The subject of microtransactions has long been a point of contention. Not only do some people feel that the practice somehow lessens a game's worth, they consider the very act to be malicious in nature. Other people seem to be welcoming the idea with open arms, and more and more game developers are redoubling their efforts in North America and Europe. The reason? They don't want to get left behind.
Selling cosmetic and grinding-assisting items has long since become the norm for Asian MMOs, but only recently have we seen the tide shift from 100% subscription based to a blend in the western world.
At first only the eastern companies such as Nexon were attempting to make any progress with western gamers. Most of their success was found in the yet-to-become-stubborn youth with games like Maple Story, Combat Arms and Mabinogi. It wasn't until titles such as City of Heroes and Guild Wars from NCsoft began offering its own microstransactions that you could say any headway was made into the more traditional space.
Shortly after NCsoft found a great deal of success with their games, Sony Online Entertainment made a move to position their lineup with options aplenty for those looking to make tiny purchases for the sake of some cool looking items or a little experience boost. More recently Free Realms has marked SOE's major entry into the realm of pay-when-you-like, although even it comes with an optional five bucks a month membership plan.
And now it looks as though Cryptic is going the same route with Champions Online, and there have been rumors of Star Wars: The Old Republic experimenting with microtransaction concepts as well. Some see these things happening and only want to see big evil corporations -- obviously 100-500 people constitute a massive entity -- trying to wring money from their pockets.
I'm a fan of Occam's razor, which basically states that the simplest explanation for a phenomenon is most likely the correct explanation. In the case of microtransactions, the simplest reasoning would be that a company must remain flexible and open to new business models in order to stay competitive. Without an edge in any competition -- be it in nature or business -- you will die out, leaving your opposition to reap all the reward.
Another popular argument concerns itself with perceived value, which is an illusion to begin with when looking at the perceived value of a subscription model. Say you get a free content update every three months on schedule -- and that time and the amount of content can vary depending on subscribers and other factors -- but let's got with that original concept. That means the average subscriber is paying, in essence, 45 bucks for that "free" additional content. Pull any of it aside for server upkeep or employee pay and you're still talking about money that ultimately goes into helping deliver said "free" content. It's all about perception.
Even assuming that someone doesn't play for those three months and only comes back when that content comes out, it's an ambiguous way to determine what players want. By releasing some new content in smaller pay-as-you-like packs, it allows a developer to have at least some understanding of exactly what people are willing to spend cash on, which is a boon for all.
Frankly speaking, I highly doubt that the future of western MMOs lies solely with microtransactions. Rather, the future is going to be some kind of blend throughout the entire market. Some games will remain mostly subscription based, with a few innocent five or ten dollar mini-expansions here or there. Other games will lean the other direction, offering a very cheap membership fee or possibly none at all. And finally, some games will sit somewhere in the middle.
I think that superhero MMOs have a wonderful opportunity to find this middle-ground, and City of Heroes is probably the first. So it really seems not too surprising the Champions Online will be doing the same, and with SOE's open imperative to support the microtransaction model we can already assume DC Universe Online will be doing the same.
Change is already here and more is yet to come, but isn't such a bad thing. Don't listen to the fear mongers out there, most of whom don't really believe in what they're spouting off anyhow. The fact is, if someone doesn't like paying a dollar here or there when they want to, that option is available to them. It's already here, and it's not going anywhere.
Reader Comments (8)
Posted: May 11th 2009 11:46AM (Unverified) said
I think most people’s concern is the severity of its implementation.
I’m not 100% against MTs. I’m 100% against paying for statistical advantages. Cosmetic differences are ok to me. Things like pots, convenience devices (loot grabbers or faster horses, etc) are fine as well. Server Transfers, Respec tokens, new hair cuts… all fine, b/c they don’t give an advantage over other players. But, my issue arises if the items bought give an advantage in any form in PvP or make a player w/out the want of purchasing an item obsolete. For instance, if a set of armor can be bought, and then the community spams for a tank to run a raid, but has to have that armor. That’s unfair.
Additionally, I DON’T like the NCSoft and SOE mechanic, b/c their MTs are ON TOP of the monthly subscription fee. So, in your example of perception, where are those additional funds going, or what is the monthly sub paying for? It’s no longer just the service and updates. And further with CoH, they’re seeing even more revenue from in-game advertisements, so why are they charging players even further on-top of that?
One or the other, not both IMO.
But, if done carefully, I think that the MT model could be a great success if implemented in a careful fashion in the western market, especially in this economy. But, if not implemented in a very casual and cosmetic way, what that game will lose, is hardcore players. And that hurts any game.
Most hardcore players won’t waste their time w/ playing hours and hours a day, creating guilds, running guilds, and hosting events for players and guildies alike, if their hard work is futile. Hardcore players are the backbone of every successful game. They’re the raid leaders. The strategy writers. They run the fan sites. They creat add-ons. They make programs for players to see their “builds”. They are the forum celebrities. If they put all that effort into a game, and see that Billy-2-hours-week can just purchase the same advantages they busted their hump for, why devote time to a game that allows that?
