PSXE Poll Update: Most Gamers Totally Against Microtransactions
While the experts say microtransactions will undoubtedly become a major part of the video game industry in the years to come, the fans aren't too thrilled.
According to our latest poll, the vast majority of readers say microtransactions should be kept at a minimum or they shouldn't exist at all (the assumed response when someone says "I really hate them"). The idea behind microtransactions is complex, but it's supposed to be better for both publishers and developers, and some are already primed to accept free-to-play and microtransactions for the future. For instance, that's the route Crytek has chosen.
In other news this past week, Sony purchased cloud service Gaikai for $380 million, a move most analysts applauded. Do you agree? Remember that Sony has clarified, saying they intend to stick with retail for quite some time, so it's not like cloud gaming will take over tomorrow. Do you still think it's a good plan for the next generation, though?
Tags: gaming industry, microtransactions, sony, gaikai, cloud gaming
7/8/2012 8:53:19 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (23 posts)
WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, July 08, 2012 @ 10:04:14 PM
Reply
While I don't actually "love" the Gaikai acquisition that's the most accurate vote for me because I think it's a very smart move to get into this cloud stuff on the ground floor. MS will probably wait until it is established and then buy out a competitor like they always do. By then Sony will have a better handle on developing for the tech.
Still sticking with my physical games, but I find as the generation wears on my digital library is slowly growing too.
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, July 08, 2012 @ 11:14:38 PM
Reply
Most people are stupid and I'm not surprised the gaming industry is taking advantage of this fact.
Temjin001
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 12:18:01 AM
Drake: You have a pay as you go phone?
Bald dude: "yeah, those contracts are a rip off, you bloody wainker"
Sad but true
(actual translation is only accurate in meaning)
Last edited by Temjin001 on 7/9/2012 12:18:16 AM
LimitedVertigo
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 12:36:59 AM
Ultimadream
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 3:25:34 AM
Reply
Besides I like to feel ownership in my games, for all I know I could purchase to play a game on Gakai and then a year down the line they could take it off the store... That doesn't happen when you have a physical copy of the game. Also, with OnLive, you could notice streaming artifacts within the image, making the resolution just look poor.
Highlander
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 10:41:16 AM
Of course all of that ignores all the control latency issues as well.
Beamboom
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 2:54:03 PM
Highlander
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 3:44:49 PM
Beamboom
Tuesday, July 10, 2012 @ 7:16:04 AM
Rogueagent01
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 4:34:59 AM
Reply
Depends on the game and why you purchased it. If you bought a physical copy but bought it for the online/multiplayer aspect, then a year down the road you could still find yourself not having that game, though you have a disc that would say otherwise.
But don't get me wrong I am still a physical copy type person myself. Well it is my preference at least, I don't mind digital games I just try not to make it a habit.
Highlander
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 10:37:06 AM
wickedproxy
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 6:27:40 AM
Reply
___________
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 6:31:20 AM
Reply
IF done right, and people feel like there getting excellent value for money than it could be the best thing for the industry!
EVER!
what id love to see done is games ditch the current up front price model and allow people to purchase games for 10 bucks or so for 1 level, than if they like it than let them unlock x amount of levels for x cash.
maybe make it 10 dollars for 20% of the game, than you have the choice to upgrade maybe 10% more because your unsure, or 50% more, or everything.
most important thing about this though is 1 choice, and 2 it MUST be cheaper than the system we have now!
if you end up paying more than what we are now than theres no point!
it would bring so many advantages though if done right!
1 we can stop the buyers remorse problem, and 2 also try make it a little cheaper for people.
allot of people only buy 1 or 2 games every month or so simply because thats all they can afford!
if we were to make games cheaper by offering certain parts of it, than not only would publishers get more money because there bringing in new customers, but they would also get more money because the person who was not going to buy their game because he spent all his cash on another game now will buy it with his saved cash.
its win win!
it will bring in new customers too simply because me for instance i never play games online, so why am i paying for something i will never use?
i have hundreds of games sitting on my shelf, and a good half of their content i have never, and will never touch!
starhawk for instance i really enjoyed the SP with that, but i took it back because i cant justify paying 120 bucks for a 6 hour SP campaign!
or even BF3, or MW3.
if they adopted this payment method,IE offer seperate bundles at a discounted price than id go buy those games!
if the publishers said to me hey will sell you the campaign of these games for 50 dollars each than i would go buy them.
but since im not paying 50, im paying 100+ so no thank you!
i never play the MP, so why should i pay for it?
so first off it would help publishers because instead of 1 person buying 1 game in their line, they would be able to buy several spending the same money.
it would help publishers secondly too because it would bring in new customers because its offering better value for money.
so thats win win for publishers.
and customers are benefiting too firstly because now instead of spending 100 bucks on 1 game they can get 2 for the same price!
and secondly they are getting better value for money, there not paying for things they wont use.
win win, win win!
