-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Where is the line with Microtransactions?
- Thread starter Pixels
- Start date
Yeah, this always bothered me. Loot box mechanics have been around in this form forever.
If you're charging real money for a consumable in-game resource or item, you've already crossed the line.
Yeah, those are bullshit too. I'd never buy a blind bag item unless it's from someone who's already opened it.
Yeah, those are bullshit too. I'd never buy a blind bag item unless it's from someone who's already opened it.
What about something like double XP for a week?
Still bullshit.
If you're going to make someone pay for a shortcut, at least let them keep it.
When the entire industry has "crossed the line" and consumers are still more than happy to pay for that, it just means the line has moved. Or maybe there was never a line in the first place outside of your head.
Vital Tundra
Member
I think pay to win/pay to accelerate are horrible and shouldn't exist. Pay to win is bad for obvious reasons. And pay to accelerate shows me your game is a grind not worth playing. Otherwise, its cool for me.
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
I like what 343 did with Halo 5; delivered free DLC to fans and made money for themselves. They kept arena play away from gameplay affecting REQs and microtransactions while introducing Warzone to go all out with new modes like Turbo and tons of weapon variants etc.
Or maybe, just maybe, it shows that as gaming expanded into something that is inclusive of a wide audience, different people value different things in a game, and some are willing to pay to ignore portions which other people find fun to play. What an interesting though.
Err... Yes.
There is no line. Publishers are as happy to use shady practices as the consumers are to reward them for it.
When I say we've crossed the line, I mean I am no longer comfortable with the business arrangement and refuse to take part in it.
Maybe I misunderstood the question.
NullPointer
Member
I don't know - I've always heard that the level of buy-in on this stuff is low, but that it doesn't matter. You get a small percentage of whales and they're enough to cover the vast majority of players and bring in a profit, and that's talking about free to play games.
Can we really say that its the customers that allow this, broadly speaking, if its only a tiny percentage of them?
By the same logic I have no idea how you're supposed to defend the line really, since even if the vast majority of us don't buy in, these techniques still pay off.
You don't have to actively buy-in to support it. Anyone who is happy to play a game that has microtransactions, enjoys it, and tells other people about it, is contributing success to the game. Anyone who buys a full priced game with microtransactions in it is supporting the game. It shows that having microtransactions is not detrimental to sales and popularity - but rather it is the opposite, not only does it not have an impact on sales and popularity, it opens up an additional revenue opportunity since some people are willing to pay for it. It is win-win and there is almost no reason not to do it if your game can support it. That's the reality.
It's not a defense, it's stating the obvious. Buying a game with microtransactions and then posting on NeoGAF going "fuck microtransactions!!!" is still supporting microtransactions. The actual people who do not buy games with microtransactions and care so much about it to want to push back are the tiniest minority.
I feel like in most console games the line is a respectful "don't give people an advantage with microtransactions".
And I'm ok with that, you can put as much glitter and glamour in a games microtansactions as you want, you make your money off those whales Devs.
However, the mobile space is full of bullshit micros that force you to pay to succede or not spend countless hours on things. It's the primary reason i hate mobile gaming.
And I'm ok with that, you can put as much glitter and glamour in a games microtansactions as you want, you make your money off those whales Devs.
However, the mobile space is full of bullshit micros that force you to pay to succede or not spend countless hours on things. It's the primary reason i hate mobile gaming.
Callibretto
Member
Eh, when developer like Capcom try to skimp on the budget with Marvel I, resulting in rough visual and lower character count, people crucify them despite the actual gameplay mechanics looking great...
Sure. Like how I think fidget spinners are dumb as fuck.
It's true.
But at least there's no arbitrary limit on how many times you can use them, so at least they have that going for them.
Don't give them ideas... lol.
Just tap your NFC enabled smart device to your spinner to purchase spin tokens for unlimited fun and amusement!
If you pay for the season pass the line is included, or you can buy just the line itself for $4.99.
