Comic Book Guy Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Some gamers treat the mere idea of microtransactions with contempt. ?Pshaw!? they snort, ?like I?d pay real money to buy horse armor in Oblivion?.? And then they usually trail off into a semi-coherent rant about their rights as gamers and greedy corporate pigs. But microtransactions?which allow you to spend a few dollars on things to enhance a game, such as extra weapons or spells?are here to stay, and gamers just need to come to terms with that. My little epiphany came when I took my son to the local Games Workshop store for some Warhammer love. There, spread out before me on shelves crammed with figures, books, paints, and all the rest of the paraphernalia of the hobby, was the world of microtransactions writ large. Back in the day (as I say when I want to clear a room), if you wanted to play as Eldar, you bought the Eldar books and figures separately (and spent at least $100). If you wanted to play as the Chinese in Advanced Squad Leader, you bought Gung Ho! (about $50). Collectable card games? Booster packs. It?s only in PC and video gaming that we expect to get everything in one neat little package, and then bitch if it isn?t all there. How many times have we read, ?$20 is too much to pay for 10 levels and a new race?? I?ve written it myself. We?ve gotten spoiled. BattleForge, a nifty collectible card game/RTS game mashup, drove that point home for me. For the base price, you get the game and 3,000 points to spend on booster packs or other enhancements. If you burn through that, you can buy $5 worth of points, which will get you a couple of booster packs to expand your deck. We?re likely to see more of this. I?m not defending RPGs where entire classes are nerfed unless you pay extra money, or designs that punish people who don?t spend extra. But the future of PC gaming will likely be driven by the ?Korean model,? in which hardcore gamers spend extra to support a game and expand their experience, while more casual gamers pay less or nothing at all for a simpler experience. The question will be: Which kind of gamer are you? Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unrealistic Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 The question will be: Which kind of gamer are you? This kind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunknMunky Veteran Posted August 18, 2009 Veteran Share Posted August 18, 2009 Can I have my 2 minutes back, I read this same argument in 2006 :p ;) As for what kind, the best kind of course, teh munky kind :woot: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comic Book Guy Posted August 18, 2009 Author Share Posted August 18, 2009 That took you 2 minutes to read, that's not good! :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunknMunky Veteran Posted August 18, 2009 Veteran Share Posted August 18, 2009 Figure of speech. I want 2 mins + 30 secs back now!! Pronto! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breakthrough Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 This kind. Owned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanManIt Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I think that these type of games are going to have a much harder time succeeding over here. There have been games with micro-transactions for a good 10 years now and none of them seem to have gained much popularity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metal_dragen Veteran Posted August 20, 2009 Veteran Share Posted August 20, 2009 Here's the problem. I used to play tabletop 40K as well, and still have about a $1000 worth of minis sitting in a closet. This is not the same as buying a game, and then paying $2-3 to buy horse armor or a new sword. When I spent money on minis, I got either a) a complete pewter mini with alternate weapon configurations, decals, etc. or b) I bought a plastic squad kit that came with alternate weapon configurations, decals, etc. The point is, I bought a complete item, with all the alternative configurations included - I didn't have to spend $2 extra on different armor, $3 extra to get the Heavy Bolter weapon upgrade. This is apples and oranges. I don't mind paying for DLC that adds meaning to the game (such as Fallout's DLC, or Fable's DLC) which adds several more hours of gameplay, new characters, new weapons and items, and possibly new achievements. This would be equivalent to the money I spent on minis - not the horse armor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDStriker Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I think that these type of games are going to have a much harder time succeeding over here.There have been games with micro-transactions for a good 10 years now and none of them seem to have gained much popularity i think games like runescape and wow fall under this category you do these micro-transactions just to keep access to you're account you think after paying $100 in monthly fee's you'd own the right to stay on you're freaking account that you also have to level before its even worth playing the game :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMELTN Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I definitely think we will see more and more of these types of games. Game Creators can say they have more subscribers, do to more games being "free" and hence more people playing them, which in turn pulls in more advertisers and help cover the costs of servers/payroll etc, and then they make the extra money from the micro transactions. I am really interested in seeing what the numbers look like though. For example Runes of Magic or Free Realms.. Both of those are considered the "biggest 2 F2P games" right now, and I would like to see what kind of revenue they are pulling in from the micro transaction system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CelticWhisper Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 But microtransactions—which allow you to spend a few dollars on things to enhance a game, such as extra weapons or spells—are here to stay, and gamers just need to come to terms with that. No we don't. Or, alternatively, I'll come to terms with the fact that microtransactions are here to stay, and the developers can come to terms with the fact that I will never, ever partake in them. I buy a game and to me, that's the game. Release a patch the day after you release the game? Too bad. The fact that you released a patch may get factored into my evaluation of the game but the results of the patch won't. Release extra tracks/cars in a racing game, or extra missions in an RPG, as Dee Ell See? Too bad, I won't pay for it. You should've either put it in the initial release or waited to incorporate it into a proper sequel (ideally the former, as I have some choice words for sequelitis as well, but that's another argument for another time). Some will say "but then they can release the game for less money and those who want to pay more for the extras can." Oh, please. You're technically right - it would be a good way to drop the price on initial releases. And just how many companies do you think are actually going to do that? Especially with all the whining about the "race against the pirates" that supposedly characterizes the first few weeks of release, they're going to be more than a little reluctant to sell for less than the status-quo $50 USD. If you release a ****-poor game with INCREDIBLE Dee Ell See, I'm going to rate your game ****-poor and tell my friends to avoid it. Doubly so since you basically sold it as incomplete. This is slightly more forgivable in the case of free downloads versus for-pay ones, but either way, it's a money-grab. It's a money-grab in the case of free addons because you're using them as bait to get people to buy the initial release (which might suck in a way that defies description, and who knows how soon you're going to have the Dee Ell See out the door?) and thus garner brand recognition, and it's a money-grab in the case of for-pay downloads because...seriously, does it need to be explained? The Internet has done wonderful things, but it's made game developers lazy. Shamefully lazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts