EA Will Be Adding Micro-transactions in all Future Games

[Marcus52]

At the cusp of the next console generation, major publishers have proven to be a little more open-minded about financial models that deviate from the traditional retail model, or, rather, they're adopting alternative financial models out of necessity.

This is the big lie companies want you to believe - that they are "forced" to go F2P or include micro transactions in order to make money. The ones that aren't totally junk to begin with are just as profitable as they ever were, it's just that companies make MORE money using these "financial models".

I don't have a real problem with people buying companion (non-combat) pets and mounts, cosmetic stuff, but being able to buy anything that effects your stats and abilities in the game turns it into something I don't want to play.

 

[godfather666]

I'd much rather pay $50 for a full game upfront, then pay $20 in microtransactions.

And I mean this, wholeheartedly.

 

[internetlad]

ALL HAIL EA! SAVIOUR OF THE GAMING INDUSTRY!

YOUR INNOVATION IS UNPARALLELED! YOUR RESPECT TOWARDS YOUR CUSTOMERS UNRIVALED!

ALL HAIL EA, KING OF THE GAMES!

Wait, this DOES mean all future EA games will be F2P right?


Guys?

 

[SirGCal]

[citation][nom]bryonhowley[/nom]I see no reason to completely boycott them at all. If they make a good game I will buy it and EA makes a lot of good games with out a question. I see this more along the lines of DLC witch I do not ever buy period. That is where I draw the line I will not buy content that should have been in the game in the first place and that is all DLC is content that was pulled out of the game just to make more money.[/citation]

EA doesn't "make" games, they control the small companies that make games and force them to make the games on EA's terms. THAT is really the entire problem...

 

[Dyseman]

There's no killing this really. I'll just avoid pay to win models since this is eventally going to be EVERY game from EVERY game maker.

We've got to face it. The world has given over to Gaming. From tetris type games on old mobile Phones, to smart phones, to portable gaming devices, Consoles, PC's, Tablets, social websites, etc etc. Even the oldest are micro-paying. My Grandmother...$H!7 paying a few dollars to get this or that to get some friggin' add on.

CoD. hell the game always runs $60... map upgrade. Another $50. Anther one coming, $50....until 4 maps later then next version. It's never going to stop.

Hell, I guess it was the same in the '80's. And everyone who stepped in an arcade is guilty. I'd plop down $20 to $30 in a day in arcades trying to master Donkey Kong, Mario, asteroids etc... Same but different. And from 25 cents to $2.50 to now around $5.00 on some games. But I suppose you get to keep your upgrades and not just gone with the wind.

Arcades are gone with the wind... this is their new funnel for money.

 

[fonzy]

Everyone should boycott EA and don't stop until they are destroyed! I don't care if they stop the micro-transactions, let them crumble to dust!

 

[upgrade_1977]

[citation][nom]hardcore_gamer[/nom]I guess BF3 will be my last EA game.[/citation]
I was just gonna post that. Looks like Crysis 3 will be my last EA game. Not cool.
Damn rich kids get all the good stuff.

Good news is this will open up the market for other developers who don't follow this model.
I avoid any and

ALL

games with in game transactions.

 

[bustapr]

just how many fools fell for that dead space 3 trap?! Im ok with this microtransaction thing as long as the game is cheaper and doesnt give you an edge over competition or an advantage in singleplayer. buying a level is just lazy as fuck.

this stupid thing of selling a game at $60(which is already a very high price) and pay a few extra bucks for in game extras is stupid. its retarded that people actually do fall for this.

 

[Guest]

i have no problem with micro-transactions .
but i will not use them - i will never buy any upgrades .
i will also not play any game where others can buy stuff that i cannot aquire .
i have no problem to progress slower than paying users .

 

[nukemaster]

Need ammo? Pay XXXXX number of points

 

[mesab66]

Just how the hell is this going to encourage gifted programmers and visionaries into, or keep those within, the industry. There has to be a growing number of p'd-off folk working here. I don't know if we can ever getback to when great AAA single player games were just a little bit higher in number (they do seem to be a dying breed). These business models should be restricted to the child-like / throwaway games all too common on mobile devices....not an adult orientated pc system.

