Electronic Arts, THQ Look To Microtransactions 83
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Forbes:
"Electronic Arts, one of the world's largest games publishers, on Monday partnered with microtransactions platform Live Gamer to bolster its online game efforts. ... THQ also announced a partnership with Live Gamer last week to facilitate microtransactions of its online PC and mobile games in North America. ... Worldwide sales of virtual items are expected to reach $7 billion by 2015, according to online games research firm DFC Intelligence. Fast-growing social games companies like Zynga, the maker of FarmVille, are leading the charge. The company is estimated to be pulling in around $600 million in revenue annually, largely from the sale of virtual goods. Americans are also growing comfortable with the microtransactions model. Game companies point to the music industry, where consumers buy 99-cent digital tracks instead of full albums on CDs."
Piracy will be impossible (Score:1, Interesting)
Note that in this case the games itself would be free like in asian markets and I doubt that the normal games are going anywhere. This is most likely to expand their market. There are a lot of people, especially teens, who rather pay for individual items than go to a store and pay full $60 for a game.
It also makes piracy really hard, especially when the games are played online and the info about items and addons you own are on the server. It's practically impossible to pirate that. With the 90% piracy rate
Re: (Score:2)
As the Internet becomes ubiquitous you should expect to see fewer and fewer games without a significant online component. Piracy is rampant and it's publishers won't pay developers unless they maintain control over the game environment.
Note that I didn't say this trend is GOOD or RIGHT, just that it's what is happening.
Re: (Score:2)
lolwut? There's so many things wrong with this post, I don't know where to begin.
1) Past products have nothing to do with it. It's all about competing with free versions of their own products, past or present.
2) The availability of console games on websites does nothing but strengthen the piracy argument, since it shows evidence that of both supply and demand of pirate software copies.
3) A red herring does not mean what you think it means
4) A company does not need any excuse to raise their prices. It's not
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What, sad? No this is great! Finally software companies are doing their duty, and finding something to replace their outdated business model! This is what slashdot has repeatedly said that it wants, and now exactly that is happening! What could be better?
(Yes, I am being sarcastic.)
Microtransactions is a code word (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nickel and Diming can be ok, if it means you don't have to pony up a $20 up front. It's also ok if they charge you a nickel for something which brings you at least a nickel worth of enjoyment.
Except you'll have to pay $60 up front and then a nickel for every bullet or health pack.
Guess I'm not going to be buying many games in future.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
With EA involved expect to pay $69.99 up front for the game, except that the last half is available only for $10 as down loadable content, $14.99 monthly for the subscription, $49.99 every year for the obligatory expansion, $4.99 for each extra map, and then, you can pay $0.10 for each extra click per day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Basically, you've answered your own question. The alternative is to not play. Sorry if you don't like this, but free marketers never promised free ponies. Not everyone gets to be an astronaut either.
Re: (Score:2)
It has come pretty close to that for me.
In the last 5 years, I have only bought 2 games at normal price. Maybe 5 more at $20 and a handful at $5.
I don't even have a real video card in my computer anymore. My play-station 2 is in pieces (but still working thanks to some patched cables).
I am just not willing to invest time in new crap games, much less the high price generally demanded.
Re: (Score:2)
You may not really be a jerk or an idiot, but that was a really moronic reply. Sorry. Not sure if you will even see this but it bothers me when people are trying to have an intelligent conversation and it gets dragged down to unicorns and bullshit like you
Re: (Score:2)
Despite your troll worthy reply to a light hearted joke, I've got a little time to kill:
Friedman et al. do not predict the nature of the market that will develop nor do they predict the results for a single consumer. Their focus is on macro level ideas. Your own individual utility is not maximized in this freeish market. This does not implicate a failure on the part of their analysis, as, presumably, the utility of ALL parties is maximized: buyers and sellers as a whole.
In my flippant response is a kernel o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Again, it's not meant to help any one person; it's an aggregate.
Collusion can only occur with imperfect knowledge. Imperfect knowledge means a non-free market.
