Why Does Jeff Keep Mentioning the Microtransactions?

#1 Posted by Sammo21 (3543 posts) -

So after listening to the last 2 podcasts and several supplemental things it seems like Jeff thinks negatively of the fact you can use Microsoft points to purchase the loot packs, but you can use the easily obtained in game currency to buy those...Why is it a big deal? Personally, I had about 180 or 190 random points I was tired of always showing up on my balance so I used them for 2 spectre packs but I didn't feel like I ever needed too.

Does anyone else feel that this optional ability to purchase in game content for you multiplayer characters is that dastardly or sickening? I don't see the big deal.

#2 Posted by UlquioKani (1182 posts) -

He said he felt they made it feel like a phone game but not in a negative or positive sense.

#3 Posted by amir90 (2178 posts) -

Because he spent 10 dollars during the quick look.

Jeff is awesome, but he hates everything.

#4 Posted by august (3866 posts) -

Nanomachines.

#5 Posted by Vitor (2832 posts) -

@UlquioKani said:

He said he felt they made it feel like a phone game but not in a negative or positive sense.

The tone in which he spoke about it definitely had somewhat negative connotations. I don't really have a problem with it. I've unlocked loads of great gear pretty regularly, even if it's not always specifically what I wanted.

#6 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

The most offensive thing about Mass Effect 3 is them releasing day one DLC that isn't available to people that bought the game new, and saying the DLC was made after it went gold which it wasn't as the DLC was part of the script leaks.

Whatever. Consumer gouging is what this industry has been leaning towards more and more the last few years.

#7 Posted by andriv (257 posts) -

it cheapens a 60$ retail game

micro transactions belong in free to play games

#8 Posted by Fredchuckdave (6143 posts) -

It's just another step toward everything becoming a Free to Play MMO. Of course it's retarded, people that spent money have this silly advantage in a not skill based mode in the first place which further deteriorates the already terrible idea of an experience based horde mode.

#9 Posted by Sammo21 (3543 posts) -

@andriv: if anything it says more about the players who spend the money on these things that the company providing the service. Again, if you play 2-3 games on silver and you have more than enough in game currency to buy these things. I don't think it cheapens anything or makes it feel like a "phone game". Also, when the game isn't competitive multiplayer buying packs that give RANDOM items doesn't change the game at all.

#10 Posted by James_Giant_Peach (751 posts) -

Because it's taking advantage of people who aren't great at controlling their spending. Micro-transactions like that can be fine, but in a $60 game, that already has far too much dlc, they're going too far.

#11 Posted by AnxiousTube (199 posts) -

Because although your paying money for better equipment, there is no way to know exactly what equipment you would be getting. It's like gambling, it could possibly lead to a lot of money in EA's bank, and a lot of people with a gambling problem; if they let they stick with the game.

#12 Posted by BrockNRolla (1694 posts) -

Since I saw another forum post today about someone spending "triple digits" on ME microtransactions, I'm going to have to say they gross me out a little.

BUT, that is as much the player's fault as it is the game's.

#13 Posted by Boboblaw (329 posts) -

Its not exactly new or anything though.
 
EA has been doing it for years with Ultimate Team in Fifa. In that you buy (with points or real money)packs of cards and its completely random as to what you get.

#14 Posted by MikkaQ (10344 posts) -

Cause they're randomized, which is a little scummy. If you payed 160 points for a specific weapon, I see no issue, but man just gambling with money like that with no possible return is duuuumb..

#15 Posted by Jake_K (105 posts) -

There are so many ways to hand out loot that to see a microtransaction based roulette in a full priced game is a little gross.

Between the high prices of the higher packs, and the randomness of the rewards it really feels like it was built from the ground up with the microtransaction model in mind.

#16 Posted by andriv (257 posts) -

@Sammo21: it's not about what is fair and what isn't fair in the multiplayer. It just gives it a feel of a free to play or a phone game by using the same tactics in bringing in more money from players willing to pay there way to the top.

#17 Edited by Sammo21 (3543 posts) -

@andriv: Except they don't block off the in game currency by trickle feeding it to you like they do in League of Legends, Super Monday Night Combat, or anything else. They give them to you rather liberally.

@Jake_K: Huh? High prices? 120 points is a high price for someone to pay for their laziness?

@MikkaQ: You are paying for a risk reward, just like with in game currency. IF someone is stupid enough to think they need to spend $10 on the stuff, like Jeff did, then it is their fault. Jeff is the same guy who acts very...loosely with his money. Skylanders...'nuff said.

I think its weird to have an attitude that something that doesn't effect ANYTHING gets so much hate from people.

#18 Edited by HubrisRanger (488 posts) -

If this was the only way to get those booster packs, I would totally understand the frustration (though even that wordage draws some interesting comparisons; if you're going to call this "scummy", then ever CCG ever is the scum of the earth). But the game also offers a very clear in-game way to get those packs as well. It is the old thing of which do you care more about: your time or your money. And as others have pointed out, EA has made serious bank of this before with FIFA, so expect to see more of this in the future. If you don't like it, don't support it, and wait for the time when you have to buy in to get anything to raise those red flag.

#19 Posted by DeanoXD (619 posts) -

There is nothing in the game that makes you need or have to pay real money for any of this stuff, so who fucking cares if its there. If a person can not control his or her's spending habits then maybe video games are not their biggest problem. And if they have the extra money to throw away who cares, the game is competitive MP they are not gaining a advantage over other players.

Day one dlc, once again not something you have to or need to buy so once again who fucking cares, don't buy it.

How many people come to giantbomb who are new members or old that can't access a lot of content because they haven't paid for a membership, yes there is still a lot free content and i don't think they are short changing anyone, but if you want the extra you have to pay. So i will concede that the whiskey media membership is on a smaller scale price wise but its the same thing, Plus non paying members have to look at ads now thats gross.

#20 Posted by fox01313 (5089 posts) -

The other cheap thing with the microtransactions here is that it's completely random on what you might get. I know when I tried it with the spectre pack, I got some shotgun mod & yet another xp boost for a class I've yet to play (soldier & infiltrator are both level5 on just the bonus xp packs from the loot crates). At least with Gotham City Imposters the stuff you can buy with real money is a little more expensive but you knew what you were getting. I tend to get more useful things from the lowest level loot crates in ME3 multiplayer than the veteran/spectre ones.

#21 Posted by Akyho (1698 posts) -

Because. While Jeff spent $10, you spent a few. EA see this and goes "SUCCESS!!" There is not final product more so its bad when its random. So its a fear for the future that normal gameplay will have micro transactions up the wazoo.

However. Jeff spent $10 you spent a few. guy down the street spend $15 another guy is on $50, there is a dude on the forums that has admited to hitting over $100 on these packs. If he is just messing. I do beleave too many people have spent $100 or more.

people may be adults except they can be stupid adults.

#22 Posted by andriv (257 posts) -

@Sammo21: This is the effect it has on us (the majority on this forum and jeff), you can have a different opinion which is just as valid.

#23 Posted by Cronus42 (276 posts) -

The fact that it is so easy to get the packs and they still give the option to pay for them. Also its random stuff. Also you paid for the game already. I don't really feel like it's super terrible it's in the game, just seems super greedy on EA's part. But then who's really surprised about that?

#24 Edited by Sammo21 (3543 posts) -

@fox01313: and that's actually gross. You are spending money on items that effect a COMPETITIVE game that gives you an edge over real people because of your laziness and something others at the same skill and level wouldn't have access to through normal play.

#25 Posted by Jayzilla (2571 posts) -

http://www.gamespot.com/features/who-the-hell-is-james-vega-6366008/

Tom Magrino kind of echoes Jeff's sentiments, but in a much more specific way. He says the stories in the games should contain all the major plot points. We shouldn't have to buy comics/DLC/books etc. to get the main story sorted. I totally agree with him. I don't want to read mediocre books or comics or play mediocre DLC(not all the DLC was bad, but some were) to get the whole story.

#26 Posted by andriv (257 posts) -

@Jayzilla: you get a separate story from the book, it has little to do with the missions Shepard is on. Saying that a story should not span more than 1 medium is a pretty strange thing to say

#27 Edited by shulinchung (182 posts) -

@AnxiousTube said:

Because although your paying money for better equipment, there is no way to know exactly what equipment you would be getting. It's like gambling, it could possibly lead to a lot of money in EA's bank, and a lot of people with a gambling problem; if they let they stick with the game.

I agree. Living in Asia, where free-to-play games with this sort of "paying for random equipment" are the norm, I have witnessed it first-hand, I saw gamers who are unaware that they have gambling problems that need psychotherapy because they think they are just palying games, not gambling; I saw teenagers bullying their classmates for money so that they can spend those money on in-game items; I saw people robbing convenient stores for pre-paid in-game currency. Game companies will just take steps further if people don't complain about it. That's what is happening in Asia. Don't let this sort of shit happen in America, fellow gamers! :)

#28 Posted by Sammo21 (3543 posts) -

@Jayzilla: What does this have to do with the multiplayer...I don't want this thread hijacked with more BS about the "on-disc DLC/Day one DLC" garbage...that's an entirely different argument and beast all together.

#29 Posted by Napalm (9020 posts) -
@Boboblaw said:
Its not exactly new or anything though.  EA has been doing it for years with Ultimate Team in Fifa. In that you buy (with points or real money)packs of cards and its completely random as to what you get.
Oh god.
#30 Posted by LaserLambert (172 posts) -

So I work hard and unlock the stuff by earning the points and some lazy ass buys it and that's cool?

can I just pay to beat the last chapter? this achievement's hard too I wanna buy it instead.

#31 Posted by Sammo21 (3543 posts) -

@LaserLambert: its random and in a pack, so the chances that you get something similar is incredibly low. Also, as I said, you can spend 120 microsoft points or you can play 3 games on silver. Not a big deal.

#32 Posted by Skyfire543 (764 posts) -

I probably dont have much of a say in this, since i havnt bought ME 3 yet, since my PC is terrible, but EA is doing the same thing with SSX, but on a much bigger scale. (Up to $10 transactions or 10 million in game credits or something like that), and for Bad Company 2, there are packs that unlock every weapon and gadget for a given class for 2 dollars a pop. EA's been doing this for a while. I dont know why people are just starting to talk about it now. 
But either way it's bad on EA's part.  If someone pays 60 dollars for a game they shouldnt even be goven the option to use real money to buy things in game game obtainable by playing it normaly.  If the content had new weapons or armor that were only obtainable by buying the packs I would understand, because it would give players more of a reason to buy the packs, and probably make more money in the long run.

#33 Edited by Slag (4864 posts) -

Perhaps Jeff doesn't like some of the subtle design changes microtransaction cause and the way it's reshaping the industry.

I personally think microtransactions allow a company to ship a more unfinished product. And well it also removes yet another carrot to really master a game unaided. As a result I think it does change mulitplayer experiences, if nothing else who is playing.

I don't know how he feels precisely, but it's his job to mention his impressions and he did. If he feels microtransactions changed the experience than absolutely he should say so.

Seems inevitable that microtransactions are here to stay. Bottom line is that it reduces risk for publishers/devs. It allows them to upsell to the their core customers, which is easier to do than convert non-fans.

#34 Posted by CptBedlam (4457 posts) -

@Sammo21 said:

Does anyone else feel that this optional ability to purchase in game content for you multiplayer characters is that dastardly or sickening? I don't see the big deal.

Yes, me.

@Slag said:

Perhaps Jeff doesn't like some of the subtle design changes microtransaction cause and the way it's reshaping the industry.

That's my guess, too. At least that what I feel towards most microtransaction models. Bioware really has become one of the worst offenders.

#35 Posted by Butler (392 posts) -

Every time you spend a dollar you are voting and influencing the market.

#36 Posted by Enigma777 (6058 posts) -

I think it's more to the fact that most of the stuff you get is one-time-use items.

#37 Posted by Tennmuerti (8174 posts) -

Any type of pay real money to get more powerfull in a multiplayer type deal disgusts me.
It cheapens the efforts of other players. It is a scummy way to try goosing more money. I never want to see "pay real money to get x virtual item" in game ever, not mp, not sp, fuck that 4rth wall breaking noise.
Saying same other games do it is not a carte blanche justification. I am fully well aware of FIFA system and cringe every time my litle brother buys a pack or some shit and try to ster him away.
Something like this feels like a complete ripoff. Paying for pretty much 0 effort on the other partys behalf.

