Take-Two Plans to Only Release Games with Microtransactions

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Take-Two Interactive chairman and CEO Strauss Zelnick made it clear that, at least for Take-Two, the game industry is now all about "recurrent consumer spending" rather than game sales. "The business, once upon a time, was a big chunky opportunity to engage for tens of hours, or perhaps a hundred hours," he said. That has turned into ongoing engagement. Day after day, week after week. You fall in love with these titles, and they become part of your daily life.

This perspective is not terribly surprising, given that Take-Two continues to generate tons of revenue from sales of in-game items and virtual currency in games like Grand Theft Auto Online and NBA2K 17. However, it still gives other devs in the industry a bit more insight into where Take-Two plans to take its business in the future: "recurrent consumer spending opportunities" (aka microtransactions).
 
No surprise given all the recent news on how much EA and all the other big boys are making on this stuff. If people keep buying loot crates and hats and all this crap, they'll keep selling it. Especially when it makes the company far, far more than selling the game in the first place.

Just like the pre-order debacles, don't blame the game studios, blame the consumers.
 
....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
.........\.................'...../
..........''...\.......... _.·´
............\..............(
..............\.............\...
 
Bandalo said:
It's not about DLC and expansion packs. It's about loot-crates, and in-game virtual currency you need to level up in game. That's where they're making the money. GOTY editions aren't going to fix that problem.
Click to expand...


I didn't say they were. I refuse to give these games my money when they pull shady shit like this.
 
What absolute garbage. The problem is figuring out how to properly punish companies for these designs because sadly, it only takes a very very small percentage of people playing and paying to make up for hundreds of thousands of those who never pay, never play, or resign in protest. I don't believe it is impossible to do , but it will take more than simply "not buying the game" - I and many others have given up on buying many of these titles and yet they continue to act this way, so it will mean approaching from a new direction.

Worst of all, recurrent spending is not necessarily a bad thing - I am a major, long term fan of it being done right, such as Subscription MMO's - but in my mind "right" means that When you subscribe, you get ALL the content (cosmetic included) sans major expansions and whatnot which are single charges. This doesn't mean you can't also have paid for extras (ie name/server changes, XP boosters, or even item sales of things that can be acquired in game as well for those who want it now) but it needs to be built in a way that you don't try to make it difficult to get/not fun without buying . From what I hear, that is exactly what happened to GTAV's GTA Online mode - they started selling in-game money cards as a primary revenue generator and because of that made in-game items cost a fortune to the point that you could grind for weeks or months before being able to afford cool items, as an enticement to just break down and buy the $50 in game cash+ that it will take you to actually buy that single new fancy car or apartment. Worse, this dynamic means that the devs start developing what new content they do to fit into this mold, such as new items to buy, rather than real content expansions with missions, story, and other things to do. Its sad and frustrating.

Another major disappointment; we need to find ways to support developers doing something better and more ethical than this.
 
Bigdady92 said:
Guess what company I"m not buying from till GOTY editions that include all this shit?
Click to expand...
That's how you do it now. I still plan to finish the Mass Effect series once I get a good bundle or deal for ME2 dlcs. Then I'll see if I can get a deal for 3. I am in no hurry. After I pre-ordered ME2 then realized others got the complete game for cheaper, I realized I did things wrong.

Take-Two? Might be a while.
 
c0bd162294ae6d5aba8434546b64fe75.jpg
 
M76 said:
....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
.........\.................'...../
..........''...\.......... _.·´
............\..............(
..............\.............\...
Click to expand...

Haha...thanks for posting this, been awhile since I've seen it. Good times.
 
Sadly, the sheeps that love preordering and other shit will continue buying into this crap.
 
Great thing about most single player games is they're easy enough to hack to get this stuff anyway w/o paying.

As for online stuff, unless it's a true MMORPG I avoid them so meh.
 
Bandalo said:
No surprise given all the recent news on how much EA and all the other big boys are making on this stuff. If people keep buying loot crates and hats and all this crap, they'll keep selling it. Especially when it makes the company far, far more than selling the game in the first place.

Just like the pre-order debacles, don't blame the game studios, blame the consumers.
Click to expand...

This. I never saw the desire for buying those things because typically they are junk.

Now I don't mind mini-DLCs if they are handled like Sleeping Dogs. That game had a few long, good DLCs. And about 50 shirt/pant/cosmetic DLCs. But those were not thrown in your face in game, and they were not required at all to play. The game provided plenty of cosmetic choices to the players without having to fork over real money. As far as I was concerned, those small DLCs were more or less a way to donate more to the developers if you liked the game.
 
I guess I'm in the minority by not seeing a problem with this. If you want to spend real money on in game items than you have that option. If you don't want to spend real money on in game items than nobody is forcing you to. If you still want all the shiny items and don't want to spend money on them than just play the damn game. Everyone is upset that game companies are giving gamers more options?
 
bristol16 said:
I guess I'm in the minority by not seeing a problem with this. If you want to spend real money on in game items than you have that option. If you don't want to spend real money on in game items than nobody is forcing you to. If you still want all the shiny items and don't want to spend money on them than just play the damn game. Everyone is upset that game companies are giving gamers more options?
Click to expand...
Its doing 2 things, destroying the modding community and those who play for hobby and doesn't entice developers to create great games anymore. They just throw out a shell of a game and charge you for everything to create a full game, essentially making you pay to actually play the game instead of buying a game to play.
 