If we are talking a study of free market economics, yes, it is utility that is maximized. For one company, they will choose pure dollars right now, no matter what. For another, they'll choose more dollars later. For a third, they'll sacrifice some profit in both the short and long term in favor of paying workers more. Similar analysis applies on the d
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that EA bought Playfish [techcrunch.com], a producer of Facebook games similar to Zynga, right? I'd venture a guess that this has much, much more to do with those sorts of games than it does their 'traditional' PC/console games.
With Zynga probably becoming a billion-dollar company in 2011, people are starting to finally take notice of the micro-transactions that have been popular in Asia for some time. My take is that EA is making these sorts of changes to try and catch up to Zynga in the social gaming spac
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not really. I'd rather pay the $20. When we're talking about $20 transactions, that's something that's worth my while to investigate and see if I'm getting a good deal. When we're talking about $.05 transactions, that's not worth my while to consider critically. Sure it's not a big loss if I get ripped off for 5 cents, but it adds up. I'd rather just skip it.
To put it another way. For a $20 transaction, I have to make 1 decision. For $20 worth of $.05 transactions, I have to make 400 decisions. Whic
Re: (Score:2)
Most people don't stress over five cents. That's the whole point. It will be less stressful (and therefore, more likely to succeed) with multiple nickel transactions.
You will figure it's not worth the effort to see if it is cost effective and pass on the entire scheme. EA and others are betting that enough people will figure it's not worth the effort and go ahead and purchase. Judging by the value and profile of Zynga, it's not hard to figure which way to bet.
It boils down to this (Score:4, Insightful)
Should the latter happen, then the whole idea of micropayments will start to look shady and people will avoid any game that employs the tactic. In other words: It's a slippery slope for all but the most popular games.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It boils down to this (Score:4, Insightful)
A big part of microtransactions are lowering the barrier to entry. If you try a bad game, you leave. No money spent. If you try a good game, you stay. Yay for you. This tends to be a more self-regulating system than traditional box sales, where the pee-sale hype determines sales, and a mistake costs the consumer $60.
Also, why is everybody talking about this as if it is new? Asia has had huge microtransactions games for ten years. The US has had some, with Anarchy Online, Puzzle Pirates, and others being microtransactions based for years.
Well, it depends. (Score:4, Insightful)
http://www.mordororbust.com/233-lotro-store-beta-screenshots/
This is for the change for Lord of the Rings Online Monthly Subscription/Lifetime membership model to a hybrid form in which you can play for free but have to buy content, similar to what they did with Dungeon & Dragons Online.
Now, having played the game a lot, I can tell give you a rough impression of the prices involved and what they mean.
Take dye. 125 points. An outfit consists of 6 items. If you color them all, that is 750 points. IF 100 points are 1 dollar (widely assumed but not yet confirmed) then that is a fairly hefty sum just to color your outfit. And the dyes can also be created in game. If you are willing to pay 750 points, then surely you would be willing to donate say 1 dollar to my paypal account for the dyes?
Crafting scrolls are even more laughable they give a 15% increase to your critical change when crafting for 30 seconds. Not a long time at all. 40 points. I crank them out by the truckload.
The content itself is far more expensive 500+ points. There are in the original game: Lone-lands, North Downs, Evendim, Forochel, Trollshaws, Misty Mountains, Angmar. 500+ points per area. Say that it is 5 dollars per area. Then you need to spend 35 dollars... how much did the entire game cost again? Oh, its budget now. 10 euro's...
So... buy them in the item shop or a real one, 20 dollar difference. And then you get all orginal classes, full character slots no chat limits etc etc.
Need I go on? It seems pretty clear that the item shop in this case is NOT the cheap option.
To be true micro transactions such items as a dye need to cost about 1 cent. But that isn't profitable. And how many dyes do they need anyway? So Lotro item mall also has scrolls that give a permanent +30 to any stat. OOOPS! Pay to Win anyone?
The old fashioned model of box-game with a monthly subscription is simple, the customer knows what he gets and so does the game company. Micro transactions only work on those who can't do maths and for those who are really going to play your game for free.
I am afraid that for regular games it will be just more of the examples we already seen. Race games were every car has to be bought, RPG's with horse armour for 1/10 of the full game.
Stop nicke and diming us to death. Gamers are not infinitly stupid and once we caught on it will be to late to change anything. We will have stopped buying and you will have gone bankrupt.