If you don't feel negative emotions towards such methods, fine I respect your right to not be concerned with it. But then do me the courtsey of the same nature.

#38 Posted by Sammo21 (3543 posts) -

@Tennmuerti: to say you are getting more powerful is a little ridiculous. I don't think this cheapens the game anymore than Gears of War 3 having paid skins for weapons and Jeff didn't seem to mind those too much.

@Enigma777: yeah but that is stuff you get in every pack and its the exact same thing as the in game currency.

I don't see this as any different than playing an mmo or RPG and constantly getting items that you can't use for your class. Just because you get weapons you don't want to use as a squishy Drell Vanguard doesn't mean that weapon isn't worth having for a Krogan Sentinel.

#39 Posted by Drakoji (230 posts) -

There's no place for micro transaction in a game that you already paid.

It's retarded. It's only push the fact that EA/Bioware are becoming greedy as fuck. Sure it hurts no one, you have no obligations to buy those packs, but it still feels wrong since you already paid for the game and this is in the game only to make money out of people who have no patience to work for it. And the fact that it is random, is stupid. Booster pack for TCG are at least in themed booster packs, if you buy yugioh cards they come in sets and I'm pretty sure pokemon and magic comes in set based on their elements / color.

#40 Edited by Tennmuerti (8174 posts) -
@Sammo21 said:

@Tennmuerti: to say you are getting more powerful is a little ridiculous. I don't think this cheapens the game anymore than Gears of War 3 having paid skins for weapons and Jeff didn't seem to mind those too much.


What?
Are you serious?
You are straight up getting better weapons and mods and their relevant upgrades faster then another person who is not paying for them. Or you are getting them without working for them.
Skins don't make your guns shoot stronger, have more bulelts, weight less (hense able to use powers faster). Futhermore the person buying packs is also getting one timew use booster items from them.
The person spending real money is either circumventing the game progression and getting the same stuff you are but without effort, or he is getting more in addition to the stuff he gets for the effort.
 
This is even besides the point that their entire system of how much credits you get per match vs pack cost is deliberately designed to encourage and try to make people buy packs for money and not spend effort.
Because it has been made so incredibly artificially slow to progress. Because you get consumables that give you better odds to finish a mission, hense get more money/XP to by more packs.
The amount of time you would have to sink in to unlock all the guns is phenomenal, i would easilly estimate it would take more then BF3 even.
Meanwhile you are running around the same several tiny maps, over and over and over, chancing bad teams and wasted time/effort, killing the same enemies.
 
I've already seen threads of people spending hundreds of dollars on these packs and it's disgusting.
Its exactly the kind of bullshit that should not be in games.
It's what makes people like me despise FTP games with the same system that tries to sell player power for money.
#41 Posted by Seppli (10250 posts) -

You can unlock cars in recent NFS games with money. I don't mind, as long as I can't accidentally spend money. There are loads of checks an balances in place to prevent accidental 'discharge' of cash, so whatever, as long as the game isn't tailored towards microtransactions.

Mass Effect 3's booster packs is tailored to fit with the microtransaction scheme. Oddly, I don't mind it, since I like that trading card game feel and how getting something awesome actually makes you kinda special.

I can only imagine how awesome it would be to unlock the Black Widow or Scorpion for coop.

#42 Posted by Bulby33 (617 posts) -

I don't know why Jeff feels that way. I personally don't have a problem with it. It's not like you have to buy those packs with money as you can use in-game currency to buy them. Plus, I had like 200 points laying around on my account so I made one purchase with them and unlocked a Drell Adept. I've used him ever since.

#43 Posted by NickLott (793 posts) -

I'm pretty adverse to micro transaction heavy games but after plaining ME3 multiplayer, I really have no problem with it at all. For what costs a dollar, you can accomplish in one good round or two decent rounds. For two dollars, all you'd need to play is about an hour to hour and a half.

#44 Posted by Brodehouse (10129 posts) -

People care how others spend their money and time.

I don't.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.