EA and Micro-Transactions

Mr E

I read this with interest on Eurogamer over lunch:

EA is building micro-transactions into all of its PC and console games, the company has announced.

The decision comes despite the recent controversy surrounding micro-transactions in Dead Space 3 - the first game in the EA-published series to be impacted by the payment scheme.

"The next and much bigger piece [of the business] is microtransactions within games," chief financial officer Blake Jorgensen said, speaking at the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom Conference (transcribed by Seeking Alpha).

"We're building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way, either to get to a higher level to buy a new character, to buy a truck, a gun, whatever it might be.

"Consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of the business."

The last line was highlighted by me for emphasis. Really EA? Are we? If the game was €20, then sure. But when games are full price and you're charging for bloody crafting materials in a game (and you engineer a very slight shortage of those materials in the game itself), then thats a load of bollocks and a crappy way to treat your loyal customers.

Out of the "consumers" here who bought/rented Dead Space 3, how many of you "enjoyed and embraced" micro-transactions? The poll is anonymous, so please be honest.

Sarky

Haven't bought it, don't intend to. Microtransactions are a large factor in that decision.

Mr E

Sarky wrote: »

Haven't bought it, don't intend to. Microtransactions are a large factor in that decision.

Good idea, I tweaked the poll slightly.

degrassinoel

microtransactions in F2P games is understandable. DLC is understandable. Expansions, and/or major events in mmo's. But i cba paying full whack for a single player game only to have it f*cked up by microtransactions for items/level and gear.

VinLieger

No interest in it but i did hear about the micro transactions and all thoughts of even renting the game went out of my head.
However i was lead to believe that the micro transactions werent neccessary to finishing the game and were more of a boost or time save than anything else?

gimli2112

Have it but not used the microtransactions.
I'm pretty much opposed to the idea and couldn't even tell you what they are/do!

Julez

DLC is getting out of hand. Simple as.

I didn't get dead space 3 because I don't like the way they have gone with the series. Micro transactions don't appeal to me but they weren't the reason I didn't buy that game.
However this kind of thing could really annoy me in battlefield. Buying your way through the ranks, no thanks.

ShadowHearth

I havent bought Dead space 3, but not because of the micro transactions ( i am not a fan of those at all too ). I did not bough it, because it was not a Dead Space game, but some sort of Residant evil 5 Action bullshiet.

Gunmonkey

Got DS3 and not paid any money for DLC. Have bought 2 of the scrap packs using the in-game currency your scavenger bots find, managed to play through the game one and a half times before I realised what the Ration Seals did.

DLC doesnt break the game, can be finished just fine without dropping a cent. Its just skin packs and boosts to make your scavenger bots work a bit faster, not vital to finishing or give you a massive advantage.

gizmo

Mr E wrote: »

The last line was highlighted by me for emphasis. Really EA? Are we?

"Consumers " are referring to, I assume, the large number of people who did take advantage of them, not, I also assume, the vocal minority who are in vehement opposition.

Mr E wrote: »

If the game was €20, then sure. But when games are full price and you're charging for bloody crafting materials in a game (and you engineer a very slight shortage of those materials in the game itself), then thats a load of bollocks and a crappy way to treat your loyal customers.

It's worth pointing out nearly every review out there said this wasn't the case.

Mr E wrote: »

Out of the "consumers" here who bought/rented Dead Space 3, how many of you "enjoyed and embraced" micro-transactions? The poll is anonymous, so please be honest.

Relevant.

As for the poll, I'm in the same boat as ShadowHearth. I wanted a horror game, they gave us what appears to be something closer to an action-orientated title without any kind of atmosphere, so I didn't buy it.

Mr E

gizmo wrote: »

It's worth pointing out nearly every review out there said this wasn't the case.

I thought I read it a few times around the review window. I must see if I can find it again.

gizmo

Mr E wrote: »

I thought I read it a few times around the review window. I must see if I can find it again.

There was most certainly people worrying about it, I know I was, but I don't think it did in the end. From the EG article and review itself...

"I managed to complete the game without spending any extra and never felt like I'd been held back, but by the same token there were plenty of moments where I fell just short of what was needed. I scraped through, but faced with an uncertain journey to the next workbench, it's easy to see how the temptation would be hard to resist, especially when certain resources are conspicuously less common than others."

The above scenario would most likely occur (and indeed has to me in many similar occasions across many different games) with or without such micro-transactions in place. However, regardless of whether they're available, there's not a chance in hell I'd use them personally.

