Report: 69% of consumers find cosmetic microtransactions acceptable

[ZhugeEX]

A common misconception is that less than 2% of players buy micro transactions, DLC and loot boxes. This number may be true on mobile, but on console the numbers are much higher. DLC attach rates are around 20% on average according to publisher investor calls. The amount of console gamers that actually spend, at least once, on post launch content of any kind is increasing to the 50% mark. EA for example recently said that around 40% of FIFA owners spend on ultimate team as an example.

The report in the article below provides some interesting insight. It does note that the amount that make in game purchases is around the 6% mark, but for some games this number is clearly much higher as noted in EA's statement above.

With nearly 2,000 comments covering over 450 topics, and more than 10,000 poll responses, the debate explored consumers' likes, dislikes, frustrations, and thoughts on the future of the industry.

Based on the responses, 69% of consumers felt that cosmetic microtransactions are an acceptable form of monetisation in games, with only 6% saying they do make make in-game purchases. However, 22% took umbrage with "pay-to-win" microtransactions, describing the model as "toxic" and "sickening".

Although microtransactions have attained a certain level of acceptance among consumers, only 1.3% were "fans" of the model. As it currently stands, 71% of respondents felt that gaming gives them value for money compared to just 9% who don't.

Click to shrink...

More at the link - https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...on-among-69-percent-of-consumers-report-finds

 

[JeffGubb]

nice

 

[zephiethewisp]

lower percentage than i would have thought, but nice nonetheless

 

[rras1994]

Well, this answers that thread:https://www.resetera.com/threads/who-is-actually-buying-these-loot-boxes.23793/page-2#post-4617208

 

[Vadara]

"However, 22% took umbrage with "pay-to-win" microtransactions, describing the model as "toxic" and "sickening"."

That is far lower than I expected. I would have expected pay to win to be highly reviled.

 

[Coldman]

not nice :(

 

[JD3Nine]

Yeah. Personally, I would prefer none but I know that's not realistic. Cosmetic only is absolutely the way to go.

 

[Pooroomoo]

A common misconception is that less than 2% of players buy micro transactions, DLC and loot boxes. This number may be true on mobile, but on console the numbers are much higher. DLC attach rates are around 20% on average according to publisher investor calls. The amount of console gamers that actually spend, at least once, on post launch content of any kind is increasing to the 50% mark.

The report in the article below provides some interesting insight.



More at the link - https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...on-among-69-percent-of-consumers-report-finds

Click to shrink...

I think even here in Era, the majority accept cosmetic microtransactions. It's the other types of microtransactions (pay to win, upgrade/get an advantage over others and such) that people object to strongly.

 

[HockeyBird]

Yeah, most people don't have a problem with cosmetic microtransactions. The ire comes from implementation. If there is excessive barriers to obtaining those cosmetics (high prices, loot boxes), that's when people start having a problem.

 

[Cap G]

It feels like just yesterday people were pointing out that the value proposition on horse armor was totally nonsensical. Look where that got us.

I hope in another 10 years we see the same statistic, but for upgrades from loot boxes. I wonder what terrible practice will come along to make us think those are an acceptable alternative!

 

[ZeroCoin]

Well, this answers that thread:https://www.resetera.com/threads/who-is-actually-buying-these-loot-boxes.23793/page-2#post-4617208

Click to shrink...

I didn't see any mention of loot boxes in the report though. A report that distinguishes standard DLC from a loot box would be interesting to see.

 

[Nirolak]

This chart strikes me as kind of odd, since it suggests the question was:

"What is your opinion on Microtransactions?
A.) Cosmetics only is okay
B.) Dislike pay 2 win
C.) I'm a fan
D.) I'd rather pay up front
E.) I don't purchase them"

 

[rras1994]

I find it interesting that only 6% in the survey admitted to making in-game purchases when the data actually shows that it's closer to 50%. That's a big difference.

 

[Deleted member 8112]

.

