Support NeoGAF

[NullPointer]

I actually didn't mind the microtransactions in Blops or the card packs in Mass Effect at all.

Consumables as DLC is the most devious and the worst of the worst of the worst of all of this, and ME has those.

The dream has always been to sell us the individual guns and then sell us the ammo on a constant basis. To establish a real-time link directly between the game's servers, the player's limbic system and their bank account. They provide the challenge, we provide the payment, they provide the pleasure stimulus. Gameplay as a steady diet of consumable microtransactions is what all of this is leading to.

Be careful what you're voting for with your wallet.

 

[scytherage]

"Don't like it don't buy it" isn't good enough anymore; companies are answering back with "We dare you" and people are giving in.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

It's not enough not to buy the microtransactions themselves.

Somewhere some whale is making this profitable for the developer.

Don't buy the game itself. Dead games don't attract no whales.

 

[Boogalogist]

I'll do my part. Not buying Forza 5. And will not buy GT6 if the DLC is this bad.

Not only I won't buy it, I'll inform everyone who wants to buy it about this DLC sham before they buy it. At least they'd be making an informed decision.

 

[Fornaximus]

"Don't like it don't buy it" isn't good enough anymore; companies are answering back with "We dare you" and people are giving in.

It was never good enough. The people who subscribe to that asinine drive-by post seem to believe they live in a vacuum, where nothing they do has an effect on anyone else. If people had refused to pay for XBL Gold to play online, the paywall would have come down like it did for GFWL. Instead, people paid for it year after year, and now Sony has adopted the paywall. Bad ideas spread when people support them.

 

[Raw64life]

I've bought DLC once ever. Microtransactions sicken me. Fuck F2P too. Will never buy any of this shit ever.

Imagine they started doing this for movies. $20 for the feature length film. $4.99 for the extended edition. $2.99 for deleted scenes. $1.99 for the commentary track. $.99 for the blooper reel.

 

[Hip Hop]

If you don't like them, simply don't purchase them.

Boycotting like this simply does not work. It's almost funny seeing people miss out on games because the label has "EA", "Ubisoft" or any other label from the big boys.

Yes, simply not purchasing would work if it was done on a mass scale. All these years and the people boycotting these companies have done very little in changing Microtransaction/DLC practices.

I would go ahead and join all of you, but when a very small percentage is taking part, nothing will ever get done.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

We already have a sizable rally thread among the dozens of other microtransaction threads to pop up since Eurogamer's Forza 5 review:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=719935&highlight=microtransactions

 

[UberTag]

There's going to be a very heavy coming down regarding these psychologically addictive practices and it's going to be bad for everyone. There's no way the practice has been going unnoticed.

Not only should we boycott these games, we should tip off the MAINSTREAM media (i.e. not the bought gaming enthusiast sites) to expose this issue by tracking down "sick" people that are bankrupting themselves by spending money on consumable microtransactions like the ones in Forza and FIFA and put public/shareholder pressure on them that way.

We can attack this issue on all fronts. We have more power to mobilize than the gaming industry does.

 

[DigitalOp]

I don't feel a blanket approach is a good idea though, I think it's more worthwhile to stop and consider how heavy a game is with it. Because quite a few do have stupid little things you can ignore and never have a problem with, I sometimes forget recent Tales games have them. Something like Forza is where I go "nope" though, and I certainly don't really care to bother with one that keeps shoving in my face OOH OOH GO TO THE STORE AND YOU CAN BUY CREDITS!

As long as they continue to sell to the Not GAF masses in the millions, they will continue to include them

Gaming community is so weak, we have no voice on anything, so call "journalist" is not on our side, normal media think game is for looser and too much violent.
This is so sad.

That's not enough, really. Because the people who run these companies will just see it as console gaming dying or some other such bullshit to justify making more smart phone games/infesting the full priced games with even more MT "features". They need to be told why, and loudly.

You know what we have to do? We have to start getting vocal. And loud.

The first thing we need to do is tell our friends and family who play games. Even my mother who is an avid lover of candy crush doesn't agree with this! She doesn't understand why the practice has made its way to full priced retail games. I don't know why either...

But we have to tell our friends. Let them know where gaming could be headed if people continue to support this model.

I'm sure they don't wanna play slogged down Halo or GTA any more than the rest of us.

And I was actually going to make a thread on how this the best time for gaming. And I still sorta feel that way. There is a massive wealth of options for gamers to enjoy. But as I really reflect on the industry and the gaming media... Im not so sure anymore. This machine they are trying to create with the gaming industry is a travesty. It absolutely bonkers.

 

[Ultra Magnus]

So lets do something about it!

Twitter campaigns aren't enough. Im talking full on NO BUY BOYCOTT

I been in that boat my friend

 

[Remmy2112]

Calling microtransactions gaming's biggest sin is really hyperbolic and stupid when there are far worse sins out there, and it in itself isn't that bad provided that it is only used to shorten the time it takes to get something that can be obtained through normal play without taking an excessive amount of time. It is not something I would use but I will not fault anyone who wants a cool car or weapon/vehicle unlock (Battlefield 3 shortcuts) but does not have enough time to unlock it in a expedient manner. If they want to spend their money on a shortcut more power to them. It does not affect me, again, so long as it is just an alternate route to something and they don't cripple normal gameplay routes to the same end.

 

[Origami Superman]

I'm doing my part. I've never even bought DLC, or supported a console with a multiplayer paywall.

Sadly many people who complain will still end up shelling out their money.

 

[UberTag]

It does not affect me, again, so long as it is just an alternate route to something and they don't cripple normal gameplay routes to the same end.

It DOES affect you.

Game design is being altered to prompt people to fork over cash for micro-transactions.
You now have to play Forza 5 for 454 hours to get the same experience you would have gotten in 1/5 of the time in previous installments of the game.

You are naive... or you have an agenda. Those are the only two options.

 

[megalowho]

It's only going to get worse and people will keep saying "Don't like it? Don't buy it." until they see how it directly affects the gameplay of the games they're interested in. They'll also eventually get annoyed by the constant "Hey, if you buy this you can blah blah" "press this button to buy blah blah".

Either that, or until they plunk down a chunk of cash in a moment of weakness, end up with nothing to show for it and feel like a damn fool (*cough*masseffect3*cough*)

 

[NullPointer]

Calling microtransactions gaming's biggest sin is really hyperbolic and stupid when there are far worse sins out there, and it in itself isn't that bad provided that it is only used to shorten the time it takes to get something that can be obtained through normal play without taking an excessive amount of time. It is not something I would use but I will not fault anyone who wants a cool car or weapon/vehicle unlock (Battlefield 3 shortcuts) but does not have enough time to unlock it in a expedient manner. If they want to spend their money on a shortcut more power to them. It does not affect me, again, so long as it is just an alternate route to something and they don't cripple normal gameplay routes to the same end.

You know what happens when you pay a company to bypass a hurdle that company itself put in front of you?

You've just paid them to increase the size and quantity of hurdles in the next game.

That's a problem.

 

[DigitalOp]

Calling microtransactions gaming's biggest sin is really hyperbolic and stupid when there are far worse sins out there, and it in itself isn't that bad provided that it is only used to shorten the time it takes to get something that can be obtained through normal play without taking an excessive amount of time. It is not something I would use but I will not fault anyone who wants a cool car or weapon/vehicle unlock (Battlefield 3 shortcuts) but does not have enough time to unlock it in a expedient manner. If they want to spend their money on a shortcut more power to them. It does not affect me, again, so long as it is just an alternate route to something and they don't cripple normal gameplay routes to the same end.

But that is the point. I agree with you as well but they actually are crippling gameplay routes to achieve this.

The unlock times are excessive. Its the only way the model works. They make way less money if they kept it as a healthy alternative to original planned gameplay progression.

