the 10% that said they do? The CEOs
10% of game developers are actually CEOs? That doesn’t make any sense.
if you asked a ceo of a game company wouldnt he tell you he works in game development? also, it was a joke :)
Or management
But the CEO’s third luxury yacht? What about that?
Oh no we have to work harder.
Do it for Yacht.
90% of developers surveyed have no say in the matter
I’d hope 100% of customers don’t want micro transactions.
It always bothered me that Ubisoft sells micro transactions to level up characters in a single player game. Like wtf who is buying this stuff? And why?
Why pay to avoid playing a game?
To be fair, the levelling mechanics in some ubisoft games (looking at you, AC origins) are complete garbage that do nothing but arbitrarily restrict your movement.
Still unsure why people would pay to skip them though.
FYI, for anyone interested in fixing this kind of bs:
there’s a program calle WeMod that easily fixes this kind of thing.
it’s basically an automated trainer platform that let’s you cheat in games with 0 prerequisites, know-how, or effort.
highly recommended for stuff like assassin’s creed, far cry, and similar games with bullshit grind.
setting xp/dmg/resources to something like 2 or 3X literally makes the game playable again!
(probably collects a ton of telemetry, which I don’t care about on my gaming system…)
I’ve never heard of this before, but like I might look into it. I expect this will trigger any client side anticheat under moon though
not really, highly depends on the game… definitely worth checking beforehand though!
haven’t run into any problems so far, but that doesn’t mean that it can’t trigger anti-cheats
I remember reading an anecdote about a guy’s kid relative, who would describe a game they want to play (not even make themselves), and before describing mechanics even they listed out all the hypothetical microtransactions.
honestly, if they are COSMETIC only, I don’t mind micro transactions. It’s when you are able to get an advantage over the f2p(f2p being players who don’t buy further than the base game in this instance) players that I have an issue with it.
I would argue in some games MT’s are almost a requirement, like the sims has a valid argument for having microtransactions with the community store. (I don’t agree with their predatory DLC/Expansion pack nonsense though).
My rule of thumb is, if the DLC or Microtransaction is something that should be base game, I don’t think it should exist as an upcharge. Single player games to boost your level to the next level? that should be something that is available as base game via a dev console. Wallhack/god mode? should be available as a cheat/dev console. A party pink pinata hat in a game that is a serious shooter? Yea that can be a microtransaction. it’s not something that should be in the original set of files in the game.
I don’t think many people actually have issues with Microtransactions, they have an issue with how hard companies are currently abusing that system.
No because that slippery slope is how we got to current day microtransactions.
the alternative is the content just /not/ being there period though. A studio isn’t going to just supply the content for free, by having the MT’s there it’s increasing content to a game. The studios are abusing it sure, but just don’t buy it. I’ve never once spent money on any of my games for a MT that should have been base game. I have to say I haven’t had any issue with it. It’s there for the people who want to throw money away, and as long as it isn’t impacting me, I don’t care. I would rather have the option available for people to use it, then no option at all.
At the end of the day, Money talks, the studios that are abusing it are doing so because people are willing to throw money away like that. A better solution is to just not partake in the game, let the people who throw money away do their thing, just don’t buy those types of games IMO
if they are COSMETIC only
Honestly stopped reading here because this is how it all started. Motherfucking horse armor was the very first paid cosmetic dlc, and it’s only gotten worse. Publishers will keep pushing the line for what is acceptable for squeezing money out of players. We have to push back at every turn, otherwise debacles like overwatch 2 will keep happening.
look at what else it has given the field though. Since that was created, user mod stores have become further involved, paid mod workshops and free mod workshops have sprouted up. Cosmetic’s that for the longest time never was even thought of are now sprung up. Character creation has been re-invented basically. None of this would have happened if it continued to be a one-off price. Honestly online servers wouldn’t be lasting as long either as no company will run a game once the profit margin stagnates.
The problem at hand is not microtransactions, it’s consumers willingness to put up with/buy bullshit that shouldn’t be one
I feel like gear progression is massively underrated. I love to dress up with my muscley rpg man, and make him look cooler and more awesome as he gets stronger. I don’t want the best cosmetics locked behind a paywall. In MMOs it also just murders any respect/cred you get from having awesome gear that needed you to clear an epic raid or similar.
I get the whole cosmetics thing for “free to pay” e-sport-esc games though, where there’s not really any gear progression
Fully agree, I like gear progression in games, its been a bit since ive played one that relied on it but, it added stuff to do. I’m not saying that system shouldn’t exist as well. I also can’t think of any games that used that system that removed it when adding the store.
Assassin’s Creed is the best example I can think of. It added a store to literally buy gear. Also see like every MMO. This one is more of a reach, but I’d also say something like Hunt: Showdown falls victim to this, as it would be awesome if you could see a hunter and know their “power level” by the cosmetics.
Horizon, both ZD and FW, are a modern example of having gear progression that exists and isn’t ruined by microtransactions
Oh I’m sure a little line of coke won’t hurt. But just a peak into pandoras box…
Your mindset opened the floodgates for this market manipulation 20 years ago and you think we should try more of that?
These companies will never be satisfied until they can leverage your labor for another quarter in the machine.
There is no negotiating. Legislation is required.
Ban the entire business model. It’s neither a product nor a service - it’s a scam. Games make you value arbitrary worthless nonsense. That’s what makes them games. There is no ethical form of attaching real-world prices to that charade.
