Author writes: "Epic Games has today shared a blog post revealing Fortnite Chapter 2 Season 2’s release date, as well as news regarding a shift to a new physics engine in the next few weeks."
Microtransactions have gotten ridiculously overpriced in recent years, with titles now offering cosmetic skins worth more than some games.
The elephant in the room tho is personal accountability. It’s easy (albeit basic) to blame the big, bad corpo, but microtransactions wouldn’t be where they are if gamers didn’t spend money on them. As it stands the MTs usually make more than the game. Publishers know raising game prices will cause backlash, so they do MTs to compensate. But the adult conversation is consumers determine the success of products with their wallets. So if MTs are a huge thing, it’s because we as consumers told them we like them by giving them a lot of money for them. So if you don’t want them to be a thing, convince your fellow gamers to stop buying them and expect that games will be decently more expensive. You all can disagree all you want, but reality is a bitch, and eventually you have to live in it.
Trying to convince people is the least realistic thing. If we are trying to be adults, actual action is what changes things not "convincing campaigns" on platforms owned by the people 'you' are going against. It's madness and idealistic.
Easier said than done. I've told gamers for years to not buy micro transactions, expensive dlc, etc. Gamers bought it anyway. Didn't fit on a DVD that would have fit on a Blu-ray disc.
I also told some gamers to not pay for online like Xbox Live because it would force the rest of the industry to only offer playing online if you pay for it. Told them not to support a broken console that Red Ringed. To not support Xbox One because Microsoft tried to take away game ownership and how you play your games. To not pay for a console by one manufacturer where a, now 3 trillion worth, didn't make enough games at the level of Nintendo or Sony who are worth less money.
How much of that did you support anyway with your money then go back and read your comment again.
yeah that was like telling people not to do drugs or alcohol, these game companies invested a lot of money in researching about how to make people buy MTs, from creating mechanics like loot boxes, purposely make the game grindy, all the way to menu designs and what color and sound effects played when gamers bought MTs.
It was specifically engineered to take advantage of vulnerable and prone to addiction people.
@z2g
People always struggle with issues like drinking, drugs, and gambling. But in games, especially those played by kids, microtransactions are another way companies take advantage of them. It's a problem that needs addressing.
I recommend everyone read this article.
My suggestion is to name these transactions, what they ARE: Hidden-fees.
There never was, the only time I paid for a microtransaction was on Blacklight Retribution (PS4) and it was because I enjoyed the game a lot so I felt the devs should get something for all that entertainment (€5 "membership")
The devs wouldn’t get that though, that shit goes straight to the higher ups who do f*** all let’s be honest.
Probably, but I wasn't as cynical back then and €5 wasn't a big ask to get the guns with grinding instead of renting them, and the game was good (still is on the PS5/4)
I couldn’t believe what Blizzard charged for horse armor and cosmetics in Diablo 4…
I remember back in the day when a season pass was $15 and you got everything included in it. Now, I see them at $60 and you still don’t get everything.
That's just Blizzard. Unlike Bethesda's $0.99 horse armour, Blizzard's first microtransaction, Sparkle Pony, cost $15.
Bethesda out did themselves a few years back with 76. They released a Xmas bundle for half price on day of release! So, was meant to sell for only $12 from day 1, but tried to convince everyone it was half price, by marking it at $24!
As soon as gaming wasn't deemed nerdy anymore, and reached the casuals this happened. We're smart, but casuals play mobile games and other stuff, and don't really have anything to compare. They think gaming is supposed to be like this and pay for in game purchases.
Samus Aran from the Metroid series almost made an appearance in Fortnite, but Nintendo and Epic couldn’t agree on how she’d be implemented.
VGChartz's Mark Nielsen: "Warner Bros. gaming boss J.B Perrette recently described traditional AAA games as “volatile”, but while that development approach has its issues as well, in reality it’s the GaaS format that best fits this description, as each title is quite literally as likely to explode in popularity as it is to implode."
Live services aren't the way forward, they're an expensive dead end that appeal to execs far more than the gaming community.
For every game that gets it right, at least five fail miserably and make no money at all. What WB and other companies consider to be easy money is actually a much worse bet than a SP title or traditional MP game could ever be.
You're talking about videogames. To these people, they don't want videogames, they want services.
The thing I've been trying to wrap my head around lately is not thinking of services as games. Games are made, games are owned and games are played.
I actually got the opportunity to speak to someone in marketing for a AAA games company and when I spoke about my annoyance regarding ownership they got flustered and actually became weirdly pedantic.
"No, you don't own the games, that's not how it works. You're wrong. They're not meant to be owned and people don't want to own them." Like they were helping people?
It was weird. It changed my outlook on the games. A Fortnite player is technically not a proper gamer. They play Fortnite but they've no idea what Assassin's Creed even is.
I think this just goes back to companies trying to force the subscription model into everything, I don't want to pay a subscription to use Office or Adobe, I don't want to pay a subscription for heated seats in my car, I don't want to pay a subscription for multiple games. I want to buy and own the product to use and enjoy as I please, I also don't want a constant internet connection for everything either.
Helldivers 2 proved live service works, I think there will always be room for good ones that respects the player base but ultimately, how many GaaS games can people juggle realistically before gaming becomes more of a chore than a hobby? FOMO is also a huge problem with these games.
'how many GaaS games can people juggle realistically before gaming becomes more of a chore than a hobby?'
This to me is one of the main cruxes of the problem. If you try shove 10 GAAS titles down everyones throats, that demand you spend a few hours every day for the 'dailies' and 'weeklies', there's just not enough time for them and they saturate each other.
