Cryptic's Roper Explains Microtransactions For Champions Online 82
Karen Hertzberg writes "Many MMO gamers have expressed concern over the recent announcement that micro-transactions would play a role in the upcoming release of Champions Online. Knowing that MTs can be a touchy subject for fans, Ten Ton Hammer sat down with Bill Roper for an interview. He reveals more about Cryptic's take on the business model, what type of items you can expect to find through MTs, and how the system will be integrated into Champions Online come launch day. Roper said, 'The idea is wanting to be able to have things there that players can get if they want to, but they don't negatively impact the balance of the game. It's not like we're expecting players to go and purchase things through micro-transactions that then give them some huge leg up. All those things I think people get worried about, but really the focus is on having things that are fun, cosmetic or are things that are more account-wide and maintenance based.'"
He doesn't even know what microtransactions are... (Score:4, Insightful)
Roper has confused microtransactions with on-line purchases. How did he get that job? A microtransaction is a charge so small that you don't really notice it and the charge is made in such a way that its not really noticed, and dont require any complicated action, by the buyer. I don't understand how anyone can confuse that with buying a char transfer for WoW, or buying something from iTune's.
Re:He doesn't even know what microtransactions are (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the term Microtransaction has become a standard definition for MMO's that have items for purchase, ranging anywhere from $1 to $10 or so. The credit card/financial definition is certainly the source of the term, but its definition is now pretty irrelevant when talking about MMOs.
If you say a MMO with microtransactions, that means they will have a store of items that will cost a few bucks or so. The reason this is a big deal is that with a subscription-based MMO, this is faily uncommon, and is seen as
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a site with microtransactions:
http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/pacerdesc.html [uscourts.gov]
Yes, the US government runs the site. PACER is intended to give access to court documents, however, to protect the business models of Westlaw and Lexis-Nexis there is an $0.08 charge per page, for both legal filings and for varying definitions of a page for many HTML rendered pages.
In the last quarterly billing cycle I managed to generate $38 in fees, so yes microtransactions do suck and are an extremely bad idea.
Microtransactions = deal buster (Score:1)
I will not play a game that rewards, or give extra benefits to, those who give cash to the company. Charge everyone a small fee, but keep everyone equal.
Re:Microtransactions = deal buster (Score:5, Insightful)
That's nonsense right there.
You assume everyone is equal right now, and that's simply not true. There are enough people in MMOs that have multiple accounts and pass money from one to the other. There are people with nothing else to do, who can grind all day, and there are people with job, friends, family, who can't.
If you want an "everyone is equal" game, play chess or go. MMOs aren't equal as they are now. Adding micro-transactions simply allows people who have a job to offset their time disadvantage compared to people without a job with something else that they have that the others don't.
Except it's not necessarily that (Score:2)
Well, I understand your point and would even side with it, if it was indeed that. Except it probably isn't. Even the summary mentions that they don't want to actually sell things which would break balance or give someone a leg up.
For example, since largely it's the same people who came up with City Of Heroes, here's what COH sells: higher resolution costume pieces.
If you come from an EQ/WoW school of MMO, that may sound like an advantage right there, but in reality it's 100% cosmetic. The costume or weapon
What do you expect them to say ?? (Score:2)
Why YES, we are seeking to milk our players for every dime we can, and YES this will cause balance issues but we've found thru studies that 1 player who will PAY $$$ for side objects is worth 3 players who won't ?? Of course they are going to downplay any balance or game mechanics issues, they ARE trying to make a profit here. That said I hope they can strike a nice balance, and that it beneifts the game and ALL the players as a whole, but I'm most certainly not going to hold my breath on the belief that th
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I guess we'll wait and see.
As I was saying, there _is_ at least one example which sold stuff that gave no actual in game advantage. So it's possible.
Whether CO will be like that... well, I'm not psychic. I'll just wait until they actually do something wrong, before I get all pumped up to whine about it :P
Re: (Score:2)
I've never seen anyone give a reasonable response to this question, so I'll ask you:
Why do you care about how other people in the game came about obtaining the powers they have?