Lol
Sure! So long as you dont sell them. Discovering loot in game with the potential for rare items is a very effective mechanic that plays on the same reward feedback mechanism without the predatory revenue model.
Plague Doctor
Member
This sums up my feelings perfectly.
I don't understand understand why people are so against them. If they were mandatory like many mobile games, I'd get it, but they're not. It's optional. It literally has no effect on you if you don't want it to.
I can count the number of games I've bought something in on one hand (with fingers left to spare). I don't feel like the ones who asked for money screwed me over. I don't feel like the times I've paid were the worst decision of my life. Hell I've bought physical goods which I regret far more.
No one blinks an eye when a coffee shop says "want to pay 20p extra for our Colombian coffee?" You say yes, or you say no. Then 10 mins later you've finished your coffee and you don't even think about it again. But when a game that you spend 100s of hours with says "want a cool lookin' character for £3?" People throw a fit and act like it's the fall of Rome.
I can count the number of games I've bought something in on one hand (with fingers left to spare). I don't feel like the ones who asked for money screwed me over. I don't feel like the times I've paid were the worst decision of my life. Hell I've bought physical goods which I regret far more.
No one blinks an eye when a coffee shop says "want to pay 20p extra for our Colombian coffee?" You say yes, or you say no. Then 10 mins later you've finished your coffee and you don't even think about it again. But when a game that you spend 100s of hours with says "want a cool lookin' character for £3?" People throw a fit and act like it's the fall of Rome.
Pokemaniac
Member
This isn't how this actually works, though. The mere inclusion of microtransactions is detrimental to game design, because they incentivize ruining the game mechanics in order to push people towards buying them. The vast majority of games with microtransactions are worse for having them.
Very true.
Enter The 36 Chambers
Member
I haven't spent a penny for any of this new shit. Although the extend they exist is that line being crossed to me.
On the one hand, I almost feel a way about pubs preying on people succeptible to all that Rng garbage.
Then I remember people are adult and can make their own decisions. Just so happens peoples terrible decisions have stopped me having to pay for map packs.
I'm okay with it.
On the one hand, I almost feel a way about pubs preying on people succeptible to all that Rng garbage.
Then I remember people are adult and can make their own decisions. Just so happens peoples terrible decisions have stopped me having to pay for map packs.
I'm okay with it.
More like "want a chance to win a cool lookin' character for £3?"
And then you just get sprays instead.
Ninja Scooter
Member
There is no line for me. Companies can choose to monetize their products however they want. If something is worth my money, whether it's a full game, a full game with micro transactions, a piece of DLC, or whatever, I will give them my money. None of it is inherently bad.
MMOs and loot-a-thons with randomized stats/etc. like Diablo have been doing this for decades. I don't think it's in line with the question you were asking in the OP.
Correct
Filthy Casual
Member
Serious question, is this AAA games are so expensive to make these days argument valid? Because when I see tidbits about how publishers like Activision are worth a gazillion dollars I find it hard to believe they are much more than a means to milk as much as they can.
In all honesty I'm probing for ideas for a game I'm working on. I have extensive experience with f2p monetization and here's a little bit of truth:
1. Blocking off content for a price makes very little. People are just not compelled by this.
2. Ads make nearly nothing. They suck.
3. Random loot boxes with extremely rare items make the most by far. We're talking many magnitudes larger.
4. Random loot boxes make people very angry and hostile.
5. Selling the contents of a random loot box brings in less than 1% of a loot box.
I hate loot boxes. I hate them more than anything. There has to be a better way.
If anyone has Q's about any monetization in f2p I'd be happy to answer.
1. Blocking off content for a price makes very little. People are just not compelled by this.
2. Ads make nearly nothing. They suck.
3. Random loot boxes with extremely rare items make the most by far. We're talking many magnitudes larger.
4. Random loot boxes make people very angry and hostile.
5. Selling the contents of a random loot box brings in less than 1% of a loot box.
I hate loot boxes. I hate them more than anything. There has to be a better way.
