| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (19)

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 8:04AM Abriael said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
As I said elsewhere, MTs are ok when people aren't asked to pay a monthly fee. It's a very viable way to fund a game without burdenin g casual players (even if anyone that's little more than casual ends up often spending more than a monthly fee, the comparison with CCG isn't definately a wrong one.

It becomes MUCH less ok when they become a further way to milk players on top of the monthly fee, like WoW's appearence/gender changes and SOE's EQ's E-walmart. That's basically an excuse to make people pay additional money for content/services that should most definately be part of the monthly fee itself.


Until now there has been a clear divide between P2P games and F2P games, bastardizing the payment method definately isn't good for us cunsomers, expecially if it becomes widespread in the industry.

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 11:54AM Tanek said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
And, as I said elsewhere, no matter what you think of microtransactions, how exactly is WoW's new gender change option something that should be part of the monthly fee? How is it necessary to your game at all? How does it give anyone an advantage?
Reply

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 8:10AM MrGutts said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Bottom line, I favor MT's...

and the rest, agree to disagree..

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 8:45AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It depends on what you are paying for. But in a AAA MMO where you are already paying $15+ a month, microtransactions are an insult. I pay $15 a month plus I just dropped another $40 for an expansion, Blizz should give me the ability to change my character for free on a long cooldown instead of charging. They are just getting greedy.

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 11:59AM Tanek said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Why? Why should Blizzard give you gender changes, name changes, server changes? I really want someone to give their reasoning for it. Most of the RMT backlash seems to be reflex. I'm not saying there are no problems with it, I would really just like to see someone explain it with more than the, "RMT is bad" or "It is an insult, I quit" kinds of things that I have seen so far.
Reply

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 8:55AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
for my own protection i wont ever start a mt game

every other industy like telecommunications, video/music on demand... goes for flat fees, why does the mmo industry think its clever to completely go the other way ?

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 11:15AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Craylon wrote:

every other industy like telecommunications, video/music on demand... goes for flat fees, why does the mmo industry think its clever to completely go the other way ?


Every other industry, really? I'm guessing you don't mean that, since most commerce is not done by subscription, but by retail since it's just not as popular with consumers. You CAN buy groceries on subscription from a co-op, for instance, but almost nobody does, preferring to buy groceries individually.

As for digital media, iTunes is microtransaction based and is the largest seller of digital music. When I buy video games, I don't pay a subscription for all I can eat. I pay per game that I purchase, whether that's via Steam or at Best Buy. If I go to Popcap.com to play their games, I pay via individual transaction, not by recurring subscription. When I make a phone call from my home phone, I pay by the minute/by the call, etc etc.

There are reasons to be against MT, but the idea that most other industries use subscriptions is simply not true.

--matt
Reply

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 9:04AM MrGutts said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
BTW where is my weekly podcast!!

I can't run/train without listening to you goofy bastards.

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 9:37AM Idle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I was going to post on how I wasn't in favor of being able to buy items that give you advantage over others in the game, but the it dawned on me. It's either money or time.

With micro transactions, he who has the most money wins. They'll buy all the good gear and beat your butt in PvP or take your raid spot because they have better gear.

With a flat subscription fee, he who has the most time wins. They'll grind all the good gear and beat your butt in PvP or take your raid spot because they have better gear.

For Joe Average, both situations kinda blow but they're really not unfair when you think about it. There will always be someone willing to spend the time or the money to become top dog. Especially when they don't have anything in real life to crow about.

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 9:40AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It cost allot to run a MMO, from the Devs to the power consumption of the servers the game runs on. Companies aren’t looking to break even, they need to profit or they will be shut down.
Its like a amusement park, you pay a lot to get in, they give you free rides, but the games, concession, and souvenirs all cost extra.Look at Professional or College sporting events they charge a fee to get in but then offer additional items to enhance your experience. Some bars charge a cover and still have the nerve to ask for you to pay for your beverages.

Does it take away from the experience? I don’t think so.

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 12:11PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
let me reposition myselve: im not 100% against mt.
im against mt that charge for stuff i think belongs to customer service like server-/ namechange for players
im against mt for ingame gold/loot and xp
i would not object to mt if theres incredible good content like a superb questline. that way i could see mt like an ongoing series of mini-expansions.

of course companies are in there to maker money but do we really believe more money to a game means a better game ?
if thats true wow should be 20times as good as eve for example.

if companies want to make money they should do it in an honest way: provide entertainment. if i have to pay 3$ for an incredible detailed quest that entertains me 5h im willing to pay that in mt.
if i have to pay 3$ to buy an xp pot to keep my leveling in synch with my friends then that mt is targeted only to feed my addiction.

as for the aspect that the guy with more time to play has an advantage: just make relaxed servers like nc did with l2 in korea. open servers that allow only a limited time a month/week alongside regular servers.