For what it's worth, if it turned out to be categorically true then I'd happily join in the outrage.

richymcdermott

Dead space managed to catch up to whats wrong with resident evil with3 titles.

Co op takes the fear away from the player.

While dead space 2 was a good game it had no horror and just gave you infinite ammo at your disposal.

I knew dead space 3 was not going to be the same as the first one but i was gonna to pick it up when a price dropped.

When i then heard microtransactions was involved i said **** it no purchase.

Sure prob the transactions wouldnt take away from the overall game but i refuse to support such a game when it was full price to begin with.

Online passes ? , fine have that if you want but transactions... Out the door with you , you greedy bastards

Varik

gizmo wrote: »

"Consumers " are referring to, I assume, the large number of people who did take advantage of them, not, I also assume, the vocal minority who are in vehement opposition.

Exactly.

The entire point of a for profit company (as opposes to a non-profit which may have different goals) is to make money and then make even more and if there's a market for this then great for them.

Do you know what you call this calling in the business world?

delta36

This is essentially what cheats used to be though. Except now you have to pay for them. Doesn't using micro transactions to buy extra stuff make completing the game as much of an achievement as by cheating? Or does the fact that it's built into the game make it ok?

deathrider

Not a fan of the direction Dead Spacehas taken. I loved the first game, like the second one, but unfortunately this looks closer to Gears Of War than it does Dead Space, so I wouldn't be buying it regardless. However, I really don't support this micro-transaction crap. Hell, I don't even support DLC.

hooradiation

I don't have Dead Space 3, I will be picking it up at some point in the near future.
Microtransactions don't bother me.

CastorTroy

I plan on picking it up,but just because I played the first 2 and decided to finish the trilogy.
Micro transactions are of no interest to me. I don't even buy DLC unless it expands the single player game with extra levels like Harley Quinn's Revenge for Arkham City.

My understanding of this would be like playing 1 and 2 and finding the same number of nodes as normal, but then having the option to buy more nodes whenever you want.

Dravokivich

Don't like it. There's a lot of opposition against it regarding games on phones, so unsure how they'd consider it a good thing on PCs/Consoles. You'd have to consider how this is going to expand into other games as well. It's like a mini-DLC, and I don't agree with the idea of DLC. It hasn't put me off purchasing a game yet though. I don't feel like I'm actually buying a finished product when they do this, so I tend to wait till they go dead cheap and still don't get the DLCs, because the price on'em doesn't adjust as the price of an old game is expected to. Which is another thing I can't stand about'em.

hooradiation

Dravokivich wrote: »

There's a lot of opposition against it regarding games on phones, so unsure how they'd consider it a good thing on PCs/Consoles.

There is a vocal minority shouting about them, don't confuse that noise with actual opposition. If there was actual opposition people wouldn't be making $Texas from microtransactions.

Zero-Cool

"Consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of the business."

What a mental quote

Nody

Would be curious to how many actually used it; I know in PS2 (F2P) they posted a while back that about 10% of their customer base had used their micro transactions (you can unlock weapons and skins; all unlocks but skins are available through normal game play as well taking from 1h to ~20h of gameplay depending on style).

VinLieger

hooradiation wrote: »

There is a vocal minority shouting about them, don't confuse that noise with actual opposition. If there was actual opposition people wouldn't be making $Texas from microtransactions.

Yeah i dont think there is that much opposition at all against them on mobile platforms.
Of course theres the core gamers railing against them but yeah its a very vocal minority

Varik

VinLieger wrote: »

Yeah i dont think there is that much opposition at all against them on mobile platforms.
Of course theres the core gamers railing against them but yeah its a very vocal minority

Apple have to payout after getting sued for them and not clearly presenting the costs and some kids spending a load.

Mr Freeze

I don't have DS3, and microtransactions and all the Day 1 DLC was a factor.

I am big DS fan I must admit, but I don't like what EA did.

Plus, I got stung with DS2, preordered it, and then it was 15 quid cheaper a week after launch. Burn!

Will pick up DS3 when its price drops hopefully, definitely not before, and definitely won't make use of micro transactions.

VinLieger

Varik wrote: »

Apple have to payout after getting sued for them and not clearly presenting the costs and some kids spending a load.