 

[Alexalder]

Cosmetic microtransactions are not only acceptable but essential to the gaming market as we know it.
The point is nobody is talking about cosmetic microtransactions when they think about all the recent scandals

 

[Nosgotham]

I'm ok with it as long as it's not the only way to change appearance. I liked how warframe didn't. You buy color packs with a bunch of colors to customize

 

[Funny Valentine]

I don't have a problem with cosmetic MTX in theory but there's often some implementation fuckery involved.

 

[diablogg]

I tried looking through the article, but I didn't see it mentioned. I'm sure plenty of people are fine with cosmetic microtransactions. It's hiding cosmetic microtransactions in slot machine loot boxes that's an issue.

 

[MagnusGman]

Yeah. There really is no problem if the stuff is cosmetic. You can at least form a debate around Overwatch and the like because of the slot machine system they have.

But straight up paying for a shinier hat is fine.

Gimme my monkey, Sea of Thieves!

 

[Deleted member 16876]

What ever they do, keep that shit away from my SP games. Fuck off WB.

 

[cosmicblizzard]

:(

The battle is lost.

 

[Deleted member 22480]

Please no...

 

[Deleted member 1413]

I'm mostly fine with it. Can get a bit ridiculous like the DoA DLC list being massive and like $90, but it's not the worst way to monetize games.

 

[wossname]

I'd be fine with cosmetics microtransactions if games gave me the ability to completely disable them. People always say you don't have to buy them yourself, which is true, but you still have to look at everyone else running around dressed as a Santa or a Mexican bandito

 

[Deleted member 1185]

I love microtransactions. I have more money than time and being able to purchase shortcuts has made games so much more enjoyable to me.

 

[Demacabre]

Direct sale cosmetic microtransactions where you can pay for exactly what you want are perfectly fine and a great way to support a game you enjoy. Count me in that percentage.

Any whiff of RNG/game of chance elements is where I take strong issue.

Remove the chance and make them direct sale or earned through gameplay. Problem solved and it's not even unreasonable. Totally monetize your game by a direct sale shop.

 

[ZhugeEX]

This chart strikes me as kind of odd, since it suggests the question was:

"What is your opinion on Microtransactions?
A.) Cosmetics only is okay
B.) Dislike pay 2 win
C.) I'm a fan
D.) I'd rather pay up front
E.) I don't purchase them"

Click to shrink...

I'll be the first to admit, it's a weird chart.

 

[Deleted member 426]

This chart strikes me as kind of odd, since it suggests the question was:

"What is your opinion on Microtransactions?
A.) Cosmetics only is okay
B.) Dislike pay 2 win
C.) I'm a fan
D.) I'd rather pay up front
E.) I don't purchase them"

Click to shrink...

Yeah this is weird. They're not mutually exclusive at all.

Ohh okay this is comments analysis. That makes sense in terms of judging overall sentiment, but the numbers aren't really reliable. Many of those 69% could also be against Pay2Win, they just didn't happen to mention it in their comment.

 

[Sybil]

cosmetics are fine... if they aren't lootboxes. multi-piece sets in which you have to shovel through boxes to get every piece is the final nightmare.
I get baffled when there seems to be a pretty significant defense of cosmetic lootboxes when...you could just sell the cosmetics as is.

 

[Pooroomoo]

This chart strikes me as kind of odd, since it suggests the question was:

"What is your opinion on Microtransactions?
A.) Cosmetics only is okay
B.) Dislike pay 2 win
C.) I'm a fan
D.) I'd rather pay up front
E.) I don't purchase them"

Click to shrink...

I'll be the first to admit, it's a weird chart.

Click to shrink...

I think the question was " with which one of the following statements do you agree the most" .... Hence this graph.

 

[RF Switch]

Lol 69....anyway I have no problems with micro transactions or loot boxes. In fact loot boxes kept me playing overwatch long past the point I would have stopped. I like the gamble of maybe I'll get something great, but ONLY if I can earn the same rewards through gameplay. The way Rocket League handles their loot boxes to me is a crime and the fact that people were so against Star Wars and nobody barely mentions Rocket Leage makes me question the entire gaming community on what the hell is everyone thinking.

 

[Molemitts]

nice... or not so nice

 

[Deleted member 8196]

I'm totally fine with cosmetic mtx, especially if i get free content.