O, no correction forgot to mention this would help solve the used games issue, so thats win win win, win win!
why this has not been done yet is beyond me!
as i said before though this wont work unless customers feel they are getting value for money!
its funny how the mind works, people dont care how much something is if they feel like its worth it.
for instance i dont think simply dropping the price would have the same effect.
because were still back at square one problem 1.
people spending money on things they dont want!
yes its cheaper, but they will be thinking i wish there was a SP only mode available so it would be even cheaper!
i really wish publishers would do this!
it would help the industry so much!
not only is it giving publishers more money in the sense that more people will play their games, but its also giving customers more games because they cost less, and its also fixing the used game issue!
as for gaikai im really excited for it!
definitely a VERY smart move to buy it!
yea they could of created their own system but theres 3 problems with that.
1 it would probably end up being more expensive.
2 it would of taken time out of their engineers working on other projects, IE ps4 and whatever else.
why use your resources to complete a task when you can get someone else to do it?
3 they already have a BIG back catalogue of content!
biggest problem with new technology is compatible software.
well, gaikai has that in spades so whenever $ony decides to make use of it there should be plenty of content available!
theres allot of rumours going around that we will see what $ony intend to do with it at gamescom.
TBH i SERIOUSLY doubt it!
first of simply because they just announced it.
secondly it will be for all $ony devices, not just the playstation brand and thats really all thats attending gamescom.
it would be much more likely to be shown at CES next year!
$ony always has a BIG hand in that with their new TVs, mobile phones and even playstation.
their biggest brands that gaikai will be implemented with, so if theres one place it will be detailed id put my money on CES!
i hope it is gamescom simply so we dont have to wait so long, but i strongly doubt it.
im really excited to see what $ony does with it though!
i would not be surprised to see $ony offering ps1 and ps2 streaming capabilities, BUT if there going to do that they really need to organize a top notch server emulator that way you can play any game you want!
if there just going to offer what is on the store for streaming instead of download this is the biggest waste of money in the history of the universe!
and the biggest waste of tech!
however if they allow you to flip a coin and pick whichever ps1 or ps2 game you want to play this would help them oh so much id be impossible to measure!
it will be a massive advantage!
they might allow the streaming of PSN games too, and maybe even ps3 games but i seriously doubt those 2 simply because of speed, bandwidth and usage limitations.
i think will have to wait till ps4 for those.
Last edited by ___________ on 7/9/2012 6:40:15 AM
xenris
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 8:31:12 AM
Reply
For example Tribes: Ascend is a F2P shooter that does things better than other F2P shooters. In tribes you outright purchase your stuff for XP that is earned in game or with gold you purchase for money. But everything can be earned without a dime spent although its a lot harder. If you pay any money on the game you get a bonus 50% xp boost for life on your account which makes things much more tolerable.
Then there are F2P games that lock away so much that it is a glorified trial only you can't even trial most of the features because they are locked. Or are just straight up pay to win. How are you supposed to get a feel for the game if the games best features are locked or you need to pay money to progress in the game and it ends up costing 100 plus dollars just to get to end game?
GW2, Lineage 2, and Aion are probably the top of the list for the best F2P experience that have micro transactions that are just for cosmetics or convenience and don't give any advantages.
What I don't like is when a game that you want to just pay 60 bucks for is F2P and you unlock the content you "want" and in the end to get everything it would run you over 200 Dollars. This was how I felt about tribes in the beginning. I just wanted to own the game and not pay 5 bucks here 5 there because I know for a fact that ends up making the total price of the game unreasonably high.
Last edited by xenris on 7/9/2012 8:32:59 AM
wackazoa
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 10:28:22 AM
xenris
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 5:38:06 PM
TheOldOne
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 8:58:59 AM
Reply
wackazoa
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 10:25:12 AM
Reply
My cousin plays the Sims 3 game and apparently they pay $40 for a expansion and $20 for some kinda stuff pack thing. Then EA has this store which allows you to buy different outfits and furniture stuff and new towns for your fake people. ( Which I think is a cool feature by the by ) But they charge you more for that stuff than the stuff pack thing. I was told one town costs more than an expansion pack!
I only used that example 1.) To show that I dont think it works when you charge for the original game. And 2.) I am beginning to see a pattern for E.A. And I am hating it. Just a personal view but E.A. is gonna be the leader of this pack it seems and I dont think it is a good thing.
jugheadjones
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 12:44:32 PM
wackazoa
Monday, July 09, 2012 @ 1:04:24 PM

See Full Image









Stabs88
Reply
Sunday, July 08, 2012 @ 9:32:07 PM