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
406 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
No because that slippery slope is how we got to current day microtransactions.
the alternative is the content just /not/ being there period though. A studio isn't going to just supply the content for free, by having the MT's there it's increasing content to a game. The studios are abusing it sure, but just don't buy it. I've never once spent money on any of my games for a MT that should have been base game. I have to say I haven't had any issue with it. It's there for the people who want to throw money away, and as long as it isn't impacting me, I don't care. I would rather have the option available for people to use it, then no option at all.
At the end of the day, Money talks, the studios that are abusing it are doing so because people are willing to throw money away like that. A better solution is to just not partake in the game, let the people who throw money away do their thing, just don't buy those types of games IMO
Somehow it existed for decades prior to DLC and online shops existing.
The Timesplitters series was practically founded on having so many characters and variants to unlock.
This argument just doesn't hold water.
That's just it, you have more items in the games with microtransactions than what you had originally.
At the end of the day you gain more items by having the system in place meaning you have more content, now at the end of the day it's optional content usually and by all means you don't need it but to say that this content would have been in the game regardless just isn't true.
I'm going to use Call of Duty as an example because that is what I saw microtransactions in the most growing up, and even that didn't start until the I think it was ghosts(?)
they still provide standard Cosmetics that you can put on your guns, there's still supplying your standard skins and now you have the option to purchase more skins, that is content that they would not have added to the game otherwise, it wasn't until they introduced that microtransaction style system that most the options hit the table
Hell RuneScape even had microtransactions, and that games 23 years old now(granted it's a hybrid F2P). You need to purchase in game currency to be able to do specific things and afford some of the items
Sorry man, this is just counterfactual.
I'm glad you feel this way I guess, but before you were born and well into the PS3 and 360 gen, games were still releasing with tons of cosmetic unlocks.
The RPG leveling system of Modern Warfare and the push to tie in game unlocks to your online progression dovetailed with selling skins and cosmetics across the industry. If you were a gamer on the PS2 and the 360 era the difference was like night and day. It's why people were bowled over when games like Spiderman included so many costumes because the pressure to monetize these would normally be massive.
But somehow, they included dozens of unique designs and outfits without it bankrupting the company. Just like the decades of games prior to the DLC era had. Like magic.
I might have to look into the older game systems I guess i did indeed miss a few of the old school systems, It's not like I missed most of the gaming era though, my first PC I ever used was a Windows 96, then an XP which I fell in love with (gearhead garage is still one of the best mechanic game you can find[but you'll have to virtualize it for it to run], same with flight sim 04 and train simulator 1 in terms of simulators). and I grew up with every playstation and nintendo(which I now boycott) product made so far. Basically every system I've used has had the ability to buy DLC or expansion packs though, with the exception of the ps1/2, I guess I just don't see how thats that much different from the current day MT's. buy it once in bulk via an additional disk with a serial key, or buy it individually, but I can't say I remember any of my games giving the amount of content that games now have without any extra cost. It's always been either super basic cosmetic customization, or a paid DLC
I just haven't had that experience with the games I've played. It's always been the opposite for me. Maybe it was for the best. Every once and awhile I boot up my ps2 cause thats the oldest system i still carry, but like the simplicity of that platform just doesn't do it, the nostalgic feel can only go so far.
Just wanna throw it out there that the Monster Hunter series is a perfect example of in game free content becoming microtransactions in just a few years.
Old MH games had all cosmetic items as free event quest rewards, where you'd get a unique and fun battle to play, and a cosmetic reward for winning. No paid DLC even available to buy. MH Rise (the newest game) has 221 paid cosmetic items listed on their site. That number is not including bundles, soundtracks, character edit vouchers, or the expansion (Sunbreak) itself.
$60 game, $40 expansion, and 200+ paid cosmetics that would instead be free in earlier games in the series.
I have to apologize in advance, cuz I haven't played a monster hunter game since the PS2, I started playing world but I just didn't like it. That being said I know the PS2 version of Monster Hunter didn't have a whole lot(in terms of cosmetics) but again it's PS2. And I know that monster hunter world had some items available, and that rise is where it apparently was really hit with microtransactions. But from what I understand with monster hunter rise they gave the base cosmetic sets that they normally would have gave with the game, they just offered the paid expansion for the additional skins. Now being as I never actually played rise could be dead wrong on that but Google searching it seems to have given me the same answer.
Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate (released 2018 outside of JP) had a ton of dlc quest unlocks and they were all totally free. It's proving difficult to find a proper separated list of exactly how many, but here's a google doc that lists ~200 quest related equipment unlocks, the vast majority of which are dlc: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hlBLacFYxdh83a-GkxYnsIF6nH7huP_H2aI4APRGicg/edit?gid=408012748#gid=408012748
Something noteworthy is that's just quests for equipment. In contrast, there's only 37 event quests (all event quests are free) in Rise that offer any unique item reward, and 23 of those quests give equipment.
Giving a very conservative estimate with that all in mind, I think it's safe to say that GU had a good five times more free dlc rewards than Rise does.