If I play for 30 minutes and get myself a +1 sword of backscratching (which sounds about like what the Champions guy was talking about - nothing major, just minor bennies) or I pay $.50 to get the same thing, what possible difference will it make to you that I've done so?
Please don't say that players who buy things vs. players who "e
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I can see your point, I guess I just don't agree with it.
I guess my feeling is that there's no equality in this situation in the first place, and as long as it isn't having a huge effect on my experience, I don't really care what people have access to that I don't.
For example, I have a really nice gaming rig - I can play games at the highest settings and my FPS won't dip much at all when I'm in a huge battle. This is HUGE in player vs. player combat because I'll be able to react to events in real time; some
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I will not play a game that rewards, or give extra benefits to, those who give cash to the company. Charge everyone a small fee, but keep everyone equal.
Well that isn't the case even now. What is the difference between a lawyer who works 60 hours a week who buys a WoW character than his wealthy retired client that sit at home all day and grinds characters?
I doubt many wealthy retirees or busy lawyers play WoW, but my point is the same. Wealthy in the real world can get you a better character passively or ac
Re: (Score:2)
Whereas I would because I don't really give a crap that other people can buy extra stuff. I'll enjoy the cheaper game without that stuff. Of course I'm probably exactly the player they don't want, which is lucky since I last all of 1 week on MMOs before they bore me silly and I never touch that one again.
Microtransaction = Cheating (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Microtransaction = Cheating (Score:4, Insightful)
That is only true if you think of the game as a competition.
I don't. The rest of my life is competitive enough as it is, thank you. I play games to relax and to challenge myself. Grinding isn't a challenge, so if I can bypass it, I will. If you call it cheating, I'll call you dumb. Also, arrogant because you are trying to put rules on my play.
Re: (Score:1)
It sounds to me (Disclamer: I don't play MMORPGs) like there needs to be two separate worlds. A "house league" world where you can buy stuff and just have fun. And a "Select league" world where its only things you have earned, where its very competitive and all about skill.
Then they could implement some way
Re: (Score:3)
What, exactly, is "unfair" about buying stuff instead of grinding for it?
Note: I'm not talking about anything that would require skill. I agree that if you want to get, say, a title "great marksmen", you should actually play and get a certain hit percentage.
But what, exactly, is unfair about investing $10 to get 100 monster skulls compared to investing 2 hours of time to get 100 monster skulls?
A huge part about MMOs is not about skill at all. Every idiot can complete 90% of the quests. The only skills they
Re: (Score:1)
What, exactly, is "unfair" about buying stuff instead of grinding for it?
Your right thats rather unclear.
There is nothing wrong with spending $10 to get 100 monster skulls. Provided that you don't see yourself as competing with other players.
However many people do see themselves in competition with others, and derive a sense of accomplishment (I am assuming its like a long term K/D ratio in FPS, I don't play MMORPGs) from getting items for their character. People only do the boring parts for the item or what ever at the end. An investment of time results in a reward.
Bu
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not really about someone (like you) who purchases one or two items needed to do something fun. Its the people who drop $500 to max out their character so they can strut their stuff without having earned it.
Yes, but compare to what? It's not as if I couldn't put down $500 today to have my character power-leveled and equipped with the best gear, is it? It's just a black market, that's all. What they're doing is making it a legit market. We should all know from the drug market experience over the past 30 or so years that pushing things to a black market does nothing to reduce demand, it only drives up the profits of the dealers and creates expenses to keep the black market in check.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because something develops a black market doesn't mean we should allow it because it is hard to deal with. If you don't like grinding, then MMOs aren't something you really should be playing. While you might just be playing it for "fun". Other people derive fun out of the competition. Achievements are a big thing now. Someone feels much more accomplished if they spent the time to get the achievement rather than someone who bought it.
If you want a game where people can buy their progress, t
Re: (Score:2)
Unless there is a mark that says "Item was bought", I'd argue that most players wouldn't know the difference between a bought or won item anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that will help. It will just label the people who buy stuff. People won't want to group with the guy with labels. It will just make stupid drama and cause subscribers to quit. A lot of people feel really strongly about this. Whether it is rational or not is a different debate.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like grinding, then MMOs aren't something you really should be playing.
