Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community - Reply to Topic

Thread: [JS] Activision Shoveling Microtransactions Into Crash Team Racing Nitro-Fueled Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
08-03-2019 08:00 AM
TheBDK Remember Skyrim and Fallout 4? All of a sudden paid mods were introduced, 4 years after the games were released. It's a despicable way of treating your customers.
08-03-2019 07:17 AM
PhillyB
Quote: Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post
I think you should make a point of not adding microtransactions after the game has released and has been bought by customers. The player should know upfront what they're buying, and these features should be clear to anyone. People could be paying $[insert amount] upon purchase, and that's the agreed sum on both parts, publisher and consumer. Anything beyond that is betraying trust.

With this single point, I have absolutely no objection to either lootboxes or microtransactions. With this kind of transparency, the customer always knows what they're buying from the get-go.
I honestly have no intention of using microtransactions at all. I hate them for the most part. The studio is small and will only be making single player games for the foreseeable future. I wrote it so that if for some reason it was added, they would never impact game play or encourage pay to win models. I think most players wont mind having additions to cosmetic options later. But, if others agree with you then I will happily reconsider it.

I like transparency as well. Nothing worse than hiding things from customers. My main gripes are opt-out data collection, or even more popular cant-opt-out data collection, and customer robbery by knowingly selling broken games at launch with planned repairs later. I make these policies public, because we as customers should be able to know what our purchases are and what they do.
08-03-2019 06:37 AM
ToTheSun!
Quote: Originally Posted by PhillyB View Post
I just wanted to say thank you to the posters in this thread. I randomly clicked on it because I can't stand micro transactions that break games. Since I run a game studio, I just wrote this into my game studio's customer policy.

"[studio name] considers purchasable "Loot Boxes" to be customer robbery. It is not gambling. Gambling implies there is a winning outcome for the customer and purchasable loot boxes do not provide that criteria. They will never be offered by [studio name] and any company which condones their use is harshly judged by this studio."

"Micro transactions are much more difficult to disregard. Some can be good, while others are not. If [studio name] produces content for micro transactions, they will be superficial and cosmetic only. Items available in the game through play will never be available through external purchase, nor will items which change game play (such as a special weapon or armor)."

(i redacted the studio name because I didn't want to get accused of advertising.)

I share your opinions on loot boxes and micro transactions, but didn't think to put it in writing.

Did I miss any key points?

(just as a side note: I bet when people were typing away they never thought it would actually impact a game studio's policy.)
I think you should make a point of not adding microtransactions after the game has released and has been bought by customers. The player should know upfront what they're buying, and these features should be clear to anyone. People could be paying $[insert amount] upon purchase, and that's the agreed sum on both parts, publisher and consumer. Anything beyond that is betraying trust.

With this single point, I have absolutely no objection to either lootboxes or microtransactions. With this kind of transparency, the customer always knows what they're buying from the get-go.
08-03-2019 06:22 AM
PhillyB I just wanted to say thank you to the posters in this thread. I randomly clicked on it because I can't stand micro transactions that break games. Since I run a game studio, I just wrote this into my game studio's customer policy.

"[studio name] considers purchasable "Loot Boxes" to be customer robbery. It is not gambling. Gambling implies there is a winning outcome for the customer and purchasable loot boxes do not provide that criteria. They will never be offered by [studio name] and any company which condones their use is harshly judged by this studio."

"Micro transactions are much more difficult to disregard. Some can be good, while others are not. If [studio name] produces content for micro transactions, they will be superficial and cosmetic only. Items available in the game through play will never be available through external purchase, nor will items which change game play (such as a special weapon or armor)."

(i redacted the studio name because I didn't want to get accused of advertising.)

I share your opinions on loot boxes and micro transactions, but didn't think to put it in writing.

Did I miss any key points?

(just as a side note: I bet when people were typing away they never thought it would actually impact a game studio's policy.)
08-03-2019 12:21 AM
Malinkadink F2P games microtransactions are OK, B2P games microtransactions are OK within REASON ie Guild Wars 2 its an MMORPG so it has ongoing costs to maintain servers etc so it needs micro-transactions to keep it going. Subscription games which are typically MMORPGs should absolutely not have any microtransactions but unfortunately that isn't the case like WoW for example, granted the microtransactions in WoW are pets/toys/mounts, but the mounts are actually a point of contention because some of them are actually really cool unique mounts that would be a good sign of prestige if locked behind a difficult achievement or something similar, but nah $25 and its yours really sours the taste and defeats any feelings of accomplishment.

Really though microtransactions in anygame that isn't F2P is a cancer on gaming and the only real way to stop these things is to not buy into them. Unfortunately these lootboxes play into the weaknesses of human psychology so for many its difficult to resist. Microtransactions aren't new, and they've never bothered me before, but when they deliberately start to design these games with those "time savers" in mind then i get angry because now they're insulting the value of my time by saying you can totally just spend a lot of time grinding these sidequests that offer no meaningful content to catch up to the main story, or you can pay us more $$$ to skip the boring stuff. Yeah okay, how about i just don't buy your game? Or i go get it for "free" and cheat to overcome stupid hurdles put in place to try and force you to spend money on lootboxes. If only more developers could be like cd projekt red.
08-02-2019 10:16 PM
Imglidinhere Microtransactions in games don't bother me when the entire game is free to play. When the game costs any kind of cash up front to play, usually with these titles that's $30 or more, adding more transactions after that point is just dumb. The reason it works with mobile titles and other games is because you only ever spend single dollar amounts, usually less than $3 for the game itself and maybe $1-$2 boosts here and there. It's easy to lose track of ten $1 purchases rather than one $10 purchase.
08-02-2019 06:00 PM
girugamesh
Quote: Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post
Well, considering you're supposed to pick 2 jobs instead of just 1, it's a different game in the sense that it's generally easier and you get to min-max (a lot) for fun.

The only real challenge would be the Trials' stage 100, which is easily more complicated than Yiazmat and Zodiark.
I mean it's good, but it's not exactly new, so not an example of something great born out of the current gen.
08-02-2019 05:42 PM
ToTheSun!
Quote: Originally Posted by girugamesh View Post
Zodiac Age is good but it's a remake of a 2007 game and I played IZJS a lot already.
Well, considering you're supposed to pick 2 jobs instead of just 1, it's a different game in the sense that it's generally easier and you get to min-max (a lot) for fun.

The only real challenge would be the Trials' stage 100, which is easily more complicated than Yiazmat and Zodiark.
08-02-2019 03:34 PM
girugamesh
Quote: Originally Posted by Butthurt Beluga View Post
Ok, so where's the problem? Corporate AAA gaming is trash anyway
True. The only AAA game that seems to be REALLY good this entire generation is RDR2, I'll play it eventually.

Resident Evil 2 is average, Zodiac Age is good but it's a remake of a 2007 game and I played IZJS a lot already.

I'm sure there's a good game here and there that I haven't played yet or which isn't my style but in general yes, mainstream videogames are boring now. For reference, last game I beat was Castlevania Lament of Innocence. I like how simple and straightforward it is. Current games are often so bloated in comparison. The one element that immediately makes me stop playing any game now are crafting mechanics. It's so dumb and overused.
08-02-2019 11:42 AM
skupples my problem is micro isn't micro anymore. "microtransaction" = "small amounts of money changing hands"

k.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off