Re: (Score:2)
My brothers plays Metin. There are paid haircuts (that also give you some defense points), but they only last two weeks.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So what do they presumably get from this move?
Re: (Score:1)
What? You mean people look down on being nickle and dimed for something?
Really? I never would have guessed people would consider this shady.
'Microtransaction' is just a new name for the same old thing. Its just a way to take your money while tricking you into thinking you aren't spending much money.
Its not a slippery slope and never was, its just a fucking scam praying on peoples propensity to spend a little bit of money way too many times because they don't realize what they are doing.
People have been t
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Who would ever think of buying a book by the chapter?
Comic book fans. You buy them a month at a time, and later on they bind them all together as a book, and sell them together.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of Charles Dickens works were sold serially.
Oh look, we killed it, let's try *squeezing* (Score:5, Insightful)
Yup. They killed a thriving industry, now they're looking to squeeze blood from the stone they made out of that vibrant, resilient hobby. Squeeze, squeeze, squeeze.
It's gruff, but that's the way I see it. The faster these arrogant publishers go out of business, the quicker we can start over. When they've gone, nothing of value will have been lost.
This all started with floppy disks and baggies. We don't need Hollywood-style production values to play and enjoy, and we can't abide the cost of corresponding Hollywood-style accounting and mismanagement that goes with it. I don't see the value of adding all that production cost to what amounts to the same crappy FPS, or a makeover on "The Sims."
Let it die already, fast, the sooner we can all go back to enjoying weird little games in baggies, and maybe find something interesting to play as a result.
--
Toro
Re: (Score:2)
Let it die already, fast, the sooner we can all go back to enjoying weird little games in baggies, and maybe find something interesting to play as a result.
I'm not sure why you seem to think that these things are mutually exclusive, but there are plenty of great and/or weird games out there, you just have to look for them.
Re: (Score:2)
I have, I could list them. Nothing I play right now is what I would call a AAA title.
My favorites:
Weird Worlds [shrapnelgames.com], distributed by Shrapnel Games. Basic, top down Star Control IIish space combat and exploration game. $24.95
Cave Story [miraigamer.net] (Doukutsu Monogatari). Free.
Anything over at Spiderweb games. Gog.com hooked me up with a strange little game called "Evil Genius" for $9.99. You have to hack the widescreen in, but it's a surprising lot of fun.
There are so many options, and I would dearly like to see AAA publisher
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. I have kids. Mainstream kids. They bring the neighborhood kids around, and I let them into the candy shop every now and then.
You break out Sonic the Hedgehog or Bonk, and they drop Super Mario Galaxy or Viva Pinata or Little Big World like a rotting, cold potato battery. It's the instant and natural responsiveness of the game that does it, I think.
Especially around age 9.
When I pull out those games, I begin to see actual, instantaneous enthusiasm. Enjoyment. No furrowed brow and frustration with
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
I agree with what you said.
I also take exception to the supposed link towards the music industry.
the music tracks on a CD are rarely if ever related to one another. Each are generally a whole work on to itself - with most of them sucking horribly in many cases. It'd be more comparable to having Awesome Game, Awesome Game II, Awesome Game III: The Sequel's Sequel, and Awesome Game IV.
Only Awesome Game was any good. So you get that and who cares about the rest.
With this micro bullshit, it'd be like getting th
Microtransactions... Good Until People Wise Up (Score:1)
Microtransactions have spawned an entire group of gamers who find nearly as much fun from paying the game for free and going to insane lengths to get something for nothing than they do from just playing the game.
Other people might pay $10 or $20, then realize what they've done and quit the game in disgust, especially as game executives get more greedy and obvious with their requests for money.
Either way there's a limited pool of people who are paying and that pool is shrinking fast. I personally wouldn't in
Re: (Score:2)
and yet Korea has had a thriving gaming industry for around 10 years existing solely on Microtransactions.
They've got tons of games here absolutely free, and completely playable to the end without paying a dime.
Microtransactions and withholding content (Score:1, Interesting)
Since their introduction, microtransactions have been subverted from their original purpose of funding content development after the game's release, and used instead to lock out content already on the disc until the user pays (e.g. Resident Evil 5's multiplayer, Street Fighter IV's costumes). This was little different from practice in the past, where content would be withheld for a future expansion pack, but is it all that different?