1 case, theres how many iphones out there with people spending money on microtansactions and not giving a ****?
Im not saying i agree with them but your deluding yourself if you think everyone who owns a phone and plays mobile games thinks the same as you

Zero-Cool

I read on Kotaku that EA have a mobile game Real Racing 3 that is free but uses microtransactions. One of these is to buy the Koeningssiignggn for 800 gold where 1000 gold costs 99 dollars. Crazy antics out of EA.

Crap to think a dev will make a game and then an exec will come along and say take out this, this and that and charge it through microtransactions.

Talks as well EA are inking some partnership deal with Microsoft and will be announced at the xbox event, most likely exclusive content, staggered release dates, fancy DLC, etc. Must be costing huge money so they need to squeeze every penny out of consumers to pay for it.

Gunmonkey

sheehy83 wrote: »

I read on Kotaku that EA have a mobile game Real Racing 3 that is free but uses microtransactions. One of these is to buy the Koeningssiignggn for 800 gold where 1000 gold costs 99 dollars. Crazy antics out of EA.

Crap to think a dev will make a game and then an exec will come along and say take out this, this and that and charge it through microtransactions.

And yet....EA are still novices compared to the big dog of over charging gamers for useless crap in the home game market.

Mr Freeze wrote: »

I don't have DS3, and microtransactions and all the Day 1 DLC was a factor.

I am big DS fan I must admit, but I don't like what EA did.

How can you be a fan of Dead Space 1, it was s**t by the definitions everyone is lambasting DS3 for in this thread? It came with around 15 pieces of Day 1 DLC in the form of weapons and armour.......but of course it would be silly for you to get so worked up about a game you liked having DLC, wouldnt it :rolleyes:

gizmo

sheehy83 wrote: »

I read on Kotaku that EA have a mobile game Real Racing 3 that is free but uses microtransactions. One of these is to buy the Koeningssiignggn for 800 gold where 1000 gold costs 99 dollars. Crazy antics out of EA.

Aspects of F2P like that certainly put a bad taste in the mouth (to put it mildly) but equally, seeing people balk at more "expensive" games on mobiles simply because they're used to paying so little for them and/or because they're on a mobile platform is nearly equally frustrating. I'd wager if publishers could get away with charging closer to $10 for games with production levels similar to the likes of Real Racing 3 and not see massive drops in the userbase then we'd see less of the above nonsense.

sheehy83 wrote: »

Talks as well EA are inking some partnership deal with Microsoft and will be announced at the xbox event, most likely exclusive content, staggered release dates, fancy DLC, etc. Must be costing huge money so they need to squeeze every penny out of consumers to pay for it.

Well obviously, as with the above instance, development costs are still rising, sales of games outside of a small number of incredibly popular (but not necessarily quality games) are fairly stagnant and the retail prices of games haven't increased. With that in mind it's absolutely no surprise that publishers are being forced to find alternate revenue streams for their titles. I'm not saying it doesn't suck, especially when it can be detrimental to games we love but I've yet to see any kind of positive action being taken by the general gaming populace to counter it.

Of particular relevance was the recent Indiegogo campaign by Lab Zero Games to add another character to their title Skullgirls. The campaign asked for $150,000 to cover development costs and they even went so far as to give an exact breakdown of where the money was going. The inital response to this was, well let's just say overwhelming negative however fans of the game have gotten behind them and they smashed their goal in a pretty short amount of time. It again ties into an apparent misunderstanding as to how much this kind of content actually takes to produce and how utterly insane it is when people start complaining about the price of games and additional content these days.

It Will Blow Your Mind To See How Much It Costs To Add ONE New Character To A Fighting Gam

Mr Freeze

Gunmonkey wrote: »

How can you be a fan of Dead Space 1, it was s**t by the definitions everyone is lambasting DS3 for in this thread? It came with around 15 pieces of Day 1 DLC in the form of weapons and armour.......but of course it would be silly for you to get so worked up about a game you liked having DLC, wouldnt it :rolleyes:

I am a fan cause I liked it, and I didn't even know it had a tonne of Day 1 DLC, none of which I purchased. Roll those eyes all you like.

nesf

Varik wrote: »

Apple have to payout after getting sued for them and not clearly presenting the costs and some kids spending a load.

Was it sued? What I remember is some parent making a complaint to Apple after their kid spent $300 or something on the Smurf Village app and Apple refunding it without a problem and releasing a press release for people telling them how to disable in-app purchases in games on iOS. The issue was normally you have to sign in to buy something in an app but if the parent had signed in before there was a 10-15 minute window where you didn't have to sign in to buy things, it wasn't that the parent in question didn't know there were micro-transactions in the game, it was that he thought his 8 year old wouldn't be able to buy anything because she didn't know the account password.

