I’m curious: would people prefer a single upfront cost on a game, in-game purchases, or for the game to be free but you need to support the developer through voluntary donations (which carry no reward)?
I prefer one single up-front purchase. That means there’s nothing for the game developer to gain by implementing predatory game design practices.
In-game purchases (excluding major expansion packs) should be reserved for f2p games only imo. And then the player should know exactly what they’re going to get. So no loot boxes.
I mean, there’s also nothing to gain for the developer by continuing development. Most f2p games only survive so long because of those microtransactions. Think about how long these games are supported, how much new content they get constantly. The “good old games” were one and done. If you got lucky, they might patch some bugs, but often that was left to the community.
It really depends on a game. The issue is greed will always corrupt any such system.
Compare BG3 to Solasta, or to the golden years of expansion packs like StarCraft and Red Alert 2.
On one end(Solasta): You have a “full” game experience, but there’s more that can be had. You don’t have to buy ALL of the expansion packs, unless there’s something you want in each, but each expansion comes with adventures to go on as well as an extra class and/or race or two. Granted, this also has built in tools to make your own adventures as well.
On the other, you have BG3(at least according to this image), where you get the whole kit and kaboodle up front. Pay once, play to your heart’s content. Granted, TMI, this lacks and will continue to lack tools for making your own adventures.
Then you have the golden years. You get one full game up front. Feature complete, full story arc for each race. Then later down the line, an expansion comes along that builds on it, using the engine from before(maybe with improvements), extra units, maybe a new race, and a new story line for each current race. IIRC, these older games included tools for making maps, but not quite full campaigns, but my memory is a bit fuzzy on that.
There’s also a game like Elite Dangerous. IMHO, it breaks a few rules. You have to pay up front, although only $20 for standard + $30 for odyssey, but you own it from then on. No monthly fees, or anything. Maybe the next huge release in 5 years will be another $20-$30. However, it’s an online game, going 24/7/365(minus a weekly reboot). They have to pay for the servers /SOMEHOW/. Only an idiot would buy the game more than once, so (try to) sell you paint jobs for everything, and gear for FPS mode, among a few other trinkets. I do appreciate how it’s 100% cosmetic only. Zero ptw whatsoever. Again, IMHO, this is the least bad way to do this.
Then there’s Eve Online. Free to play, but you’re limited in what you can use. Pay for a sub to get access to use anything(must still have character skill and buy it with in game money) and you can, in a round about way but a supported by the devs way, pay that subscription using in game money. They also have cosmetics. The downside, you can pay real money(or trade in game money with another player for this currency) to get a skill point injection kit* or open up to train on a second(maybe third?) character at the same time on the same account. The skill point injections aren’t 1 hour xp boosts, and they’re not instant lvl 60 potions, the more skill points your character has, the less you get from injecting. You don’t buy the injection, you buy the syringe, suck the sp out, and sell on the market. Those sp came from another player, and you don’t have to pay premium currency for it, can use the in game stuff. Again, it could be better, but it’s better than many others.
For the most part, micro-transactions are a cancer on the gaming world, but due to human greed, I don’t see them going away in my lifetime. Now that most everything is being “published” digitally, we don’t have any actual scarcity of the games themselves. There’s no threat of not being able to get the game on launch, and having to wait months for a reprint missing having it for your birthday lan party. Early access is not a terrible thing, it should just be called what it is, THE ALPHA/BETA program, and should not be full price, unless you are getting some big rewards on/before launch, and those need to be properly disclosed ahead of time. Larian could have done better on this, but they’re at least not StarCitizen.
I’ve made some very small games as a hobby for game jams, but the main reason I’m not charging for them is that I know they wouldn’t be worth any tangible amount of money regardless.
If they contained, say, hours of voice acting, a wholly unique gameplay concept, and visuals that took hundreds of thousands of man-hours, then for its business model I’d suddenly be more doubtful of that “donate if you enjoy” model.
I prefer a single upfront purchase, though I am not against the idea of expansion packs or meaningful DLC (extra character races, maps, campaigns, etc). For online games, I think cosmetic DLCs are a good way to bank server costs. People who don’t want to buy them aren’t missing out on anything really, and the people who do get some nice swag/street cred to show off.
What I am completely against is pay-to-win crap.
