Moving the Conversation Forward With Video Game Microtransactions

The conversation surrounding microtransactions has been stuck at a certain roadblock for a while now. Every time a game comes along that incorporates them in some overreaching way, the conversation inevitably becomes a battle of those who like said game and those who don’t, and the real issue gets lost in the shuffle. In general, the attitude regarding microtransactions is tied far too closely to one’s love or distaste for a given game. For many out there, enjoying a game often means defending its practices tooth and nail no matter what, while disliking another game translates into lambasting it for similar practices. No one can have things both ways—neither gamers nor game makers. Inconsistent attitudes make for a poor discussion, and having a poor discussion about microtransactions doesn’t help anyone.

Discussing microtransactions can no longer hinge upon the games that host them. Egregious microtransactions aren’t limited to bad games after all. A game can be good—even great—and still go too far with its microtransactions. When that happens, said microtransactions must be acknowledged for what they are rather than simply defended on the basis of the game’s quality.

The same goes for games with good microtransaction implementation. If they’re used fairly, it must be acknowledged even if the game isn’t the greatest. Doing so will lead to an improved, more consistent discussion that will be better equipped to exert a positive influence on the industry as a whole.

With that in mind, let’s take a look at two games that have gotten a lot of attention because of their microtransactions lately: NBA 2K19 and Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey.

Pay to Progress

NBA 2K19 received quite a lot of heat at launch thanks to having most of its content tied to “Virtual Currency,” the game’s version of, well, virtual currency. In this game, players are prompted to spend Virtual Currency at just about every turn. Player clothes, Gatorade for performance boosts, and even transportation in the Neighborhood all require the spending of Virtual Currency. That alone might’ve been tolerable, but 2K also decided to tie player stats and growth to the currency as well.

Improving one’s custom character isn’t done simply through playing the game, but through acquiring and spending Virtual Currency. This currency can be earned through gameplay, but only at a rate insufficient for most player’s needs. This leaves directly purchasing Virtual Currency as the most viable option for those who don’t want to spend dozens of hours just getting their guy up to par. This situation has made it fairly easy to talk about the game’s microtransactions without having the debate drift-off into its other aspects, but this is an unusual case. The issue of a game’s microtransactions isn’t usually so clear cut.

Time-Saving Spending

Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey’s microtransactions aren’t nearly as intrinsic to its experience as NBA 2K19’s are, but there are still issues nonetheless. As a game, Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey is quite well regarded by many fans, and it’s not hard to see why. It’s an absolutely gorgeous game with a beautiful world to explore, an interesting story, cool gear to collect, and a decent combat system. It also has an extensive cash shop. It’s mostly filled with cosmetic items of course, but that’s not what invited controversy. No, that distinction goes to the contents of the shop’s “Time Saver” section.

For an extra $10, a player can permanently double their experience gains and speed up the pace of the game in the process. Spending another $10 can permanently double all money earnings, and players can spend even more money on resource packs. These are entirely optional of course; the game is certainly playable without them. However, being optional shouldn’t excuse their existence. The presence of these EXP, drachmae, and resource boosters calls the game’s design into question and thus warrants discussion. It’s not about using them to call Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey a bad game, but rather examining their actual impact on the game regardless of whether one is a fan or not.

Sticking to talking about the microtransactions in NBA 2K19 is fairly easy since they’re woven throughout the experience; doing the same with a game like Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey is a bit harder because it’s difficult not to drag the rest of the game—which again is pretty decent—into the conversation. Yet that’s exactly what needs to be avoided as we continue talking about microtransactions.

Regardless of any given game’s quality, its microtransactions must be evaluated on their own merits. We need to take a really close look at what they add, what they take away, and what kind of impact their presence has upon their host game. It’s imperative that all gamers take the time and initiative to do this, because that’s the only way we can each arrive at our own informed opinions. Just going along with the maxims of “microtransactions ruin games period” and “it’s fine if it’s just cosmetic” isn’t enough to keep the conversation moving forward anymore. Relying on borrowed logic just leads to stagnation; it’s only through many independent and informed opinions that useful conclusions can be reached.

Moving Forward With Video Game Microtransactions

Like it or not, microtransactions are here to stay in some way, shape, or form. One could say they’re still in the testing phase. Game developers and publishers still appear to be trying to figure out the best way to incorporate them. They’ve got plenty of data sources to draw from, but the main ones are probably sales figures and genuine fan reactions seen on sites like this one, Twitter, Reddit, YouTube, and others.

If the discussion surrounding microtransactions isn’t consistent—if we never take it beyond knee-jerk reactions and tired platitudes—then game makers won’t be able to factor that feedback into their design decisions and will most likely continue to plan their projects based purely on what sells. The result: more games that probably won’t appeal to the non-casual gaming populace. However, if we can all take a step back and examine microtransactions on their own merits rather than view them through the games they’re attached to, then we’ll be able to drive this conversation forward in a way that will be beneficial for all—game maker and game player alike.

Star Wars Battlefront 2 microtransactions

Thoughts on Battlefront II Microtransactions?
Cameron Teague

I am on the side of none of this bothering me really, so I don't really mind if this was done just to save face. This is a business and as such, things will be done to make money. I also don't have any problems with loot boxes and I have loved leveling up and opening new boxes in Overwatch every time.
Chandler Wood

This is the breaking point. It's a culmination of many things, from gamer outrage, to publisher overreach, to Start Wars being a massive franchise owned by an even more massive corporation. Other developers are bound to take notice of the fallout though, and will likely opt not to toe that line.

It's a bit of both. Of course EA wants to save face as they launch one of their biggest properties. Is that so surprising? But I've talked to the DICE guys. They are passionate about the community and taking feedback to heart. Star Wars is a franchise filled with passionate fans, including the people making the game. They want it to succeed, and honestly, more success means more people buying into whatever microtransactions they put back in there. It's a two-fold operation.

They've already admitted that the paid currency is coming back, so it's not a matter of then being gone. The games industry isn't sustainable in its current trajectory. Post-launch revenue streams are a must. But we will see them fix it to become far less predatory and pay-to-win. Dial it back to cosmetics and gamer rage will subside until the next great ridiculous controversy that seems from gamers forgetting that gaming is simply an expensive hobby.
Elizabeth Henges

I really think it's just an attempt to save face, because... Well, it's Star Wars. The new movie is coming out next month, and Disney probably doesn't want bad publicity involving the series so close to The Last Jedi. I doubt EA would have changed their microtransaction policy if it weren't for Disney's CEO calling and having a chat with EA. While I don't doubt that when the microtransactions come back they'll be better than before, I don't think this will be a lasting change of policy with EA.
Keri Honea

Eh, another reason why I'm glad not to be a fan of multiplayer. Not that single-player titles don't occasionally have their own pay-to-win or pay-to-finish models...
Louis Edwards

I'm not sure I understand what all the fuss is about. Paying for better equipment and/or characters has been implemented in sports games like Madden's Ultimate Team and MLB The Show's Diamond Dynasty for years. It's always a gamble when buying packs and you're better off saving those points or Stubbs for use in the marketplace, but still, you can have the greatest offense and defense in Madden or the greatest pitching staff and batting line-up in The Show and still get your butt handed to you by a more skilled player. Do I like the pay-to-win model? Of course not, but why all the whining about it now? It's not a new concept.
Michael Briers

Given Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader were locked from the beginning, it's difficult to see this U-turn as anything other than saving face. And that's okay. As Zarmena so rightly says, implementation is the key here, with Battlefront II being the textbook example of cultivating a pay-to-win environment.
Paulmichael Contreras

I've been saying this since day one: they should have followed Titanfall 2's post-release DLC plans. Launching free content such as maps, and only asking for payment for new cosmetic items as a sort of tip doesn't piss off any sane person, keeping the game fresh while also creating an avenue for additional revenue for the retained player base. You could see this kind of fallout coming a mile away, but the question was whether Star Wars as a gaming franchise was big enough to weather the storm. I think we now know the answer.
Tyler Treese

I get the feeling that we'll see similar microtransactions added back in a few months from now after Disney isn't worried about an upcoming film, and Battlefront II is no longer the hottest topic in gaming. I feel this is just a way to save face, and I really doubt we'll see any meaningful change in how AAA gaming operates. This is a business after all.
Zarmena Khan

I'm going to go with what one of our comments said: this might just become a case of Mortal Kombat and the birth of video game ratings. It's not microtransactions or loot boxes that are a problem per se, but rather how they're implemented. One could argue that gambling is also a choice and going out to a casino is also a choice. My personal take is that if these microtransactions are starting to cross the line between harmless cosmetics/minor items and games of chance, then I think authorities have every right to look into these practices. I don't consider a total lack of governance a good thing either. Is this backlash going to lead to meaningful change? Maybe. I hope so.