Developers need to start thinking of productive and rewarding ways to get people to spend their money. I ALWAYS support those types of endeavors. There are plenty of people who do the same. They don't need to resort to schemes in order to make money. Its destructive to the artform, industry, and community.

Lose, Lose, Lose

 

[TouchMyBox]

The bolded is the part that I always think of. I've always regarded video games as art, but this trend of micro transactions really kills it for me. It really does come off as more of a business than an art.

I can't think of any artful games which engage in this micro transaction psychological warfare.

They're a fantastic litmus test for shit.

 

[Cronox]

It seems pretty clear that for at least the near future, microtransactions are going to be profitable. Thus the only answer is public shaming. Mainstream press should be picking this up and running with it as a news story, or even an "exposé." The primary problem currently is that there is no easy way to distill the problem into a simple catchphrase.

When Mark Cerny went on Jimmy Fallon's show to show Knack on PS4 and Jimmy said "so this is the console that plays used games, right?" and Cerny said yes, that was a huge moment (whether it was slightly misinformed or not), and showed how the campaign against the Xbox One had morphed from a shaming campaign to a public perception of value that was very damaging for Microsoft to not do something about. We would likewise need a shaming campaign with a hash tag as catchy as famous mortimer's...


Ideas?

 

[Cwarrior]

I will not buy a game that supports microtransactions, buying any of these games will only cause publisher to ram more of it into more games getting more disgustingly worse with each game.

Please avoid this microtransactions disease before gaming our hobbie goes rotten to it's core.

 

[Open Source]

I agree. They (usually) actually change the design of the game for the worse, as they now primarily work to open the player's wallet instead of primarily working to entertain the player. (And yes, these are two different things.)

But money talks, and so it will continue, while games that don't offer them (or at least don't design around them) either don't make profits or don't get greenlighted because they don't have the potential to be sufficiently strip-mined.

This is less of a problem on PC and XBLA/PSN, but on the other hand there are fewer top-end titles there.

 

[Blackage]

While I support any anti-microtransactions in full priced video games movement. I feel that the internet is not yet mad enough yet to do anything about it.

Will you all be pissed about it a month from now, will you all do everything in your power to vilify every full priced game that does come out with microtransactions? Will some slip through the cracks that are ok?

Time will tell.

 

[wapplew]

I'm not against all micro-transaction model, some games have great MT model.
like Dota2 and League of Legends, all cosmetic, do not affect game balance at all.

Bad micro-transaction model
- Gamble/randomize box : this is the worst, straight up illegal
- Selling fake money for real money: sell something without making any effort, money printing scam.
- Unlock/Time saver boost: Make game into grind fest.

 

[LakeEarth]

When its on the disk, that's when it goes too far. When the game actively tells you to buy dlc, beyond 'hey there's new dlc, check it out', that's when it gets infuriating.

 

[whitehawk]

I'm not against all micro-transaction model, some of well done one is great.
like Dota2 and League of Legends, all cosmetic, do not affect game balance at all.

Bad micro-transaction model
- Gamble/randomize box : this is the worst, straight up illegal
- Selling fake money for real money: sell something without making any effort, money printing scam.
- Unlock/Time saver boost: Make game into grind fest.

Well, yeah. Dota2 and LoL are free to play though.

 

[quickdevilred]

disagree locked on disc content is far worse
at least microtransactions give me something I haven't already paid for (a fast track)

 

[Htown]

And yet, I'm perfectly fine with them. They're completely optional, so I play any game as if they flat out don't exist. If the game is too grindy, due to them modifying the game to encourage micro's, then it's simply a bad game that I don't buy in the first place.

Except they aren't optional, because every single game with non-cosmetic microtransactions has its gameplay systems altered to push players towards those transactions.

 

[SneakyStephan]

I'm not against all micro-transaction model, some of well done one is great.
like Dota2 and League of Legends, all cosmetic, do not affect game balance at all.

Bad micro-transaction model
- Gamble/randomize box : this is the worst, straight up illegal
- Selling fake money for real money: sell something without making any effort, money printing scam.
- Unlock/Time saver boost: Make game into grind fest.

Those games are free to play to begin with (especially dota is fully free)
this shit is never ok in games you already paid for, ever.

But neither is community splitting multiplayer dlc and online paywalls, and people have bent over and accepted those, so I don't have any hopes for microtransactions to be any different in a few years:\

I will keep boycotting and shaming but people who care or consumers with self respect are too few.

 

[whitehawk]

Ridge Racer Vita had a bad case of this. It came with like 3 cars and 2 tracks. The gold pass (free for NA) had an extra 3, and the Silver I think another 3. They also both came with cars.

Thing is, everything was unlocked from the beginning. When I first got the game, everything was available. With Ridge Racer 1/2, the progression came from winning events which unlocked more tracks and more cars. That progression was replaced with either none at all, or paying for it...

PlayStation All Stars

This game has 2 really strong characters locked behind a $10 entry fee. I paid $60 for the game, and they expect 1/6th of that just for 2 characters. Ugh. Instead of unlock-able characters, we had to pay for them. It really kills the replay value. I enjoyed unlocking all the characters in Smash Brothers Brawl.

 

[VillageBC]

It's impossible for a game that promotes micro-transactions to not have an effect on the game design. If it's purely cosmetic, then the game will ship with dull, lack lustre art aspects to give the micro transactions space. If it's short cuts, then the rest of the game is designed around filler to promote those short cuts.

It's only the naive that believe somehow this takes place in a vacuum and will not affect the full $60 experience.

 

[Phire Phox]

Overreaction much?

 

[Derrick01]

Truth is, games are getting more expensive to make. Microtransactions allow a developer to squeeze a bit more revenue out of a product, thus it probably has the effect of keeping game prices down.

Publishers should be looking at ways to reduce the cost of making games, whether that means less focus on absurd graphics or setpieces or budgeting smarter. They can't keep finding new ways to screw people forever. Eventually it will backfire hard.

 

[NeoGash]

Just so we are clear, didn't GTA V have micro-transactions galore? If so, why was it nowhere near as big of an issue? Honest question, I'm not pointing fingers or defending micro-transactions as I loathe them, but I want to get a bigger picture of what we are complaining about. Is it a matter of how much perceived value a game gives us before micro-transactions become an issue? I suppose in GTA V's case I don't really care as I don't plan on getting the game but it seems to offer a lot of content whereas a game like Forza for instance is a bit light on content. I just want other people's opinions.

 

[DigitalOp]

Overreaction much?

Don't give a damn about the state of your hobby much?

Publishers should be looking at ways to reduce the cost of making games, whether that means less focus on absurd graphics or setpieces or budgeting smarter. They can't keep finding new ways to screw people forever. Eventually it will backfire hard.

I never understood why Publishers don't look towards "making an offer that can't be refused". When you really show a product is packed with content and value, That makes people wanna buy it. That reinforces their decision to click 'Purchase'. These Publishers wanna skimp and expect everyone to buy 2 copies...

Just so we are clear, didn't GTA V have micro-transactions galore? If so, why was it nowhere near as big of an issue? Honest question, I'm not pointing fingers or defending micro-transactions as I loathe them, but I want to get a bigger picture of what we are complaining about. Is it a matter of how much perceived value a game gives us before micro-transactions become an issue? I suppose in GTA V's case I don't really care as I don't plan on getting the game but it seems to offer a lot of content whereas a game like Forza for instance is a bit light on content. I just want other people's opinions.

My biggest issue is when the actual presentation and progression is affected by Micro purchases. If its placed in the game as an alternative means to progression while the original game is intact. Well, there is really nothing to be upset about...

But that doesn't get you more money, does it? So that game is gonna have to slowed down. That weapon has to be 10x weaker. And that boss has to hit 20x harder.

 

[Herbspiceguy]

Companies do this to cover the increasing costs of development. Purely cosmetic microtransactions only work in a few games. So what's the alternative? Higher retail price?

