It's stupid how many $60 games are having microtransactions

Started by Legend, Oct 05, 2017, 11:05 PM

previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

DerNebel

I'd personally prefer games to be made cheaper and without some of the extras if it's really that necessary. Trim the fat and focus on the core experience.
Then you get people screaming about the lack of content or how the game looks like trash or whatever.

Microtransactions really aren't something that most publishers have to do, at least not in these egregious ways, they just want to maximize their profits. They'd profit anyways probably especially with the ever increasing digital attach rate as well as all the weird special editions that are being put out nowadays.

the-pi-guy

I'd rather have a solid core game, and then maybe some fairly expansive DLCs.  

darkknightkryta

I wonder if this is getting to the point of a chicken or the egg issue.  They're putting micro transactions into a game to offset the cost of development, but putting these micro transactions in is raising the cost of development.  Like others have joked, they're going to start putting micro-micro transactions to pay for the micro transactions, thus adding more cost to development.

Legend

I think I'm going to start boycotting games with purchasable loot boxes. It's gotten so ridiculous nowadays and I don't have the time to play that many games anyway, so I might as well avoid the ones that are guilty. Play them once they reach bargain bin prices if they're really good.

BananaKing

I think I'm going to start boycotting games with purchasable loot boxes. It's gotten so ridiculous nowadays and I don't have the time to play that many games anyway, so I might as well avoid the ones that are guilty. Play them once they reach bargain bin prices if they're really good.
eh, sometimes it works out if its done for cosmetics. For Honor has a currency system for its upgrades and cosmetics, but the upgrades are relatively cheap, and the cosmetics are expensive. so while you dont unlock everything in the game, you can still unlock what you want, upgrade your characters to max level without needing to grind really. you just play the game if you enjoy it and unlocks will come. for me, For Honors microtransactions work, because of them we've been getting new content like maps, cosmetics, new gear, new characters and emotes, they will even add dedicated servers and are adding new modes. it wasnt as good at launch, but they fixed it.

Legend

eh, sometimes it works out if its done for cosmetics. For Honor has a currency system for its upgrades and cosmetics, but the upgrades are relatively cheap, and the cosmetics are expensive. so while you dont unlock everything in the game, you can still unlock what you want, upgrade your characters to max level without needing to grind really. you just play the game if you enjoy it and unlocks will come. for me, For Honors microtransactions work, because of them we've been getting new content like maps, cosmetics, new gear, new characters and emotes, they will even add dedicated servers and are adding new modes. it wasnt as good at launch, but they fixed it.
Instead of saying "boycott loot boxes," I think "boycott rng microtransactions" is a better way to express my position.

Pay to win sucks and no one wants that but it's separate from the problem I have with rng microtransactions. The rng system is used to hide the true price of things and break it up into smaller more impulsive purchases. No one would spend $50 for a single microtransaction but in modern loot box games that's a common average price for getting something you want. Darth Vader in Battlefront 2 seems to take an average of $200 of loot boxes to unlock for example.

What you like about For Honor is Games as a ServiceTM. It's becoming an extremely popular thing because it makes an extreme amount of money. Almost every publisher is chasing it right now. It's possible to have that without having rng microtransactions.

Go Up