplicates every time.

yes but the duplicates give you money to buy things. Sure it's not much, but if you get nothing but duplicates it adds up.

 

[El Héroe Oscuro]

yes but the duplicates give you money to buy things. Sure it's not much, but if you get nothing but duplicates it adds up.

Eh, I disagree. Unless they increased the reward system substantially, for a gamer who doesn't buy loot boxes you have to level up a shit ton just to get enough credits to buy a purple item at the very least.

 

[Desert Stream~]

Eh, I disagree. Unless they increased the reward system substantially, for a gamer who doesn't buy loot boxes you have to level up a **** ton just to get enough credits to buy a purple item at the very least.

Well you may be right :p I do level up a **** ton.

 

[Somewhere_]

Loot boxes suck a lot, especially when they are pay-to-win. But they are necessary for developers and publishers to make money because the prices of initial games have stayed the same, and with inflation, they receive less and less revenue each year (assuming gaming sales remain constant).

So we have cheaper games nowadays, but cheaper prices come with a downside. In our case, its loot boxes or stuff similar to that.

 

[Arsenic]

Anti-consumerism is the name of the game now-a-days. Things like Microtransactions, cut-content to make "pre-order bonuses" and even larger chunks of a game taken out to make a Season's Pass are all under the same umbrella.

And with all of this game company's profits are still shrinking! HEY! MAYBE TRY MAKING A GAME WORTHY OF HIGH SALES NUMBERS INSTEAD OF COMING UP WITH MORE CREATIVE WAYS OF NICKLE AND DIMEING CONSUMERS!

Microtransactions in particular are something I hate. Thanks to Valve's ingenious idea of loot boxes to turn gamers into gambling-whores, the whole medium is going down the shitter. All these loot boxes are getting worse and worse too, I mean just look at Battlefront 2, Loot boxes are the entire progression system! "Oh boy I hope I finally get the item I want after 32 level ups!" Yeah that's the way to make satisfying progression alright!

What happened to when you'd unlock stuff just from leveling up. It was a lot easier in Halo Reach for example, when I'd find something I want and it'd just say "Reach level X to unlock" and so I'd commit and earn my item and feel satisfied after. Now you have to hope RNG is feeling nice enough for your to get your items (*cough*Halo 5*cough*)

I will happily trade loot boxes for Cosmetic DLC being in games forever. Sadly the retarded gaming community keeps pouring stupid amounts of moola into loot boxes so theyre here to stay.

I'm not going to even start on purchasable currency. Holy fuck...

 

[El Héroe Oscuro]

Anti-consumerism is the name of the game now-a-days. Things like Microtransactions, cut-content to make "pre-order bonuses" and even larger chunks of a game taken out to make a Season's Pass are all under the same umbrella.

And with all of this game company's profits are still shrinking! HEY! MAYBE TRY MAKING A GAME WORTHY OF HIGH SALES NUMBERS INSTEAD OF COMING UP WITH MORE CREATIVE WAYS OF NICKLE AND DIMEING CONSUMERS!

Microtransactions in particular are something I hate. Thanks to Valve's ingenious idea of loot boxes to turn gamers into gambling-whores, the whole medium is going down the shitter. All these loot boxes are getting worse and worse too, I mean just look at Battlefront 2, Loot boxes are the entire progression system! "Oh boy I hope I finally get the item I want after 32 level ups!" Yeah that's the way to make satisfying progression alright!

What happened to when you'd unlock stuff just from leveling up. It was a lot easier in Halo Reach for example, when I'd find something I want and it'd just say "Reach level X to unlock" and so I'd commit and earn my item and feel satisfied after. Now you have to hope RNG is feeling nice enough for your to get your items (*cough*Halo 5*cough*)

I will happily trade loot boxes for Cosmetic DLC being in games forever. Sadly the retarded gaming community keeps pouring stupid amounts of moola into loot boxes so theyre here to stay.

I'm not going to even start on purchasable currency. Holy fuck...