Technically I think Apple could have the told the parent to feck off. It would have been very bad press though.

Penn

EA Sports... It's not all in the game unless you pay for it

Canis Lupus

nesf wrote: »

Was it sued? What I remember is some parent making a complaint to Apple after their kid spent $300 or something on the Smurf Village app and Apple refunding it without a problem and releasing a press release for people telling them how to disable in-app purchases in games on iOS. The issue was normally you have to sign in to buy something in an app but if the parent had signed in before there was a 10-15 minute window where you didn't have to sign in to buy things, it wasn't that the parent in question didn't know there were micro-transactions in the game, it was that he thought his 8 year old wouldn't be able to buy anything because she didn't know the account password.

Technically I think Apple could have the told the parent to feck off. It would have been very bad press though.

Twas in the news. Was a class action suit and they're settling it.

Back on topic it's honestly shocking to hear that EA are working micro transactions into single player, I've already paid for this, games. They can shove their micro transactions up their micro holes.

Varik

nesf wrote: »

Was it sued? What I remember is some parent making a complaint to Apple after their kid spent $300 or something on the Smurf Village app and Apple refunding it without a problem and releasing a press release for people telling them how to disable in-app purchases in games on iOS. The issue was normally you have to sign in to buy something in an app but if the parent had signed in before there was a 10-15 minute window where you didn't have to sign in to buy things, it wasn't that the parent in question didn't know there were micro-transactions in the game, it was that he thought his 8 year old wouldn't be able to buy anything because she didn't know the account password.

Technically I think Apple could have the told the parent to feck off. It would have been very bad press though.

It was a law suit and dates back to before you'd need to sign in or have the 15 minute window, it's only be settled out of court now and was down to the parents not knowing.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/apple-agrees-to-settle-lawsuit-over-app-purchases-by-children/

Azza

The microtansactions in Dead Space 3 are pefectable acceptable to me. I'm not interested in using them myself but I have no problems with the option to use them being there what so ever.

Grimebox

Penn wrote: »

EA Sports... It's not all in the game unless you pay for it

EA Games...Challenge Pay For Everything :pac:



I'm actually surprised by the amount of people that have no interest in the game whatsoever. I thought I was the minority. I played the first one and the horror aspect faded away after 30 mins and just became an average action shooter. I can appreciate that creating a authentic horror atmosphere must be incredibly difficulty in an interactive media like gaming

nesf

Varik wrote: »

It was a law suit and dates back to before you'd need to sign in or have the 15 minute window, it's only be settled out of court now and was down to the parents not knowing.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/apple-agrees-to-settle-lawsuit-over-app-purchases-by-children/

Cool, I was thinking of this one: http://www.tuaw.com/2011/02/09/smurf-it-all-to-smurf-in-app-purchases-ring-up-1-400-in-charge/

Azza

Yeah I thought Dead Space 1 struggled to maintain the horror atmosphere as well, a few hours in and the atmosphere was gone. You just get desensitized to after a while. These type of games have no atmosphere on repeated play throughs.

Still I enjoyed the first 2 and so far I'm enoying the 3rd one as well.

gimli2112

Ye'r all very brave in the cold light of day.

Anyone who played Dead Space 1 in a dark room, alone at night with a headset turned up loud has my eternal respect.


A fukun 6 shot plasma cutter? Things improved as you got better stuff but still!

elekid

I've never played a game with microtransactions but from what I've read they seem to be all about making games more tedious so that people will be willing to pay to spend less time playing them - sounds fun.

Azza

For as long as I can remember gaming, single player games have used a system of unlocking weapons and equipment gradually as you progress through the story. If you find that tedious you will find a very high percentage of games tedious.

Icyseanfitz

Azza wrote: »

For as long as I can remember gaming, single player games have used a system of unlocking weapons and equipment gradually as you progress through the story. If you find that tedious you will find a very high percentage of games tedious.

yup, playing the game not paying the game

this kind of **** is whats making gaming gradually worse, i wouldnt pay for this crap but for every one of me there is 20 idiots who will so its only going to get worse and worse

biggebruv

I bought Dead Space 3 and enjoyed the heck out of it just as much as 1+2

micro transactions does not bother me the game is not affected because of it

its there for fools that do buy stuff like that and EA know theres a lot of fools who will be spending it on them.

but aslong as the game was not affected then I don't see the harm its not forced upon the player with a massive popup in the game

you can turn CO-OP off completely in dead space 3 aswell something RE did not do you dont have to babysit a stupid AI when playing alone

Dead Space done it perfectly and future REs should take note that this is how you do coop for a horror/action game

Azza

Icyseanfitz wrote:

yup, playing the game not paying the game

this kind of **** is whats making gaming gradually worse, i wouldnt pay for this crap but for every one of me there is 20 idiots who will so its only going to get worse and worse

If you don't want to use it thats fine. If others do thats fine also and it does not make them idiots.

With alot of games if you want to get all the weapons and equipment sometimes it requires several play throughs. For many people they won't get to unlock the weapons because they get bored playing through the same levels over and over. I for one would be one of those type of people. So now they have a shortcut to get all the gear unlocked for their first playthrough or maybe a second. Maybe they do like multipal pay throughs but just don't have the time with work or other commitments. They now have an option to get all the gear faster.

Icyseanfitz

Azza wrote: »

If you don't want to use it thats fine. If others do thats fine also and it does not make them idiots.

With alot of games if you want to get all the weapons and equipment sometimes it requires several play throughs. For many people they won't get to unlock the weapons because they get bored playing through the same levels over and over. I for one would be one of those type of people. So now they have a shortcut to get all the gear unlocked for their first playthrough or maybe a second. Maybe they do like multipal pay throughs but just don't have the time with work or other commitments. They now have an option to get all the gear faster.

Yeah ea where just testing the waters with this, you won't be too happy when you have to pay to play a character in a fighting game or spend 3 weeks trying to unlock it trough grinding , that's what its going to come to if this becomes acceptable

VinLieger

A relevant discussion just popped up in the simcity thread.
Everyones assuming, probably rightly, that EA are gonna go nuts with simcity dlc and addons etc and that they will be ridiculously priced for what they are offering.
But then someone mentioned paradox and their approach to DLC where you usually get a decent amount of content for the price as well as balance updates, tweaks and fixes to the actual game that even if you dont want the DLC are still applied to the game.
Through this paradox have built up a loyalty where people actually go out of their way to pick up the packs as they feel it is worth the money and rather than the feeling of being screwed theres a feeling of being rewarded for being a customer

gizmo

VinLieger wrote: »

A relevant discussion just popped up in the simcity thread.
Everyones assuming, probably rightly, that EA are gonna go nuts with simcity dlc and addons etc and that they will be ridiculously priced for what they are offering.
But then someone mentioned paradox and their approach to DLC where you usually get a decent amount of content for the price as well as balance updates, tweaks and fixes to the actual game that even if you dont want the DLC are still applied to the game.
Through this paradox have built up a loyalty where people actually go out of their way to pick up the packs as they feel it is worth the money and rather than the feeling of being screwed theres a feeling of being rewarded for being a customer

The difference being, Paradox are a privately owned publisher creating niche games on smaller budgets and aiming them at the core and often more fickle gamer. EA are a publicly traded company creating big budget blockbuster titles to appeal to everyone. The former needs to go out of their way to ensure that they keep their fanbase happy and do so by providing excellent content updates such as those described, the latter need to ensure that they maximise potential revenue with each release. This doesn't preclude the development of outstanding games of course, but their underlying philosophy as a publishing house is entirely different.

Azza

Icyseanfitz wrote:

Yeah ea where just testing the waters with this, you won't be too happy when you have to pay to play a character in a fighting game or spend 3 weeks trying to unlock it trough grinding , that's what its going to come to if this becomes acceptable

We already have had DLC characters in fighting games.
Street Fighter 4 series, Street Fighter X Tekken, UMvC 3, Blaz Blue, Mortal Kombat.

Grinding to unlock characters is also already in fighting games. It was in SF3 and SF4. SF3 is over 10 years old and it had it.

This is a system thats been around in all types of video games for years.

nesf

gizmo wrote: »

but their underlying philosophy as a publishing house is entirely different.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/12/05

:pac:

gizmo

nesf wrote: »

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/12/05

:pac:

And on that note, for all the abuse EA get, I'd still regard them as having published a far better collection of games this generation than Activision. Whether people feel that their subsequent mishandling of sequels erases that goodwill is something I'll leave up to them.