‘Oh, but if it’s only cosmetic…’ Y’mean proof that people can be made to want stuff, even if it doesn’t do anything? Entire games exist to funnel people toward emotional response, and some of them make billions. Saying ‘it’s just hats’ is the opposite of a defense.
No need to ban it. Just dont participate in it.
I’m not-buying-it as hard as I can, and hey guess what? It’s still swallowing the entire industry. It is half the revenue and growing. This abuse is so easy and risk-free that it’s in full-priced, major-franchise, single-player titles. Nobody cares that ignoring the in-game advertisements is feasible. They’re still there, nagging at every player, reminding them there’s a better version of the game if they just open up their wallets and look the other way.
We were never going to shop our way out of this. It is greed exploiting human irrationality. The only real solution is to make companies just sell games. You want recurring fees, publishers? That’s called a subscription. People don’t throw as much money at those? Wow, you don’t say. It’s almost like rational spending decisions look nothing like what this business model sucks out of people.
It’s still swallowing the entire industry
No, it’s not. There’s phenomenal indie games out there. Hades 2, Elfen Ring DLC and Black Myth Wukong are just some of the latest games I’m having a blast with, and then theres still rimworld, factorio, timberborn, CK3, Dead by Daylight … The list goes on. None of those games has Ads for ingame purchases (except DbD) and all of them are phenomenal.
None of them are AAA,truey, but idc. Theres so many fun games out there that idc what ubisoft, EA, Activision or other shit companies release.
I think iPhones are overpriced garbage, yet I’m not sitting here and asking for them to be banned - I just don’t buy it. I bought a used pixel 6, installed graphen, done.
I think casinos are stupid and a waste of money, yet I’m not sitting here and asking for them to be banned. I just don’t go there.
I think Microsoft, google and Amazon are terrible companies, yet I’m not sitting here and asking for them to be banned. I just don’t use their products and services.
Making a change starts with yourself. If you don’t buy their stuff, great - still plenty of great games out there.
‘This systemic problem doesn’t affect me personally, so it can’t be serious’ is hilarious enough without your list of games it hasn’t spread to including a game it has spread to.
I have no remaining patience for libertarianism. This business model is fundamentally abusive. Of fucking course we should regulate that, the same way we regulated gambling, and the same way the DOJ is coming for Microsoft, Google, and Amazon, and the same way the EU has Apple by the nuts. It is perfectly fine for you to say - ‘fuck these business practices, for anyone.’ The fact that you, personally, can choose to ignore them, doesn’t make them any less real for millions of people.
According to the 100 developers asked out of the 300 speakers at the event, 89% said that they believe that premium AAA games can be “financially successful just by being Buy-to-Play.”
Moving on to challenges facing the industry as a whole, 55% believe it’s caused by market saturation while another 46% point towards the rising development costs of games. Regarding layoffs, 57% said that layoffs will continue either at the same pace or a higher pace over the next 12 months.
All due respect to Gamescom speakers, but I may have some follow-up questions for at least 35 of them.
TF2 and it’s consequences have been a disaster for humanity
I mean I understand if it’s a game like Dead By Daylight or something that has regular content updates that need to be paid for, but… there’s no reason why Immortals Fenyx Rising, a single player narrative driven experience, should have me busting out the credit card to try to get some Adventure Time armor that I should just be able to unlock by playing the fucking game.
Micro transactions are a cash cow.
developers handle design, not finances. Microtransactions have always been in the interest of profit, not to make the games better. They were the markets compromise with gamers being unlikely to pay enough to cover costs of a Triple A development cycle.
Reminder that when the NES came out, it was still $60 dollars for a game, which would be about $180 today. And that’s not accounting for all the extra manhours that now go into the major titles. Microtransactions and DLCs are the deal with the devil we made to keep games from being $200+ a pop
Reminder that the amount of gamers worldwide has exploded since the NES came out. There is now upward of 3 billion active gamers. I guarantee you inflation grew at a slower rate.
two business partners are chatting and one says, “We’re losing money on every sale”, so the other one responds, “Yea, but we’ll make it up in volume!”
Software costs nothing to copy and paste, only to design.
deleted by creator
If a response would be satisfied by inserting the word “essentially,” please do not make that response.
deleted by creator
Alan Wake 2 (for example) did not spend a decade in development, but somehow blow “pretty much 100% of the budget” after launch.
You can maybe salvage that sentence fragment by insisting we’re talking about multiplayer-only “live service” crap that goes on for years and years after launch… but the topic you named is distribution. The marginal cost of software is essentially zero. Supporting customer N+1 is a rounding error. Valve basically has a monopoly on PC game distribution and only employs a couple hundred people. Do those salaries cost money? No shit. But relative to, conservatively, half the money spent on PC games? Fraction of a percent.
“Keeping people employed” takes a lot of money because making a game takes a lot of people a long time. Shipping is the cheap part. Has been since CD-ROMs. In many infamous cases, people were not kept employed once their game shipped, because all those people were not necessary to make all of the money off of the game.
Games are so damn cheap. It’s insane how cheap games are now. Final Fantasy XVI is going for 50 bucks on Steam and that’s an expensive release. Yesterday I bought several Disgaea games for like ten bucks each and those are a good hundred hours a pop. The top seller list on Steam right now includes multiple games cheaper than 20 bucks. And that’s not even counting all the free to play stuff and the constant sales.
There are great looking and playing games out there that cost less than a movie ticket and a bucket of popcorn. I had to save for six months to get a game when I was a teenager.