 

[border]

I never understood all the crying and whining about on-disc DLC. What does it really matter how the content is delivered to you? They intended to sell it as a microtransaction either way. Would it suddenly be okay if it were a 600MB patch that you had to download? I'd rather get instant access through a tiny unlock code.

 

[Salamando]

It's only the naive that believe somehow this takes place in a vacuum and will not affect the full $60 experience.

Certainly won't argue that micro's can't and won't affect a game's design. If the game is edited enough that I cease to enjoy playing it, the issue is the game isn't fun. I buy my games based on how much fun I can have with what I have access to, and nothing more. Micro's, no Micro's, all that matters is entertainment.

 

[Salex_]

Overreaction much?

Is this the next thing you're going to downplay?

 

[Acorn]

The only way it will change is when regulators start looking into it. I believe the OFT started looking at it last summer, although they were more coming at it from an accidental child purchase POV iirc.

 

[Derrick01]

Just so we are clear, didn't GTA V have micro-transactions galore? If so, why was it nowhere near as big of an issue? Honest question, I'm not pointing fingers or defending micro-transactions as I loathe them, but I want to get a bigger picture of what we are complaining about. Is it a matter of how much perceived value a game gives us before micro-transactions become an issue? I suppose in GTA V's case I don't really care as I don't plan on getting the game but it seems to offer a lot of content whereas a game like Forza for instance is a bit light on content. I just want other people's opinions.

GTA online had microtransactions and the game design showed. Online was an atrociously designed, endless, soul sucking grind to unlock anything or purchase anything of value. To make it worse when people found (relatively) easy ways to make money Rockstar immediately took it out or nerfed the payout of missions to force them back to the grind.

It's the perfect example of why microtransactions shouldn't be in gaming. Or AAA games at least.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

I'm not against all micro-transaction model, some of well done one is great.
like Dota2 and League of Legends, all cosmetic, do not affect game balance at all.

Bad micro-transaction model
- Gamble/randomize box : this is the worst, straight up illegal
- Selling fake money for real money: sell something without making any effort, money printing scam.
- Unlock/Time saver boost: Make game into grind fest.

For a retail game, Dead Space 3 was pretty great. You could earn everything in-game with no hassle. In fact, it was mostly a background function unless you set out to needlessly grind. Even on Pure Survival mode, I never found myself wanting. The game wasn't altered in a negative fashion, and in fact was an alteration that fans had been talking about since the first Dead Space.

The only bad thing was the ration packs being still tied to EA servers when redeemed through in-game methods for some odd reason. So if EA servers cut off (as they do every hour, on the hour, if not more), then the game warns you that whatever resources you earned aren't saved. That's really more of an issue with EA and online though than the microtransactions themselves.

Which is why I think these "no microtransactions at all" arguments are a bit narrow. There are ways of making it work. As long as the publishers are going to push for it, I'd rather we highlight what works and reign them in first. Otherwise, we just sound like we have our heads in the sand just as much as they do to us.

 

[border]

Companies do this to cover the increasing costs of development. Purely cosmetic microtransactions only work in a few games. So what's the alternative? Higher retail price?

I'd probably rather pay $10-20 more for a "complete" package than have microtranactions that can suck up an endless amount of money by selling you consumable items or consumable currency.

If the consumer backlash is loud and hard enough I hope that ends up being the direction everything goes in. $80 Collector's edition gets you everything, $60 standard edition comes with microtransactions.

 

[Gaz_RB]

I never understood all the crying and whining about on-disc DLC. What does it really matter how the content is delivered to you? They intended to sell it as a microtransaction either way. Would it suddenly be okay if it were a 600MB patch that you had to download? I'd rather get instant access through a tiny unlock code.

Because I bought the disc and if it's already on the disc I don't want to have to pay more money to access it.

 

[CambriaRising]

Is this the next thing you're going to downplay?

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=91314076&postcount=3

 

[border]

GTA online had microtransactions and the game design showed. Online was an atrociously designed, endless, soul sucking grind to unlock anything or purchase anything of value..