If anyone has Q's about any monetization in f2p I'd be happy to answer.
Tangential and I'm not sure how useful this is to you but gating time as an incentive to 'go faster', which essentially was the primary means of Facebook/social games, and thus grandfathered into the typical western-style mobile F2P monetization model, seems to have become less and less appealing over the years, no thanks in small part to heavy-handed hit-you-on-the-nose examples like EA's short-lived Dungeon Keeper mobile.
Even many Japanese models built around gacha and stamina are focusing less on the stamina aspect as a hard gate. Gonna be lazy and copypaste a post I made prior on my observations on that front:
From your responses you've demonstrated some knowledge of systems like the sparks in Granblue Fantasy. I feel like there's always a balancing act between 3. and 4., where a game has to feel like it's worth the time for the larger f2p or dolphin base, since that's what drives the whales to spend. No one wants to bother being King Cobra of a deserted island, and as you're probably aware, it's a very, very competitive market so the crowds can and will churn as soon as they feel the game isn't worth their time or a little too stingy with its progression.
Unless you're Brave Exvius. No one stops the Final Fantasy train. D:
edit: If I could also comment on 2. - it highly depends on the region. Places like SEA, and to a lesser extent China, do have their subset of whales and casual spenders but on average ads (or, more hilariously enough, "game over, watch a video to continue!") tends to earn more revenue than selling consumables.
It's simply a matter of regional taste, the same way gacha has traditionally been more widely accepted in Japan than in EU/NA.
Even many Japanese models built around gacha and stamina are focusing less on the stamina aspect as a hard gate. Gonna be lazy and copypaste a post I made prior on my observations on that front:
From your responses you've demonstrated some knowledge of systems like the sparks in Granblue Fantasy. I feel like there's always a balancing act between 3. and 4., where a game has to feel like it's worth the time for the larger f2p or dolphin base, since that's what drives the whales to spend. No one wants to bother being King Cobra of a deserted island, and as you're probably aware, it's a very, very competitive market so the crowds can and will churn as soon as they feel the game isn't worth their time or a little too stingy with its progression.
Unless you're Brave Exvius. No one stops the Final Fantasy train. D:
edit: If I could also comment on 2. - it highly depends on the region. Places like SEA, and to a lesser extent China, do have their subset of whales and casual spenders but on average ads (or, more hilariously enough, "game over, watch a video to continue!") tends to earn more revenue than selling consumables.
It's simply a matter of regional taste, the same way gacha has traditionally been more widely accepted in Japan than in EU/NA.
Ah I forgot to mention this tactic. It's incredibly ineffective in my experience and I'm not sure how devs got it to work well. That being said, speeding up timers is decent, which is weird as they're essentially the same thing.
Yes and I think certain audiences accept it more.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
The line is basically when people stop paying.
Was actually going to post your blogpost. Here it is anyway - it's still a great read.
https://medium.com/cultural-panopti...l-of-japanese-free-to-play-games-a866dce1649a
autoduelist
Member
Intentionally breaking a game for profit is the line. And it's long been crossed.
A good example are grind gates that intentionally distort in-game balance. Normally, a game's difficulty is balanced for fun [where fun can range from easy to challenging, based on the genre, etc]. A grind gate is a place where the difficultly is often literally impossible within the natural progression of the game. For example, you can't even damage the 'end of region' boss unless you either a) grind for 5 hours, or b) pay $5 to get gems to buy new weapons.
A good example are grind gates that intentionally distort in-game balance. Normally, a game's difficulty is balanced for fun [where fun can range from easy to challenging, based on the genre, etc]. A grind gate is a place where the difficultly is often literally impossible within the natural progression of the game. For example, you can't even damage the 'end of region' boss unless you either a) grind for 5 hours, or b) pay $5 to get gems to buy new weapons.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Hah, I think Japanese games have basically perfected it and you're seeing Western games catch up to find models that "justify" the gacha systems we've seen.
