Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Anything else

Which Topic should we discuss for next week's Informative gaming discussion?

Poll ended at Fri Jan 10, 2014 5:01 pm

1: Hardcore games/Gamers
2
18%
2: Censorship
4
36%
3: Publishers VS. Developers
5
45%
 
Total votes: 11

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 12:20 am

I decided I'd try desperately try to contribute to the Wolfire community, so I started THIS:

Every Friday, I'll make a thread on some trend in the Gaming Community, in this case: MICROTRANSACTIONS. My goal is to have an informative discussion that any gamer can partake in. So if you feel that this should be a thing, try and contribute, or just make a post that makes me feel like this is turning into the YouTube Comments.

So the actual discussion:

Microtransactions are reoccurring theme in multiplayer games, allowing players to gain an advantage over players who do not spend money to unlock the items necessary, to progress. This isn't news to anyone, the term "Pay to Win" is used by the masses to show that a game doesn't allow fair play, do to the "Instant gratification" as it's called by developers. Many devs try and pull a fast one on people by allowing them to purchase in-game currency, this usually goes unnoticed by reviewers (as it gives no obvious advantage). Few games managed to pull off microtransactions that do not provide a direct advantage (TF2, Ryse: Son of Rome are great examples), that said even AESTHETIC microtransactions should not be considered right.

There really isn't a way that any game that allows you to pay for something should consider it right.
Last edited by Phoenixwarrior141 on Sun Jan 05, 2014 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Korban3
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:14 pm
Location: 42nd St E, Hell

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Korban3 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:15 am

I bought a couple skins for the newest installment in the Tomb Raider series. I enjoyed the game a lot and the skins I bought were both on sale and looked cool.
I'm not a fan of Pay To Win setups, like Planetside 2's. Really irks me that it's almost impossible to get any decent gear through play.

However, I don't think aesthetic micro-transactions are inherently wrong. They're a good money source for the developers and don't effect gameplay at all.

If a developer insists on having micro-transactions that effect gameplay, once again talking about Planetside 2, I would be a lot happier with it if it was possible to earn those items through a reasonable amount of play, too. The fact that PS2 makes it almost impossible to get good gear through hard work is ridiculous.

All in all, it's a hard system to balance, as a dev. I wouldn't enjoy being in charge of it. But it can be done well, especially by sticking to just aesthetics.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 4:06 am

While sticking to aesthetics may work for indie companies, it DOES NOT work for a larger company (*Cough* EA).

By the end of this discussion I hope we'll know what makes a good microtransaction.

User avatar
Korban3
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:14 pm
Location: 42nd St E, Hell

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Korban3 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 4:26 am

I don't see how it hasn't. I remember a lot of the cosmetic DLCs for the Dead Space series selling pretty well. I believe some of them carried in-game benefits as well, but I can't remember entirely.
in the scope of things EA is a company, not a games company. They only look toward what companies have always done to boost profits. Games are a different media and I believe they require a different approach, but EA has been doing what any other company would do in their shoes. We might not like their practices, but it works. They're making a ton of money, which is the only actual end-goal of a large company.

As far as micro-transactions, they've become a big method for companies to churn revenue because they work. Most people are far more likely to pay for a 1 dollar item in a free game than to buy a 30 dollar game flat. I'm not even going to go so far as to call it a fad because I think it's here to stay. I'm sure the methods will be perfected as time goes on, but I believe it's impossible to say they don't work already. They just need refining.

As far as the whole Pay To Win contention, it's on the developers. When a developer is saddled with the burden of EA, Activision and other distasteful publishers, they lose control of how their game is manipulated. Either they do as the publisher says or they lose funding. So, if EA wants frustrating micro-transactions in a game they're publishing, the developer has to do it. Publishers own the IP after it's released, rather than it staying with the devs.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 4:43 am

As for Dead Space DLC/ skin packs,

Does the company/EA really, REALLY need our money? Should we trust them? or are they desperate?

Also in more ways than one, the words Free to Play, are becoming synonymous with Pay to Win
(or Pay to Play). It's a disease, a curse, and these instances a becoming frequent on Steam Greenlight, as they are free to play, they get greenlit NEARLY instantly.

As for the devs, that's just what they release to the press. For all we know, they could have simply E-Mail saying:
EA wrote:Milk those customers like cows, or your done...
I don't know, it's an issue though...

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Endoperez » Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:38 am

Micropayments are fine. League of legends and Dota2 are more F2P games that avoid P2W. It's a fantastic model.

Micros basically allow developers to get money when players want to put time in a game. The tech is neutral, like DLCs and expansions and sequels - all could just be greedy moneygrabbing operations.

I haven't used it in a game yet, but it's one of the better options for an unknown indie dev. Basically donationware, with perks built in. Get your name out, perhaps get a bit of money too, players get a free game. Win-win, no?

User avatar
Korban3
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:14 pm
Location: 42nd St E, Hell

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Korban3 » Sun Jan 05, 2014 8:27 am

No, it's actually completely true that EA owns Dead Space, even though Visceral made it. EA was the final word on every feature cut, on every design decision. Visceral doesn't own Dead Space, they won't make a sequel unless EA says they will. That's why even though Visceral could make Dead Space 4, could fix the mistakes in the third game and could bring the franchise back, they won't be able to because EA saw that the third game didn't get as much money and thinks it's a dead franchise.

The whole practice of the publisher owning and pushing everything on a game like that is actually really common. Almost every AAA title goes through that.

That's all leaving aside that I'm ok with Dead Space being done because that means Visceral is probably going to kick off a new franchise full of badassery.

