Some games are using a bait scheme where you pay for the game and suddenly after a certain amount of missions it gets impossible or extremely hard to progress without paying as I described in my post
That's why I like the Avernum series. You get to play a good chunk of the game for free (maybe 30 hours). After that, it's about $20 to $30 for the whole thing. We're talking, with sidequests, probably 150 hours of game play and a HUGE game world RPG, which is now on it's 3rd or 4th remake.
Maybe a mod should split this discussion away from Fallout 76 as we’ve veered very much off topic.
As we are no longer taking about cosmetic micro transactions which IMO are completely fine, to P2W micro transactions which IMO fall into a grey area.
@mlnevese that’s shitty. I’d personally understand if the game was F2P, but bottlenecking progress like that is inappropriate. If anything, you should write a detailed review of what happened on the games APP page to warn others of it. Usually when I encounter such mechanics, I am like “ok, see you in 3 days!” But if you are immersed in the game I can see how being forced to take a break is wrong.
Perhaps because they are playing with their guild. Or because toil now means more reward later. Or because they want mastery over something? Fun is not always the same thing as reward.
Playing with their guild equates to peer pressure, or forced peer pressure (if you do not participate all these people will be worse off). Unless it’s a bunch of friends running around at a set time, you really shouldn’t care and if they are friends you should be able to voice your displeasure about the game.
Toil now means more reward later is a giant trap. There will always be toil and what you are doing is investing more time (which could be spent on other rewarding activities) just for the hope that the payoff will be worth it in the end. If the reward isn’t enough, a player’s mind is now saying, I’ve already spent X amount of hours getting to this point, which will be wasted if I stop now. The next reward looks promising and it’ll only take Y amount of time to get there so let’s toil away and hope it gets better. Which turns into, I really want to see the end game but I don’t want to commit anymore time to it, if I pay $5 now I can bypass this part... you no longer want to play, you just want the reward or feeling of accomplishment.
The mastery over something is another trap. You’re the one who mentioned it, but psychologicalist use that want of mastery and accomplishment against the player. If a player can recognize that the only reason why they are playing this game is for that feeling, and their inclined to give money to get to that feeling then you are in a trap and your best course of action is to stop playing and try to get that feeling from somewhere else.
I get the “getting a high” after beating a challenge. Out of all the games I reviewed last year, Chicku was probably my favourite because it checked all the boxes that I like when it came to gaming. It also released a nice bit of Dopamine everytime I finished a level because of its challenging nature.
But challenge and toiling around are not the same thing. If a person is not putting a real skill set (chicku, hand eye coordination) into the challenge its not really a challenge. If you’re sitting there saying “I need X to pass this part and I can either get X by buying it, or toiling for 12 more hours” it isn’t a challenge. You are paying for that feeling of accomplishment one way or another. If you enjoy what the toil is (I get to smash more Orcs, I get to test my brain with match 3 gameplay) then it isn’t really a toil but something you personally enjoy.
Paying microtransactions is a choice, but that doesn't mean the choice should be there. People also have the choice to use tobacco or gamble, but these things are worth condemning and worth restricting--personally, I would prefer to ban them outright, if it could be done. It's possible for things to be addictive without being pleasurable, and generally speaking, microtransactions qualify. People, whether they're the type who are willing to pay microtransactions or the people who aren't willing, have more fun when they pay for the full game up front. The reason microtransactions continue to exist is because of addictive behavior patterns that can be exploited--not because microtransactions are good for any players.
It's true that we keep complaining about these things and yet they continue to exist. Gobs of people hate microtransactions, yet developers still make money by including them. But I think these complaints are still important: they serve as a public service announcement warning people to be careful about microtransactions and to realize that some video games are, yes, designed to squeeze money out of people while giving nothing in return.
If these few comments on this small forum discourage a single person from shelling out their hard-earned money for addictive but unfulfilling microtransactions, I'd consider that a good deed.
If these few comments on this small forum discourage a single person from shelling out their hard-earned money for addictive but unfulfilling microtransactions, I'd consider that a good deed.
If these few comments on this small forum discourage a single person from shelling out their hard-earned money for addictive but unfulfilling microtransactions, I'd consider that a good deed.
Winners Don't Buy Microtransactions.
If we wanted to go with the public shaming route, we could take it a step further: "Losers Buy Microtransactions."
I hate microtransactions as much as anyone (well, maybe not as much as anyone, but I do hate them). Moreso than that, I hate the limited-time content that creates a fake sense of urgency to play service games NOW. It has what has caused me to finally say goodbye (at least until Classic comes out) to my favorite fantasy universe of Azeroth, and a game that has been a constant in my life for over a decade, World of Warcraft.
