Sections

EA’s future games will all feature microtransactions

Wednesday, 27th February 2013 11:43 GMT By Dave Cook

Dead Space 3′s microtransaction model didn’t go over well with gamers, but it hasn’t deterred the publisher one bit. EA’s financial officer Blake Jorgensen has revealed all of its games will feature some form of micro-payments.

The quotes come from a Morgan Stanley Technology, Media, and Telecom Conference discussion we reported on earlier. Our previous coverage revealed that EA feels assured of its readiness for next-gen, promising some big things on the horizon.

OXM has since spotted another interesting quote from Jorgensen regarding EA’s approach to micro-payments.

Said Jorgensen, “We are building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way; to get to a higher level. And consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of business.”

EA’s chief technology officer Rajat Taneja is overseeing the move. Jorgensen added that Taneja’s team views microtransactions as a key feature moving forward, and they have decided to take payment models in-house, instead of outsourcing them as they used to.

Added Jorgensen, “If you’re doing microtransactions and you’re processing credit cards for every one of those microtransactions you’ll get eaten alive. And so Rajat’s team has built an amazing backend to manage that and manage that much more profitably. We’ve outsourced a lot of that stuff historically; we’re bringing that all in-house now.”

So there we go. Could Dead Space 3′s micro-payment model be par for the course moving forward? We already know that the EA-published Real Racing 3 has gone big on micro-transactions as well, much to the scorn of fans.

What’s your take?

Latest

57 Comments

  1. The Auracle

    I wouldn’t say Dead Space 3 was the first game to feature micro-transactions. FIFA was a breeding ground for this when Ultimate Team was introduced back in FIFA 2009. The success from that combined with game publishers seeing many mobile-based games ranking in the dosh has given them a reason to combine the existing gaming model with the mobile one.

    It was only a matter of time.

    #1 1 year ago
  2. Dragon246

    Well, as long as its non-obtrusive….
    60$ of 2005 is approx 70$ now. If they are keeping it at 60$ then i think they deserve a bit of leeway.

    #2 1 year ago
  3. NooB GobliN

    Does anyone like MicroT?
    I get the idea and if you don’t want to pay you dont have to and you can still enjoy the game. But I’m concerned that it will effect the design in games. Like they will all have some stupid made up currency just so they can sell this stupid “currency” packs for real money.
    Do you guys remember cheat codes? And how will this work on PC where people can mod and give their character whatever amount of things they want.
    I guess EA looks at gameplayers like they’re these dicks made of money just waiting to get sucked. And they wanna suck us dry.

    Sorry…

    #3 1 year ago
  4. Samoan Spider

    But this does highlight an often overlooked fact. The outspoken ones who lambasted EA’s approach aren’t the target audience and are only a small portion of those that actually bought the game. I didn’t find it intrusive during the campaign and its not like anything was impossible to obtain, it was just pay to win for the lazy generation. I don’t see a problem with this business model just as long as if I choose not to buy, I wont miss out on anything. And trust me, I choose not to buy every time (I’ll buy the game, just not the tat because I can’t justify the extra cost). We of course haven’t seen sales figures for the pay-to-win bits, but I’m assuming it wasn’t a disaster for them if they want to do it more.

    #4 1 year ago
  5. The Dude

    It’s a slippery slope, man.
    I reckon it’ll get to a point where, especially when it comes to multiplayer, levelling and upgrading will become such a grind that the only reasonable way to progress will be to pay your way to the top. Or, like ME3, there’ll be a “gambling” mechanic where you spend money to get random unlocks… pay more to have a higher chance of obtaining rarer or better items, for example. They’ll pray upon the impusliveness and addictive personalities of certain people. All they need is a few big spenders.

    If they can get microtransactions to the level of social and mobile gaming, they will.

    Ugh, basically.

    #5 1 year ago
  6. Tearsir

    They will never have my money.

    #6 1 year ago
  7. YoungZer0

    Paying for cheat-codes, wonderful. Just wonderful.

    It’s getting worse and worse. Big Publishers are going to use every crack they find to make more until there is no actual game left. Greedgreedgreedgreedgreedgreedgreedgreedgreed.

    @5: Yep!

    #7 1 year ago
  8. Gnosis

    I’m troubled. As long as they keep it the way it was in DS3, I’m absolutely cool with it. But it’s EA we’re talking about and the worst case scenario would make games unplayable. What I have in mind is basically “pay to progress…at all”. On the other hand, I can’t imagine something like this being successful, let alone being popular with the fans. Let’s just hope EA is not fuckin stupid

    Edit: @5: Yeah, and that’s the other problem. Though can imagine that they’d get problems with the law. I hope. Really.

