4 hours ago, Novadude987 said:Where is your proof of devs "making a fortune" off of comsetic microtransactions?
https://www.cultofmac.com/314240/crossy-road-developers-made-10-million-90-days/
..but:
10 hours ago, Zido_Z said:Cosmetic microtransactions do, in fact, affect gameplay as much as purchasing guns or characters, if not more.
That is... not a very common opinion.
Reminds me of what I wrote back on page one. Someone will ALWAYS be unhappy.
Here we've got people saying the only acceptable ones are cosmetic, that do not affect gameplay. Then another saying those are unacceptable.
Whatever decision the game developer makes, they are going to offend people. It is a tricky balance about who to offend and how much. Ultimately a business needs to make a profit to be viable, so the typical balancing act is between making a good profit while retaining your morals while also not offending too many of the wrong people. And to further complicate matters, sometimes offending a vocal subgroup is a good strategy for marketing.
11 hours ago, Hodgman said:https://www.cultofmac.com/314240/crossy-road-developers-made-10-million-90-days/
..but:
That is... not a very common opinion.
Thanks for the link. Never played the game or seen gameplay myself. Are the characters merely cosmetic or do they have different stats/abilities? Just curious I don't think the article specified.
2 hours ago, frob said:Reminds me of what I wrote back on page one. Someone will ALWAYS be unhappy.
Here we've got people saying the only acceptable ones are cosmetic, that do not affect gameplay. Then another saying those are unacceptable.
Whatever decision the game developer makes, they are going to offend people. It is a tricky balance about who to offend and how much. Ultimately a business needs to make a profit to be viable, so the typical balancing act is between making a good profit while retaining your morals while also not offending too many of the wrong people. And to further complicate matters, sometimes offending a vocal subgroup is a good strategy for marketing.
My thoughts exactly man. 
No matter what people are going to get pissed off. AAA's most practiced PR stunt seems to have to be damage control. All a company can do is minimize the anger as much as possible.
19 hours ago, Novadude987 said:Where is your proof of devs "making a fortune" off of comsetic microtransactions?
This is true, but there have been ENTIRE GAMES based off of cosmetic microtransactions such as PSHome, Second Life, etc. Cosmetic microtransactions are the easiest way for devs to generate extra revenue without the risk of pay-to-win microtransactions.
The game industry has the luxury of having an incredibly active and vocal community. If a microtransaction is unfair or exploitative, there will be LOADS of refunds, lost customers, backlash, and just overall bad PR. Just look at EA, who is hairs away from losing their contract with Disney, as well as most of the Battlefront fan base.
To sum it up: Microtransactions aren't going to "destroy the game industry" for the simple fact that consumers won't let it.
League of Legends and Second Life are great examples of cosmetic successes.
My comment was not on the why they use cosmetic microtransactions, but the how it got successful. And the reason they did was because cosmetic transactions are equal to if not better than pay-to-win microtransactions, which still exist in the industry through buying different characters with different functions, the core of freemium games. That was my point. That cosmetic micros are important to the game because game mechanics are only one part of a video game.
15 hours ago, Hodgman said:https://www.cultofmac.com/314240/crossy-road-developers-made-10-million-90-days/
..but:
That is... not a very common opinion.
It's not because most of the common man are brainwashed that the only thing that affects a game is the mechanics. Which is natural because the goal of a video game is to make a player become dazed by the sounds, graphics, and full on presentation. And when you have a player hypnotized, they are unaware of what is causing said hypnosis.
58 minutes ago, Zido_Z said:It's not because most of the common man are brainwashed that the only thing that affects a game is the mechanics. Which is natural because the goal of a video game is to make a player become dazed by the sounds, graphics, and full on presentation. And when you have a player hypnotized, they are unaware of what is causing said hypnosis.
Yeah, nah. Most people actually don't care about how their character is dressed up. It really doesn't affect their game experience anywhere near as much as other game items, and your viewpoint is actually extreme to them.
On the other hand, some people do really care about how their character looks, or feel compelled to collect things, and for these people, collecting the "useless" cosmetic items is the game. I guess you're in that category. Don't make the mistake of projecting your own feelings onto everyone else though.
When you put it this way, it does seem kind of immoral to exploit this small demographic's compulsions for monetary gain...
5 hours ago, Novadude987 said:Never played the game or seen gameplay myself. Are the characters merely cosmetic or do they have different stats/abilities? Just curious I don't think the article specified.
They're just cosmetic. You get the full game for free, and then you grind, watch ads, or pay money to get coins, which you can use to unlock cosmetics that change the character model and sometimes also the appearance of the world.
2 hours ago, Hodgman said:They're just cosmetic. You get the full game for free, and then you grind, watch ads, or pay money to get coins, which you can use to unlock cosmetics that change the character model and sometimes also the appearance of the world.
See I have literally zero problems with those microtransactions. Especially since the game is free to download. In fact, I don't see why costume microtransactions are a big problem for some people. Especially since they are less "microtransactions" and more "dlc". They are an add-on for the base game and are completely optional.
4 hours ago, Zido_Z said:It's not because most of the common man are brainwashed that the only thing that affects a game is the mechanics. Which is natural because the goal of a video game is to make a player become dazed by the sounds, graphics, and full on presentation. And when you have a player hypnotized, they are unaware of what is causing said hypnosis.
Uuhhhh... I wouldn't call me playing a game and saying "hey these graphics are great" being hypnotized or brainwashed. Also, tell me how Minecraft's sole purpose is graphics and sounds. I'm lead to believe that many other games rely on things like story, character development, and gameplay.
Forgive me but I can't help feeling that you were grasping at straws with this post.
23 hours ago, Hodgman said:Yeah, nah. Most people actually don't care about how their character is dressed up. It really doesn't affect their game experience anywhere near as much as other game items, and your viewpoint is actually extreme to them.
On the other hand, some people do really care about how their character looks, or feel compelled to collect things, and for these people, collecting the "useless" cosmetic items is the game. I guess you're in that category. Don't make the mistake of projecting your own feelings onto everyone else though.
When you put it this way, it does seem kind of immoral to exploit this small demographic's compulsions for monetary gain...
They're just cosmetic. You get the full game for free, and then you grind, watch ads, or pay money to get coins, which you can use to unlock cosmetics that change the character model and sometimes also the appearance of the world.
Woah there, I wasn't projecting any of my feelings at all. I was stating a fact. You just said: " Most people actually don't care about how their character is dressed up. It really doesn't affect their game experience anywhere near as much as other game items, and your viewpoint is actually extreme to them. "
Except my viewpoint has been proven by the huge profits established from games like League of Legends, Overwatch, Heroes of the Storm, Second Life, and a lot of other games with these kinds of models. If they're selling, then they must be affecting people's game experience more than just buying a new character or mechanic in the game. So I don't know where you get off suddenly saying "most people", when those very people are constantly buying skins, in-game avatars, and collector editions. Yes, collector editions is a certain kind of cosmetic.
21 hours ago, Novadude987 said:
Uuhhhh... I wouldn't call me playing a game and saying "hey these graphics are great" being hypnotized or brainwashed. Also, tell me how Minecraft's sole purpose is graphics and sounds. I'm lead to believe that many other games rely on things like story, character development, and gameplay.
Forgive me but I can't help feeling that you were grasping at straws with this post.
You're assuming a little too much about me from statements that were meant mostly for informing. The goal of video games is for immersing players and making them forget they're playing software that is calculating their every move with numbers in the background. They're entertainment products first and foremost. If they aren't captivating the person, they already failed their goal. Minecraft's graphics and sounds are just enough to keep it satisfactory. Being 3D also helped its appeal, along with its cube based world. And the sounds were crisp and appetizing enough to the ear whenever you swing your axe at a dirt mount and that appealing crush follows.
These are all cosmetic features of a video game, so it makes sense why in minecraft, using your example, people enjoy changing out the world textures or changing their avatar's skin, which is one of the bigger enjoyments from the game itself. And once again, as evidence shows, Microsoft knows the value of cosmetics as the bulk of their DLC are skins.
It's really hard to accept you guys saying "cosmetic microtransactions aren't important to the game," while developers are making bank off a so called "useless" feature.
22 minutes ago, Zido_Z said:It's really hard to accept you guys saying "cosmetic microtransactions aren't important to the game," while developers are making bank off a so called "useless" feature.
I think you are misinterpreting what is being said. No one has suggested that cosmetic microtransactions fail to make money, nor that cosmetics can't increase a player's enjoyment of the game.
They are merely pointing out that cosmetics do not have a direct effect on the game's mechanics. i.e. folks who desire to can play the game without ever purchasing cosmetics, and their ability to play the game is not compromised by that choice.
1 hour ago, Zido_Z said:Except my viewpoint has been proven by the huge profits established from games like League of Legends, Overwatch, Heroes of the Storm, Second Life, and a lot of other games with these kinds of models. If they're selling, then they must be affecting people's game experience more than just buying a new character or mechanic in the game. So I don't know where you get off suddenly saying "most people", when those very people are constantly buying skins, in-game avatars, and collector editions. Yes, collector editions is a certain kind of cosmetic.
Your viewpoint wasn't just that they're making profits, it was that cosmetic items affect a game equal or more than gameplay-changing items, and that most people are affected in this way.
High profits doesn't mean that a high percentage of players are buying them. The ARPU for free-to-play / micro-transaction games is usually tiny - far less than the cost of a single item. e.g. In a game with $1 micro transactions, the ARPU might be $0.01, which suggests that 1 in 100 people buy an item, or that 1 in 1000 people buy 10 items. The latter group of people are called "whales" within the industry, and a lot of effort goes into making games that will cater to these whales, to convince them to pay $100, to offset all the people who play $0. The targeting of whales is another moral dilemma for the industry - developers have been know to hire private investors to learn more about their top spenders, and create game patches based on what a single high-paying player wants. Some of these people are seriously addicted and spend tens of thousands of dollars on a 'free' game, subsidising it for the 99% of players who don't pay.
On 11/24/2017 at 4:48 PM, Zido_Z said:It's not because most of the common man are brainwashed that the only thing that affects a game is the mechanics. Which is natural because the goal of a video game is to make a player become dazed by the sounds, graphics, and full on presentation. And when you have a player hypnotized, they are unaware of what is causing said hypnosis.
2 hours ago, Zido_Z said:You're assuming a little too much about me from statements that were meant mostly for informing.
A statement meant to inform should be backed by facts, not opinionated statements.
1 hour ago, Hodgman said:Some of these people are seriously addicted and spend tens of thousands of dollars on a 'free' game, subsidising it for the 99% of players who don't pay.
Good lord! I couldn't imagine spending that kind of money 