There is so much good about this game. The art design, the peerless music, the fluid gameplay, the charm oozing from it's pores. And yet, for the last few expansions, they have started making certain things (including hugely important quests lore-wise) unobtainable after a certain date, usually when a new expansion hits. What has driven me away is that Blizzard is a company that caters to people with a completionist mindset, yet deliberately removes content from games based on artificial time-frames so you can't EVER actually complete what you want to if you miss even a few months of game-time. The last straw was recently. I was fine with them selling mounts and pets in the cash shop. But then over Christmas, they put together a pack of a number of them on sale, selling it by saying they were "going into the vault" on January 6th. And I saw this game played when I was a kid with Disney and VHS tapes. Creating artificial scarcity for digital goods is not the Blizzard that made Warcraft 2, Diablo 2 and Starcraft. It signals it is now a company that has been completely consumed by Activision. It pains me to see it happen.
If these few comments on this small forum discourage a single person from shelling out their hard-earned money for addictive but unfulfilling microtransactions, I'd consider that a good deed.
Winners Don't Buy Microtransactions.
If we wanted to go with the public shaming route, we could take it a step further: "Losers Buy Microtransactions."
Depends on DLC. If it's new features and mechanics, then it's worth it imo. Especially if the game is actually all about gameplay (aka strategy), and not storyline (aka what RPG has been reduced to), so you can keep replaying it indefinitely.
When it comes to DLC I mostly just wait until the GOTY Edition is on sale.
It's not like there are no other games to play in the meantime.
When I think of Microtransactions I think of the Single Use Easy Fatalities from Mortal Kombat X, Loot Boxes and everything in association with Farmville.
So I guess we have to ask what actually constitutes a microtransaction, vs DLC, vs additional content.
I'm fine with microtransactions as long as: - They don't impact gameplay balance. Selling a costume or another hairstyle is ok, selling the Godbow isn't. - The game doesn't aggressively market them to you. Someone mentioned Dungeon Keeper mobile and its hours of waiting for everything but I'd like to remind people of Assassin's Creed: Unity requiring you to whip out your phone and log in to uPlay everytime you opened a treasure chest. Now that's intrusive shit. - They don't use them as an excuse for always-online DRM. Not a problem being online for a multiplayer mode but online for single player content? Screw that, no buy for me.
Depends on DLC. If it's new features and mechanics, then it's worth it imo. Especially if the game is actually all about gameplay (aka strategy), and not storyline (aka what RPG has been reduced to), so you can keep replaying it indefinitely.
And that’s the problem. What is something people will/should pay money for and what should be just added to the base game for free?
Everyone has their opinion but no one knows where the line is, especially not even game publishers as Battlefront II quickly highlighted, but they are going to continue to push it until they do know.
And if enough people throw money at it, even with everyone else raging about it, publishers will keep doing it.
I've been playing Elvenar for a while now. It's a "Build your Town, complete Quests, etc." When you join the game, you start out with 100 diamonds. Diamonds can substitute for goods you are missing or pay to speed up production. When you complete the first 18 quests, you get another 100 diamonds. I've been playing for, maybe 6 weeks now. Out of the 200 diamonds, I have 40 left. You can buy these things with real money. I haven't bought any, nor do I wish to. Things take longer without Diamonds. I can wait. I also took part in a Winter Event, where you did extra winter quests to get Snowflakes (which you could also purchase with Real Money. No, thanks.) I did okay for myself. I'm having fun, and ducking every microtransaction they try to shill me.
I'm not in competition with anyone. And I'm still enjoying myself. I view this as a win.
What about this new trend of making digital itens limited in quantity to justify its prices.
Do you want that nice sword? Well you can't get in game and there are only 3 left for sale at the nice price of U$ 19,99... Buy while stocks last!
Although my example is fictional things like this are happening in many games, mainly MMOs.
I actually think this practise might be able to be challenged in a Compition Bureau as their is no way a digital item (that can be copied can sell out).
However, if the item was already advertised as a limited quantity item to allow their purchasers something unique to stand out in the online server, that maybe something they can fight for, but I think the company has to list it as such from the get go.
