Ubisoft: Microtransactions make games more fun
Ubisoft: Microtransactions make games more fun
www.gamereactor.eu
Ubisoft: Microtransactions make games more fun
18 comments
-
This is something only an out of touch suit with a buying addiction would say.
I don't care about what people buy for themselves, but implying it enhances the game in any way is extremely stupid. This is why suits ought to stay away from videogames.
-
Don't worry, this isn't something they actually believe. They're just trying to craft a narrative. I worked there for 5 years, and in that whole time nobody on the publishing end of the company said anything that even hinted at them giving a shit about fun.
-
-
They left out, "for us" in the end.
-
Why do we give coverage to stuff like this? It's clearly an attempt to keep their name relevant or manufacture consent. Maybe both.
-
Been gaming on PC since 1984 - in no way shape or form is it "fun" to be forced to spend money to complete a part of a game. It's a shakedown. This is also why I would never spend a dime on anything Ubisoft.
-
You know what makes games even more fun? Un-focking-lockables
-
Quite the opposite in fact. Microtransactions offer the promise of fun, but never deliver, because in order to incentivise users to purchase them, the player must feel like the game is 90% of the way to being fun and that tiny additional purchase will get it there.
It's like the cartoon image of the donkey rider holding a carrot on the end of a rod. The donkey keeps moving to try to get the carrot, but never quite reaches it.
-
I've felt that the introduction of micro transactions was the beginning of the end of videogames. There is no reason to push boundaries inside of an industry as an artist when it is so heavily commoditized down to your basic attention in seconds.
I think maybe we need a little history to understand how we got here from gaming meaning gambling, to pinball, to "video" gaming, to Electronic Entertainment as a whole to realize where the boundaries are supposed to be.
Deceptive business practices need to be put in check. Consumer protection needs enforcement otherwise there would still be lead in everything you touch.
Who needs artists pushing boundaries when it's legal to sell heroin.
-
Only a non gamer would say something so blatantly false
-
There's a game I playtested that had microtransactions in it. Every time you went to the a menu that you have to interact with heavily, it would always move to the screen that had the microtransactions on it. Didn't matter where you were before you went to that menu, it always went on that screen. That was my number one feedback to the people listening to me. I'm sure it's too fun to change.
-
Playing arknights. I spend $5 on the monthly pass for non premium loot box currency as daily rewards. Every month I decide if I'm enjoying the game enough or if I should scale back. When I consider how much I'm spending annually, I always consider cancelling. It's not fun at all.
-
Sorry, but their strategy is working on you
-
I'm aware, but I'm enjoying the game mechanic enough to pop in $5. It's just a little depressing to think about how much I'm spending. It's my concession to not spending money on the currency.
-
-
-
If implemented in a specific way, I actually agree.
Getting thousands of lootbox cosmetics unlockable through MTX or by normal playing is awesome. The MTX funding means the devs can continue to support the game.
Having 10 minor variations on one cosmetic or making unlocks incredibly time consuming is not. Not to mention the millions of other ways they can undermine gamers over greed.
-
How is being paid lootboxes more fun than free ones? Some NRG on the rewards is OK, but needing the credit card on top doesn't as to the fun
-
I agree. That's why I said they need to be earnable. I'm not paying for them.
The MTX option just ensures that the devs put time into making them. At least that's how it's worked in some games that did it right.
-
-
Maybe if it actually worked that way, but i think in most cases it's just the publisher going for a cash grab and will not support the devs. If anything it takes away support from good content and is put towards mtx content instead and now you have minimal effort gameplay and a flood of unwanted mtx content making it harder to get the thing you want and other ways of forcing you to pay since playing is becoming to unreasonable of a way to acquire it
-
It definitely depends. You need to keep people engaged, so a lot of the time there's still development on good content. But the good content that doesn't fit in the MTX scope is cut.
And I mentioned the flood of bad cosmetics. Although I think fluffing the cosmetics is more about artificially extending replay value for grinders and giving deep purchase incentives for whales. In my experience, the purchase incentives are terrible (expensive) compared to just playing. Then again, I don't buy MTX. So if I'm not advancing without paying, I'm likely to just quit.
-
-
18 comments