EA Will Be Adding Micro-transactions in all Future Games

[Guest]

You'll be seeing more micro-transactions in EA's games in the future.

EA Will Be Adding Micro-transactions in all Future Games : Read more

 

[Suzaku]

Yup even more reason to boycott anything EA.

 

[underpatch]

Well I have not baught a EA game since Origin.

The tighter your grip the more gamers will slip throught your fingers!

 

[hardcore_gamer]

I guess BF3 will be my last EA game.

 

[magnetite]

EA just like any business is in business to make money. I don't see how this is any different than someone like Valve having people buy hats and such for TF2. They did that before the game went F2P.

 

[kawininjazx]

Well you could say it helps the people who don't have as much time to play, but it's all a scheme to make more money, which is understandable since they are a business. I'm just sick of buying a game and then having to spend even more getting maps and weapons everyone else has.

 

[bllue]

I don't see why anyone's surprised. Microtransactions have been a huge huge trend in the industry for the last 3 years of years. Companies rake in millions from microtransactions...see Riot Games (League of Legends) and Valve (TF2) for example. It's only a matter of time before this system penetrates more into games. It's a model that makes a lot of money because people like to buy that stuff.

 

[Guest]

I bet SimCIty will use micro-transactions.

 

[wanderer11]

For everyone comparing it to TF2 keep in mind that is a F2P game. Having microtransactions in a $60 game is just greedy. Looks like I will never buy another EA game.

 

[jordanjkj]

Free to play doesn't bother me as much as pay to win models. Where someone can pay to have better stuff that you normally don't get in game. Or where you can pay more money to have a better gaming experience. 'cough' dead space 3 'cough'

 

[wannabepro]

EA, I am dissapoint.

Althought I expected this from you.

 

[Guest]

The problem with micro transactions is the game then becomes balanced around said transactions. Most games include some forms of grinding from time to time, but if there's a micro transaction to skip the grind then the game developer is incentivized to make that grind longer or less fun than it otherwise would be to persuade more gamers to take the micro transaction route. This ends up ruining the playability for those who have not and will not ever use the micro transaction "feature".

 

[revered]

[citation][nom]magnetite[/nom]EA just like any business is in business to make money. I don't see how this is any different than someone like Valve having people buy hats and such for TF2. They did that before the game went F2P.[/citation]
I'm tired of reading from people defending game publishers and developers citing that they are 'in the business of making money.' They are in the business of making games for the enjoyment of consumers. Their hope is that they make money from this. Gamers are becoming more unhappy with the the results of such companies because they are producing games with making money in mind, not the enjoyment of the consumer.
If they stopped trying to stuff features into a game that are so clearly designed towards jumping their profits up and compromising the design of the game then they would a produce a better quality game with the time they saved and most likely end up making more money from satisfied players anyways as players flock to such a rare title.

 

[JamesSneed]

I only agree with this model when the stuff you can buy gives no or very little in game advantage. Like say different color cloths etc. That way everyone who wants to skip the micro transactions can without being at a disadvantage.

I really hate this new trend where you pay more for a game either up front premium package or later in microtransactions to have an advantage. To me it just defeats the purpose of it being a fun thing one does after a hard day at work.

 

[lunix]

[citation][nom]magnetite[/nom]EA just like any business is in business to make money. I don't see how this is any different than someone like Valve having people buy hats and such for TF2. They did that before the game went F2P.[/citation]

When you only have access to certain advantages (not content, but power) through paying, that's called Pay to Win and is ev0l.

If you can pretty up your character without an advantages over non-paying players, that's fine by me. No one forces me to wear a hat.

 

[bllue]

[citation][nom]revered[/nom]I'm tired of reading from people defending game publishers and developers citing that they are 'in the business of making money.' They are in the business of making games for the enjoyment of consumers. Their hope is that they make money from this. Gamers are becoming more unhappy with the the results of such companies because they are producing games with making money in mind, not the enjoyment of the consumer.If they stopped trying to stuff features into a game that are so clearly designed towards jumping their profits up and compromising the design of the game then they would a produce a better quality game with the time they saved and most likely end up making more money from satisfied players anyways as players flock to such a rare title.[/citation]
It's true that they are making games for the enjoyment but it's just as much true that they're doing it for the money. Jesus christ, they're a business and if they were solely doing it for the enjoyment they'd release the games for free. There's nothing inherently wrong with wanting to do something you enjoy and charging for it. You can't please every single gamer so it's senseless to argue that the reason people are unhappy is because of the way games are produced. Gamers go on a riot for every little thing.

 

[pocketdrummer]

The gaming industry is reaching the point where it's not worth the investment to play. When that happens, I suppose I'll just make my next PC a small form factor. I'm not going to get nickel and dimed by these pricks.

 

[captainnemojr]

It's going back to the arcade days...Insert Coin to continue

 

[revered]

[citation][nom]bllue[/nom]It's true that they are making games for the enjoyment but it's just as much true that they're doing it for the money. Jesus christ, they're a business and if they were solely doing it for the enjoyment they'd release the games for free. There's nothing inherently wrong with wanting to do something you enjoy and charging for it. You can't please every single gamer so it's senseless to argue that the reason people are unhappy is because of the way games are produced. Gamers go on a riot for every little thing.[/citation]
You just used a 'solely for' argument to describe my post just like the one I was responding to. I wasn't saying that. As I stated, I believe such companies are beginning to prioritize money-making features over the quality of their games and satisfaction of the customer. To the detriment of their bottom line. See the portion of my post where I suggest they could possibly be making more money focusing on the quality of the game and satisfaction of the player? Yeah. I didn't describe anything remotely like how game developers should becomes NPO's or there being anything 'inherently wrong' with making money. Your post is atypical to what I was describing originally.

 

[Jdorty]

[citation][nom]revered[/nom]I'm tired of reading from people defending game publishers and developers citing that they are 'in the business of making money.' They are in the business of making games for the enjoyment of consumers. Their hope is that they make money from this. Gamers are becoming more unhappy with the the results of such companies because they are producing games with making money in mind, not the enjoyment of the consumer.If they stopped trying to stuff features into a game that are so clearly designed towards jumping their profits up and compromising the design of the game then they would a produce a better quality game with the time they saved and most likely end up making more money from satisfied players anyways as players flock to such a rare title.[/citation]

More so that the goal to make money should coincide with the goal to make gamers enjoy themselves.

Not to mention comparing microtransactions that give you advantages, whether they can be earned in-game or not, to buying HATS or SKINS is outright ridiculous.