Largely true, which is why I have carefully selected those that I do, and avoid the pure grinding parts in them. I don't need the super-special rare items that you need 20 hours of grinding to get, and that give you a 0.5% advantage over some item you can buy from the weapon trader.
Other people derive fun out of the competition. Achievements are a big thing now. Someone feels much more accomplished if they spent the time to get the achievement rather than someone who bought it.
And I never said achievements should be buyable. If you like competition, you should compete based on skill, not based on how many hours you can put into the game, wouldn't you agree?
People want to escape the real world where the rich have all the advantages. You allow everything to be purchasable and you just pissed off the majority of your customers.
That's a good argument, yes.
I would argue for
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It devalues the work other people have put into their characters and therefore makes playing the game at all that much more pointless, thereby gradually spoiling the game.
It is similar to saying, I don't want to study for four years for a degree, so if I can bribe someone to give me a degree without the studying, why shouldn't I do it? Similar to steroid use. If I bust my ass off for a good body, it is inevitable that someone will accuse me of steroid abuse eventually, degrading the effort, making it poin
Re: (Score:2)
It devalues the work other people have put into their characters
Good. I'm all for devalueing pointless, repetitive work. We have machines for that. Us humans should engage in challenging work that requires skill.
Your degree example doesn't hold. A degree is a paper that says "xyz has these and these skills". Almost no item or level in an MMO is equivalent to that, all they say is "xyz somehow killed the end boss abc", which in most cases essentially translates to "put x ours of time into it".
Time has no value. What you do with the time has.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny. Most of the times, difference in equipment or level is the reason why I can't play with people who I'd like to play with.
You assume that everyone who would buy stuff is there to show it off. I claim the opposite. The people I know who'd buy stuff are those who are more interested in playing than in showing off or grinding.
But heck, as some other poster suggested, make every item in two different variants, one that can only be bought and one that can only be gained in-game. Then you could still be sho
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It sounds like you just don't understand MMOs. There really isn't skill involved until you've already collected all of the loot and are just in PvP playing against other players that have also managed to collect all of the best equipment. Everything is an investment of time and/or money, and some people already simply pay to have their character leveled and equipped to the point at which they can jump into the end-game and compete in the only skill portion of the game. If the company gets in on the action b
I prefer MTs (Score:2, Insightful)
This is just a bunch of people who think having Tier 8 or whatever actually matters. If you are a gear whore -- then you can still earn gear the "legit way". If you
Re: (Score:2)
It diminishes the value of what the other players have EARNED.
If i spent days working on an item or questing for some special item, and your mom just goes and buys it for you... what the hell was the point of me earning it the hard way? It makes honest players feel like suckers.
It's not cheating in that it is not against the rules, Blizzard WANTS players to gold farm and twink. But it's certainly unfair for people to players who can't afford to buy imaginary property with real money, it's also unsportsmanl
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It diminishes the value of what the other players have EARNED.
If i spent days working on an item or questing for some special item, and your mom just goes and buys it for you... what the hell was the point of me earning it the hard way? It makes honest players feel like suckers.
One, for people who work for their money, paying for something is just as much "earning it the hard way".
Two, the "work" you refer to is the exact kind of work that humans have built machines for ever since they were able to - stupid, repetitive, non-challenging work. We call it "grinding" for a reason.
Three, there is absolutely nothing dishonest about buying an item if the game so allows. We can argue about honesty in regards to games where buying stuff is expressively forbidden, but that's not what this t
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, some of that is true.
The most important part is that the model can not simply be added to an existing MMO that was designed with the assumption of grinding built-in, for example. If the entire reward concept is built on micro-rewards given for repetitive actions, then buying your way around that will frustrate you quickly because you bypass the addictive part of the game.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
MMOs and RPGs have never been about merit and skill. They've been about who can sit in their chair the longest and press the attack button the longest.
the longer you do it, the more powerful your character. Nearly every MMO out there is about grinding. It is the #1 complaint for a reason...
Microtransactions don't have anything to do with cheating as long as they are done properly. A lot of western companies haven't figured that out yet, but asian companies have been doing it a long time. Here in Korea every
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, were you referring to the other guy?
Oh please - stop with the PR attempt (Score:1)
Corpo-Speak (Score:3, Informative)
There's a lot of bull being thrown around in that interview. In response to the first question about whether the US market can accept micro-transaction games:
"I think a great example of that is Rock Band. That game is based wholly on micro-transactions and has a really high cost of entry, you know? With Rock Band you're not just buying the game, you're buying all of the peripherals and equipment... World of Warcraft has micro-transactions and people don't even think about it. Their micro-transactions are fairly steep at times - like $25 to move your character to another realm - and that's account-wide micro-transactions."
If an item is "really high cost" and/or "fairly steep", then it's not a micro-transaction, duh. And look, our game is comparable to both Rock Band and WOW, right.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, the guy has no idea what a micro-transaction is. Character transfers are a service Blizzard provides that they don't really want to encourage. But if you really want to, you can pay some money and they will do it. The money is more of a deterrent.
You need to look at the Korean games to understand micro-transactions. 50 cents to buy a new outfit or a new item for your virtual home.
I think his definition of a micro-transactionsis anything that you pay for above and beyond the cost
Hellgate part 2? (Score:1, Insightful)
This sounds a lot like the subscriber/non-subscriber deal from Hellgate London. Either way, if Bill Roper gets his hands in like Flagship, this mmo, microtransactions or no, won't see it's first birthday.
I wish it were:Hellgate part 2 :p (Score:2)
Well, I understand your point, but the alternative is that it's designed by Jack Emmert (Statesman) like COH :p
Now the game had a lot of good ideas (for my taste) and I still love the superhero setting. So Statesman gets my recognition for that.
But seriously, the game had _massive_ balance problems that could have been avoided by just doing some arithmetic on the back of a napkin. Jack Emmert was also genuinely surprised as to what happened to his game's balance when you just use level 22 equipment. Serious
I smell a re-hash. (Score:2)
Anyone looked up the term "Flagshipped"?
There was nothing wrong with the game Hellgate London but they screwed the pooch with a bad payment model by trying to sell a game as an MMO that was definitely not an MMO.
I smell a another debacle in the making. Bill Roper at the helm is apparently not a good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
There was nothing wrong with the game Hellgate London [snip]
Slightly off-topic, but there was plenty wrong with HGL. We could start with poor class choices (the only melee character is a holy warrior? wtf...), end with poor itemization (let's see, I need 54 more sizzling doodads to get +4 damage to my blue uzi, or I could just get a glitched rocket launcher by farming an early quest boss), and hit every point along the way where Flagship utterly failed to listen to any bit of beta reviewer commentary that didn't begin and end with OMG THIS IS THE BEST GAME EVAR! But
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I had fun with the game playing it as just an out there FPS. I wasn't looking for an in-depth rpg.
What I didn't like about it was the subscribe to play content instead of pay X for the content to play whenever you like (see guild wars model). Also the no LAN play. If they had charged per expansion I am quite sure they would still be running today. The whole free players vs subscribers thing was a huge fiasco.
Most people were not willing to pay the monthly fee because n
An interesting choice (Score:1)
I always see incredibly negative feedback to micro transactions in subscription games. While forum polls are obviously very biased by the vocal minority, they tend to also have an overwhelmingly negative response to questions about integrating micro payments into subscription MMOs. My impression is that a non-trivial percent of MMO players will not subscribe to a game that also integrates micro payments in a substantial way. Perhaps marketing research has shown that the revenue from micro payments will m
Re: (Score:1)
Oh, wait, Bill Roper...now I see. I guess the backlash to Hellgate's ridiculous payment model didn't burn him deeply enough.
Re: (Score:2)
One point of note though is that City of Heroes already has pay for DLC vanity items like he's talking about. Those transactions are actually viewed pretty favorably by the CoH players so Champions is probably counting on their target market already being broken in on that regard. In fact they probably got the idea from watching it work so well for the new group running CoH.
