Over half of Activision Blizzard's $7.16 billion yearly revenue came from microtransactions

midian182

Posts: 9,763   +121
Staff member

While not every consumer is a fan, Microtransactions are often a huge part of a company’s revenue stream. In the case of Activision Blizzard, for example, the World of Warcraft dev has found that in-game purchases are bringing in more money than the actual games themselves.

In its latest financial results, Activision Blizzard revealed it made a record $7.16 billion in revenue across the entire fiscal year. $4 billion of that amount came from “in-game net bookings,” which covers loot boxes, sales of DLC, and in-app purchases.

It’s important to remember that Activision Blizzard owns King, the company behind a series of mobile games including Candy Crush, all of which have a big focus on microtransactions. King generated around $2 billion from in-game purchases for its parent company. That means the other $2 billion came from PC and console titles, as well as Activision Blizzard’s own mobile efforts such as Hearthstone.

Blizzard Activision does, of course, have a number of popular games that come with some form of microtransactions. Loot boxes and other in-game purchase options are present in Call of Duty: WWII, Destiny 2, and Overwatch. Even the long-running World of Warcraft still brings in plenty of revenue through player purchases.

The backlash against the loot box systems in games such as Shadow of War, Forza 7, and especially Electronic Arts’ Star Wars Battlefront 2 shook the industry last year. EA’s title led to some countries' regulators calling for a partial ban on loot boxes, with many claiming they constitute a form of gambling.

Despite the outcry, EA made $787 million from its “live services” during the last quarter. With people spending more on microtransactions every year, it’s easy to see why companies continue to include them in their games.

Permalink to story.

 
Until people wise up [...]

DV1nOctU8AA7JAj.jpg


In the future, changing your graphics settings will cost $0.99 and resolution changes will be one time use RNG from loot crates.
 
I guess reality is that the 'entertainment' buck is relatively elastic. I think it is also one of the first places where tightening appears in a downturn.
 
Why do you think Adobe went to a monthly plan?
Why do you think MS will do it with Windows eventually?
Couple reasons. One, makes it easier to do a budget, a "guaranteed" monthly
revenue stream, instead of a BIG dump of revenue once a year or so.
Plus, people see it as "not that much"...but, it really adds up.
 
The kids these days that don't know any better freely give away their money for a different color digital shirt for their character to "wear". I don't know how many adults do, but it is destroying the gaming market. I won't fund any game with microtransaction ripoff money grabs. I won't pay for any game that has them, either. The game list is getting thin.
 
With blizzard games, the only micro trans that can give you a advantage would be in hearthstone card packs and wow tokens in which you can sell for gold. I wonder if these 2 sources makeup a majority of its micro transactions.
 
A $5.00 bag of heroin could be deemed to a "street micro transaction". Sometimes the first bag is even free. The apparent trouble gamers seem to be having, is distinguishing one type of addiction from another.

Oh, and believing the game publishers give a f**k what they think, or how badly they bleed them. Those seem to be a real mental hurdles as well.
 
Why do you think Adobe went to a monthly plan?
Why do you think MS will do it with Windows eventually?
Couple reasons. One, makes it easier to do a budget, a "guaranteed" monthly
revenue stream, instead of a BIG dump of revenue once a year or so.
Plus, people see it as "not that much"...but, it really adds up.
Yup, I'm totally PO'd with Adobe. Used to use Acrobat Pro. Amazing what you can do with it. Last fall they stopped support rather suddenly, I reluctantly installed the free Adobe Reader. What a scam. For example if I want to delete a blank page at the end of a document, in the Reader you hit edit and a box opens saying "you can pay x dollars to complete this action or you can subscribe for x dollars monthly". Microtransactions and dirty tactics IMHO. Woiuld rather the program says it can't do it and doesn't have controls that lead you to believe you can do what you want only to find out you can, if you pay.
an analogy, you are using Office 2016 standalone MS Word. You click 'header and footer' and instead of being able to work, a box pops up stating you can pay to complete that action or subscribe to Office 365.
I also found out (but not from Adobe) that they had been hacked and my info stolen. so Adobe gets the one finger salute from me.
If MS does this with Office, I'm out. If they do this with Windows, I don't care if I need to take classes or get some help to use Linux.
 
I view microtransactions as an extension of the "everybody wants you to subscribe to their crap" model. Car wash, Prime, Netflix, Hulu. Name it, what company does not want you to subscribe to something these days. My middle finger is up to car wash and Prime subscriptions, and pretty much all else that I have no interest in.
 
Back