http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20060428/ai_n16222796/

http://blogcritics.org/gaming/article/microtransactions-in-games/

There are a plethora of gaming critics poised to cut down the possibility of microtransactions, and it's understandable why. As games get more and more expensive for consumers, a growing debate over the ethics of the industry is gaining ground. Many of these worries are aimed at the costs and profits of large companies. Will MT prevent price raises in the future? Will the cost of games decrease? The simple answer is that in the last 15 years, games have only increased in price by 10$ on average whereas inflation has halved the value of money. A 50$ game in the nineties would now cost 98$. I agree that games are still pretty expensive already at 60$, but for the most part, we are not being ripped off by the content that is generally equal, if not better, than previous content.

Unlockables

Several companies have taken a particular attachment to an unlockable model. One which shows the unlockable in the game but requires a monetary fee for the use. Such practices pose the question, "was this content planned as free or is it a penny-pinching decision". At this early point in the industry of micro-transactions, it is important for users to provide the criticism these decisions warrant. A business will always seek the most profitable strategy available to them. That's how the world goes 'round. But the consumers do have a say in what form this trend will take shape. Micro-transactions are a very viable source of income, and provides competition to the user-mod market, where free content for nearly any game has been available for years. Again, it will depend on the market strategy whether or not all content will be available at release, but options outside the scope of the game should be appreciated in some way.

DLC

When I talk about Micro-transactions, this is the typical form that I endorse. As an avid Starcraft fan, I wouldn't mind paying 1$ extra for a hot pink terran color option. I also wouldn't mind paying 50 cents to a dollar for new official maps. Howabout different sounds and new unit voices and music? The options are available in any game. Some are better than others, but these decisions could significantly extend the longevity of games in general. The point is, there is a market for it. People are willing to pay for additional content, and although people complain about the possibility of MT in gaming, the market is still very young. It is important for gamers to decide with their wallets, and stay out of the argument. As a gamer, I certainly don't want people telling me I'm stupid for downloading the Super Stardust extra game modes, or for changing my portrait on Eve.

I must say that, while logical, inflation never comes off as a good reason to justify anything. Certainly games are cheaper in a real dollars sense, and we do generally get more content, but that doesn't justify cutting things that you could have put in in the first place, or things that you actually did put in (RE5 Versus), but just dummied out until someone ponies up the dough

Imagine buying a next gen console where all games available for it are free!

The only catch is games are short... but it's okay you can buy the next installment of the game. Or additional characters or additional maps.

No more sequels or stand alone games. You can play a franchise and purchase the next segment as they are released. Along with updates to the engines etc.

Or pay a game, and pay three times its DLC ? Can you imagine that ? Oh wait, its present, and it's My Life as A Darklord.

Or pay a half made game, and wait for the end in DLC ? Oh wait, that's the last Prince of Persia

Or pay a DLC at full price ? Oh wait, man, it's Halo : ODST.

Or pay full price, for each the DLC ? Oh Wait , that's Guitar Hero / Rock Band


Nope, not for me. I buy my games but I do not support ripoffs.

Edit : About the microtransactions. Ihmo, it's the cancer of MMOs. You can't play a game knowing that other people put more money to get special items and so on, it's like paying an easy mode. I'm ok if this virtual money is earned through in game mechanics, but not by IRL money. I've played MMO in the past, and you don't know how frustrating it is when such cheats are revealed. So microtransactions = no thanks.

Yeah silicon, that's one of the biggest things I can see happening in the future.
There are already a couple companies that use that strategy and do very well, particularly Nexon has released several very popular games that make a lot of money using ONLY microtransactions.

I mean, yeah, that is a very revolutionary model, and not viable in every circumstance, but with Micro-transactions, we could see games staying at 50-60$ for the next 10-15 years.

@killy
You have a very valid point, but those examples are only part of the equation. Sure some of those things don't seem very appealing, and it's important that you argue with your wallet. Companies will have to figure out what works best for them.

However, I think ODST is worth it for some people. I think the Prince of Perisa DLC was worth it for others. In fact, I think Prince of Persia was a very good game, and the end of it could very much have remained the only ending. Movies end on cliffhangers and provide an opening for sequels. That is no different, but there was some conclusion to that game, and the ending was very cool on it's own.

In fact, I don't wan't games to be split into several parts. I don't want to buy my equipment. I don't want to buy half made games, and finance with my money hypothetic upgrades. Somehow, the gaming communauty is not mature enough to force the editors not to repeat those mistakes. I don't know if the feedback about the DLC is available, it should be interesting to get some.

Imho, the best use of DLC should be for localization. It would be cheaper for editors to support games worldwide without having to localize for US, PAL, and use DLC to d/l the localization.

How about this killy
You get an item in diablo 3 but would rather have a different color for that equipment. Is it worth 10 cents to you?

Nobody wants half-made games. But I think a lot of gamers would like 110% of the games they buy. There are some things that are beyond question though. Don't offer overpowered weapons as DLC. Don't offer advantages over others with DLC. DLC should be made to complement a game and improve the enjoyment of it.

Microtransactions is a great way to accomplish both of those goals (improved gameplay and finances)

There are a few problems with the inflation argument:

- the $50 to $60 increase was done suddenly. That's a 20% increase in one year, which feels too sudden to gamers.
- a big part of the cost of games in the 90s was the cartridges, optical media made those costs much cheaper.
- with online distribution becoming more popular, two things are happening: the value of games is decreasing (since there's no resale value) and publisher's profit margins on each copy increase since retailers don't get a cut.

In short, I believe it's perfectly possible to keep prices where they are, especially if the exponential increase in development costs stops (which should have already happened in this gen, but didn't for the HD consoles resulting in a troubled industry).

I am not Killy but I wouldn't even pay 1 cent for just different color for certain equipment in the game even if the original color would be worst color I have ever seen. Even that 1 cent for just different color for a certain equipment would be a terrible rip-off (even with 10 equipments it would be a rip-off). And I have played one free-to-play MMO with micro-transactions (Atlantica Online) for 6 months 1-2 hours a day without ever even paying $1 for any equipment or for anything in the game.

IMO micro-transactions are worst thing what have ever happened to gaming. If you can't enjoy the game fully without any DLC or unlockables then game is only half-made when it is released. Which means you shouldn't pay more than half-price for game either.