Personally I'm of two minds on the issue. I think the prices companies charge for this sort of stuff are way too high considering
Re: (Score:1)
The interesting thing about MMO pricing is how well your profits scale as you add players. While some additional expenses are incurred with each new player development costs largely remain the same at 100k players and 10,000k players. This means that a company like Blizzard can invest enormous resources into ongoing development compared to a company like Turbine, and still be making vastly more money on a per subscription basis.
This makes it difficult to determine a fair rate, since a game like WoW is bas
Re: (Score:2)
That's fine for you, but a lot of people find it stupid that you could progress in a game by buying your way through it. The whole point of end game in most MMOs is to work with other people to get better gear. There is no need to run Ulduar with your brother if you could just buy the Ulduar gear. There is nothing to work towards so people would quit the game after they beat all the dungeons which would be trivial since everyone would have bought the best gear. Gear is the game.
And gear progress
Re: (Score:1)
2) If you bought WoW now -- you would have to level to 80, clear Heroics, do Naxx, then Ulduar and then get ready for the next stuff -- if you want to be elite. It is just easier and more fun if they sold maybe Tier 8 but made you earn Tier 9, then once Tier 10 is out, start selling Tier 8.
3) I agree it is fine line between buying gear and peo
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I know some people don't like running dungeons a lot, but that is what PvE endgame is about. If you want to do PvP, gear is earned by doing more PvP so that really isn't an issue.
If you bought WoW now, you would probably enjoy your first play though, I know I did.
If you take time out of the MMO, you don't really have an MMO anymore. There are plenty of skill based multiplayer games out there. But subscription based MMOs are designed to make you spend a lot of time on them. You remo
Re: (Score:2)
Silly me. Here I thought the point of playing a game was to have fun. I run a dungeon because it's fun, not to get some gear out of it. Then I buy my way out of the ones that I don't find fun.
If you prefer to just buy your way out of all of the dungeons, why are you even playing?
Hmm, methinks the point has been missed... (Score:1)
FTFA: "And it's not even because that item has a gameplay effect; it's that cool mount, or that cool pet that is a super rare drop or that kind of thing. [...] But if I had the opportunity to get something that was similar or something that I felt was equally cool, so not even necessarily the exact same thing, I might say, 'Oh cool, I'm going to buy this cool pet for myself.' I don't think that negates from the enjoyment of my game, or the enjoyment other people have with their game because they're going to
City of Heroes has been doing this. (Score:3, Informative)
Seriously, this isn't necessarily some huge, game-breaking thing.
Their previous product, City of Heroes, has been doing this for over a year now with Super Boosters.
What these boosters deliver are a few extra costume options, some extra emotes and what is usually a neat, but relatively useless power.
The first, though not officially a "super booster" was the Wedding Pack [paragonwiki.com]
SuperBooster I: Cyborg [paragonwiki.com]
SuperBooster II: Magic [paragonwiki.com]
SuperBooster III: Superscience [paragonwiki.com]
The only thing that has me worried...well, not worried, but apprehensive is that it sounds like they're going to allow the purchase of actual, game-changing items.
If that's ACTUALLY the case, then you DO have something to worry about other than the lousy play mechanics in the game.
Ahhh Bill Roper (Score:1)
The guy doesn't have a great solo track record. (Score:1)
Isn't this from the guy that ran Hellgate: London into the ground in the most ridiculous way possible?
I can't find the link, but I remember reading a postmortem of Hellgate from the community and a few developers that discussed how ever since he's gone solo, the man has managed to bring all sorts of fail to the party.
Poor Business Model for a Subscription Game (Score:1)
The problem here is that they are delivering fluff content for pay that used to be delivered for free, in game, just for purchasing the game and buying a subscription. Now a subscription doesn't get you everything. It's just a door opener to spend more money. The player is basically paying for content twice.
The other problem is the "slippery slope" dilemma. I hate the whole slippery slope argument in general, but I think it can apply here. If they see fluff as a viable model for MTs where does that stop