Reply

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 9:40AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I like both ways so long as they are done right. Traditional monthly fees are fine with me as long as they aren't too expensive and they don't gimp on content patches. Microtransactions a la Guild Wars' online store I'm also okay with. Everything else...not so much.

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 10:18AM Deryk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't like RMT and / or Micro transactions. They detract from the game and separate the community of the game into the "haves" and the "have-nots". Not everyone can afford these items. A subscription fee is bad enough, letting alone having to spend hard-earnt money on digital stuff. I know of people that have spent $1000's of $$$ on trying to get a single rare card in SOE's LoN and SWG card games! That's their call, but it makes a VERY unfair advantage for people when they get these items.

Whatever happened to paying a once-a-month sub fee and logging in with your friends and having fun? All this extra nonsense just detracts from the fun of a game!

I hope my favorite game LotRO NEVER goes to any type of RMT. If it did I'd have to deal with it, but it's still not fair, and I would think ALOT less of Turbine Entertainment if they did so.

In economic hard-times I think it irresponsible of companies to come up with gimicks to try and dig deeper into people's wallets/purses. Granted it's the individual's responsibility to "Just say NO!" to RMT, but we all know not everyone is fiscally responsible and companies count on that!

So don't be a dupe to a corporate exec, "Just say NO!" to RMT and micro-transactions! These gimicks will soon go away.

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 12:07PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
But if you think about it, what about people who can't "afford" to invest the time?

I played WoW for years and hit 70 during the BC days. And then I stopped playing, as I really couldn't be arsed with raiding and all the associated waiting around, little Hitlers barking orders at me and the whole vicious circle of not being "ready" for raids as I didn't have raid gear.

I'd purchased (with in-game gold) the best gear I could and the only option to get anything else was to grind PvP rep. So faced with that, I quit.

But suppose I'd been able to buy some gear to keep me interested?

I don't think it has to be a case of "one or the other" when it comes to payment. What about people who have active subs but don't play that often? For example, I didn't log into WoW for about 5 months yet during that time I was paying.

Sorry, I'm rambling but it's almost Beer O' Clock and I'm eyeing the clock...
Reply

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 10:36AM bylthe said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I am okay with microtransactions in a game. I am not for MTs in a game that charges a monthly subscription. I think it should be one or the other, just not both. I refuse to play a game that has both.

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 11:09AM Mr Angry said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Massively could use some editing, there is already a ton of feedback on this subject from the many threads this week, then two almost identical stories on the front page?

I think there has already been some excellent discussion on this, but I don't think I can be bothered to go over all this yet again, it get's too tiring!

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 11:58AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't mind them to be honest, providing they're not forced on the player or balanced so they're more "enhancements" rather than "must-haves."

Think of them like The Sims expansions - you can buy those "stuff" packs and get a few extra furnishings for you houses, but you can still play the game without them.

I think NCSoft's approach is pretty good - it's stuff you fancy but don't NEED to play and it doesn't alter the core game too much.

So for example, if they offered the Midnight Steed in WOW as a horse that looked cool but was just a reskin of an existing mount in terms of performance, that's the sort of thing I think works. But if the Midnight Steed was 300% faster than all mounts and also made the rider invulnerable in combat, well then it's getting a bit silly...

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 12:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think it is a simple matter of one or the other. There are plenty of people willing to do MTs and more power to them.

However when you mix MTs with a monthly payment you run into problems. People expect a high level of support and new content when they pay a monthly fee. And even if the developer "thinks" they are continuing to give there customers the same high level of support the perception will be that they are getting less value for their $ then they were before.

This will anger the customer base who thinks they are now paying more to get the same thing they had before. It does not matter if it is true or not.

Now the trick would be to reduce the monthly payment and add MT. Doing that would let people have something to blame the precevied lower quality on, and would encourage people to make some MTs as the cost would just be a break even.

But if the devs do it right they can get more money out of us on a monthly basis and keep us happy.

But I am betting they will try leaving the monthly fee at the same point and add MTs. Shrug, the bigger the company the dumber they tend to be. See SOE if you dont believe me.

Posted: Dec 12th 2008 2:07PM Evy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I prefer paying a monthly fee up front and being done with it. Micro-transactions make it too easy to spend more than you intended. I want a flat fee.

Featured Stories

Why I Play: ArcheAge

Posted on Oct 30th 2014 12:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW