Quick Jump Daily Digest
Thank you for your interest in the Quick Jump Daily Digest. Get notified of all new content on QJ in our free Daily Digest. To subscribe, enter your email address below and click the subscribe button.
Microtransactions: the experiment that failed? |
Listed in: PS3, Xbox 360, Wii Tags: Downloadable Content, Electronic Arts, Konami, Major Nelson, Q Entertainment
Ó
After Electronic Arts got its hands on it, it would be so easy to think so. Funny thing is, this bold online console gaming experiment called microtransactions could have been a good idea - DON'T HIT ME YET, I said "could," and even I have my doubts it could ever be, okay? Then EA got its hands on it, ran it in Marketplace and, frankly, they botched it.
For example: Madden NFL 07 tutorial vids? Haven't you guys heard of GameFAQs and YouTube? Then 200 MS points to max out a Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07 golfer? What's this, pay-per-GameShark? After that, pay to unlock The Godfather uber-guns, then PAY for the in-game money to buy them? What's this, the offer we can't refuse? And latest of all, NFS Carbon unlocks at a price? It's highway robbery, we tell you, highway robbery!
And when you have Xbox Live community shepherd TriXie "crying rape", and Major Nelson becoming very worried about it, you know it's over for microtransactions, man. At least as far as we're concerned, and not the publishers. Don't forget: Carbon also comes out on the PS3 and Wii, which will have their own online portals. OMG, is EA going to do this same thing to those consoles' players too?
The original intent of microtransactions was to give gamers the power of choice. Something like iTunes, where you can choose which songs of an artist's complete itinerary you'd like to keep. If you don't like a specific feature or extra of a game, why do you have to pay for it when you don't have to ask for it in the first place?
This mentality runs into a brick wall that dates back to the pre-online console days. We're used to seeing our games in one complete package. Expansion packs were just that: expansions that did nothing to detract from the original game. For the money we pay for a "full game", we rightfully expected a full game, and not what in effect is a demo at 1,200 MS points (example: Lumines Live! Fun, but sadly not complete).
But for all of microtransaction's deplored failures, it does offer advantages that can't be ignored - and we don't mean the advantage for highway robbery. One example, it allows game devs to continue releasing expansion or sequel game content that could recycle part of the original content or code. And they can do so at a lower price than if they had to include the code in the sequel.
And some of the more positive comments to Lumines Live! had a point, too. Nothing's stopping Q Entertainment from expanding the game further with mouth-watering additional content - or producing a sequel which, hopefully, will be cheaper than 1,200 MS points if it's going to be an add-on to the Lumines Live! "Base Pack".
Try looking to microtransactions as a way to offer us the game's "minimum playable content" at the lowest possible price, and offer the rest as downloadable content. But the total price of them all should not exceed the MSRP of that platform's game disc containing all that data. To use Gran Turismo HD and its planned downloadables as an example, the total price of the game's basic engines (for gameplay, visuals, audio, etc.) plus the "downloadable" cars found in the PS2 Gran Turismo 4 (of which HD is a port of) should not exceed the $ 60.00 MSRP of a PS3 game. Any more than that, and for me it would be a total rip-off.
With that, I could play GTHD at a much lower price, although I won't have all the cool cars of the complete game package. But the option to have the complete game package, plus the price I paid for the "Base Pack", would not cost me more than if I purchased the complete game on a Blu-Ray disc.
Not all games would be compatible with this kind of economic model, I'm sure (I wouldn't forgive Konami if they made Snake a "downloadable" optional character for MGS4), but that's just one way out of one guy's imagination to make this nightmare work - I mean end. And even I am not sure it could work. Or if anyone in corporate cares (the full HD is still estimated at $ 500.00). I'm just a poor gamer boy on a tight budget.
Those are just hypotheticals. Call me devil's advocate (or something that only needs four letters, if you will), but there could be a way microtransactions could work. But it has to be focused on making games easier for us to purchase and play, and to offer us new and exciting content at lower prices than we're used to, not to offer us gamers half-baked efforts that the publisher'll "promise" to correct with future patches or sequels, or to con us by offering us "offers we can't refuse." Yeah, we're talking to you, EA.
It must be coincidence I'm listening to Metallica's "The Memory Remains" right now. Part of the chorus comes to mind when I think about EA and this...
Fortune, fame, mirror vain, gone insane... Fortune, fame, mirror vain, dance little tin goddess, dance...
God, I miss the days when EA was about the Desert Strike game, not about its customers deserting its games in strike. Nah, na-na-nah, nah-nah-nah, nah-nah na-na-nah...
[Digg this Story!]
| This story sucks? This story rocks! |
|
|
Comments
AMAZING ARTICLE!
Reply
Reply
Don't bash the whole thing!
Reply
1)Microtransacti ons: pay some content, and pay for more
2)Old school:get it all when you pay for the game
This is how it works:
The devs make it all at once.
Then the marketers remove stuff to make people pay more.
Not like this:
The devs make the game
The devs make more stuff for you to pay for
Note that oblivion and others don't do this. But the potential for abuse is soo huge that it is bad.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I'll drink to the death of microtransactio n abuse and the banning of EA on the marketplace until they can get their act together.
Cheers.
Reply
Reply
Micro transactions are a double edge sword. Sometimes its good and sometimes its bad. Its funny, people complain about having to pay for extra content but have no problem with expansion packs for games.
You cant use GTHD as an example since polyphony is redesigning alot of car models and tracks. which most will be used in GT5. Saying that micro transactions for GTHD is a stupid idea is like saying car packs for Forza or PGR is stupid as well.
Oblivion does it well, they release real content for the money unlike EA who just lock the features of the game until you buy it.
Why do companies do this? Because of development time. When the deadline comes around you have to cut your losses somewhere from incomplete missions to content. But the retail value will be the same regardless of if its finished or not. But if they spend extra time on new content, they unfortunately cant tell the bosses that they plan to make it free, because thats money. So if they spend the companies time to make the completed content, its gonna have to make money.
EA abused, and soon enough they are going to realize that its a failure on their attempt and possibly make those unlockable features free.
Reply
Reply
If they had just listed the game for 2000 points I'm sure people would have complained even louder. FYI - Gaming costs money, but EA? You are killing the industry.
Reply
As for EA's strategy guides, if people are willing to spend their money on them then why would they not offer the product? I don't think most people would purchase those guides because they are available on the internet in so many places, but if a sucker is willing to part with his money why wouldn't EA hold out their hand ready to receive it?
Most of the micro transactions are working just fine. $5 for Geometry Wars was a perfect price point. Most of the XBLA games are very accurately priced. Some of the themes and picture packs are priced more than I want to pay, but companies are used to supply and demand and will adjust their prices accordingly. But this won't happen instantly...supply and demand data takes a long time to compile.
Reply
I truley hate EA and there games are begining to suck.
If they do the same with Wii and PS3 then they "Will"
fail.
Thank you for scamming us EA, but the only
game i ever liked was Future Cop...
Reply
I'd suggest "no" we wouldn't and then the manufacturers would be stuck with un bought content that they had to pay to devlop.
Reply
This is a perfect response! If everyone does this, then the developer has two choices: come up with better content -or- lower the price to something that is reasonable. This is the foundation of supply and demand.
Q! Entertainment has been stung by the backlash of people not willing to pay more than the initial $15USD for LuminesLive. They aren't going to make as much as they wanted and they got a bad rep for being shady in the first place. Will they change the pricing structure of LuminesLive? Probably not. But everyone in the industry will learn from the mistake Q! made and try not to repeat it.
And one definite rule of supply and demand: if supply goes up and demand stays the same, prices will fall. How does this translate to XBoxLive Marketplace? It means that as more and more content is supplied to the XBLMarketplace, if the number of XBoxLive users doesn't sharply increase then all the different developers out there will start competing for your dollar. Competition helps the consumer. If you continue to vote with your dollar, prices will fall.
Reply
Reply
CoD2 made 1million out of new maps (not scams)
Reply
Reply