In PvP, skilled players are at a disadvantage against prepubescent kids with daddy’s credit card and that really ruins the experience.
The most ridiculous to me is when you can use real money to buy items/skills/exp for single-player games. I remember being shocked to see that there were several launch-day DLCs for Tales of Zestiria for packs of healing items or early weapons that are normally obtainable in-game, just to help you out in the beginning. There used to be cheat codes for this sort of thing, now the “cheat” is forking over cash.
Not only is it predatory, people are actually paying for something the game already gives them access to, essentially giving the publisher money for being able to play, and then giving them more money for being able to play less.
It all depends on the game. I play one game most of the time and others when I am not playing that main game. For my main game I pay a sub and expacs and occasionally for something from the store I like. Mostly I just raid and chill with my friends.
But in other games it’s casual. I’m ok with some transactions if I am enjoying myself. If it hinders my progress or is unnecessary then I’m just bored. Like Genshin. Beautiful game but way to gotcha. Plus the game control is ass. Gamers want a combo or something more interactive to do attacks with. Elden Ring was ok with that. But there are several games that forget it’s an interactive medium.
But I digress. Games like RDR2 I have never paid beyond the base game. But I will throw down for a Fortnite skin every once in awhile because I like it. It’s not a linear “if the game is free I will micro” kind of discussion. It’s if the game hits me right I will do it. Like fuck Battlefront 1 and 2. Never ever with EA again. Their customer support is shitty too.
Honestly I really hate playing f2p games. Reason being is there is no leveling up to earn rewards for your time such as skins in old games think old halo games etc. Now all those times must be bought for 10+ $ for f2p or even in some cases full price games. I would rather slap down 60-70 and get everything earnable in game.
The reward should not be at the cost of degradation of player experience of other players who do not pay. If you can do that, sure. Like cosmetic dice dlc for instance.
I’m curious: would people prefer a single upfront cost on a game, in-game purchases, or for the game to be free but you need to support the developer through voluntary donations (which carry no reward)?
I prefer one single up-front purchase. That means there’s nothing for the game developer to gain by implementing predatory game design practices.
In-game purchases (excluding major expansion packs) should be reserved for f2p games only imo. And then the player should know exactly what they’re going to get. So no loot boxes.
I mean, there’s also nothing to gain for the developer by continuing development. Most f2p games only survive so long because of those microtransactions. Think about how long these games are supported, how much new content they get constantly. The “good old games” were one and done. If you got lucky, they might patch some bugs, but often that was left to the community.
It really depends on a game. The issue is greed will always corrupt any such system.
Compare BG3 to Solasta, or to the golden years of expansion packs like StarCraft and Red Alert 2.
On one end(Solasta): You have a “full” game experience, but there’s more that can be had. You don’t have to buy ALL of the expansion packs, unless there’s something you want in each, but each expansion comes with adventures to go on as well as an extra class and/or race or two. Granted, this also has built in tools to make your own adventures as well.
On the other, you have BG3(at least according to this image), where you get the whole kit and kaboodle up front. Pay once, play to your heart’s content. Granted, TMI, this lacks and will continue to lack tools for making your own adventures.
Then you have the golden years. You get one full game up front. Feature complete, full story arc for each race. Then later down the line, an expansion comes along that builds on it, using the engine from before(maybe with improvements), extra units, maybe a new race, and a new story line for each current race. IIRC, these older games included tools for making maps, but not quite full campaigns, but my memory is a bit fuzzy on that.
There’s also a game like Elite Dangerous. IMHO, it breaks a few rules. You have to pay up front, although only $20 for standard + $30 for odyssey, but you own it from then on. No monthly fees, or anything. Maybe the next huge release in 5 years will be another $20-$30. However, it’s an online game, going 24/7/365(minus a weekly reboot). They have to pay for the servers /SOMEHOW/. Only an idiot would buy the game more than once, so (try to) sell you paint jobs for everything, and gear for FPS mode, among a few other trinkets. I do appreciate how it’s 100% cosmetic only. Zero ptw whatsoever. Again, IMHO, this is the least bad way to do this.
Then there’s Eve Online. Free to play, but you’re limited in what you can use. Pay for a sub to get access to use anything(must still have character skill and buy it with in game money) and you can, in a round about way but a supported by the devs way, pay that subscription using in game money. They also have cosmetics. The downside, you can pay real money(or trade in game money with another player for this currency) to get a skill point injection kit* or open up to train on a second(maybe third?) character at the same time on the same account. The skill point injections aren’t 1 hour xp boosts, and they’re not instant lvl 60 potions, the more skill points your character has, the less you get from injecting. You don’t buy the injection, you buy the syringe, suck the sp out, and sell on the market. Those sp came from another player, and you don’t have to pay premium currency for it, can use the in game stuff. Again, it could be better, but it’s better than many others.
For the most part, micro-transactions are a cancer on the gaming world, but due to human greed, I don’t see them going away in my lifetime. Now that most everything is being “published” digitally, we don’t have any actual scarcity of the games themselves. There’s no threat of not being able to get the game on launch, and having to wait months for a reprint missing having it for your birthday lan party. Early access is not a terrible thing, it should just be called what it is, THE ALPHA/BETA program, and should not be full price, unless you are getting some big rewards on/before launch, and those need to be properly disclosed ahead of time. Larian could have done better on this, but they’re at least not StarCitizen.
Most people would prefer the third option - and would be very, very quiet in online discussions as to why.
Which is exactly why I prefer a fair upfront cost
@Katana314 @Narrrz i do games as an hobby and using the last one.
I’ve made some very small games as a hobby for game jams, but the main reason I’m not charging for them is that I know they wouldn’t be worth any tangible amount of money regardless.
If they contained, say, hours of voice acting, a wholly unique gameplay concept, and visuals that took hundreds of thousands of man-hours, then for its business model I’d suddenly be more doubtful of that “donate if you enjoy” model.
@Katana314 i dont do jams and started only in December. But have around 1k hours in 2 games 😅
But im gonna make the 3rd one (something alot bigger) for donor’s only during early access.
I prefer a single upfront purchase, though I am not against the idea of expansion packs or meaningful DLC (extra character races, maps, campaigns, etc). For online games, I think cosmetic DLCs are a good way to bank server costs. People who don’t want to buy them aren’t missing out on anything really, and the people who do get some nice swag/street cred to show off.
What I am completely against is pay-to-win crap.
In PvP, skilled players are at a disadvantage against prepubescent kids with daddy’s credit card and that really ruins the experience.
The most ridiculous to me is when you can use real money to buy items/skills/exp for single-player games. I remember being shocked to see that there were several launch-day DLCs for Tales of Zestiria for packs of healing items or early weapons that are normally obtainable in-game, just to help you out in the beginning. There used to be cheat codes for this sort of thing, now the “cheat” is forking over cash.
Not only is it predatory, people are actually paying for something the game already gives them access to, essentially giving the publisher money for being able to play, and then giving them more money for being able to play less.
Donations to a company? 🤨🤨 Bro just make games
@Lemmynkainen @Narrrz i do games as an hobby on my free time and using the 3rd.
Everything is free and rely on donations.
It all depends on the game. I play one game most of the time and others when I am not playing that main game. For my main game I pay a sub and expacs and occasionally for something from the store I like. Mostly I just raid and chill with my friends.
But in other games it’s casual. I’m ok with some transactions if I am enjoying myself. If it hinders my progress or is unnecessary then I’m just bored. Like Genshin. Beautiful game but way to gotcha. Plus the game control is ass. Gamers want a combo or something more interactive to do attacks with. Elden Ring was ok with that. But there are several games that forget it’s an interactive medium.
But I digress. Games like RDR2 I have never paid beyond the base game. But I will throw down for a Fortnite skin every once in awhile because I like it. It’s not a linear “if the game is free I will micro” kind of discussion. It’s if the game hits me right I will do it. Like fuck Battlefront 1 and 2. Never ever with EA again. Their customer support is shitty too.
Honestly I really hate playing f2p games. Reason being is there is no leveling up to earn rewards for your time such as skins in old games think old halo games etc. Now all those times must be bought for 10+ $ for f2p or even in some cases full price games. I would rather slap down 60-70 and get everything earnable in game.
Pay upfront, buy DLC’s
The reward should not be at the cost of degradation of player experience of other players who do not pay. If you can do that, sure. Like cosmetic dice dlc for instance.