    #8 1 year ago
  9. Joe Musashi

    @7 You forgot the word “optionally” again. And if consumers weren’t showing that they were willing to pay for this sort of thing then companies wouldn’t be employing such practices. You seem persistently determined to overlook the behaviour of consumers when you’re doing your corporate-greed schtick.

    Possibly related: CVG are floating a rumour of a Microsoft / EA partnership to be revealed at the forthcoming Xbox event.

    JM

    #9 1 year ago
  10. YoungZer0

    Yawn. Yes, you have the option to be screwed or to not buy the game. Wonderful.

    #10 1 year ago
  11. orakaa

    @8: SPOT ON.

    That’s the problem: it’s not going to become “optional”.
    Why are EA implementing micro-transactions in the VERY FIRST PLACE? To make more money. Now, if micro-transactions get in place everywhere, the games design will be altered to make game progress hard enough so that, if you don’t want to grind for hours, you “have” to pay.

    Look at free to play Korean MMOs… sure you “can” progress without paying even once… but at what cost? You go through boring content over hours and hours with the option always available to say “hey, it’s boring, but if you pay…”

    Again, this is EA (and other publishers) we are talking about. Their interest lie ONLY in money. It’s a business for them and they want to make the most money out of it. They don’t care that a game won’t be able to be played (at all) once they shut their servers, because there’s no profit for them. They don’t care if you want to replay a specific game 5 or 10 years later. They want (only) money.
    They don’t care about gamer’s experience quality, they want to find ways for people to give them more money.

    Now there’s business and business. I’m willing to pay for my games, but not if that means being screwed over in such a way.
    If they want to block used games and force micro-transactions, then I won’t pay 60$ for a “rental” (without taking into account micro-transactions).

    Seriously, I remember being hyped for each new console launch… but for the next PS4/Xbox720, it’s the first time I am considering to stop buy consoles…

    #11 1 year ago
  12. Joe Musashi

    @10 By jove, I think you’ve finally got it.

    I think a lot of gamers seem to forget that gaming is not a basic human right like food and water. It’s a luxury hobby. The stench of entitlement and narrow-mindedness is palpable.

    JM

    #12 1 year ago
  13. hives

    Optional? Hell, good F2P games have optional microtransactions. So why would I choose EA shooter with microT if I can play PlanetSide 2? BTW, I wonder if PS2 will launch for PS4…

    #13 1 year ago
  14. The Dude

    @12 Guess we should all just sit down and play Colonial Marines then AND ENJOY IT!

    I’m with YoungZer0 on this. Greed shouldn’t be excused just because it’s entertainment companies are selling.

    #14 1 year ago
  15. YoungZer0

    @14: Enjoying the game is optional as well.

    #15 1 year ago
  16. Sadismek

    Of course, it’ll be optional in the beginning, until they shove it down your throat.

    #16 1 year ago
  17. Joe Musashi

    We live in a capitalist world. There is nothing greedy in an organisation’s desire to generate revenue and maximise profits. Like it or not, that is how today’s world works.

    Many don’t agree with that and eschew capitalism and all its trappings and benefits. Benefits such as enjoying videogames, for example.

    It’s not a smart idea to attach such melodrama to things. Terms like “evil” and “greedy” have no bearing – other than to show how narrowly you perceive things and how you try to assign emotional weight to emotionless actions.

    JM

    #17 1 year ago
  18. Tavarish

    Before it was ~50€ for whole package (game), but today it’s around +100€ for whole package (all missions, gear etc.) because of DLC’s, Season Passes and these micro transactions. Sad state of affairs if you ask me…

    Just as e.g. Mass Effect 3 is good example of this. Game is fully finished now roughly year after release, through all that DLC.

    Edit: @17, seeking profit is all fine and dandy. All businesses aim for it, no news there. How they go about it can be discussed and is up to opinion. A lot of people don’t like how developers and publishers slices parts of game into micro transactions and DLC just to maximize revenue.

    Making profit, revenue, through butchering “final” product, and selling those parts later on, is all different shades of shady. In my opinion anyway.

    #18 1 year ago
  19. YoungZer0

    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/6814-Companies-Exist-To-Make-Money

    #19 1 year ago
  20. Samoan Spider

    JM, I could agree with you all day long. We all have a right to get protective over our choice of hobby, just as people do with cars, bikes or bird watching……. but you have a choice on how much you get involved and if you don’t something, don’t buy it. But don’t get misguided enough to think a few thousand protest votes against a company/product is going to stop things changing. I’m not apologizing for EA or Microtransactions, but some perspective is not a bad thing for gamers to have.

    #20 1 year ago
  21. Fin

    Vote with your wallet.
    Complaining in a comment won’t do shit.

    #21 1 year ago
  22. The Dude

    @19 My thoughts exactly.

    #22 1 year ago
  23. YoungZer0

    @18: My brother bought me Mass Effect 3 for 20 Euros last month, because he wanted to play the multiplayer with me. Said it was good. It isn’t. But that’s besides the point. I walk into the Origin Store and check out the DLC’s. 6 DLC’s. If you buy them all, you spend 30 Euros extra just for the DLC. I would have to spend more Euros on the DLC’s than on the actual game to get the FINAL FULL Version of it.

    #23 1 year ago
  24. Joe Musashi

    @21 “Vote with your wallet.”

    Nothing is more powerful. Every time you bitch about a game but buy it because you’ve still ‘got to have it’ and don’t have the strength to stand by your convictions you are telling companies “I can be bought. I will complain but I will still open my wallet for you”.

    When consumers stop doing this, things may change. Talk is cheap.

    @21 You’re mostly wrong. And still jumping to conclusions about something you haven’t even looked into. And conveniently overlooking the free DLC that was produced for the game. You’re clearly not interested in understanding what’s involved. You only appear to care about the bit that benefits you personally. That, my friend, is a perfect example of greed.

    JM

    #24 1 year ago
  25. Gnosis

    @24: I don’t care about companies trying to make money. They have the same rights to be payed for their products like everyone else. I’m not even concerned about what we get for this money. As you said, it’s simple: to buy or not to buy. What I’m troubled about is what this can do to the media of gaming itself. Let’s go on and imagine the worst case scenario: Ok, ppl are fed up with the unfair price performance ratio and stop buying the games. EA’ll make enormous losses. How good are the chances they’ll recover from it? Games are getting more and more expensive. Since ALL EA games will have the micro-transaction feature, many big titles will flop. EA is one of the biggest publishers out there. How many developers will be closed? Good developers, with great potential. How will it affect the current “balance of power”? Will that lead to a monopoly of (for example) Activision? How good can that be for the gaming genre?
    Of course, aside from the fact, that we know basically nothing about how the whole thing will work, it’s hard to predict how it will affect the development of the market. But still… I’m troubled. And I hope the reasons are comprehensible.

    #25 1 year ago
  26. Fin

    @24

    That’s one of the best infographics I’ve seen.

    @25

    Jesus you took that to an extreme didn’t you?
    EA games have microtransactions -> they won’t sell -> EA goes bust -> games industry collapses

    If you always think of the worst case scenario you’ll never get anywhere.
    Far more likely is
    EA games have microtransactions -> some people use them (and overall sales of the games won’t be affected) -> EA gets more cash -> EA makes more games

    #26 1 year ago
  27. manamana

    @Joe that goes for all EA games but not BF 4 or BFBC3? No way I’m skipping those games, Microtransactions, Origin and whatnot.

    #27 1 year ago
  28. YoungZer0

    @24: Yawn. You mean the ‘free’ DLC for the boring multiplayer no one asked for in the first place? Let’s not forget that the multiplayer is nothing but grinding and also features your most favorite thing: micro transaction. So what people fear is already happening.

    @25: How many are already closing? Isn’t that what EA is doing? Buying developers and then closing their studios?

    @26: “EA gets more cash -> EA makes more games”

    Or the more realistic version: EA gets more cash -> EA keeps more cash

    #28 1 year ago
  29. Gnosis

    @26: I think, SE delivered the best example of how only one big project can cause severe damage to a well running company. And they admitted, that another failure of the same magnitude would pretty much kill them.
    As I said, as long as it remains the way it was in DS3 I couldn’t care less about it. They’ll keep making money and games and I’ll keep buying them. I just wouldn’t underestimate the consequences of a possible failure.

    #29 1 year ago
  30. Joe Musashi

    @25 You raise valid points. Whilst it may be perceived as greed, it might simply be what’s required to survive. But its refreshing to see consumers considering the bigger picture. I think companies like EA and Activision are always interesting to watch because, typically, they’re the ones that seem to be the most creative when it comes to drumming up ways to take money off of consumers. These companies have to run very hard just to stand still. I don’t think the industry would collapse if one or the other died. I think it would make a big impact and things would definitely change though. Hopefully, neither will happen – because I enjoy some of the EA games I’ve played in my time.

    @26 Yes, it’s a good one isn’t it? :). I mean, assuming you are interested in the full picture rather than just a “me me me” mentality.

    @28 “Yawn. You mean the ‘free’ DLC for the boring multiplayer no one asked for in the first place? ”

    And there you are doing it again. Exagerrating and making assumptions. And you act like it doesn’t matter that a BIG EVIL COMPANY gave something away for free. Because it didn’t benefit you personally. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. It just shows how narrow your view of the situation is and how selfish your approach to it is.

    Amusingly, that wasn’t the particular free DLC I was referring to. But you’re so quick to jump the gun with your assumptions and accusations that you didn’t stop to consider that.

    @27 I don’t know about all EA games. You’d probably have to speak to EA to get that answer. But, manamana, your response is telling:

    “No way I’m skipping those games, Microtransactions, Origin and whatnot.”

    And that’s cool. That’s your choice. And companies want you to feel that way about their product. They want consumers to be so passionate about the game element that they will be prepared to accept the less savoury aspects that are packaged with it. This is why that ‘Boycott MW2′ image is so good. :)

    JM

    #30 1 year ago
  31. OlderGamer

    Do you guys remember MSs first bit of DLC for an xbox live game?

    I do it was and still is one of my fav all time games. Mechassult, imo, the greatest online shooter ever made. One that I played so much at, believe it or not I was frequently ranked in the monthly top 10, even top 5.

    Bragging? No. Just showing the level of play I was at and the dedication I had for the game. Anways.

    The first DLC for the game(and it was the first game, before Halo 2) was free. It was in the form of extra Mechs. I was so proud to be a Xbox Gamer. Ofc after several bits of free DLC, there came the first shocker. I stared at the screen in disbelief. MS wanted money for something that goes to a game that I had bought.

    Now my thinking was that I paid for the xbox, paid for the game, and bought a Live Starter kit, and paid a monthly fee for LIVE. I figured, at the time, the DLC was good and covered. We were talking about a MS published Live game after all. But nope, there it was. A game that I had bought demanding from me more money.

    I wasn’t alone the bulk of the community was livid. But a few wise sages pointed out that it wasn’t something we had to purchase. Our game wasn’t going to suddenly stop working. And they weren’t going to take away things we already have. Most of us didn’t buy the content(was in the form of extra modes/maps mostly).

    Years later when MS brought out the XB360, they pulled the plug almost over night on Xbox One Live. Meaning we couldn’t get to that Mech DLC weather we paid for it or not. So infact they did take it away from us.

    I still play Mech. I was playing grinder offline just yesterday. And once in a blue moon some friends and I have a lan party with it.

    Also take a look at DLCs humble begining and compare it to what we have today. Slippery slope indeed. Remember when Bungie would release its Halo map packs for free once they have been out for 6 months? I do. It keept most of the community caught up and on the same page. It didn’t allow them to be so fragmented. There are tuff economic times, and some folks can barely afford to pay for the hardware, the game, the isp, the Live service, and building your game model around microtransaction is often times the straw that breaks the camels back. I know gamers that won’t even buy older cheaper games for 20usd because the DLC would bring said game upto 40, 60 or more usd. Or by the time they can afford the game, the community playing it online has been fragemented or just moved on.

    I know three people like that personialy. None of them play consoles anymore. They all play Steam. Where they can bag a game and its dlc for a fraction of the investment of a console version.

    Greed is the backbone and motivation for capitalism. It is ugly. And many folks feel it is justified. Choice is also a catilist for moving Capitalism forward.

    Optional as JM likes to say.

    And fundimentaly he is right. The EAs and MSs of the world can choice to do what they want. And you and I can chose NOT to support them.

    I have purchased a lot EA games over the years. EA are rolling the dice in regaurds to my keeping my biz. But that is their choice.

    I remember all of those years ago that when MS put out DLC it now feels like a trojon horse. I believe they envisioned back then a day when they could microtransaction the shit out of games and gamers. It was all part of their plan.

    How crazy it would be if your newly purchased movie stops and asks you for more money in order to continue. Or a book offers you extra endings for additional money. It is all optional, gotta keep that in mind. And because it is optional we shouldn’t, as one big pissed collective group, voice our distaste with it across every web forum we can. We shouldn’t do that. It is optional, remember?