I’m not saying ALL hardcore players are like this, but being able to devote time and knowledge of a game and being in the upper echelon of players, provides a sense of superiority to those players and drives them to keep going. Most of the hardcore players I’m talking about spin the superiority into an extremely positive manner. Not all, but most. As such, they do more by holding groups of players together b/c they have those achievements over other players. If you take that away, you only have casual gamers that just will not hold a community together for very long.
TOR probably has the best chance, b/c of its recognition, to be able to pull off a MT based model, if done right, and still making Hardcore players viable as the “glue”. But it has to create a very delicate balance of giving casual players something “worth” paying for, while not impeding on hardcore players’ ability to lead through example.
Reply
I’m not 100% against MTs. I’m 100% against paying for statistical advantages. Cosmetic differences are ok to me. Things like pots, convenience devices (loot grabbers or faster horses, etc) are fine as well. Server Transfers, Respec tokens, new hair cuts… all fine, b/c they don’t give an advantage over other players. But, my issue arises if the items bought give an advantage in any form in PvP or make a player w/out the want of purchasing an item obsolete. For instance, if a set of armor can be bought, and then the community spams for a tank to run a raid, but has to have that armor. That’s unfair.
Additionally, I DON’T like the NCSoft and SOE mechanic, b/c their MTs are ON TOP of the monthly subscription fee. So, in your example of perception, where are those additional funds going, or what is the monthly sub paying for? It’s no longer just the service and updates. And further with CoH, they’re seeing even more revenue from in-game advertisements, so why are they charging players even further on-top of that?
One or the other, not both IMO.
But, if done carefully, I think that the MT model could be a great success if implemented in a careful fashion in the western market, especially in this economy. But, if not implemented in a very casual and cosmetic way, what that game will lose, is hardcore players. And that hurts any game.
Most hardcore players won’t waste their time w/ playing hours and hours a day, creating guilds, running guilds, and hosting events for players and guildies alike, if their hard work is futile. Hardcore players are the backbone of every successful game. They’re the raid leaders. The strategy writers. They run the fan sites. They creat add-ons. They make programs for players to see their “builds”. They are the forum celebrities. If they put all that effort into a game, and see that Billy-2-hours-week can just purchase the same advantages they busted their hump for, why devote time to a game that allows that?
I’m not saying ALL hardcore players are like this, but being able to devote time and knowledge of a game and being in the upper echelon of players, provides a sense of superiority to those players and drives them to keep going. Most of the hardcore players I’m talking about spin the superiority into an extremely positive manner. Not all, but most. As such, they do more by holding groups of players together b/c they have those achievements over other players. If you take that away, you only have casual gamers that just will not hold a community together for very long.
TOR probably has the best chance, b/c of its recognition, to be able to pull off a MT based model, if done right, and still making Hardcore players viable as the “glue”. But it has to create a very delicate balance of giving casual players something “worth” paying for, while not impeding on hardcore players’ ability to lead through example.
Posted: May 11th 2009 11:52AM (Unverified) said
Also, I just though of this analogy…
In Sports, a player relies on their skill to play the game. They wear a uniform, BUT they can wear shoes, gloves, use bats or cleats that are, while w/in the discretion of the rules, their choice.
A MT model like that would be fine. What they don’t allow (ok, what they publically denounce) is the use of steroids.
Reply
In Sports, a player relies on their skill to play the game. They wear a uniform, BUT they can wear shoes, gloves, use bats or cleats that are, while w/in the discretion of the rules, their choice.
A MT model like that would be fine. What they don’t allow (ok, what they publically denounce) is the use of steroids.
Posted: May 11th 2009 11:53AM Myria said
What microtransactions does Guild Wars have? Admittedly I haven't played in a while, but I can't think of anything that could remotely be construed as a microtransaction.
Also, while NCsoft owns Guild Wars, Anet did all of the development. Calling GW an NCsoft game is kind of like calling WoW a Vivendi game.
Frankly I think the article is reaching to a ludicrous degree to try and support the unsupportable.
Reply
Also, while NCsoft owns Guild Wars, Anet did all of the development. Calling GW an NCsoft game is kind of like calling WoW a Vivendi game.
Frankly I think the article is reaching to a ludicrous degree to try and support the unsupportable.
Posted: May 11th 2009 12:05PM (Unverified) said
Yeah. Keep microtransactions on specific servers. Let people play the game without 'em if they want.
Reply
Posted: May 11th 2009 12:06PM (Unverified) said
In GW you can buy extra character slots, skill packs, mini-episodes, etc.
Technically speaking, I guess they're 'Microtransactions', however it's always appeared to me to be done in 'good taste', so to speak.
Reply
Technically speaking, I guess they're 'Microtransactions', however it's always appeared to me to be done in 'good taste', so to speak.
Posted: May 11th 2009 12:40PM Myria said
I guess I don't see the extra character slots as a micro-transaction in any meaningful sense. It's really no different from buying two copies of the game, which is what pretty much every serious player did before Anet introduced buyable slots.
Skill packs are a little closer, but since they're strictly PvP and were introduced so PvPers didn't have to PvE to cap elite skills, I'm not convinced they qualify. Essentially Skill Packs are a way for PvPers to buy a PvP-only version of GW.