GTAV didn't seem that bad to me. You could purchase in-game currency, but you still had to play and level up to even unlock the stuff that you could spend the money on. But then I didn't really play that much of GTA Online.

I think that game's problem was more that the online gameplay itself was kinda garbage. If it were fun I don't think you'd be as likely to call it a grind.

 

[whitehawk]

I never understood all the crying and whining about on-disc DLC. What does it really matter how the content is delivered to you? They intended to sell it as a microtransaction either way. Would it suddenly be okay if it were a 600MB patch that you had to download? I'd rather get instant access through a tiny unlock code.

There isn't really a difference between on-disc DLC and day one DLC, except proof. Most gamers are upset that the content was finished alongside the game and locked behind a pay wall. This is opposed to finishing the game and saying "Hey, lets make some more content for later release!" When the DLC is on disc, that's proof the extra content was finished the same time as the core game.

See this video. Developers saying that DLC was developed after the game was finished. With a few tweaks, the DLC is playable with the content on the disc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2Wu2YgQUf8

 

[border]

Because I bought the disc and if it's already on the disc I don't want to have to pay more money to access it.

So if Capcom sells you a Street Fighter new character that's on the disc that's horrible. But if you download the character it's fine? You're just quibbling over the delivery method at that point.

 

[Sean*O]

Sony or MS if they have the balls might enforce a regulatory labeling if a game contains microtransactions that may or may not effect or limit gameplay. Not disclosing it will hurt the console platform as a whole, and a few greedy sellout developer/publishers pushing some crap games shouldn't be allowed to spoil the whole batch for everyone.

 

[KyanMehwulfe]

Truth is, games are getting more expensive to make. Microtransactions allow a developer to squeeze a bit more revenue out of a product, thus it probably has the effect of keeping game prices down.

Then sell genuine new content post-release. Release the game earlier with less content.

Don't leverage the XP Grind or rare cars to exploit your most dedicated fans.

Micro-transactions are fine and can work. But this type of micro-transaction that seems to be coming is incredibly insulting to gamer who cares about challenge, achievements, and is educated enough about content and development to know when he or she is being exploited.

At least do it like Killer Instinct, selling it at a decreased price and charging for characters later. But the way Forza is leveraging its XP grind and rare cars is just in poor form and disrespectful.

And yes, I don't like it so I won't buy Forza. And I will buy Killer Insinct. I do that, and write this, not to change this Forza, but to contribute to the discussion of the next Forza. I don't want to have to "not pay" -- that's a terribile solution from one passionate gamer to another. It's the first step, sadly, for now, but the real solution is not to not pay and shut up -- it's to not pay and express your opinion so that you don't even have to ask that question next time around.

I'm fine with micro-transactions. I've used them in MMOs, or cellphone games. I have friends that have. I have friends that have spent over $100K USD in Chinese RPGs. I am not against micro-transactions. I like the way KI seems to do it so far. But what I don't like is being expecting to pay $60 to have the publisher leverage their boring XP grind to market their XP Boost and 'fast super car access', effectively. There's a classier way to do micro-transactions, and then there's a easier way that abuses the consumers you should be giving the best treatment to. That's something I really didn't expect this November, and it's very discouraging.

 

[NeoGash]

My biggest issue is when the actual presentation and progression is affected by Micro purchases. If its placed in the game as an alternative means to progression while the original game is intact. Well, there is really nothing to be upset about...

But that doesn't get you more money, does it? So that game is gonna have to slowed down. That weapon has to be 10x weaker. And that boss has to hit 20x harder.

Yeah, in the case of Forza it is easier for me to relate. They actually took away a lot of things that Forza fans were used to in previous game just so that they could sell things to you, which is disgraceful. I think we have to discuss whether we should be against ALL micro-transactions or perhaps let them slide if the developers temper that with some free content as well. I think I'd prefer zero MT, because I don't trust the EA's, the Activision's and the Microsoft's of the world to not abuse them.