That’s the thing with online games. People will bitch in forums, but won’t bitch to people who can make a difference such as in Canada:
oh, amusingly enough, this is 100% on me btw, but I bought the $7.99 Wildcards DLC for Pathfinder: Kingmaker and my brain parses Tieflings as "Pay To Win" bc I ran Pathfinder for many years and tested the waters with minor changes to the PC's with the racebuilding optional rules and Tieflings specifically are a 13 Racial Point Featured Race (with some subraces like Oni-Spawn or Daemon-Spawn being imo more powerful) which in general terms this number means "Whoa, there, DM. This is more powerful than average. Be cautious and selective as if you want to let a PC play as this." I got it for the new companion and new story options but just this nagging part of my brain says I bought a powerful race.
but Aasimars are a 15 RP Featured Race that is standard in the game so w/eeee
oh, amusingly enough, this is 100% on me btw, but I bought the $7.99 Wildcards DLC for Pathfinder: Kingmaker and my brain parses Tieflings as "Pay To Win"
I guess thats an interesting thought but, well, look at the nature of the product. Kingmaker lets you make the game so easy your characters might as well be invincible, so a dlc race having a stat advantage is pretty innocuous. I did get the DLC, though I wonder if they charged a little bit high for a race/class and companion w/romance and quest. On the other hand, you can't accuse the game of lacking in content (now being buggy and unbalanced, but that was definitely the publisher's fault forcing an early release) so selling some extra content being upfront about what you get with it isn't necessarily scummy.
But yeah I find a lot of modern gaming anti-consumer practices disgusting and I WANT said companies to go out of business like tomorrow. Scorched Earth shit, because we're long past the point that these companies offer anything good to the world.
There is one game that does this right, and it is Path of Exile. The game is entirely funded on cosmetic microtransactions, yet is also completely free, which is kind of insane when you take into account how frequent the updates are and how much content there is. It can be argued if you want to be serious about the endgame, you probably should plop down at least $20 for extra stash tabs, but as a casual player you in no way NEED them (indeed, the default stash space is already magnitudes larger than what is offered in Diablo 2 or Torchlight 2, and is on par with Grim Dawn). And, frankly, if you are far enough into Path of Exile that you are out of default stash space, the fact you aren't giving Grinding Gear Games a measly $20 for what could easily be a fully-priced $50 game is just you being cheap.
My opinion is that I'm entirely too susceptible to buying cosmetic graphical enhancements on impulse for my characters in free-to-play games. I've dropped at least 200 bucks in total that I could ill afford to waste like that on Path of Exile and Neverwinter.
It always starts when I tell myself, "I'll just buy this one thing, because it looks really cool and I'll enjoy it. It's only $5. It's only $10. Wait, this pet is awesome and it's only $20, and it even gives fighting bonuses." Before I know it, my spending on cosmetic enhancements has gone from an intended $40 or so ("I'm just paying them fair market price for this wonderful AAA game, after all."), to more than $100, before I realize what is happening and I cut myself off from that game.
I'm exactly the kind of sucker the free-to-play developers are aiming at. Microtransactions are very addictive, and seeing my character look more awesome is like a drug hit to me. It gets worse if you're only buying a *chance* for the thing, which amounts to gambling, and if the base game was not in fact free-to-play, but a full price title. So far, I haven't fallen for any of the full-price microtransaction scams.
The practice is only going to stop when we gaming consumers stop paying for it, which is unlikely, given the psychology of behaviorism, gambling, and addiction. I'd say microtransactions are here to stay. "There's a sucker born every minute."
For me to spend money on a game, it really has to be something I want...like when I played duo and I wanted the green power set, bought it, I was able to keep myself from buying the arcane poweraet though.
Very few times I actually bother with buying things in game.
Lately I've seen online decision making games that are free but you pay for extra dialogue options. It comes to me "what if they started doing it with rpg games?"
For me that would surely ruin the game and I would not pay for it.
Lately I've seen online decision making games that are free but you pay for extra dialogue options. It comes to me "what if they started doing it with rpg games?"
For me that would surely ruin the game and I would not pay for it.
I can see EA pulling a “Max out Paragon for $4.99. Unlock all of Shepard’s Paragon dialogue options as well a lower all shop prices for this amount.”
In ME2, usually to have these unlocked, a person had to either import Shepard from ME game or already go through one play through of the game. I can see someone paying for this option that wouldn’t hinder other players.
I can also see a “fourth/fifth” fully voice acted dialog option being introduced as a dlc after the game was released. Shepard’s/Hawks cocky/stoic voice sets only $14.99. Experience Mass Effect in a new light with a completely new voice over dialog options.
Once again, doesn’t take anything from the game, fixes one of the complaints people have about these games and something people can live without but easily marketable. Perfect DLC content IMO.
It's a game thats looks like a soap opera , where someone starts talking to you (usually romantic and funny situations) and you choose the dialogue options.