So says the company responsible for one of the biggest flops of the year. This is a pathetic attempt to push an agenda to justify GAAS and mobile monetisation in triple A games. Do you think we're stupid? No one asked you to balloon your development costs by over hiring and expanding and over estimating sales and budgets, failing to meet targets, developing trash games like Suicide Squad that have to be delayed and take 6 years to release because of poor reception, creating mediocrity like Gotham Knights, or over extending on advertising
As the article points out, Gaas is equally likely to be a monkey sink especially post release if it fails like Redfall.
Baldur's Gate 3 and God of War Ragnarok shamed you all. The former for delivering a top quality product without the vices of triple A games, and the latter for releasing an entire game mode and story DLC for free because their product was quality enough to sell beyond expectations.
It’s already working. I’ve made comments about this and people are happy with Hell Divers 2 and even defending the micros and Battle Passes. We’ve opened the door and traditional games are going to be less and less the norm. Hope you’re happy with the bright future of gaming.
Not when the vast majority of these are failing and losing these studios money. Helldivers didn't succeed because it was live service, but in spite of it- because the devs wanted to deliver a fun game first and a storefront second. It is absolutely not comparable with trash like SS or Skull and Bones.
Live Service is Live Service, my dude. It doesn’t matter if it’s good or bad, it’s the thing the industry is pushing for and for a very SPECIFIC reason. You still have your battle passes and micros with Helldivers 2 and everyone has defended it. Why couldn’t it just be a traditional made game with no season passes and micros? Why choose to make the game GaaS?
So, now guess what? You’re going to have many who will just throw everything at the wall to replicate that success. I mean you have Sony looking into pulling an Xbox and publishing on different platforms because sales in traditional game don’t bring a ROI. WB is just hellbent on GaaS because traditional AAA games are “volatile.”
This gen actually has been terrible for Sony with lines like this coming out:
“Sony now expects to sell 4 million fewer PS5 consoles in its 2023 fiscal year ending March 31st compared to previous projections, Bloomberg reports. The revision came as part of today’s third-quarter earnings release which saw Sony lower the PS5 sales forecast from the 25 million consoles it expected to sell down to 21 million.”
““Looking ahead, PS5 will enter the latter stage of its life cycle,” said Sony senior vice president Naomi Matsuoka in comments reported by Bloomberg. “As such, we will put more emphasis on the balance between profitability and sales. For this reason, we expect the annual sales pace of PS5 hardware will start falling from the next fiscal year.” Sony added it has no plans to release “any new major existing franchise titles” in its next fiscal year.”
https://www.theverge.com/20...
Have you read the leaks of possibly Sony selling Spider-Man 3 piecemeal? I have no idea why dev cost is so expensive now when the tools to make games haven’t changed. Why are they hiring more people when games don’t radically look different than last-gen games or even worse as is the case with Suicide Squad vs Arkham Knight? I think I even read an article on this very site claiming more people enjoy playing older games than games released currently.
We’re going to see shift in games. I think a lot more AA traditional games (which is what the industry needs to do, the onus is on them to manage budget and do cutbacks rather than expect everyone to pay more for games and buy an insane anount to make up for ROI) and a lot more GaaS.
@crimson Helldivers 2 is everything right with service games. The micros and battle passes are not remotely predatory and there are plenty of ways to earn the currency to unlock that content at no cost to the player. Everything is not as black and white as everyone here pretends it is. There are levels to it and some live service games are clearly out to exploit and extract as much money as they can as opposed to games like Helldivers that were obviously made with player experience in mind.
I'm a helldivers 2 player love the game refuse to buy a battle pass they got my money once I'm happy to grind out the free pass
Best 39.99 game purchase I've made in a long time. Like you, I'm not really swayed to heavily to buy any of the extra warbond tiers. Probably get one after I've unlocked all the standard stuff, but even then that just more of a me thing. Need to be able to spend those bonds on something new eventually, but at least their are multiple choices in tiers, and aren't locked into something like COD where you have to grind 100tiers to get everything it has to offer. Not to mention the game is fairly liberal with the amount of bonds, and SC's you can gather in game.
Just because a very few games are successful as a live service, that doesn't mean it's the way forward. Very few dev's/publishers have found the winning formula.
There will always be those exceptions
HD2 being what it is, is the reason I didn't buy it, and won't buy it. Any game - no matter how good it's supposed to be - that is live service is an instant deal breaker for me.
The micros in helldiver's don't really do anything at all. The super credits are to unlock battle passes ..which you can do by playing and to buy cosmetics.....which you also get by playing. Not to mention you can grind super credits in the game.
You can't buy samples or medals with super credits.
Not to mention they don't function like typical battle passes. No expiration
This is my point. Everyone, pay attention to how we’re justifying the battle pass and micros now.
There was a time, not long ago, when the backlash was real to anything like this. We’re ok with monthly battle passes now because they don’t expire. I personally, do not like the thought of continuously dumping money into a game over the course of its life-time and the “roadmap” of the game.
I’m saying why even do them in the first place? Why even design with GaaS in mind over just a good ol’ fashioned traditional game design? Imagine if all games started doing this? But hey, it’s not like the battle passes would expire.
2.8bn in 2023 revenue. I bet that game also has a very high profit margin, so it must be a bit of a cash flow cow for them.
I’m not a fan of the game but they do keep it moving, I gotta give them that. I like pubg, I wish they would take some notes from these guys.