    Well, being pissed off is an option too. And if the EAs and MSs don’t like it or it hurts their bottom line, THEY can remember it was a choice they made. Because being a greed driven corperation that craps all over their user base is optional too.

    #31 1 year ago
  32. theevilaires

    I told all of you! I ranted and bitched and you all laughed at me. I said those game passes would be the start and that next gen they’re going to nickel and dime us as much as they want unless we fight back……no you ass holes still believe in some damn honor system with these companies. Now you’re really gonna get fuck by E.A. next gen and gaming will become less fun.

    That headline pic is dead on. Good job ;)

    #32 1 year ago
  33. Shuklar

    So long as the microtransaction only unlock things which can be naturally unlocked through regular gameplay, I have no problem with a company milking the stupid and impatient.

    The one time I bought a microtransaction, was not for the item it was offering, yet because I wanted to show my support for the game and the company behind it. When Rainbow Moon was released on the PSN, it was only $12 for PS+ members, $15 regular. I felt it was worth more than that (had the same or more fun than a lot of $60 games), so I bought some items, spending about $6 (50%) more. Now they’re working on getting the game on the Vita, and working on a whole new sequel.

    I’m happy that I contributed to their success and continued growth of the game I loved. Now when it comes to big name studios, where the entry fee is $60+, and knowing any extra money is probably only ensuring an executive with no creativity can have toilet paper covered in flakes of gold, yeah, I’m definitely not interested.

    #33 1 year ago
  34. Ge0force

    Microtransactions in mobile games also started “optional”. Now most of those games are unplayable without them, unless you’re prepared to repeat the same level over and over again to gather enough money or xp.

    It’s sad how much gaming is changed in one generation. Last generation I bought a pc-game for €45. Online gaming was free, community maps and mods kept me playing for months, and extra costumes/weapons were unlocked by playing the game or entering cheat-codes. Now we have €60 games, payed clothing and weapons DLC, Xbox Live Gold, €15 mappacks, Season Passes, Premium subscriptions, online passes and microtransactions. And all of this because of a few greedy companies like MS, Activision and EA. Bleh.

    #34 1 year ago
  35. Joe Musashi

    “Well, being pissed off is an option too. And if the EAs and MSs don’t like it or it hurts their bottom line, THEY can remember it was a choice they made”

    Being pissed off won’t hurt their bottom line at all. Ranting on websites that they don’t read won’t bother them in the slightest.

    JM

    #35 1 year ago
  36. YoungZer0

    @30: “Amusingly, that wasn’t the particular free DLC I was referring to.”

    Yawn. The only free DLC they released was the Multiplayer part. I really hope you’re not talking about ending here. I really, really hope you do not.

    “But you’re so quick to jump the gun with your assumptions and accusations”

    Lawl. Look who’s talking.

    @31: “Well, being pissed off is an option too. And if the EAs and MSs don’t like it or it hurts their bottom line, THEY can remember it was a choice they made. Because being a greed driven corperation that craps all over their user base is optional too.”

    Well said, mate.

    #36 1 year ago
  37. OlderGamer

    You must like the view from your high horse JM.

    Ofc, you are smart enough to know what I am getting at. I would think. Pissed off gamers that DON’T buy their stuff will hurt their bottom line. And masses of gamers ranting on websites = fan backlash. I am sure that EA takes an interest in that very much.

    I doubt EA will tumble. But I won’t support them any more. And if other gamers do the same…

    #37 1 year ago
  38. Joe Musashi

    @36 So you’ve now grasped the fact that MULTIPLE dlc came out. For free. Oh, but you’re still going to act like it didn’t because you didn’t benefit from it personally. Or you’re going to concoct another victim-fuelled woe-is-me conspiracy theory where something you aren’t entitled to is taken from you. In spite of evidence to the contrary. Don’t let facts or logic get in the way of your agenda.

    @37 Another unwarranted personal dig? Impressive.

    I don’t have a lofty view. I just don’t have a completely self-centred one. It’s telling that you feel that being conscious of the full picture is something to be sneered at.

    ” I would think. Pissed off gamers that DON’T buy their stuff will hurt their bottom line. ”

    It won’t. Because, as you’ve pointed out a number of times, they’re very much the minority. And as much as they scream and rant, they don’t stand by their convictions. They still pay the money. Alongside all those hundreds of millions of other, more casual gamers, that will buy FIFA, Madden or whatever the heavily-marketed game of the moment may be.