Technically sports games also have gacha based on events, since you're grinding credits to do a draw to try to get your Level 99 Tom Brady card in Madden 17... only to have to do the exact same thing in Madden 18 (which would be the equivalent of a new "event" in a Japanese game).
Like with everything, it's about being aware that you are being manipulated and understanding your limits in that context. Modern gacha is based entirely on the pure adrenaline of pulling a slot machine combined with the "FOMO" factor of time-limited events and gachas that make the gacha much more urgent that it would be otherwise. It's why FFRK and GBF constantly add special gacha to coincide with their regular gacha.
Developers only care about the bottom line and will basically go as far as they can without breaking any (Japanese and Chinese) laws. So I do stand by my pithy statement, inasmuch as once as a game goes too far, people will abandon and jump ship and move on to the next game. lol
You know what's funny though? Two of the games I've written about are dead, and of course, Love Live has basically contracted to a Japanese server, a Global server, and a mainland China server.
I feel it's a great read because it breaks down why people still 'put up' with it. Aside from great gameplay (which, without, they're likely to have moved on, as we both agree here, and which audiences can easily get their fix from in non-gacha frameworks what with all the great games being constantly released today) the other factors, like continuous events, community, laughing at other people's hilariously bad or good pulls (SERIOUSLY WHAT IS THIS), essentially are an extension of the Games as a Service model that MMOs pioneered.
In many ways, watching the story unfold and experiencing the side stories in standalone giants that aren't a gacha version of a popular franchise (FF, One Piece, DBZ, FE:Heroes etc) like Granblue is akin to watching a TV series and experiencing it for the first time alongside the rest of the community/fanbase, and I feel that's also one of the large draws that the more successful/longstanding games achieve.
I actually wanted to make a topic about the article with my own thoughts, but never had the time.
Sad Affleck
Member
No microtransactions in full-price games. They are fine in free to play titles but unacceptable if you are paying $60 for the game.
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
I think of Microtransactions in general more like a "tipping jar" for games I really like. Only "problem" is that most games where I would be inclined to give the devs something extra don't have microtransactions because usually only games by big publishers feature them (or F2P games obviously). And as much as I enjoy Overwatch, I don't feel any incentive to shoot some more money to those poor starving folks at Activision.
Like, I wouldn't mind some MTA in Hitman to support IO or studios like Larian or Obsidian as long as all the stuff you can buy is just cosmetic garbage. But when a game comes from a multi-billion company like Activision it just seems pathetic to me.
Like, I wouldn't mind some MTA in Hitman to support IO or studios like Larian or Obsidian as long as all the stuff you can buy is just cosmetic garbage. But when a game comes from a multi-billion company like Activision it just seems pathetic to me.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Yeah, I've been meaning to write about Games as Service and my own issues with "FOMO" feeding a bit of an addiction with these games and why I'm basically afraid of starting a new game like Fate/GO or whatever the new hotness comes around.
It's funny, I can't even read the Idolmaster stories and have never felt the need to find a translation of them, but I still feel the need to collect them from each event because I don't want to miss them.
That said, I haven't felt like I HAD to pay into these games to beat events (well, except FFRK's bullshit lol), so while events are good at retention, I'm not sure if they are necessarily a driver of whales - well, outside of ranked events where people race to be on the leaderboard and do so by spending money. I can almost understand the appeal that comes with being the "top of the leaderboard" with some of these F2P games, and we had someone on GAF who did that with Love Live back in the early days.
You look at it the other way, where Blizzard continues to support Overwatch for "free" without making you buy new characters or new maps.
The gacha spend there is to basically allow you to trade money for time, since if there's an event-based skin you REALLY want but don't want to spend hours grinding lootboxes for, then you have the option to do so.
(I assume event skins are exclusive to that event, or perhaps they are relegated to the broader pool which makes skins near-impossible to get because of the drop rates)
Probably the only thing that's "bad" about Overwatch is that it's not full F2P and that you have to buy a 40 dollar box to get the game in the first place.
Awesome read!