By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Cerebralbore101 said:
shikamaru317 said:

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the issue with cosmetic microtransactions in a multiplayer game, as long as they're not randomized (aka lootboxes). Multiplayer games require ongoing support from the developers for at least a year after release usually, sometimes years plural. The devs/publishers have to pay for that post-release content development somehow, you can't just expect a publisher who cares about their bottom line to support a multiplayer game with all free DLC for years after release, that is years of paying a probably 40+ person DLC development team $70k+ per year per person to develop that DLC. Multiplayer games used to have paid map packs and such, but the industry has moved away from those to free maps because they realized that paid map packs split the playerbase too much and made it harder for those who owned the maps to find matches on those new paid maps. Instead, multiplayer developers now support the development of free maps and modes with paid cosmetics, which are almost always also available through in-game means. That is fine with me and most multiplayer gamers.

So yeah, I just don't see the issue with Microsoft putting cosmetic microtransactions into Halo Infinite, a game which they are planning to support with free maps and modes for the entire 9th generation (we're talking probably 6 years of DLC support). 343 even already confirmed that all cosmetics will also be available to earn in-game.

Your 40 man dev team would cost 2.8 million. If the game sells 5 million copies and just 6% of the playerbase (300,000 people) spend just $10 per year then they've recouped their losses + a $200,000 profit. If 12% of the playerbase spends $10 a year they've more than doubled their investment. Most businesses are golden if they make $1.10 in revenue for every $1 they spend. A profit margin of 200% or more is obscene, and evidence that somebody is being taken for a ride.

That is $2.8m per year to pay for the development of that all free multiplayer DLC in that hypothetical scenario. But for Halo it would be alot more. 343 Industries has nearly 600 devs, I would assume there will be at least 150 people on Halo Infinite's post-release multiplayer support team, and MS has already said that they want to support Infinite the entire generation with both singleplayer and multiplayer DLC. While the singleplayer expansions will presumably cost money, all of the maps, modes, and weapons that will be released for Halo Infinite's multiplayer will be free. So 150 people making an average of probably $80,000 per year (343 Industries is in a high cost of living area so I assume their average pay is higher than most other AAA game studios), with probably 6 years of support. That is $12m per year x 6 years = $72m. You can't just expect MS to be willing to spend $72m on 6 years of free DLC support for Halo Infinite's multiplayer, it's unreasonable, even if the game will make over $1b in revenue from sales of the game. They already have a rumored budget of $200m+ for the past 5 years they've spent working on the game with 500+ people.

This is the real world we live in, gaming is a business for AAA game publishers like Microsoft; they're not in the business to earn the goodwill of gamers, they are in the business to earn as much money as possible so that Satya Nadella and the other MS executives can be filthy rich, live in mansions, bathe in champagne, and fly in private jets, the American dream baby! xD

The good news is, Halo Infinite microtransactions are confirmed to be cosmetic only, non randomized, and earnable in-game. I can't really complain about that, I would only complain if they were randomized, it sucks to want a certain cosmetic and have to rely on gambling to get that cosmetic. Looking at you Overwatch!

Last edited by shikamaru317 - on 18 November 2020