    Consumers could make a change. But they’d have to genuinely care. And they don’t really care beyond self-centered, mostly ignorant, rants on gaming sites. EA cares. It’s their livelihood, not a hobby. They’ve got much more invested in it than consumers do. They will always be working harder and acting more determined than those that believe spewing a few rants on some website equates to affirmative action.

    People have been ranting on this topic since Oblivion’s Horse Armour DLC appeared. Look where empty ranting has got them.

    JM

    #38 1 year ago
  39. Fin

    @38

    +1

    #39 1 year ago
  40. OlderGamer

    “Consumers could make a change. But they’d have to genuinely care.”

    And that starts with gamers voicing how they feel about a subject. And while that for some reason seems to bother you, it has been going on across several websites and outlets as we speak.

    #40 1 year ago
  41. Samoan Spider

    @38 Agreed. Nothing will change no matter the wallet voting vocal minority say. As gamers, the choice is our own, we just shouldn’t assume that the world + dog agrees with our views on what’s right or wrong with a decision that a developer or publisher makes.

    @40 But its still only a drop in the ocean of actual buyers. Even if its 10000 people voicing an opinion (bearing in mind there’s maybe 8-10 in this thread I’ve probably exaggerated the number there) that’s still a tiny number against the 5 million or so that buy each major game EA publish.

    And just for good measure there’s this -> http://tinyurl.com/78o4pdv

    #41 1 year ago
  42. DSB

    I’m glad I’m not buying a lot of EA stuff anymore. Origin made that easy, but they just obviously couldn’t give less of a fuck at this point.

    #42 1 year ago
  43. Gadzooks!

    Microtransactions I can, and do, happily ignore.

    Online passes are more of an immediate and widespread problem. It’s pretty hard to avoid online passes these days.

    To the best of my knowledge the only first-party to implement online passes is Sony.

    MS and EA are the only evil-doers in the industry though, right?

    #43 1 year ago
  44. YoungZer0

    @38: Yawn. Alright, so it’s free DLC. Free stuff for a mode people never wanted in the first place. What’s next? New weapons for the SINGLEPLAYER of Battlefield 3? Are you going to praise them for that as well?

    I wonder if Bioware would’ve gotten the ending right the first time if they didn’t waste their time on the multiplayer?

    @40: Yeah, I fail to understand why he’s so extremely bothered by the fact that we care.

    It’s not the companies who are greedy who asking for more and more, while delivering less and less. It’s us, for wanting to buy the full game once and not having to pre-order the game at three different retailers, paying money for cheats, paying money for colors of costumes, paying money for 3 extra maps. It’s us. We’re the problem.

    #44 1 year ago
  45. Gnosis

    @33: It’s great, isn’t it? I did it for Thatgamecompany. A lot. They don’t have micro-transactions as such, but I tried to stuff my money in their pockets as often as possible. I wanted to do something good for them. Makes me wish, it happened more often with other companies…

    #45 1 year ago
  46. OlderGamer

    “we just shouldn’t assume that the world + dog agrees with our views on what’s right or wrong with a decision that a developer or publisher makes”

    But doesn’t that work both ways?

    I think that EA deals a lot to the semi dedicated yet semi hardcore markets. Meaning that middle ground that only buy a few games a year. Titles like FIFA, Madden, NFS or BF. Gamers that aren’t so dedicated that they think eat sleep and drink games. Gamers that don’t focus all of their free time playing. I think setting up a microtransaction focus biz model will keep those gamers away from EA games.

    I do think it will have an impact. Because I think there are a lot of those type of gamers out there. I think EA will sell less, and make up the difference from extracting more money from those that do buy the game.

    But I also think that next gen systems will have a robust launch window followed by a extremly sluggish post launch. I don’t see them flying off of shelves. Could be wrong. But I think the changes that are setting up will hurt the console industry long term. I think it will drive people away.

    #46 1 year ago
  47. Samoan Spider

    @46 I agree with the sentiment there. They do deal with the semi dedicated, but those people are ok with paying for an advantage. Say a football supporter who buys Fifa every year. Any DLC they purchase in the interim will likely benefit their chosen team so by extension will in their mind count as part of being a teams supporter. I don’t think anything will keep the sports fans away from their chosen product. As a direct example: My Father-in-law buys Tiger Woods every single year. I could easily see him paying a couple of quid here and there for extra gear to up his game. None of this news will ever reach his ears unless I mention it. Nothing we say here will register with him or people like him. I don’t think having MT’s will touch EA games sales, yet still make them more money.
    With all these bloody fondleslab games doing so well, people have become trained to pay a small amount for a small advantage, so it isn’t a huge leap to see it working just fine here for them.

    #47 1 year ago
  48. YoungZer0

    @43: Nope, I still think it was unacceptable for Sony to ask for an online-pass for Uncharted 3. The game had so many microtransaction elements, I would’ve happily bought those dumb hats just to customize my character. Just go to PSN and type in Uncharted 3. It’s full of customization options.

    Now they do this free to play thing. Not sure if I can play it with my second-hand version without downloading the whole thing.

    #48 1 year ago
  49. Joe Musashi

    @40 “And that starts with gamers voicing how they feel about a subject. And while that for some reason seems to bother you, it has been going on across several websites and outlets as we speak.”

    Gamers voicing how they feel means absolutely nothing. Because it amounts to absolutely nothing. What happens on the web doesn’t necessarily affect the real world. Oh, sure, some may get motivated enough to form an online petition or a steam protest group. But none of that matters when the money still ends up being handed over. As has been proven multiple times over multiple products over multiple years.

    For what it’s worth, OG, I fully appreciate where you’re coming from. But you’re one voice in a sea of overwhelming apathy. In many respects I am with you, but you will never see the actions you believe in amount to anything because of the majority of consumers will continue to pay for the product. I’m not saying you should give up fighting or compromise your ideals. But I think your sense of perspective is skewed.

    “And while that for some reason seems to bother you”

    And that’s the second time you’ve tried to put words into my mouth and present me as someone who doesn’t like people expressing their opinion. If you would kindly stop applying these fabrications I would appreciate it. If you persist you’ll leave me no option other than to assume you are pursuing some personal agenda.

    @44 “I wonder if Bioware would’ve gotten the ending right the first time if they didn’t waste their time on the multiplayer?”

    This is one of the most exquisitely naïve comments I’ve ever read.

    @48 “Nope, I still think it was unacceptable for Sony to ask for an online-pass for Uncharted 3.”

    It’s perfectly acceptable to ask. It’s perfectly acceptable to answer and say “No”.

    It’s not acceptable to attempt to dictate what may or may not be asked. There is a significant difference there.

    JM

    #49 1 year ago
  50. Gadzooks!

    #47

    Took me little while to work out what a fondleslab was. I did LoL when it clicked.

    Phrase of the day. (which needs to be a forum thread surely?)

    #50 1 year ago
  51. Samoan Spider

    @50 Haha, wish I could take credit for it, but that’s a favourite phrase of http://www.theregister.co.uk/ along with other delightful ones as pay-by-bonk and such :)

    #51 1 year ago
  52. lama

    it sucks to be a gamer these days, doesnt it?

    #52 1 year ago
  53. OlderGamer

    Maybe I can’t change it JM. And really I am not on a crusade to change it. I am just excersing my rights to complain. Maybe in the long run nothing changes. but that doesn’t mean I have to shut up and paint a smile on my face. It also doesn’t mean that I will continue to support EA, MS or whomever else thinks I am a mindless wallet for the plucking.

    One of the funny things about this industry is that fortunes can change over night in the blink of an eye. While I, and others, enjoy EA games. We don’t need them to survive. Or even need them to be a gamer. EA games on the other hand, absolutly need us as consumers. Collectivly we have real clout. Will people stand united?

    No, not likly. But they will bitch and complain. Having an impact or not isn’t so much the point. People vent. Trying to stop people from venting would be as fruitless an adventure as one gamer trying to change the industry.

    Clearly I am not alone, and clearly these actions and tid bits are upseting. You can’t stand in the face of that. Can’t tell people they have no right or cause to be upset, and can’t expect them to not vent about it.

    #53 1 year ago
  54. MadFlavour

    I fucking hate gamers. Everyone moans about it, but when the time comes everyone will buy the games anyway.

    If no one buys the games they’ll stop doing it.

    But that’s never gonna happen.

    #54 1 year ago
  55. Joe Musashi

    @53 “but that doesn’t mean I have to shut up and paint a smile on my face.”

    “Trying to stop people from venting would be as fruitless an adventure as one gamer trying to change the industry.”

    “You can’t stand in the face of that. Can’t tell people they have no right or cause to be upset, and can’t expect them to not vent about it.”

