I havent been convinced at all that Microtransactions are needed to cover the supposedly increasing costs so I dont believe that your question is correct.
So I dont believe that something has to give
Microtransactions: the Future of Games? (LootBoxes and Gambling)
So I dont believe that something has to give
supposedly? So games made in 2000 have not required more money than today?
Well. Making a game is guaranteed cost. You can invest millions into a game and get back nothing or miss your mark.
It happens probably more than we know or think. It's not about just breaking even. Companies are looking to spend their times that will net them a reasonable amount of return, otherwise they just spent 2-3 years to break even.
You went way too far behind.
How about the previous generation where microtransactions were mostly non existent and the technologies used havent changed as much?
I'm having problems finding full data sources so that I can graph it for you, but I'll leverage this graph from Mark Cerny
This is game budgets btw.
2006-2013 is considered last gen? That would be in between the red lines I'm fairly confident without seeing the data points that the graph will continues going upwards.
As for sales, if we look historically at prices for video games:
It's cheaper now than ever, and more expensive then ever to make.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Yes, but games reach a much larger audience nowadays, and digital distribution has significantly lowered the costs for distribution for this much larger audience.
15 years ago, the only way to reach >5 million sales would be to bundle the game with a console for many years, save for a few exceptions.
We now have families where fathers and sons/daughters are all gamers in the house, all wanting to play Call of Duty or Battlefield. Plus the grandpa playing minecraft, mind you.
This pretty much didn't exist 15 years ago.
15 years ago, the only way to reach >5 million sales would be to bundle the game with a console for many years, save for a few exceptions.
We now have families where fathers and sons/daughters are all gamers in the house, all wanting to play Call of Duty or Battlefield. Plus the grandpa playing minecraft, mind you.
This pretty much didn't exist 15 years ago.
Billy Idol
Legend
Now that our games include gambling with real money.
Why is it allowed that kids buy those games?
Are kids allowed in Casinos in the US?
Gambling in e.g. Germany is typically regulated, and not accessible by kids.
Is DICE breaking the law with SWBF2?
Why is it allowed that kids buy those games?
Are kids allowed in Casinos in the US?
Gambling in e.g. Germany is typically regulated, and not accessible by kids.
Is DICE breaking the law with SWBF2?
I need to see details on what this graph represents. I need the context. Also the graph stops at 2011.I'm having problems finding full data sources so that I can graph it for you, but I'll leverage this graph from Mark Cerny
This is game budgets btw.
2006-2013 is considered last gen? That would be in between the red lines I'm fairly confident without seeing the data points that the graph will continues going upwards.
As for sales, if we look historically at prices for video games:
It's cheaper now than ever, and more expensive then ever to make.
Need a graph that shows previous gen and this gen specifically. The previous gen is when the devs started implementing technologies that are now common. So the difference betwen this and previous gen may actually not be that different. Regardless, last gen which was one of the longest and probably most profitable did not require microtransactions.
I still call it bullshit. Even if dev costs did increase, the "costs" argument are a convenient excuse.
In addition games in the 90's included packaging costs and manuals that do not exist now. It includes costs which affect the graph and in addition the market has grown enormously compared to the 90s. It is almost like an economy of scale. Bigger and streamlined production for a larger market. Prices where probably adjusted to a market that was much smaller and "niche" too in the 90s. Companies also sell games digitally which further saves costs and these games are often sold at the same price or similar as their physical copies. To top it, since digital stores appeared, devs sell downloadable content and add ons that farther increase their revenue. These did not exist during the 32bit and 128bit era.
I dont see the necessity of microtransactions and even if it was necessary, microtransactions or any other similar tactic is no proper solution
Last edited:
ahh, yea me too. I'll look around for more, I don't know which games he's budgeting here seems generic which won't help my cause.
Billy Idol
Legend
Idea for Diablo 4:
One character class available with one skill tree if you buy the 60$ base game, you can choose your starter class out of 4 unique heros. Full story mode available, also all DLC (maps, new classes, new skill trees) is free!!!
The progression system is such: all other chars and skill trees (also the DLC ones) need to be unlocked...by playing the game, you get ingame currency proportional to the time you spend, independent of your achievements. With the ingame currency, you can buy lootboxes, or „diabolic boxes^TM“ with a certain chance to get an artifact that unlocks the skill tree or even a new class all together (very rare!). Estimated playtime including rng is roughly 4000h to get most of the essential unlocks.
Or you can buy 30 silver coins (that reference to religion!) with real money, to get access to diabolic boxes way faster.
If you spend a certain amount (1000$) you get premium devil status and the rng is improved with every new 10 dollars you spend.
Premium devil status also opens the possibility for the unique „all of me“ artefact in new mystic lootboxes, 30 silver coins each: once obtained and equipped, you can choose for a single type/group of items (one time use) that the rng of dupes is drastically reduced.
I should be a business consultant for Act-Blizz!!
Gamertag: devils_advocate
One character class available with one skill tree if you buy the 60$ base game, you can choose your starter class out of 4 unique heros. Full story mode available, also all DLC (maps, new classes, new skill trees) is free!!!
The progression system is such: all other chars and skill trees (also the DLC ones) need to be unlocked...by playing the game, you get ingame currency proportional to the time you spend, independent of your achievements. With the ingame currency, you can buy lootboxes, or „diabolic boxes^TM“ with a certain chance to get an artifact that unlocks the skill tree or even a new class all together (very rare!). Estimated playtime including rng is roughly 4000h to get most of the essential unlocks.
Or you can buy 30 silver coins (that reference to religion!) with real money, to get access to diabolic boxes way faster.
If you spend a certain amount (1000$) you get premium devil status and the rng is improved with every new 10 dollars you spend.
Premium devil status also opens the possibility for the unique „all of me“ artefact in new mystic lootboxes, 30 silver coins each: once obtained and equipped, you can choose for a single type/group of items (one time use) that the rng of dupes is drastically reduced.
I should be a business consultant for Act-Blizz!!
Gamertag: devils_advocate
The regulatory bodies do not consider it gambling because there is always a reward. I also doubt they want to touch it at the moment because it would be very difficult to regulate for legal and tax purposes.
Billy Idol
Legend
Just found this on ResetEra:
Apparently, Belgian gambling commission is investigating SW:BF2 lootboxes
https://nieuws.vtm.be/binnenland/onderzoek-naar-nieuw-star-wars-spel
It begins?
Edit: translated article https://www.pcgamesn.com/star-wars-...2-loot-box-gambling-belgium-gaming-commission
Apparently, Belgian gambling commission is investigating SW:BF2 lootboxes
https://nieuws.vtm.be/binnenland/onderzoek-naar-nieuw-star-wars-spel
It begins?
Edit: translated article https://www.pcgamesn.com/star-wars-...2-loot-box-gambling-belgium-gaming-commission
Last edited:
How much games cost or how much pubs are able to generate through game sales is driven by what the market is willing to accept. How any one individual feels is irrelevant. It's all about how much the market is willing to spend.
If I could take that old piece of wood sitting in my backyard and use it to sell $100 a piece tooth picks. You think I wouldn't? LOL
As long as I'm not making false claims and people understand they are just buying a tooth picks, how am I wrong just because some random person feels I am over pricing my "Dobwal's Reclaimed Wood Teeth Cleaners". I am simply charging what the market is willing to support.
Whether I sell them in assorted colors at varying price levels or sell them assorted randomly in a wooden box adorned with a question mark with a chance of obtaining specially engraved tooth picks. It relatively still tooth picks. Unless I am doing something to induce unhealthy behavior in a large segment of my userbase then offering my goods in loot box form is just a mechanism for encouraging more sales.
And addictive game mechanics in and of themselves don't have a negative connotation. Games like WOW, Diablo 3 and Division are built around RNG. Unless significant numbers of gamers go running around selling blowjobs and the elderly go blowing through their social security checks so they can buy the "Platinum Extreme God Gun of the Apocalypse" with matching gear then these mechanics are hardly problematic.
If you have a problem with microtransactions then it's not the pubs you should be blaming it's the divergence between your buying values and the values of the overall gaming userbase. Because pubs can't sell what a market doesn't support.
Nevertheless, if enough gamers have a problem with it then they should continue to be vocal in hopes of actually influencing people to vote with their wallets. Thereby discouraging pubs from heavily researching in this area to keep them from finding some really addictive and unhealthy hooks.
I don't really want to find myself one day in a dark alley on my knees telling myself, "I really need that 'P.E.G.G.A' with the rainbow skin!"
LOL
If I could take that old piece of wood sitting in my backyard and use it to sell $100 a piece tooth picks. You think I wouldn't? LOL
As long as I'm not making false claims and people understand they are just buying a tooth picks, how am I wrong just because some random person feels I am over pricing my "Dobwal's Reclaimed Wood Teeth Cleaners". I am simply charging what the market is willing to support.