 

[casualcolors]

[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]

You seem to fundamentally misunderstand the goal of businesses everywhere. lol

With that said, if you don't like what you're being offered (and I certainly don't) just don't buy it. Businesses ARE in fact in the business of making money, and the most clear message you can send to them is to simply not give them any.

 

[DryCreamer]

Let the market demand, if ppl want it, they will use it. If not, then ea won't make much money

Dry

 

[buckcm]

[citation][nom]lunix[/nom]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.[/citation]

Except you can get advantages in-game through transactions. One example is the pyro: normally the pyro has a speed of 100%. The Gas Jockey's Gear can be used to increase the pyro's movement speed to 110%. This can possibly be gotten after playing the game for hours and hours or the easiest way of buying it.

 

[revered]

[citation][nom]casualcolors[/nom]You seem to fundamentally misunderstand the goal of businesses everywhere. lolWith that said, if you don't like what you're being offered (and I certainly don't) just don't buy it. Businesses ARE in fact in the business of making money, and the most clear message you can send to them is to simply not give them any.[/citation]
I'll respond similarly to you how I did another guy who misunderstood my point from the same perspective. I know businesses want to make money and need to. By wording my post in the way that I did, "in the business of making games," I was illustrating the function of a game company. They do, in fact, make games. Making money from these games is the hopeful end result. My point is that game companies are focusing less and less on making stellar games and directly jamming the games with features that make them money. Features that often compromise the quality and design of the game. Their priorities and focus are askew. They could be making more money and producing better quality games, in my opinion, if they realigned them.

 

[computertech82]

The sad part is, there are MANY ppl that will fall for the pay-to-(play/win ). And MANY will WHINE that the ppl PAYING for items, that give them advantages, are STOMPING their non-paying butt, and they will be too brain dead to comprehend why.
Even models like 'THE SIMS' has become micro-transactions. What SHOULD have been in the game, are now seperate. And the add-ons are DOUBLED in price of what they use to be, and contain HALF of what they use to. They even stopped most bug repairs, because the money is still rolling in very well.
As long as there is a sucker to spend their money on these micro transactions, it will become more and more common.
I remembered SINGLE player games that could last weeks/months, and most bugs were actually fixed! Sad that is slowly decreasing.

 

[tobalaz]

I have no problems with microtransactions if it unlocks a special skin or apparel to make a player feel more distinguished in a multiplayer game.
I have no problem with a free rpg on a mobile phone that you can buy special weapons or armor to go through the game faster or a potion to double your experience for a few days, so long as its not NEEDED to finish the game.
I have a problem when it gives unfair boosts to payers that play competitive multiplayer games.
I have a problem with day 1 dlc like extra maps or special characters that are already on the disk of a game you paid $60 for.

 

[hoofhearted]

This crap simply needs to go away in any shape or form. I hate microtransactions and even subscriptions to games. I should pay once, then the game is mine. I even wonder if there is some law they are breaking by creating this in-game currency. Maybe there are banking laws against private currency that would apply here. I mean what if the company shuts down overnight? Does this mean that all the money you spent on your pay-to-win character is all of a sudden just lost? Personally, this makes for and easy discrimination for me. If game has subscription, microstransaction or too much DLC and no pay-one-price option, then it is simply off my list and I will never buy it. I know that this means said game will be frought with processes just to authenticate this in some form of network DRM. So even if the game goes on fire-sale after time, there will be some of this useless callback-the-mothership crap within. I guess their next step is to somehow trick people into this crap.

Businesses do need to make money, but not from this predatory practice. They need to make a game that consumers can buy and review and if their game does well, they will make money off sales of their game as a whole. Not trying to rip gamers off by just giving them a little bit at a time.

 

[Bloob]

[citation][nom]wanderer11[/nom]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.[/citation]
I don't really care if they are greedy or not. If people enjoy the content, and are willing to pay for it, of course they should add it. Personally, I'm sure it will affect the gameplay in such a bad way, like D3 AH did, that I will stay away from EA until proven wrong.

 

[amoralman]

HAHAHA! That's actually funny until all other companies think it's a good idea and do it, and then they will stretch it so much I will shoot myself.

Hum, actually it's not that funny.