(most) Microtransactions are OK and people need to stop bitching about them

Author Topic: (most) Microtransactions are OK and people need to stop bitching about them  (Read 9245 times)

I think having the ability to get the edge over people just because you have more money than them is kinda dumb
for stupid stuff like hats and skins, I don't give a stuff if you're dumb enough to spend money on that

i don't really know any loot boxes that don't show what you can get but if they are out there i definitely think they should be showing the potential prizes and rarity of each one

gambling is paying money to have a random chance of making money, fundamentally. tin/card booster packs and loot boxes jump the line between ok and gambling when people start doing it to make money, a la csgo skins.

people seem to make the distinction though over how the loot box “feels” - is it something that attracts you to keep spending money with partial wins or the promise of massive rewards, or is it like a “oh hey lemme try my luck this one time”

You act as though the game will be playable without paying microtransactions.

The devs could create a game that has an acceptable amount of "grinding" or XP collection or whatever. And then they could stretch it out 3x longer and make you pay a microtransaction to speed it back up. Now you buy the game and its a stuffty grindfest unless you spend more money on it than you already have (which you are compelled to do because otherwise your purchase was almost a waste, if the xp grind burns you out)

Microtransactions shouldn't effect core gameplay. Leave that garbage stuff to mobile games.

so would you recommend that developers publish the outcome pool and the odds of each particular outcome, like how china requires?
i could see it working.

edit: pubg already has this integrated and working with their crate system. and you don't even have to pay money to earn crates. but the items you get from those crates can yield an actually profit. like this baby. http://steamcommunity.com/market/listings/578080/PLAYERUNKNOWN%27S%20Trenchcoat
« Last Edit: November 01, 2017, 03:42:24 PM by Alkatjo »

You act as though the game will be playable without paying microtransactions.

The devs could create a game that has an acceptable amount of "grinding" or XP collection or whatever. And then they could stretch it out 3x longer and make you pay a microtransaction to speed it back up. Now you buy the game and its a stuffty grindfest unless you spend more money on it than you already have (which you are compelled to do because otherwise your purchase was almost a waste, if the xp grind burns you out)

Microtransactions shouldn't effect core gameplay. Leave that garbage stuff to mobile games.
those kinds of games tend to not live long, and the best way for these kinds of games to make money is by not alienating consumers with long grinds. fortunately for the consumer its good game business sense to make a game people will want to play a lot

I only want macrotransactions in my game


With bullstuff things like Creation Club you can't just buy a 30 cent item you are forced to put in 5 whole dollars into your account.

It won't let you put in lower denominations.

credit card transactions take flat rate fees iirc, so small purchases <$1 actually lose a significant portion of the transfer

i guess microtransactions are-

BUY THE loving "OPINION DLC" FOR $10000 TO VIEW THE REST OF THIS MESSAGE YOU loving CUNT


look id like not having microtransactions as much as the next guy, but did you really think video game devs weren’t gonna participate in capatilism or something. i mean you see an opportunity to make money and you take it, it’s not morally wrong or illegal. if they integrate it poorly, people don’t buy their game, they don’t make profit. i mean this is like hoping mcdonalds makes everything on the $1 menu $1 again, but it’s just not gonna happen.

Clearly the major companies were doing fine before microtransactions became a craze. The game is retailing 60 dollars at launch. This is legitimately worse than the horse armor DLC stuffstorm for oblivion way back ago because sure You Can Beat The Game Without Buying It but not only is it locking stuff behind a paywall when I already dropped 60 bucks on the game but I'm having to shill out cash repeatedly if I want to play the game to its full extent, which shouldn't NEED to happen for a 60 loving dollar game. I was pissed about this happening in dead space 3 way long ago and I'm pissed about it now.

Will they learn and stop doing it? no. I'm not here to try and convince anyone to stop doing it because they wont give a stuff. they want your money. they are going to get your money. and your point about it being used to fund the games, I genuinely believe they're just going to pocket it. that's just my nihilistic outlook but take it as you will.

I mean hell, you think this is a new issue?

Go look at the previous game, Shadow of Mordor, take a look at its DLC.

should look somewhat similar to this:



Yeah, bits of actual DLC content you'd expect from a game but also spattered about loving "runes" for a dollar a piece that have an actual ingame effect.

EDIT: let me try to put into perspective how bullstuff this is. for the same price of all 5 "runes", at 5 dollars, you could purchase a single Fallout: New Vegas DLC right now on steam with no sale going on and receive more than 100x the content. Quote me on that. Sure, the game is older and the DLC prices have gone down since their original prices I believe, but you have to understand my point. you're getting gouged for such a stupidly small (but still potentially impactful!) ingame thingymabob

"oh but you dont need to buy them to beat the game!"

forget you, that mentality.

notice how some of the runes have the exact same release date as the game? you'd be paying 40-60 bucks (forget its launch price), and there'd still be ingame content YOU CANNOT HAVE because of money grubbing tactics like they're doing now. I don't agree with this practice. I don't agree that you're now literally paying real money for content you don't even know for sure what you're receiving. This lootbox craze is disgusting.

This is all in respect to games you're already paying out the ass for. Hell, in a free to play game, I perfectly understand. I'd even reasonably defend this practice in cheaper games that are primarily multiplayer based because you can expect to be 100% of the lootbox contents to just be cosmetics that you can decorate your gun/sword/etc. with and also support the developer. (don't get me started on halo 5's implementation of this. even more disgusting.)

This is not the same scenario. I'll defend to the death microtransactions/release DLC for cosmetic content but if I'm having genuine, even small, gameplay aspects locked behind paywalls that aren't legitimate, meaningful DLC content, then it's just terrible, not worth your money, not worth my money, and all in all I just hate it.

rant over
« Last Edit: November 01, 2017, 06:48:44 PM by Zack »

the monitisation and chopping up of games to sell later wont stop here. give it a few years until we've gone full circle to paying $1 per life like with arcade machines or $1 for 2 minutes

these AAA games make loads of profit already, they just want more and more and more each time. I mean sure, they want extra cash, thats business. but dont spout stuff like "they just want to pay their workers a fair salary"