Take Two: All future games will feature microtransactions

[BobF64]

With micro-transactions, i expect the game to be free and any buyable things to be optional.

I also think that if you pay up to £30-40 cumulatively, you should never have to buy anything else again in that game.

Neither thing I expect to happen in a PC game micro-transaction environment, because the games normally have more depth and work put into them than the mobile market.

[Xlucine]

It's not a zero sum game. A few publishers going in a particular direction does not do a single thing to stop independents from releasing superb games without microtransactions.

It is a shame to see the big companies with the well known and loved IP going this way

[Wrinkly]

I'm fighting back by making the main transaction as micro as possible. I never buy a game these days until it's at least 40% off on Steam. I doubt I'd have had such patience in my youth though.

Doing the same. I hope your checking cdkeys and fanatic (was bundle stars) for the deals before buying on Steam.

[LeetyMcLeet]

I don't mind coughing-up for AAA titles, but there's no way in hell I'm then going to pay for additional stuff like skins, maps or even PTW stuff to give me an advantage over another player. There's a line.

Take World of Tanks. I love the game so I've spent about £35-40 quid on it over the last couple of years, but say I wanted the "whole game" and bare in mind that some of the tanks are literally £30-£70 (for what is effectively just a model and skin lol), you'd be spending thousands on it. Oh, and don't forget the PTW ammo lol.

Spread the word people, Don't buy games that require additional purchases or at the very least, don't buy the "additional" content.

Oh, and don't forget which company gave us the micro-transaction model in the first place people... (Hint: it's one of the only things that they've ever actually "innovated" (a word they throw around alot)) and the company name (something else they stole lol) rhymes with Crapple

[Spreadie]

Vote with your wallets, peeps.

I don't do games subscriptions or micro-transactions - I just find a different game.

[kalniel]

It is a shame to see the big companies with the well known and loved IP going this way

Again, IP isn't zero sum either. The incredible Divinity series: indie. Pillars of Eternity series: indie. Samorost/Machinarium/Botanicula etc.: Indie.

I don't know where to class the Witcher series - they are a huge publisher and company, but sort of indie as in house game. Again, huge IP, but no microtransactions.

[cheesemp]

I spend £100's on games a year but to date I've bought 1 DLC and felt bad for that (and that was BF Vietnam which was almost a full game). I don't plan to start changing now. I guess I'll stick to indie devs and GOTY editions then... The game industry is not what it once was.

[MrJim]

I don't have a problem with micro-transactions for cosmetic items in games - if that's necessary to fund extra maps and updates to the game, that's fine. It's how Rainbow Six Siege & Overwatch have done things, and it's far better than having paid-for 'Premium' DLC services which splits the player base behind a pay-wall. What I despise are 'pay-to-win' micro-transactions, where certain items in paid-for loot crates give you a definite advantage in the game (Battlefront II).

[Spud1]

Personally i've no issue with micro transactions as such.. as long as they are not "pay to win".

Skins, emotes, dances etc are fine - but weapon unlocks, game affecting perks etc, are not.

Blizzard have a great model for this for example - Overwatch is a paid-for game, but all the new content is free to everyone. new maps and heroes are regularly released (2-3 a year between the two) for no extra cost. The micro transactions there are only for new skins and emotes I've bought a few too (admittedly not many) as its a game I have sunk hundreds of hours in to and I wanted the skins Nothing game changing though. You also get free ones every few games so there is very little incentive to pay for them. I expect that free to play games like hearthstone are included in their figures for micro transactions and thats where most of their revenue comes from...i've spent hundreds on hearthstone packs over the years, but then I do have well over 400 hours in that game so I don;t feel bad about it

PUBG is another good example - loot crates exist there but again are purely cosmetic, and again are given our like candy for free if you just play the game.

Most of EA's games are a bad example, as they often have pay to win options. e.g. paying to unlock all weapons in a Battlefield class rather than earning them in game, or Battlefront 2 including weapons and upgrade cards within their loot crates.

Personally I am more put off by lazy developers than I am by micro transactions - Ubisoft are notorious for it, I don't think they have released a new game in 10 years..just variations on the batman or Farcry games with different skins (All the baman & Shadow of War games are identical, as are all the recent farcry games).

[Saracen]

Vote with your wallets, peeps.

I don't do games subscriptions or micro-transactions - I just find a different game.

That, basically.

I guess a lot depends on how it's implemented, but my stance, for many years, has been that I buy software as a purchase item, expecting X benefit, for £Y cash.

If I don't know how much £Y is, I don't buy. And whether it's a monthly subscription or in-game microtransactions, it is impossible to know what it'll cost in total. So, whether it's a game, or Office upgrade, or Photoshop, I'm NOT going to buy a pig in a poke.

That said, it's not that I can't see the appeal, certainly for some users, of subscriptions, certainly on business or 'serious' software, like Office/Photoshop.

But it ain't for me, and nor are microtransactions.

So .... if microtransactions are available but not necessary to play, and provided that other people buying power-ups, etc, doesn't wreck MY game experience, then I don't care if other people buy in.

My very strong personal preference is for either standalone, single player games, or for co-op mode with a couple of mates clearing pre--set or AI opponents. I'm not really interested, at all, it online shoot-em ups, etc, against a bunch of planet-wide strangers.

Sadly, single-player and co-op mode seem to be the excrption not the rule, these days. Add to that that since the inception of Steam, exactly one game has tempted me to make an exception to my "no way in hell" rule for Steam and it largely explains why gaming doesn't feature highly in my life these days, despite being an avid gamer, in the past, with a collection of game boxes, dating back to the late '70s ( Apple II) that, stacked vertically, reaches floor to ceiling .... several times.

Nowadays, it's pretty much GOG or nowt.

[Biscuit]

I think my gaming days are pretty much at an end now.

Can't be doing with lootboxes and microtransactions so if that's where it's all going, I'll find a different hobby I guess.

I remember when games where a competitive, adrenaline fuelled thrill; not a narcissistic introduction to the wallet emptying world of gambling.

[shaithis]

I wouldn't mind if the publishers needed to do it to make money but they are posting bigger and bigger profits each year and prices keep going up.

The greed is too much and I am also now only buying seriously discounted games. I've never liked microtransactions and now actively hate the way they are used to create PTW titles.

[Yoyoyo69]

Don't know why anyone would seem surprised, this was guaranteed long ago. GTA V is one of the worst games I've seen for ripping people off. Pay for fake money, then have them devalue it in various ways.

Shares, insurance, etc. The items in game aren't even remotely reasonably price either. The worst thing of all is the largest portion of their player base is under the legal age, this is how they make this much, just like COD and EA games. market to kids, empty mom and dads pockets

[aidanjt]

How about they focus on making better games? I've had little reason to buy take two games in recent years. And this is a hard pass for me.

[LUKAYA]

as people have said before it is so annoying to see them release half of a AAA game for £60 and expect you to buy the other half in DLC's for another £40 or make it nearly impossible to get anywhere in a game without having to spend actual money on in game gear. got to love the pay to win rubbish.

[TODD90]

Did not enjoy GTA V much at all apart from the graphical improvement had a lot more fun on the GTA IV multiplayer