About Path of Exile, note that PoE receive more content on a first abril joke than D3 on years... D3 was my greatest disappointment as i've already said on other threads but honestly, i don't think that PoE microtransaction and predatory progression based lootbox are in the same level.
One thing that i hated is that ESRB will put "in-Game Purchases" label on everything who have "in-game purchases", so an 50+ hours expansion with tons of new assets, an F2P game who allow you to purchase an non add plan and an lootbox based progression will receive the same label. This is awful. Should be an big warrning "this product uses gambling like mechanics and is not recommended for people under 21 years old or with gambling addiction"
It's a game thats looks like a soap opera , where someone starts talking to you (usually romantic and funny situations) and you choose the dialogue options.
is that like a visual novel? can you give an example? I like choice & consequence games even if that's the sole means of gameplay
Comments
did any of yall see what he's doing with Queen's Wish? I'm way hype
As we are no longer taking about cosmetic micro transactions which IMO are completely fine, to P2W micro transactions which IMO fall into a grey area.
@mlnevese that’s shitty. I’d personally understand if the game was F2P, but bottlenecking progress like that is inappropriate. If anything, you should write a detailed review of what happened on the games APP page to warn others of it.
Usually when I encounter such mechanics, I am like “ok, see you in 3 days!” But if you are immersed in the game I can see how being forced to take a break is wrong.
@voidofopinion Playing with their guild equates to peer pressure, or forced peer pressure (if you do not participate all these people will be worse off). Unless it’s a bunch of friends running around at a set time, you really shouldn’t care and if they are friends you should be able to voice your displeasure about the game.
Toil now means more reward later is a giant trap. There will always be toil and what you are doing is investing more time (which could be spent on other rewarding activities) just for the hope that the payoff will be worth it in the end. If the reward isn’t enough, a player’s mind is now saying, I’ve already spent X amount of hours getting to this point, which will be wasted if I stop now. The next reward looks promising and it’ll only take Y amount of time to get there so let’s toil away and hope it gets better. Which turns into, I really want to see the end game but I don’t want to commit anymore time to it, if I pay $5 now I can bypass this part... you no longer want to play, you just want the reward or feeling of accomplishment.
The mastery over something is another trap. You’re the one who mentioned it, but psychologicalist use that want of mastery and accomplishment against the player. If a player can recognize that the only reason why they are playing this game is for that feeling, and their inclined to give money to get to that feeling then you are in a trap and your best course of action is to stop playing and try to get that feeling from somewhere else.
I get the “getting a high” after beating a challenge. Out of all the games I reviewed last year, Chicku was probably my favourite because it checked all the boxes that I like when it came to gaming. It also released a nice bit of Dopamine everytime I finished a level because of its challenging nature.
But challenge and toiling around are not the same thing. If a person is not putting a real skill set (chicku, hand eye coordination) into the challenge its not really a challenge. If you’re sitting there saying “I need X to pass this part and I can either get X by buying it, or toiling for 12 more hours” it isn’t a challenge. You are paying for that feeling of accomplishment one way or another. If you enjoy what the toil is (I get to smash more Orcs, I get to test my brain with match 3 gameplay) then it isn’t really a toil but something you personally enjoy.
It's true that we keep complaining about these things and yet they continue to exist. Gobs of people hate microtransactions, yet developers still make money by including them. But I think these complaints are still important: they serve as a public service announcement warning people to be careful about microtransactions and to realize that some video games are, yes, designed to squeeze money out of people while giving nothing in return.
If these few comments on this small forum discourage a single person from shelling out their hard-earned money for addictive but unfulfilling microtransactions, I'd consider that a good deed.
There is so much good about this game. The art design, the peerless music, the fluid gameplay, the charm oozing from it's pores. And yet, for the last few expansions, they have started making certain things (including hugely important quests lore-wise) unobtainable after a certain date, usually when a new expansion hits. What has driven me away is that Blizzard is a company that caters to people with a completionist mindset, yet deliberately removes content from games based on artificial time-frames so you can't EVER actually complete what you want to if you miss even a few months of game-time. The last straw was recently. I was fine with them selling mounts and pets in the cash shop. But then over Christmas, they put together a pack of a number of them on sale, selling it by saying they were "going into the vault" on January 6th. And I saw this game played when I was a kid with Disney and VHS tapes. Creating artificial scarcity for digital goods is not the Blizzard that made Warcraft 2, Diablo 2 and Starcraft. It signals it is now a company that has been completely consumed by Activision. It pains me to see it happen.
It's not like there are no other games to play in the meantime.
When I think of Microtransactions I think of the Single Use Easy Fatalities from Mortal Kombat X, Loot Boxes and everything in association with Farmville.