    You’re right about that. But you are absolutely wrong in your repeated implications that I have been doing this. Just as you were when you made the same assertions yesterday.

    On the contrary, I have been engagind directly with people and furthering the discussion. I have backed up my perspective with data and evidence – not just in this topic but in yesterdays. At no time have I ever tried to stifle this debate or its participants.

    “Collectivly we have real clout.”

    We’re in agreement then.

    “Will people stand united?”

    No. Because not enough people care to make any meaningful difference.

    @54 That’s a bit strong but its certainly succinct. :)

    JM

    #55 1 year ago
  56. theevilaires

    @54 I wait and buy the games ;) I bought Battlefield 3 for $9.95 at a SEARS in the discount bin cause no one buys games from there :D So yea fuck E.A. and their game passes ;)

    Felt great I was playing their product and using their online servers for just $10. It made the playing experience that much more enjoyable….ahhh I love fucking over big corporations like E.A.

    #56 1 year ago
  57. OlderGamer

    I thought I would leave this here:

    The article there is the same as here.
    http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-02-27-all-future-ea-games-to-feature-microtransactions#comments

    But, the response from someone like this was worth noting. I thought.

    Michael Levine
    President

    PILEATED PICTURES

    Top Comment First off, I never post here, like …ever. I am an industry veteran of over 20 years and worked at LucasArts “back in the day” on everything from MI2, X-Wing, Dark Forces, Full Throttle, The Dig and many more.
    I applaud you all for speaking up about this. Funny, as I don’t see a single post saying “Oh boy, micro-transactions! Yay, this is what I have been waiting for!”
    This has been a sore spot for me as of late. Having broken from AAA games years ago to make online games and now fully in mobile, my team has been living in the F2P world for longer than most. Let me be clear before I say what I am about to say – and that is, I have no gripe with the concept of Free. None whatsoever. I also don’t have a problem with micro-transactions, when done in a way that is not annoying or obtrusive to the player or game. However I now strongly feel this current flavor of F2P, is basically like a cancer. Its grip, driven by greed, is spreading like wildfire to all forms of games. And here is the funny thing – when you talk to almost any game designer – they agree with me on everything I am saying here. This is NOT being driven by creativity, which drove this industry for decades – this is being driven by SUITS, who are NOT thinking long term. I wish people and companies would wake up!! But I admit, its a temptation hard to resist. We do have F2P apps in the app store. But what this has taught me, is it’s bad on every level – it’s bad for games, its bad for players and its going to be bad for business. You can already argue it is. Look at Cliff B’s article. Listen to what people were saying at DICE. This industry is facing a massive crisis. Consoles are in trouble. For every one Clash of Clans on mobile, there are 1000 games making only pennies a day.

    This current flavor of F2P, is not even about game design. Don’t believe anyone who tells you it is. It’s about psychological manipulation. It’s about pushing people to their edge – to the point where they are just frustrated enough to think about buying something, but not enough to hate the game/publisher/developer. And that is a very fine line. (And yes I am generalizing, there are of course a few bright lights out there but they are becoming harder and harder to find). F2P, in its popular incarnation, completely fundamentally changes the progression and flow of a game. And lets be real, most mobile games are THRILLED if they convert 3% of their players to someone who pays. A hardcore console game – maybe 5%? I am not sure but its not more than that I would bet either. So what are we doing? We are educating a generation that games should be FREE. And we are designing games to MILK money from those dumb enough to pay. We focus in on these “whales” and every ounce of effort goes into getting them to pay us more, and more and more …. . These people are not the most into the game per se – they are the ones weak enough or have enough income to give into buying items rather than “really playing”.
    And here is the truly sad part – I don’t see any going back. This is similar to what happened to the music industry – but that was driven by technology. What is this driven by? Crap – we didnt have to do this. Looking at Mobile, where my company, HappyGiant is focused – didn’t Angry Birds and Where’s My Water teach people you can make money on paid games still? What about The Room or TellTale’s The Walking Dead series? You can still make money on paid apps. Or do Free in different ways, like League of Legends, where it doesnt affect the gameplay (as much at least).
    Do people agree with me? I am curious to hear what others think. Let the hate posts begin (joking, I think most will agree. The ones who don’t – ask em where they work!!)
    Well — I just wanted to get this off my chest. Thanks for listening! (-:
    –Mike
    [link url=""]www.happygiant.com[/link]

    #57 1 year ago

Comments are now closed on this article.