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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Is it normal to have "microtransactions" in $60 AAA games?

spemanig said:

I'm still having problems with the retarded $60 price model. Not every game is worth $60, and that's not a bad thing. The middle market is not a bad thing.

Then wait for the price to drop.  I waited for The Last of Us on PS4 @ $30 before I purchased it, Infamous Second Son, Freedom Wars, and The Walking Dead Season 2 for $15.  I buy a lot of games, sure, butI probably buy two games to the majority's one on average.

*edit*

Also, more $60 games are worth paying $60 over most indies paying $1-$20.  I don't think price should factor into the quality of a game.  Whether you purchase it for $1 or $60, you should rate it comparatively, not give the cheap pos game a free pass because it's a cheap pos. 



Around the Network

I've never ran across a microtransaction... Perhaps because I'm currently playing games from the last two gens ONLY. But they sound like cheap attempts to squeeze money off the customers and satisfy some greed. I blame Ubiflop.



SmokedHostage said:
We're in a new age ladies and gentlemen.

The age of the whale.


So sad, yet so true. I avoid microtransactions for the time being, but as they become more prevalent, I suppose even that might be difficult. At least they haven't become invasive, as others have mentioned. Well, not yet. 



Hmm

I don't mind microtransactions. Obviously, the market is there to justify them, otherwise they would have gone away.
I personally will never pay a cent for a single MT, I even stopped buying DLCs a few years ago. But if there are people willing to pay for them, why should I complain? Everybody spends their money as they see fit.



Unfortunately more and more games will have them.



    

NNID: FrequentFlyer54

Around the Network
spemanig said:

I'm still having problems with the retarded $60 price model. Not every game is worth $60, and that's not a bad thing. The middle market is not a bad thing.


nintendo does make games for 30 or 50$ with a bit smaller scale.

i just used microtransactions once, wanted the astronaut teemo so badly, and lol is a good game and totaly free and i think you can support em with buying a freaking spacerat skin---



i feel sorry about the kids who will grow up and be accustomed to that



On meth it is.



I replicate the above. I don't mind it as long as it doesn't affect single player and doesn't take from the multiplayer itself (locks off features to only those who pay). If you can achieve the same feat of earning 'gold' or tokens by just playing it them what's the issue? ... although it is basically just a paid for cheat in a way. :P



Hmm, pie.

Ka-pi96 said:
It is normal for all games with multiplayer. I don't really mind them though, as long as they keep far far away from the single player parts of the game and as long as the mp doesn't become pay to win then they are fine.


Here you state something important. More and more games do become pay to win. Wich is horrible.

In many games players who pay the most are the best. (Best weapons, outfits, cars, etc etc etc)

Besides that i agree, i dont mind some microtransactions as long it does not affect the outcome of the multiplayer.