Can you think of a game where they had a system such as Battlefront 2's where they he. A "loot box" progression system but than reverted or changed that policy in a future update? I'm just wondering if The reviews of said system becomes so negative such as from the Battlefront 2 beta that the whole system is uprooted. I don't expect that to happen, mind you, but I'm curious if that's ever happened.

Loot boxes suck a lot, especially when they are pay-to-win. But they are necessary for developers and publishers to make money because the prices of initial games have stayed the same, and with inflation, they receive less and less revenue each year (assuming gaming sales remain constant).

So we have cheaper games nowadays, but cheaper prices come with a downside. In our case, its loot boxes or stuff similar to that.

I don't know if they are "necessary" per say to make money; I think of it more as a "hey, this is a sure way to squeeze a few more bucks out of our consumers." I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I'm sure you are right where it does cover some ground in terms of lost revenue through loot boxes.

My take is this: if they changed their price of a game from $60 to $40-50, I'd be okay with loot boxes being implemented. Yeah, it's outright gambling, but it's a middle ground in terms of consumers and companies where, in my opinion, a gamer isn't being outright jipped.

 

[Somewhere_]

Can you think of a game where they had a system such as Battlefront 2's where they he. A "loot box" progression system but than reverted or changed that policy in a future update? I'm just wondering if The reviews of said system becomes so negative such as from the Battlefront 2 beta that the whole system is uprooted. I don't expect that to happen, mind you, but I'm curious if that's ever happened.



I don't know if they are "necessary" per say to make money; I think of it more as a "hey, this is a sure way to squeeze a few more bucks out of our consumers." I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I'm sure you are right where it does cover some ground in terms of lost revenue through loot boxes.

My take is this: if they changed their price of a game from $60 to $40-50, I'd be okay with loot boxes being implemented. Yeah, it's outright gambling, but it's a middle ground in terms of consumers and companies where, in my opinion, a gamer isn't being outright jipped.

From a quick google search, I found that games have been at the $60 norm for at least 20 years. Prices double every 20 years, but game prices have not. And during the old cartridge days, games could sell for up to $80. We are paying a LOT less for games nowadays. We are are essentially paying $30 from the late nineties, which would still have been about $50 cheaper than the cartridge games. I know its a rough estimate, but it gives you the same idea.

Thats why I'm okay with loot boxes even though I personally dont like them.

 

[El Héroe Oscuro]

From a quick google search, I found that games have been at the $60 norm for at least 20 years. Prices double every 20 years, but game prices have not. And during the old cartridge days, games could sell for up to $80. We are paying a LOT less for games nowadays. We are are essentially paying $30 from the late nineties, which would still have been about $50 cheaper than the cartridge games. I know its a rough estimate, but it gives you the same idea.

Thats why I'm okay with loot boxes even though I personally dont like them.

+1, nice research on your part mate!

 

[Somewhere_]

+1, nice research on your part mate!

I wouldnt exactly call it good research lol... just sifting through some stuff lol. When I find the time, I might actually research the topic more. Because inflation isnt the only factor that affects prices. There could be other factors I'm not thinking of that could actually render loot boxes and the like unnecessary, and as Arsenic mentioned, potentially anti-consumer. I'm hesitant to say these things are anti-consumer (assuming they are unnecessary) because consumers are buying them. If gamers didn't buy loot crates and stuff, then they wouldnt exist. Or they would exist in a less prevalent form.

 

[Arsenic]

From a quick google search, I found that games have been at the $60 norm for at least 20 years. Prices double every 20 years, but game prices have not. And during the old cartridge days, games could sell for up to $80. We are paying a LOT less for games nowadays. We are are essentially paying $30 from the late nineties, which would still have been about $50 cheaper than the cartridge games. I know its a rough estimate, but it gives you the same idea.

Thats why I'm okay with loot boxes even though I personally dont like them.

While I applaud the research, it doesn't factor in that to get the complete game, you need the seasons pass (A practice that wasn't around in the 90s) To this I find that 90 dollars (the usual asking for a "gold" edition or "deluxe" edition) to be a much better base.

