594
Nearly 90% Of Developers Surveyed Say Premium Games Don't Need Microtransactions
(insider-gaming.com)
this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
594 points (99.0% liked)
Games
16813 readers
478 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Honestly, I'm all for horse armor. Oblivion didn't do anything stupid like requiring an internet connection, and I could easily ignore the horse armor as horrendous value for my dollar. It's way worse when they're prioritizing "engagement" via battle passes or legalized gambling for children via loot boxes.
Tell that to literally every lake ever... When several slopes join together, you can, in fact, drown down slope.
It gave your horse extra health actually, so not purely cosmetic. But I think in a single player game that also has extremely good modding tools, it doesn't really matter. If you want to pay to win your single player game, you do you.
Horse armour was mostly a landmark for showing companies that consumers were willing to pay for micro stuff like that. The potential return vs effort invested was crazy. Todd himself said that they try doing nice DLC that gives you good value for your money, but it's hard to justify business-wise when the horse armour is so cheap to make and sells so well.
It didn't start with horse armor. And even then, while clearly stupid, it wasn't egregious in the way modern mtx is. It was just a poorly priced optional cosmetic DLC. Modern mtx is a whole other beast, where companies use every psychological trick in the book to get people addicted to gambling.
Oh, it had like an inventory functionality? I love Oblivion, but I obviously didn't get the armor and don't remember the details. I suspect it also provided defense for the horse? In that case it's almost approaching Assassin's Creed's "buy xp to skip grind" level of egregiousness, but still just a DLC.
Could you please explain? Now I'm curious.
I didn't find any references to "cache". That's the part I want to understand, what the significance of that part of the joke. Why "cache"?
Ah, as in it provides respect? And sounds like cash? I know, I know, dissecting jokes is a lot of fun.
Cachet.
Horse armor was not cosmetic. It was armor.
Otherwise, spot-on. At least people who paid for horse armor got a whole new file for something that was not already in the damn game. Nowadays you're already looking at the thing, and you're getting gouged for the ability to say you have it.
Horse armor came out in 2006. Micro transactions started in 2002 with Maple Story. Plenty of other games had micro transactions by then. Horse armor was a peak when Microsoft drove too hard and consumers pushed back- it was far from the start.
wait, did microsoft own bethesda back then?
No, but they had a very close relationship. Morrowind was an Xbox exclusive. Oblivion was a timed Xbox exclusive that was supposed to be a 360 launch title that got delayed (the Horse Armor fiasco happened in 2006, while Oblivion didn't release on PS3 until 2007).