Weekend Open Forum: Your thoughts on microtransactions, loot boxes & other pay-to-win...

[Evernessince]

If you pay 60 for a game it should have no micro transactions, lootboxes or anything of sort. If the game is free, cosmetic stuff is ok and it shouldn't be annoying and intrusive. Lootboxes shouldn't exist anywhere because that is pretty much gambling.

What about games as a service? Like for example Guild Wars 2 and Overwatch, where they provide you with the base game and constant free content.

 

[Stark]

Simply speaking : NO in any form or way to loot boxes.
I will not buy a game which includes such or spend any money in game where I am not sure of the return I am getting, as "real money + CHANCE = Gambling" in my book simple.

Microtransction : depends.
The only game I play which has both is league of legends. I have never brought a single loot box ( you can earn them at a deathly slow pace and it includes specific skins and stuff so am fine with it ), but I do buy stuff in game BECAUSE it is COSMETIC. No real impact on game-play other than visual looks. and I feel fine supporting it in this way as game is FREE to play. People argue its pay to win but having the whole pool of heroes unlocked will not increase your win chances. Its that one champion and how you play the game with it which matters. Play more to unlock more, not pay more.
if you want to have microtransction then have the guts to make game free to play, or just charge an upfront fee and be done with it.

DLC : Witcher 3 did it right I do not mind paying for extra content after the main campaign. But if its any thing like Mass Effect 2 (heh another EA title) where they locked the content behind DLC which was essential to main campaign then screw it. Say if Witcher 3 locked the Bloody baron quest behind DLC then how would you feel. Congratulation you have discovered the castle of baron now pay 15$ to unlock the Main gate.
Also I Buy game of the year edition on steam/GOG, I got Witcher 3 a great price and half way though, another reason I love PC gaming.

Monthly subscription or charges after purchasing : Do it like Blizzard, and charge each person equally according to purchasing power parity irrespective of their country.

 

[Neewuser]

Microtransactions, loot boxes & other pay-to-win elements are a plague. They should be banned for people under 18.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Microtransactions, loot boxes & other pay-to-win elements are a plague.

I agree.

They should be banned for people under 18.

This is where I disagree, solely because of the difficulty of policing age across the Internet. There should not be any criteria in who is banned and who is not. Either ban micro-transactions and etc... for all or leave them as is.

 

[cuerdc]

Pay to win should be banned as not fair game for everyone. Although like in destiny 2 can buy extra stuff but is purely cosmetic and does not affect gameplay that should be allowed.
Only gambling which should be allowed is entering competitions/leagues which you can win.
At the prices of them crates should be winning pc's consoles tv's act..

 

[Axle Grease]

Offer season passes or increase the price of the game. The imbalances micro-transactions create make the game less enjoyable.

 

[Puiu]

I have absolutely no problem with cosmetic stuff, but they should absolutely not ruin the game just to shoehorn in some form of stupid microtransactions.

 

[Shinjitsu]

Overwatch loot boxes are NOT pay-to-win but it is still a terrible thing. Why is it that rewards have to be RNG based in the first place? Why can't it be your XP be turned-in for a cosmetic item of your choice?

If a game company wants to sell cosmetic/color/skin mods, and most importantly NOT pay-to-win, that is probably acceptable as it is their prerogative. What a game company should NOT be allowed to do is fail to disclose whether if their game is "pay-to-win", nor should they be allowed to bait-and-switch people later by adding in "pay-to-win". This kind of deceitful behavior should already be illegal, and the existing legal framework is adequate to enforcing this, that should be remedied.

 

[Darth Shiv]

Ironically overwatch lootboxes, as pictured on the main page for this article, do not contain any pay to win element.

Paying for any randomised content regardless is still gambling by many government definitions. Hence should not be available to minors at the very least.

 

[Evernessince]

Paying for any randomised content regardless is still gambling by many government definitions. Hence should not be available to minors at the very least.

Just a heads up, that would implicate trading card games, Crackerjack, and any form of grab bags or raffles. So yeah, if I were you I would re-think your definition. At least with lootboxes, you always get something. Can't say the same for regular gambling. Or should we arrest the people who operate the kids toy dispensers that give out random little toys as well?

 

[davejonnes]

I don't have a problem with lootboxes, as long as they are used entirely for cosmetic purposes, without any effect on game progress/gameplay.

So far, the only loot box method that does not bother me, is the one in Blizzard games. The loot boxes in Overwatch, does not hinder the gameplay experience. Overwatch's lootboxes are entirely cosmetic.

Even the gold system in Heroes of the Storm, or even the pay per pack system on Hearthstone , as the base game itself is free, and they tend to be somewhat generous with gold and the progress you make through quests; the progress on those is entirely feasible on a free to play basis compared to other f2p games out there...

 

[bolski]

Could $99.99 for a "crate of crystals", really be considered a "micro transaction"? To put it into perspective, that's more than a 256 GB SATA III SSD, plenty to buy an 8 GB set of RAM modules, or even a lower end motherboard.

Since I've been led to believe that a gamer on a strict budget could possibly squeak by with a dual core CPU, here's the newest, fastest, Kaby Lake Pentium for..... you guessed it.... $99.99 ! https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117736

And it's not permanent. That is the REAL big issue. It's for something that goes away as it's used. And just wait until they add NEW items that will require MORE spending to get those new items or else, you won't be able to progress any further, or in PVP, you'll lose because those that spent for those new items will have more power than you.

 

[bolski]

Simply speaking : NO in any form or way to loot boxes.
I will not buy a game which includes such or spend any money in game where I am not sure of the return I am getting, as "real money + CHANCE = Gambling" in my book simple.

Microtransction : depends.
The only game I play which has both is league of legends. I have never brought a single loot box ( you can earn them at a deathly slow pace and it includes specific skins and stuff so am fine with it ), but I do buy stuff in game BECAUSE it is COSMETIC. No real impact on game-play other than visual looks. and I feel fine supporting it in this way as game is FREE to play. People argue its pay to win but having the whole pool of heroes unlocked will not increase your win chances. Its that one champion and how you play the game with it which matters. Play more to unlock more, not pay more.
if you want to have microtransction then have the guts to make game free to play, or just charge an upfront fee and be done with it.

DLC : Witcher 3 did it right I do not mind paying for extra content after the main campaign. But if its any thing like Mass Effect 2 (heh another EA title) where they locked the content behind DLC which was essential to main campaign then screw it. Say if Witcher 3 locked the Bloody baron quest behind DLC then how would you feel. Congratulation you have discovered the castle of baron now pay 15$ to unlock the Main gate.
Also I Buy game of the year edition on steam/GOG, I got Witcher 3 a great price and half way though, another reason I love PC gaming.

Monthly subscription or charges after purchasing : Do it like Blizzard, and charge each person equally according to purchasing power parity irrespective of their country.

I've found myself going back to my old PC games lately and enjoying them. The older games had substance over flair and the story lines in many of the RPGs is top-notch over many of what is out these days. Heck, Ultima 3 through 7 (maybe with the exception of 6) were top-notch and the depth of the story-line is those games were excellent. Yes, there were many grinding missions that were needed in order to level up your party, but that was all a part of the game! Thank goodness for GOG and getting these games again at a great price and with NO DRM. The days of PC games in the 80's and 90's were probably some of the best now that I look back on it. Of course, the machines back then didn't always have the greatest graphics, so you HAD to draw the player in with deep story telling. Once graphics started coming to the forefront, it seemed that the backstory development in many games went to the side as it was all the up-front graphics that were used to sell the games.

 

[bolski]

I don't have a problem with lootboxes, as long as they are used entirely for cosmetic purposes, without any effect on game progress/gameplay.

So far, the only loot box method that does not bother me, is the one in Blizzard games. The loot boxes in Overwatch, does not hinder the gameplay experience. Overwatch's lootboxes are entirely cosmetic.

Even the gold system in Heroes of the Storm, or even the pay per pack system on Hearthstone , as the base game itself is free, and they tend to be somewhat generous with gold and the progress you make through quests; the progress on those is entirely feasible on a free to play basis compared to other f2p games out there...

Unfortunately, pay-to-stay is growing in an alarming rate. And Game of War is probably the absolute worst in anything out there these days. And MZ is horrible in bringing out weekly updates that will nullify whatever you had working before it. Spent money on a bunch of $99 packs (not me) to upgrade everything to make you all poowerful? Watch out! Here comes the next round of updates where if you want to get back to where you were, you have to spend more money because those items that help you upgrade are only available via the $99 packs. It's a shame this couldn't be a crime because what MZ and many other companies like them are doing is raping people of their money. Of course, if you're stupid enough to spend on them, the blame rests on those that spent.

 

[bolski]

Offer season passes or increase the price of the game. The imbalances micro-transactions create make the game less enjoyable.

And then games become SO unbalanced with more updates that the game is just unplayable. Too many games have gone that route.

 

[bolski]

You are kidding right? You're part of the problem! You don't mind them, huh?

So, in the not so distant past...Gamers used to have to get to upper levels to get upgraded weapons and skins. It was a sense of accomplishment. Now, are gamers that lazy, that they have to buy these upgrades to enjoy the game? I think not.

It's called entitlement. They feel they don't have to work for anything and that everything should be given to them. And they're willing to pay for it, with mommy and daddy's money as they live in their parent's basement.

 

[bolski]

I agree.

This is where I disagree, solely because of the difficulty of policing age across the Internet. There should not be any criteria in who is banned and who is not. Either ban micro-transactions and etc... for all or leave them as is.

Micro-transactions that give one player an advantage over any other player in a PvP type game should NOT be allowed. Also, micro-transactions that are required in order to advance and complete a mission in a game should NOT be allowed at all.

 

[Potato Judge]

The only paid game that I really cared about that have microtransactions is GTA online and MGSV TPP. Not a fan of the practice so I have stopped buying games that have it entirely. But pay to win or not, I think there's just too much focus on profit nowadays.

 

[Stark]

I've found myself going back to my old PC games lately and enjoying them. The older games had substance over flair and the story lines in many of the RPGs is top-notch over many of what is out these days. Heck, Ultima 3 through 7 (maybe with the exception of 6) were top-notch and the depth of the story-line is those games were excellent. Yes, there were many grinding missions that were needed in order to level up your party, but that was all a part of the game! Thank goodness for GOG and getting these games again at a great price and with NO DRM. The days of PC games in the 80's and 90's were probably some of the best now that I look back on it. Of course, the machines back then didn't always have the greatest graphics, so you HAD to draw the player in with deep story telling. Once graphics started coming to the forefront, it seemed that the backstory development in many games went to the side as it was all the up-front graphics that were used to sell the games.

Nailed it mate! could not have said it better myself.

 

[Evernessince]

And it's not permanent. That is the REAL big issue. It's for something that goes away as it's used. And just wait until they add NEW items that will require MORE spending to get those new items or else, you won't be able to progress any further, or in PVP, you'll lose because those that spent for those new items will have more power than you.

That's the downside with digital goods that you cannot download and save many of them to your hard drive, the party providing them is not required to provide anything beyond the second your "acquire" the item. They could all vanish and you have absolutely no recourse as a customer to get any of it back. You have four kinds of digital goods:

Standalone: Digital items that are not consumed after a single use that work by themselves without the support of an online service or provider. ex. Games, Movies, Music

Addon: Digital items that complement standalone digital goods or services and require their continued operation for use. ex. Skins, weapon DLC, horse mounts in an mmo

Consumable: Digital Items that are consumed after a single use. ex. Lootboxes, keys, robux, in game tokens

Service: A digital system that provides access to content. ex. Pandora, MMOs, Netflix

The problem we have is many digital items are provided as a service (like any steam game for example) when most people should be getting a standalone item. Companies like Steam should be required by law to allow all users to download a copy of the game to their hard drive that will not one day stop functioning when steam arbitrarily stops supporting it or shuts down. In addition, games that operate as a service that also have a purchase price should be required to provide a copy of the same that runs without the service dependency upon shutdown of the game's service. That could be as simple as just adding direct connect. Games that run as a service w/o an initial purchase that include addons should also be required to provide access to these addons in some manner, whether through an offline gallery mode or an offline mode.