-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Are you okay with micro transactions in SP games if it meant the studio was guaranteed to profit?
- Thread starter Riderz1337
- Start date
You and I both. The reason these aren't profitable is because they can't stay on budget. You're asking customers to fund poor management.
It does, because the premise of this thread is micro-transactions helping studios turn a profit on their games. How about learning to budget their games so there's no need to nickel-and-dime consumers to break even in the first place?
I 100% completed Shadow of War and didn't spend a cent on microtransactions. I also ended up with over 100k of the in game currency by the time I was finished which is kind of a ridiculous amount considering the chests in the game are only 1500 a pop.
Shadow of War is probably the biggest example of the outrage being unnecessary and completely overblown.
Just because you've completed without using microtranacions doesn't mean the game was not fundamentally altered because of it, which did happen. It's not an outrage to point out facts.
Exactly, they clearly had to design certain aspects of a SP game for them.
I feel publishers are largely to blame...a game does not need to be a technical marvel, in fact most of the best selling games are because they are fun to play. Scale down your project, starting with wasting money to get Peter Dinkledge to voice your game character lol.
To imply that a studio can only turn a profit through Microtransactions sounds like the game was created with the intention that it isn't going to sell well. Mind you if the game is free to play, that's a different story, but a game should stand on its own merits if you are paying the full price. (Overwatch being the prime example).
I'm generally okay with most micro-transactions that don't affect game balance in the slightest manner but I do find it petty and unrewarding, as a consumer, if I buy a product that has more content developed for it at the get-go than I am able to get because of some contrived reason.
Publishers and developers have proven multiple times that we can't trust them with the benefit of doubt that they won't change their game's balance if they sell a micro-transaction that affects the balance or makes progress easier.
Whether or not they make a profit is irrelevant to me as a consumer. I just want a good product that I can appreciate and if they make it I will support them and if I don't appreciate it I won't. It's as simple as that.
Publishers and developers have proven multiple times that we can't trust them with the benefit of doubt that they won't change their game's balance if they sell a micro-transaction that affects the balance or makes progress easier.
Whether or not they make a profit is irrelevant to me as a consumer. I just want a good product that I can appreciate and if they make it I will support them and if I don't appreciate it I won't. It's as simple as that.
If you're balancing your game that the experience is demonstrably worse or more frustrating by not spending money on loot boxes or gameplay relevant items, then fuck you.
Story content that doesn't feel like the game was missing crucial story details (Mass Effect 3), cosmetics etc., I am not at all bothered by. Even stuff in BOTW locked behind amiibos are far from necessary to enjoy that game. In fact the upper-tier items you get from them break the balance of the game more than anything.
But Shadow of War was a disgusting exercise to wring money out of their users.
Story content that doesn't feel like the game was missing crucial story details (Mass Effect 3), cosmetics etc., I am not at all bothered by. Even stuff in BOTW locked behind amiibos are far from necessary to enjoy that game. In fact the upper-tier items you get from them break the balance of the game more than anything.
But Shadow of War was a disgusting exercise to wring money out of their users.
the good version of this would be them including it for people who don't want items that require extra effort to obtain
but the sad truth of that would be we wouldn't know what effort was normally required to obtain said items if MT weren't included in the first place. so it's sort of a conundrum itself. the items don't affect other players in a SP game but for those who don't want to spend, who's to say it would not have been easier and less of a grind to acquire said items if MT were never involved'? that's the issue. see: Shadow of War
but the sad truth of that would be we wouldn't know what effort was normally required to obtain said items if MT weren't included in the first place. so it's sort of a conundrum itself. the items don't affect other players in a SP game but for those who don't want to spend, who's to say it would not have been easier and less of a grind to acquire said items if MT were never involved'? that's the issue. see: Shadow of War
No, however I have no problem with how paradox handles DLC so that model is fine with me. If anything I find it a little bit sad that the paradox model was not there during the time SMAC was developed. I would have loved as long support for that game as I got under the time I still had time to play EU4.
I don't mind them at all, I can still enjoy games. There are a couple of bad eggs but for most part not game breaking.
It's not my fault if a studio isn't profitable. I'm not going to tolerate microtransactions if I don't want to.
Last edited:
Generally the main question I ask myself on MT's is "Do they add value?"
And they usually don't.
Loot boxes especially don't add value since you're paying for a randomized nothing. "To save time" while you maybe get something kinda like what you want and have to stop and back out of a game or go into a different menu and wait for the unboxing animations to play out etc. Injustice 2 got extremely tedious in that regard. I wouldn't want to reward that kind of approach with money ever.
A solid expansion like Blood and Wine? Hell yes. I'll buy that.
And they usually don't.
Loot boxes especially don't add value since you're paying for a randomized nothing. "To save time" while you maybe get something kinda like what you want and have to stop and back out of a game or go into a different menu and wait for the unboxing animations to play out etc. Injustice 2 got extremely tedious in that regard. I wouldn't want to reward that kind of approach with money ever.
A solid expansion like Blood and Wine? Hell yes. I'll buy that.
Yes I would mind, however I don't care what you do outside of that experience. You wanna sell me a season pass of dlc, sure. Multiplayer forced in with loot boxes, as long as the single player is the game I want it to be I'll safely ignore it. But the game design on that single experience needs to remain consistent.
If battlefront 2 had a single player that was legendary I don't think I would care as much about them ruining that multiplayer.
If battlefront 2 had a single player that was legendary I don't think I would care as much about them ruining that multiplayer.
Microtransations put some heavy negative pressure on game design that I'd really rather just not be there ever.
But it didn't. It didn't affect the game design and they are actually pointless to the point of not being worth anything even for people looking for shortcuts.
Those aren't facts though. I mean, they literally aren't. The only basis you have for this is because you said so. The majority of people who actually played the damn thing will tell you it's more of a useless after thought more than anything.
What? No. That's akin to asking if you'd be okay to find hair on your pizza if it means the restaurant turns a profit. If you can't sustain your business, maybe you shouldn't be in it. Of course games can always encounter problems or bomb for unforeseeable reasons, but the norm should be to have realistic sales expectations and turning the budget down if necessary. That's business 101.
No.
I still haven't bought Deus Ex: Mankind Divided or MGS5 because of micro transactions. And both series are series I love and bought the previous Deus Ex and MGS games at launch.
I still haven't bought Deus Ex: Mankind Divided or MGS5 because of micro transactions. And both series are series I love and bought the previous Deus Ex and MGS games at launch.
Depends how and what kind of microtransactions are implemented.
But single player games in general no.
Especially loot boxes. Keep that shit out of the game.
But single player games in general no.
Especially loot boxes. Keep that shit out of the game.
We have to ask ourselves how did we get here in the first place. Too many studios shot themselves in the foot by pushing and advertising visuals instead of gameplay. And yes, while there is nothing wrong with amazing visuals and pushing hardware to it's limit, the percentage of the budget eaten nowadays by non-gameplay elements is so high it's eating into the budget which used to be allocated to the teams responsible for gameplay elements.
Even if the studios want to cutback, some suit is going to point out that "the competition isn't cutting back so we can't", and the cycle will continue. So now they have to find other ways of milking the cow, and GaaS and microtransactions are one way of doing so. The bloated tripleA development cost bubble is going to burst eventually, and it can't happen soon enough.
Even if the studios want to cutback, some suit is going to point out that "the competition isn't cutting back so we can't", and the cycle will continue. So now they have to find other ways of milking the cow, and GaaS and microtransactions are one way of doing so. The bloated tripleA development cost bubble is going to burst eventually, and it can't happen soon enough.