To use a car analogy, withholding content for an expansion pack and nickel
Why not? (Score:2)
This is a great comparison! (Score:5, Funny)
For years now, we've been able to get around the old injustice of having to buy a whole album just for one or two of the songs which weren't crap....
Now, they'll let us buy just the levels in a game we want to play? Great! Level 1 is always such crap, no matter the game, I shouldn't have to pay for it!
Those of us with busy schedules can just purchase the final level, all the pleasure of beating the game without the time investment of all that buildup nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Insert Credit (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Next thing you know they'll make you stick a quarter in a slot for three more "lives" in the game.
Re: (Score:2)
...until you come to the lose: gamers might not take to the old ways so well, and they may end up selling less games. Plus, it only takes one company to
Re: (Score:1)
As a developer who wants to 'make games' for a profit/hobby I don't really care if they pull this crap, its helpful to me.
I don't have a budget, I do it for fun. I'm a programmer, not a graphic artist or sound engineer, no way I can compete with EA on a quality level across the board.
This however gives me a nice easy way people will want to give me a try. $5 for my little game forever, or $5 in nickle and diming so you can play Maddan 2011 for 45 seconds.
People won't be nearly as impressed by my game, but
Are real people buying at iTunes? (Score:1)
There is a small but vocal minority that would buy the phone book if Steve Jobs offered it to them, but is anyone else still buying music? I don't know anyone who does.
If there are, what percentage of them are curmudgeonly old people too conservative or technophobic to pirate, and what percentage aren't going to die in the next 20 years?
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, gramps (Score:2)
But if you're in your mid-fourties now, you'll be in your mid-sixties in twenty years. That's just shy of your sell-by date. I wasn't trying to be mean, but it's well accepted that social change happens to a large degree through older generations passing on.
I'm happy to pay musicians for music, but I can't in good conscience fund terrorist organizations like the RIAA.
Good luck with the colostomy bag, but I don't imagine you could afford me.
How about lower the price of the game vs 60+ this (Score:2)
How about lower the price of the game vs $60 + this shit?
on a wing and a prayer (Score:2)
Who is this 'god', you speak of?
Well, that's your problem, I am sueing you and you can sue this 'god' person.
how is this tactic taken seriously in a court of law?
Re: (Score:2)
You go on that rant about owning what you buy, and then you say you will use a kindle?
You do remember when they edited and deleted media off of users devices remotely, right?
Re: (Score:2)
And that's why I do what I do with any other media: back it up. They can delete away, I'll just copy it back.
Re: (Score:2)
They can delete away, I'll just copy it back.
And the moment you copy it back, the copy gets deleted again.
I'm just sick... (Score:2)
I DON'T WANT the extra costumes in a console fighting game for 99c, I DON'T WANT any of the 20 extra levels that each cost 1/5 the full price of the base iphone game. It is currently fine that I don't want those things and can choose not to get
Would you pay $2,000 for a video game? (Score:2)
I'd also like it if there was an option to buy a game for $65 instead of $60 at the store on/near release day that guarantees all future DLC is included.
Imagine how much a lifetime subscription to all of a game's DLC would cost for a game like Rock Band, with over 1,000 downloadable songs [wikipedia.org] at $2 each [n4g.com].
How is a 99 cent song a microtransaction? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not the same thing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can buy and enjoy a single song without owning the rest of the album.
Unless you get to things like Pink Floyd's albums, all of whose tracks show up as "album only" [crunchgear.com]. Nor can you buy one scene from a movie.
Re: (Score:2)
A Dollar is Not a Microtransaction (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
That's not true (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Modules, anyone? (Score:1)
I don't see the real gripe here. Everyone's so pissy about micro-transactions being yet another way for the big bad industry to screw you. Seriously? They're giving you an opportunity to see if you even like something before committing anything to it. Boy, I sure wish other industries would screw me over like that instead of forcing me to drive a 50% devaluation off the lot...
Okay, so they're figuring out that arcades were the way to go and are now wrapping back around to it. So what? What is it now, 12 mil