As for the mini-episode, originally that was supposed to be a pre-order only freebie, if I remember right, no? Presumably (and I quit playing right around this time, so I don't really know) the fact that it had to do with Gwen, the one character from pre-searing everyone wondered what in god's name happened to, caused enough screaming by those who didn't get it that Anet decided to release it separately. Given the (fairly ludicrous for what it is) cost of it I'm not sure it doesn't qualify as a mini-expansion (heavy on the mini, it's just one mission isn't it?) but I guess I can see an argument made.
I suppose part of the problem is defining what qualifies as a micro-transaction, something it seems to me the article leaves deliberately vague.
My, probably flawed, understanding of the term is that it basically boils down to small -- generally sub-US$1 -- charges for in-game items or abilities. "For seventy-five cents you can have your sword of orc cleaving upgraded to an uber sword of awesomeness, click here now!" kind of thing.
Reply
Skill packs are a little closer, but since they're strictly PvP and were introduced so PvPers didn't have to PvE to cap elite skills, I'm not convinced they qualify. Essentially Skill Packs are a way for PvPers to buy a PvP-only version of GW.
As for the mini-episode, originally that was supposed to be a pre-order only freebie, if I remember right, no? Presumably (and I quit playing right around this time, so I don't really know) the fact that it had to do with Gwen, the one character from pre-searing everyone wondered what in god's name happened to, caused enough screaming by those who didn't get it that Anet decided to release it separately. Given the (fairly ludicrous for what it is) cost of it I'm not sure it doesn't qualify as a mini-expansion (heavy on the mini, it's just one mission isn't it?) but I guess I can see an argument made.
I suppose part of the problem is defining what qualifies as a micro-transaction, something it seems to me the article leaves deliberately vague.
My, probably flawed, understanding of the term is that it basically boils down to small -- generally sub-US$1 -- charges for in-game items or abilities. "For seventy-five cents you can have your sword of orc cleaving upgraded to an uber sword of awesomeness, click here now!" kind of thing.
Posted: May 11th 2009 4:30PM (Unverified) said
The Guild Wars Bonus Mission Pack is more of a mini-expansion: it has four missions and gives access to around 48 or so new items (Mursaat, Tengu, Undead and Charr versions of all the various weapon types and shields I believe). These weapons don't give any advantage over other types that are readily available from weapons NPC crafters or as drops.
So I agree, not really a micro transaction compared to the stuff being sold in many F2P type games, but I guess that depends on your definition of the term. All the items in the GW item shop are like that; more char slots, storage panes, skill and pet unlocks for the lazy, name changes, makeover kit, and the GotY / Fire Imp updates to bring your account up to date with the versions being sold currently. Mostly overpriced? Yes! But nothing that changes the game play in any real way and is all optional.
I think it really comes down to two types of additional transactions: stuff that is purely cosmetic / convenience, or items that give you an advantage over other players that either can't be obtained through regular play or that would take so much grinding that it isn't realistically possible to get without paying. The first isn't a problem. The second is a deal breaker, at least for me.
As to the prices many are charging (I'm looking at you Atlantica Online and Free Realms!!!!), the prices could hardly be called "micro", by any means. I don't mind supporting games I enjoy playing. I do mind having to pay $5 to $10 a pop for stuff that isn't permanent or that can't be transferred between my characters (Runes of Magic mounts, for instance). So they don't get my money and I end up not playing them very much, if at all.
On the upside, at least with many of the non-subscription games, you'll always have access to the game and anything you buy as long as the game servers are up and running. Buy anything in a subscription game and you lose access to it the moment your sub runs out.
Reply
So I agree, not really a micro transaction compared to the stuff being sold in many F2P type games, but I guess that depends on your definition of the term. All the items in the GW item shop are like that; more char slots, storage panes, skill and pet unlocks for the lazy, name changes, makeover kit, and the GotY / Fire Imp updates to bring your account up to date with the versions being sold currently. Mostly overpriced? Yes! But nothing that changes the game play in any real way and is all optional.
I think it really comes down to two types of additional transactions: stuff that is purely cosmetic / convenience, or items that give you an advantage over other players that either can't be obtained through regular play or that would take so much grinding that it isn't realistically possible to get without paying. The first isn't a problem. The second is a deal breaker, at least for me.
As to the prices many are charging (I'm looking at you Atlantica Online and Free Realms!!!!), the prices could hardly be called "micro", by any means. I don't mind supporting games I enjoy playing. I do mind having to pay $5 to $10 a pop for stuff that isn't permanent or that can't be transferred between my characters (Runes of Magic mounts, for instance). So they don't get my money and I end up not playing them very much, if at all.
On the upside, at least with many of the non-subscription games, you'll always have access to the game and anything you buy as long as the game servers are up and running. Buy anything in a subscription game and you lose access to it the moment your sub runs out.
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- WoW loses another 100,000 subscribers 146 comments
- The Daily Grind: What's the highest sub fee you'd pay? 85 comments
- Earthrise shutting down today 69 comments
- Star Trek Online unpacks Cardassian mystery boxes 57 comments
- Meet the guild that's lasted over 16 years 54 comments