Whether I sell them in assorted colors at varying price levels or sell them assorted randomly in a wooden box adorned with a question mark with a chance of obtaining specially engraved tooth picks. It relatively still tooth picks. Unless I am doing something to induce unhealthy behavior in a large segment of my userbase then offering my goods in loot box form is just a mechanism for encouraging more sales.
And addictive game mechanics in and of themselves don't have a negative connotation. Games like WOW, Diablo 3 and Division are built around RNG. Unless significant numbers of gamers go running around selling blowjobs and the elderly go blowing through their social security checks so they can buy the "Platinum Extreme God Gun of the Apocalypse" with matching gear then these mechanics are hardly problematic.
If you have a problem with microtransactions then it's not the pubs you should be blaming it's the divergence between your buying values and the values of the overall gaming userbase. Because pubs can't sell what a market doesn't support.
Nevertheless, if enough gamers have a problem with it then they should continue to be vocal in hopes of actually influencing people to vote with their wallets. Thereby discouraging pubs from heavily researching in this area to keep them from finding some really addictive and unhealthy hooks.
I don't really want to find myself one day in a dark alley on my knees telling myself, "I really need that 'P.E.G.G.A' with the rainbow skin!"
LOL
Last edited:
Bondrewd
Veteran
They might as well start distributing Path of Exile in b.net after that.
Billy Idol
Legend
Except PoE is f2p the last time I checked and played?!?
Are we more forgiving when a game is f2p instead of having a premium price entry?
(Btw, all reviews I came across for PoE stated that progress system is reasonable and fair, which I can confirm for my little playtime I had with the game.)
Are we more forgiving when a game is f2p instead of having a premium price entry?
(Btw, all reviews I came across for PoE stated that progress system is reasonable and fair, which I can confirm for my little playtime I had with the game.)
If people want to properly discuss that, someone needs solid data on earnings off all the publishers and devs including those that went under (not sure how to count those that got bought and killed). There needs to proof that everything was fine last gen for those arguing that, as much as there needs to be proof that games have increased in cost since then.
Until someone creates graphs for all the publisher earnings going back to 1990, I don't think we can have a discussion beyond personal feelings of personal suppositions.
These are microstransactions.
As I said earlier, people need to differentiate between fair MTs like DLC and abusive MTs like gambling loot boxes. Arguing, "MTs are wrong!" is arguing that DLC is wrong.Greed, profits , lazy devs and what not. People throw around these words so easily.
A publisher is a company, a company exists for one reason only, make money for the owners.
Now there are tons of side effects of course, but making money is the reason it exists, if not, you can make games and give them away for free then.
It is very easy, do not buy something if you do not think its valued correctly.
As long as no laws are broken, then Dobwal can charge what ever he wants for his toothpicks, I might stay with my gold string floss instead, but hey
A publisher is a company, a company exists for one reason only, make money for the owners.
Now there are tons of side effects of course, but making money is the reason it exists, if not, you can make games and give them away for free then.
It is very easy, do not buy something if you do not think its valued correctly.
As long as no laws are broken, then Dobwal can charge what ever he wants for his toothpicks, I might stay with my gold string floss instead, but hey
The only argument I have against lootboxes cosmetic or not, is if the only reason they play the game is because of the lootboxes. So the game is just a means to pointless grinding or spending money to open the box.
I think that is... a problem. Big one.
I think that is... a problem. Big one.
Billy Idol
Legend
Lawbreakers has lootboxes iirc, at least I opened a few. And they were cosmetic only.
OT: Here is the thing: I am not 100% sure, if Lawbreakers is really a good game. For me personally, it had generic design and its biggest problem: the character models were very small relatively and looked very same. Hence, the impact of the cosmetics in actual game play was literally not there. Compare this to Overwatch, were every hero can be spotted due to its silhouette alone. Gameplay was ok, but nothing special. The unforgiving "hardcore aspect" of the game is imo exactly what people on console do not like Look again at Overwatch, which is so casual in design of the gameplay and its heros...
OT: Here is the thing: I am not 100% sure, if Lawbreakers is really a good game. For me personally, it had generic design and its biggest problem: the character models were very small relatively and looked very same. Hence, the impact of the cosmetics in actual game play was literally not there. Compare this to Overwatch, were every hero can be spotted due to its silhouette alone. Gameplay was ok, but nothing special. The unforgiving "hardcore aspect" of the game is imo exactly what people on console do not like
Look again at Overwatch, which is so casual in design of the gameplay and its heros...