So I guess we have to ask what actually constitutes a microtransaction, vs DLC, vs additional content.
- They don't impact gameplay balance. Selling a costume or another hairstyle is ok, selling the Godbow isn't.
- The game doesn't aggressively market them to you. Someone mentioned Dungeon Keeper mobile and its hours of waiting for everything but I'd like to remind people of Assassin's Creed: Unity requiring you to whip out your phone and log in to uPlay everytime you opened a treasure chest. Now that's intrusive shit.
- They don't use them as an excuse for always-online DRM. Not a problem being online for a multiplayer mode but online for single player content? Screw that, no buy for me.
Everyone has their opinion but no one knows where the line is, especially not even game publishers as Battlefront II quickly highlighted, but they are going to continue to push it until they do know.
And if enough people throw money at it, even with everyone else raging about it, publishers will keep doing it.
Do you want that nice sword? Well you can't get in game and there are only 3 left for sale at the nice price of U$ 19,99... Buy while stocks last!
Although my example is fictional things like this are happening in many games, mainly MMOs.
I'm not in competition with anyone. And I'm still enjoying myself. I view this as a win.
However, if the item was already advertised as a limited quantity item to allow their purchasers something unique to stand out in the online server, that maybe something they can fight for, but I think the company has to list it as such from the get go.
That’s the thing with online games. People will bitch in forums, but won’t bitch to people who can make a difference such as in Canada:
http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/02776.html
but Aasimars are a 15 RP Featured Race that is standard in the game so w/eeee
But yeah I find a lot of modern gaming anti-consumer practices disgusting and I WANT said companies to go out of business like tomorrow. Scorched Earth shit, because we're long past the point that these companies offer anything good to the world.
If it's cosmetic and don't actually effect the core function of the game, than I don't care.
If its not loot boxes or effectively gambling which holds a small percentage of getting the thing the player really wants, get rid of it.
Of its something meant to give one player a competitive advantage in pvp over another, get rid of it.
But honestly its the player not the company who should have better control over their own wallet.
It always starts when I tell myself, "I'll just buy this one thing, because it looks really cool and I'll enjoy it. It's only $5. It's only $10. Wait, this pet is awesome and it's only $20, and it even gives fighting bonuses." Before I know it, my spending on cosmetic enhancements has gone from an intended $40 or so ("I'm just paying them fair market price for this wonderful AAA game, after all."), to more than $100, before I realize what is happening and I cut myself off from that game.
I'm exactly the kind of sucker the free-to-play developers are aiming at. Microtransactions are very addictive, and seeing my character look more awesome is like a drug hit to me. It gets worse if you're only buying a *chance* for the thing, which amounts to gambling, and if the base game was not in fact free-to-play, but a full price title. So far, I haven't fallen for any of the full-price microtransaction scams.
The practice is only going to stop when we gaming consumers stop paying for it, which is unlikely, given the psychology of behaviorism, gambling, and addiction. I'd say microtransactions are here to stay. "There's a sucker born every minute."
Very few times I actually bother with buying things in game.
For me that would surely ruin the game and I would not pay for it.
In ME2, usually to have these unlocked, a person had to either import Shepard from ME game or already go through one play through of the game. I can see someone paying for this option that wouldn’t hinder other players.
I can also see a “fourth/fifth” fully voice acted dialog option being introduced as a dlc after the game was released. Shepard’s/Hawks cocky/stoic voice sets only $14.99. Experience Mass Effect in a new light with a completely new voice over dialog options.
Once again, doesn’t take anything from the game, fixes one of the complaints people have about these games and something people can live without but easily marketable. Perfect DLC content IMO.
https://kotaku.com/call-of-dutys-latest-microtransaction-is-a-tiny-red-dot-1831487105
About Path of Exile, note that PoE receive more content on a first abril joke than D3 on years... D3 was my greatest disappointment as i've already said on other threads but honestly, i don't think that PoE microtransaction and predatory progression based lootbox are in the same level.
One thing that i hated is that ESRB will put "in-Game Purchases" label on everything who have "in-game purchases", so an 50+ hours expansion with tons of new assets, an F2P game who allow you to purchase an non add plan and an lootbox based progression will receive the same label. This is awful. Should be an big warrning "this product uses gambling like mechanics and is not recommended for people under 21 years old or with gambling addiction"
"That includes bonus levels, skins, "surprise items" like loot boxes or mystery rewards, music, in-game currency, subscriptions, season passes, and upgrades that enable extra features or eliminate ads. "https://www.pcgamer.com/esrb-tackles-loot-boxes-with-a-new-in-game-purchases-label/