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Endoperez » Sun Jan 05, 2014 10:37 am

I'd like to add to what Korban said - the publisher has a final word on every feature cut that's due to money or time concerns, but they can delegate the actual decision-making down to someone on the developer side, if they trust him or her.

Also, publisher vs developer would perhaps be better as the topic for the next discussion. Let's stay on microtransactions for now.

There are bad microtransactions, but they're more prevalent in Asian MMOs than in any Western games. The "pay to win" mentality is taken to a really different heights in some Asian MMOs - not in each one, but the culture accepts it to a much greater extent, so some companies embrace it as their main source of revenue.

http://www.develop-online.net/opinions/ ... ay/0117938

http://www.danwei.org/electronic_games/ ... _in_zt.php

In contrast, even when pay-2-win exists in Western games, it tends to be direct results instead of buying luck-based stuff, and there are often some in-game rules that prevent newbie-stomping. Money alone isn't enough, winning also requires an investment of time. Money might be necessary at the top level even in Western games, but there is still a huge culture difference.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/22/techn ... d=all&_r=1&

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sun Jan 05, 2014 4:57 pm

That said, there is an western, indie game with War Z style mechanics (it's also early access, you can see where this is going)

I haven't bought it yet, but the Steam page states that players can purchase items, using Nether Gold, or real life currency ( The Store page reviews state this, in case you're wondering.)


Several customer reviews mention rumors that those two companies (the War Z company: Hammerhead Interactive, and Phosphors: the indie company.) were the same.

Among other things, there were reports of developers/moderators abusing the community.



Sources:

Steam Page:(http://store.steampowered.com/app/24773 ... 1_7_15__13)

Customer Reviews: including notions of Pay to Win aspects, and Hammerhead Interactive's involvement:

(http://steamcommunity.com//profiles/765 ... ed/247730/)

(http://steamcommunity.com//id/lifelink/ ... ed/247730/)

Developer/Moderator abuse:
(http://steamcommunity.com//id/lifelink/ ... ed/247730/)

This is a reoccurring theme now a-days

(Also I updated the thread with a poll for next week's topic.)

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Endoperez » Sun Jan 05, 2014 5:58 pm

Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:That said, there is an western, indie game with War Z style mechanics (it's also early access, you can see where this is going)

I haven't bought it yet, but the Steam page states that players can purchase items, using Nether Gold, or real life currency ( The Store page reviews state this, in case you're wondering.)
Okay, so that's a bad game. That doesn't mean it's a trend, or that microtransactions are bad - it means that it's a bad game.

Were the microtransactions the only thing that made it bad? Probably not.


edit: Also Nether seems to be getting more positive user reviews than negative ones, recently, so it might eventually evolve into a good game. Who knows?

http://steamcommunity.com/app/247730/re ... mostrecent

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sun Jan 05, 2014 6:27 pm

Those appear more recent reviews, I scrolled down and saw some more negative reviews, but again who knows?

And I call it a trend because:

The War Z

Planetside 2

Nether

are all Pay to win games, and Planetside 2 will come to the PS4, Pay to Win services included

Not to mention, Mobile games getting PC releases, some with Pay to Win services.

Maybe not a trend now, but soon.

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Endoperez » Sun Jan 05, 2014 6:54 pm

After some quick search Planetside 2 didn't seem heavily P2W game.

https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/ind ... in.141214/

You can buy boosts for faster in-game money, and you can unlock weapons that are more specialized on specific roles but come with drawbacks, instead of straight-up better. There seem to be some straight-up better options, but those don't seem to be the majority.

It seems comparable to League of Legends. A free player and a paying player will be on equal footing in-game if they have the same stuff. It will take longer for the free player to get the same stuff. A free player won't have any trouble getting the stuff he wants for a single role, or for some specific roles. However, the paying player can have the stuff he wants for ALL the roles, potentially.

So money lets you choose more often from the same pool of available stuff, but if you're happy with a small amount of specialized items, you don't need to spend money at all.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sun Jan 05, 2014 7:45 pm

That's a fair point, BUT:
Nocturnal7x wrote:There are no "I win" weapons, like the zephyr at launch, people who bought those were winning for months, too many people were able to buy those with certs because they didn't nerf them fast enough.

Now SOE has a 2-3 week nerf schedual. Now certers don't have as much time to win with the new weapons.

But yea, not pay 2 win. Pay for an advantage till your advantage gets nerfed and you have to buy the next advantage.
Scroll down to this comment (I copied and pasted this straight from the forums, hence the spelling errors)

This makes Nerfing look like a way to make more money.

*Slow clap*

On another note, Microtransactions are just ways of making money, Pay to Win is different though, so regardless Planetside 2 HAS microtransactions, even if they ARE pointless.

User avatar
Phoenixwarrior141
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 12:37 pm
Location: I've lost all sense of direction, I'm quite concerned to be honest.

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Phoenixwarrior141 » Sun Jan 05, 2014 10:48 pm

Oh and can we get some poll votes?

Please guys?

User avatar
Endoperez
Posts: 5668
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:41 am
Location: cold and dark and lovely Finland

Re: Informative (Gaming) Discussion 1: Micro-transactions

Post by Endoperez » Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:56 pm

Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:Oh and can we get some poll votes.
Give it some time.


Releasing OP stuff to sell it, then nerfing it later? Could be a problem. Does it happen as the game is patched, regularly? If not, it was just a normal balance problem, not a moneymaking plan.

I wasn't saying Ps2 doesn't have micropayments. My point was that your P2W trend examples didn't all seem to actually be P2W. Not much of a trend.
And micros aren't a problem for me, if the game is designed to be fair.

Post Reply