EA Building Microtransactions into all future games

I don't buy EA games.It's a Porsche thing.

There is no way to compete with RMT(Real Money Transaction) equipment and leveling on any playing field. I don't care if you have the best macro pallets, parsers or the best gaming equipment.

Why play the game if you take all the fun out of it?

I'd be ok with it as long as it's not game crippling. As long as it's either just cosmetic or I can get the same object myself eventually, I mean if you want to pay for a different camo or pay to get a level 50 gun early as long as I can still get that gun at level 50 I'm ok with that I guess...

Yeah, any game that forces you to purchase extra content to either complete the game, or be competitive can shove it as far as I'm concerned.  Instant no buy for me.

If they want to offer additional content that run in parallel w/ standard content (w/o a major advantage), I'm OK with.  Fools with their money are soon parted. 

But I still think these "Micro-transaction" style games need to have entry costs from $0-20, maybe $25, if they are expecting people to purchase a bunch of stuff.

A $60 buy in to get a fraction of the content is a rip-off.  Games that end up costing over $100, even $150 by the time it's said and done had better be mind blowing.....problem is, they aren't.

.....And people keep buying into it....

If the microtransactions have to do with items that do not give a player an advantage (customize armor color etc) then I say go for it.   However, if they try this with multiplayer where someone can have better armor or weapons just because they paid for it, then it will ruin online gaming.

They probably will go the route of Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer. You buy the game for the SP campaign and the MP is a free add on. Once you are there you can either grind your way or buy your way to the more powerful guns, customizations, etc. It is a highly effective model from what I can see. Folks put in hundreds of hours to unlock everything (me included). Keeps the game off of the used shelves and the $2-$3 packs pad the profits on the game.

With this in mind I will probably avoid these types of games going forward. Unless a good bunch of friends are playing, or it is a game franchise that I love like Mass Effect. Me personally, I have been happy to buy a few packs here and there to help keep the MP experience going. All of the maps are free so I figure, throw a few $$$ thier way. It all works out in the end cost wise considering other games charge for the MP Maps.

From a gameplay standpoint this works just fine in ME3, but then again it is a CO-OP MP. If it was competitive and you had to buy packs to keep up with the competition, then yes that would break the experience for alot of people. As it stands now, the in game credits are shared based on the success of the team, not the individual. So some guy rolls in with all the best stuff, then great!

i've kind of seen this type of thing going on with the "free" games that are on teh Windows 8 Store.  In that, you get the game for free.. can only get a few levels, but then the people get more difficult to beat and you have to "pay to upgrade" in order to finish the level.  

If that shit happens - I'M OUT!

New hobby =  

Just another reason for me to hate EA even more.

FUCK YOU EA!

every time i play a game and get to a point where i have to pay money to continue advancing, i drop it.

its cramp in my opinion and i won't be a part of it.

does anyone think this will be present in Destiny (bungie's upcoming release)

It shouldn't since Bungie is under Activision, not EA. Unless I'm missing something...

I don't know Wam... Not for nothing, a persistant MMO like shooter may be nice. You would probably pay a monthly subscription. However the sub includes regular updates, content, server maintenance and community events. Of course you play on a dedicated server. Glitches and cheating are dealt with quickly by in house employees. PvP matches are instanced and are lockable. Because time is money and if people aren't playing they are not paying, I would bet any patch comes real quick since it is server side. I would pay for that all day!

Like I said before though, pay for levels and gear that gives you an advantage is not right. You can't compete with it.

I think that this is an industry movement, not just EA. I think they are bumping up against a fine line and they know it. Part of what makes a game fun is the leader boards and if those are filled with douchebags with deep pockets instead of players with skill, those players will move on and the game will die.

The reality is that these developers are not greedy, they are just looking at new models to help fund the games we love. Again, the only experience I have with this is ME3. There the pack system funded an entire MP experience with 4 FREE DLCs. A lot of players were able to experience the entire thing for no additional cost above the initial game purchase. Pretty cool if you look at it that way. Now if they made it so that you could only unlock certain weapons or characters of the game with real money then who knows how successful that would have been.

Activision is as bad, or worse, as EA. I have no doubt in my mind that they have something like this in the works 

They do this with their sports games, and it can be pretty shitty. The last Tiger Woods game I played you could pay to unlock the better clubs and guys sooner, as well as buy all the little tokens that gave your stats a boost. I don't so much mind if people wanna waste their money to unlock a piece of kit early. But when they can just outright pay for an advantage that's just bullshit. The next CoD will probably let you buy bullet proof jackets to be invincible and let you rent an aimbot by the hour.

EA clarified micros will not be in every console game.  Every game will be able to have them.  It will be up to developers as to whether to implement them.  Or not.

http://www.vg247.com/2013/03/06/eas-jorgensen-u-turns-on-micro-payment-stance/

If Sony’s PS4 announcement presser is any indication, I think this going to be a next gen theme.  That all developers (and publishers) will have much more freedom on consoles to create their own pay structures and assign their own price tags, and probably use their own online marketing strategies.  The Sony/M$ buffer that currently exists between console gamers and the game making industry is going to be drastically reduced.

I came across this article yesterday while getting my daily dose of news and thought of this thread.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/03/05/real-racing-3-app-insider/1965075/

If you dont feel like clicking through, here is the main downside pointed out in the article:

Some events – or cars required to race in the events – need to be purchased via the in-game store, using virtual money earned from winning races. But this is where Real Racing 3's problems arise. Because it's a "freemium" game, you need to pay for every little thing you want to do – and you'll come to that realization very soon. To service your car, upgrade components or change its skin, be prepared to spend a lot of virtual cash or wait a long time. Just ahead of the game's public launch I was forced to wait 15 minutes for an oil change, for example, but the developer has since dropped the time down to 5 minutes for the same task (or even less for others). It's still way too long as it hurts the game's pacing considerably.

You also need money to buy new cars, of course, and it takes a long time to earn it through racing (and during that time you'll be stuck with the same cars and races). As a result, you might consider using real money to buy the game's virtual currency, called "R$," to speed up the process. For instance, $4.99 buys R$140,000 – and a car might be twice that amount -- plus there's also gold you can buy for real money to speed up repairs. Or you can purchase booster packs, such as $9.99 to buy a 2010 Dodge Viper SRT10 ACR-X, unlock two series (Accolade Open and V10 Grand Open) and 65 gold coins. Here's a tip: keep an eye out for car deals, as you'll be able to score pricey cars for less, such as the Audi R8 LMS Ultra for $256,410 instead of $366,300 (30 percent off).

I think games that operate this way are horrible and a nonstarter for me. I actually checked this game out on my iPad and it looks cool, until you realize that free is not really free. It is designed to hook you in and then open your wallet and the next thing you know you have spent $30 on something that should have been a $5 App to begin with.

The data that these companies have on our behaviour indicates that they can take advantage of a minority who spend too much and come out with higher profits.These games hit on the same nerve that turms folks into compulsive gamblers and the "I need it NOW"! generation.

If this is the way they want to go then I'm gonna break my controler and go outside. GAME OVER

Edit: Like how that douchebag reporter throws the "tip" in there to get a "deal"? Is this information article or an Ad for that stupid game because I can't tell.

Wow.  Is $13 for a virtual car really still a [i]micro[/i]transaction?

Now I don't play many FPS games so please bear with me... I think he said the same thing there. He just worded it differantly. Buying the premium service gets you different guns, customizations and vehicles I think. Are these better than the ones you get by just playing the game?

If they are then I don't really see a difference. You simply pay one lump sum instead of the money being paid over time.

Damn.

Gone are the days when I could collect everything and actually fully complete the game!