Though this still doesnt disprove your point, as doing some quick math from your numbers would only bring us to around $45

 

[Somewhere_]

While I applaud the research, it doesn't factor in that to get the complete game, you need the seasons pass (A practice that wasn't around in the 90s) To this I find that 90 dollars (the usual asking for a "gold" edition or "deluxe" edition) to be a much better base.

Though this still doesnt disprove your point, as doing some quick math from your numbers would only bring us to around $45

Can you explain the season pass thing further please? I thought you just had to pay for Xbox Live Gold (or the PS4 equivalent) and you can play online on any game you want (thats online of course haha). So you are paying for live, but its not just for one game: the payment is spread throughout every game. Price is subjective, but I dont think $60/year can be considered anti-consumer. Has this changed since the xbox 360?

I have a xbox 360, but not an xbox 1 by the way.

 

[El Héroe Oscuro]

Can you explain the season pass thing further please? I thought you just had to pay for Xbox Live Gold (or the PS4 equivalent) and you can play online on any game you want (thats online of course haha). So you are paying for live, but its not just for one game: the payment is spread throughout every game. Price is subjective, but I dont think $60/year can be considered anti-consumer. Has this changed since the xbox 360?

I have a xbox 360, but not an xbox 1 by the way.

He's referring to "gold" as in "gold edition" of a game where you get a bunch of perks like passive bonuses, weapons, etc. that's separate from the vanilla version of a game. Usually costs a lot more than the standard game - it's completely separate from Xbox Live (Gold).

 

[Somewhere_]

He's referring to "gold" as in "gold edition" of a game where you get a bunch of perks like passive bonuses, weapons, etc. that's separate from the vanilla version of a game. Usually costs a lot more than the standard game - it's completely separate from Xbox Live (Gold).

Oh that makes sense. And the code for all of these bonuses is already in the vanilla version, but not accessible for vanilla players? Which is why the two versions are capatible together?

 

[Arsenic]

Oh that makes sense. And the code for all of these bonuses is already in the vanilla version, but not accessible for vanilla players? Which is why the two versions are capatible together?

While yes it has all of those bonuses, it also includes a seasons pass. A seasons pass is a one purchase way to get all of the "seasons" dlc. Most games with one only have a single one, and it is on average comprised of large chunks of content (even to the extent of entire new lands, multiplayer maps, weapons, and more) that is removed from the base game (sometimes still even on the disk! You just got to pay to unlock it!) to be sold at a later date.

For example

Spoiler:

This isnt one that is included on the disk though. For an example of that, look to Mass Effect 3's on disk dlc
I'm sorry I keep editing this you probably have a million notifications from me, but I keep forgetting to finish my train of thought

So with content pulled out to have easy to finish stuff for a seasons pass, most devs put out a deluxe edition for about ~90 bucks (or gold edition or whatever they want to call it) that includes the game, the already close to finish/finished DLC (seasons pass), and a couple of other exclusive goodies that were withheld from the masses simply because the company is greedy.

 

[Somewhere_]

While yes it has all of those bonuses, it also includes a seasons pass. A seasons pass is a one purchase way to get all of the "seasons" dlc. Most games with one only have a single one, and it is on average comprised of large chunks of content (even to the extent of entire new lands, multiplayer maps, weapons, and more) that is removed from the base game (sometimes still even on the disk! You just got to pay to unlock it!) to be sold at a later date.

For example

Spoiler:

This isnt one that is included on the disk though. For an example of that, look to Mass Effect 3's on disk dlc
I'm sorry I keep editing this you probably have a million notifications from me, but I keep forgetting to finish my train of thought

So with content pulled out to have easy to finish stuff for a seasons pass, most devs put out a deluxe edition for about ~90 bucks (or gold edition or whatever they want to call it) that includes the game, the already close to finish/finished DLC (seasons pass), and a couple of other exclusive goodies that were withheld from the masses simply because the company is greedy.

Considering your post, it seems that calling DLC's "expansions" is false advertising. I guess the companies win this one on a technicality.