 

[Coconico]

Microtransactions aren't going away until some new form of post-release monetization finds popularity. When these companies are making literal billions off of it every year, you have to assume most people don't give a shit if they're reaching those numbers. Also:

You need to reply to this thread in order to see this content.

 

[Polioliolio]

It's ridiculous. Why do I need to dress like a clown or a pirate in a given game where that's not anywhere in the spirit of the theme of the game?

Why do I need to be able to dance in every multiplayer game?

Are these things fun? Yeah I guess. But it just shows you how every game expects to make money off of players by including dumb shit that has little to do with anything. This is beyond the simple experience of a game.

Microtransactions are bad for art, for experience. They're great for business and capitalism though. What side do you sway toward?

 

[Twilight Suzuka]

Being part of the 31% never felt so good.

 

[Kodama4]

The 22% trying to resist those sweet MTXs

 

[Deleted member 36578]

I'm one of those who are OK with cosmetics only mtx. Yeah, back in my day they were unlockables and rewards but it's a lesser evil nowadays.

 

[Pimienta]

We deserve what we get.

 

[tyfon]

I'm in the minority then although the chart options are really weird.
Good thing that there is room for games without any microtransactions still though like Mario and Horizon: ZD.

 

[TheKeyPit]

I'm ok with cosmetic microtransactions, but only if they can be aquired via playtime too. The system in Rainbow Six is nice, but their Operation Chimera approach is bad.

 

[Mesoian]

Ya'll really need to be prepared to start paying 90 dollars minimum for your games (at launch).

That's just where we're at.

 

[PatMan]

It's ridiculous. Why do I need to dress like a clown or a pirate in a given game where that's not anywhere in the spirit of the theme of the game?

Why do I need to be able to dance in every multiplayer game?

Are these things fun? Yeah I guess. But it just shows you how every game expects to make money off of players by including dumb shit that has little to do with anything. This is beyond the simple experience of a game.

Microtransactions are bad for art, for experience. They're great for business and capitalism though. What side do you sway toward?

Click to shrink...

Well video games are bottom tier when it comes to art, so I guess more towards business? Seriously who cares about video game stories at all?

 

[MarineMountie]

Gone are the days of earning that badass armor or weapon skin. Now you just get it out of a box or buy it.

I remember the gold weapons in Modern Warfare. You knew someone worked for that shit. No more. I remember weapon skins and camos in Battlefield that you had to work hard for to be able to wear. No more. Just get lucky in a Battle crate.

It really takes an element away from gaming. No more sense of accomplishment when you see someone with a badass skin or weapon skin. You know they either bought it or just got lucky in a box. Sucks. Overwatch is the worst with this. There is NOTHING in that game that doesn't involve a box or buying.

 

[stumblebee]

I'm one of those people. Not the biggest fan of crate-and-key lootbox style games, but I've bought into them when they're cosmetic.

 

[Joeyro]

I don't mind cosmetic mtx but it's time to get rid of season passes completely if you include them.

 

[Xumbrega]

Yeah, cosmetic MTX are ok in my book.

 

[Gold Arsene]

I'm fine with cosmetics as long as I can buy them directly.

No BS random chance slot machines like Overwatch.

Ya'll really need to be prepared to start paying 90 dollars minimum for your games (at launch).

That's just where we're at.

Click to shrink...

Care to explain your logic here?

 

[Vadara]

Ya'll really need to be prepared to start paying 90 dollars minimum for your games (at launch).

That's just where we're at.

Click to shrink...

The more it costs to get into the game at all, the less people buy it. The less people buy it, the less people there are to buy mtx in the first place. Prices aren't gonna be raised.

 

[mael]

A common misconception is that less than 2% of players buy micro transactions, DLC and loot boxes. This number may be true on mobile, but on console the numbers are much higher. DLC attach rates are around 20% on average according to publisher investor calls. The amount of console gamers that actually spend, at least once, on post launch content of any kind is increasing to the 50% mark. EA for example recently said that around 40% of FIFA owners spend on ultimate team as an example.

Click to shrink...

So for all the talks about mobile gamers being less discerning than console gamers, it's actually the reverse.