I'm all for cosmetic stuff. Hats, shirts, patches/decals, emotes, etc. Nothing that actually affects gameplay. But if it's does affect gameplay, even just say level boost, no way!
 
bristol16 said:
I guess I'm in the minority by not seeing a problem with this. If you want to spend real money on in game items than you have that option. If you don't want to spend real money on in game items than nobody is forcing you to. If you still want all the shiny items and don't want to spend money on them than just play the damn game. Everyone is upset that game companies are giving gamers more options?
Click to expand...
Nope, if that were the case there would be no problem. However I'm yet to see a game that would use that model. The items you can unlock by paying are usually not available trough regular gameplay. You want a custom tattoo on your character? PAY. You want a new minor decal? PAY. This model is terrible and it does kill modding, as they won't allow mods for a game where they expect you to pay even for minor cosmetics. Modders would wipe the floor with that shit, they can fulfil niche wants much better. That's why bethesda is trying like hell to somehow make paid modding a thing to overcome that "limitation" or "freedom" depending on which side you stand. So far the pushback was enough to stop it dead in it's tracks, but it's not like they're going to stop trying.
 
SecretStash said:
That's how you do it now. I still plan to finish the Mass Effect series once I get a good bundle or deal for ME2 dlcs. Then I'll see if I can get a deal for 3. I am in no hurry. After I pre-ordered ME2 then realized others got the complete game for cheaper, I realized I did things wrong.

Take-Two? Might be a while.
Click to expand...
Then I think you're going to wait forever. If they didn't include all DLCs in the newly released trilogy it's doubtful they're ever release a complete edition.
I have no problem paying for extra single player campaign DLCs, they're no different than expansion packs of the nineties. The only difference is the delivery method.
What I have a problem with is withholding content from the game and selling it as an extra, like it's a car. And it's not like the price is in proportion with the cost.
They charge 40-60 for a full game and then charge 5 for a skin? One takes millions to develop, the other takes a gimp chimp and an art student and fifteen minutes. No wonder they're making a killing on them. This is what I'd call unfair pricng, and abuse of a monopoly. As they create their own monopoly of cosmetic expansions by disallowing modding, and then charge outrageous prices for things.
 
Jim Kim said:
Glad I played during the glory days of pc gaming.
Click to expand...

Same! Could be said for the console era of PS1, XBox, hell even PS2, and Xbox 360. Micro-Transitions can eat a bag of dicks. I hate them...they are only acceptable in free-to-play games where you can grind your way to the top, or pay to assist to the top. I ain't spending $60, 45, 30, or hell even 20.00 for any of the base game to only have to pay more to complete the game.
 
Unleash the Jim Sterling Brigade! :p

Also, Microtransaction Simulator 2017 (or 2018), it's a coming! :smug:
 
Depends how they do it. I play Elder Scrolls Online for free on the backs of everyone who buys every stupid florescent colored guar. On the other hand, in Planetside 2, I was the guy buying stupid florescent colored Reavers and others played on my back for free. This business model I have no problem with.

If they require you to buy non-cosmetic stuff to compete in the game, or even have a reasonable chance to play all the content of a single player game, then that's a shitty business model that I won't support.
 
I'm glad I've mainly been playing indie games lately. Every once in a while I have to grab a AAA, but it's easy enough for me to skip anything that doesn't sit well with me. Too bad things are going this way. Guess it makes things easier for me now though. :D
 
SomeoneElse said:
Its doing 2 things, destroying the modding community and those who play for hobby and doesn't entice developers to create great games anymore. They just throw out a shell of a game and charge you for everything to create a full game, essentially making you pay to actually play the game instead of buying a game to play.
Click to expand...

To me offering to sell someone chintzy cosmetic items that they don't need to play the game isn't making something pay to play...it's just pay to optionally accessorize. It's not like game companies weren't going to release crappy, unfinished games if it wasn't for micro-transactions...the only difference is that you can now pay more to finish the game where you wouldn't have been able to before lol.


M76 said:
Nope, if that were the case there would be no problem. However I'm yet to see a game that would use that model. The items you can unlock by paying are usually not available trough regular gameplay. You want a custom tattoo on your character? PAY. You want a new minor decal? PAY. This model is terrible and it does kill modding, as they won't allow mods for a game where they expect you to pay even for minor cosmetics. Modders would wipe the floor with that shit, they can fulfil niche wants much better. That's why bethesda is trying like hell to somehow make paid modding a thing to overcome that "limitation" or "freedom" depending on which side you stand. So far the pushback was enough to stop it dead in it's tracks, but it's not like they're going to stop trying.
Click to expand...

But having a tattoo on my character doesn't effect the game in any meaningful way. It's just a cosmetic item, it's either worth it to you to pay for or it isn't but you have the option to have it or not which I see nothing wrong with.
 
You can pre-order MT's in mobile games now, give it 2-3 years and the big boys will be wanking themselves dry over implementing that as well.

 
Because games dont make enough money to comp their dev ans marketing.

(Call of duty 500mil weekend record)
 
bristol17 said:
But having a tattoo on my character doesn't effect the game in any meaningful way. It's just a cosmetic item, it's either worth it to you to pay for or it isn't but you have the option to have it or not which I see nothing wrong with.
Click to expand...
Being able to fully customize the character in a game is very meaningful to me. In fact it boosts even a mediocre game to a much higher level, if I'm able to make the game feel "mine" that way.
But I'm not going to pay for virtual clothing in a game. What's next? Pay for the virtual bullets you shoot in the game? Oh damn I just gave them an idea.
 
M76 said:
Being able to fully customize the character in a game is very meaningful to me. In fact it boosts even a mediocre game to a much higher level, if I'm able to make the game feel "mine" that way.
But I'm not going to pay for virtual clothing in a game. What's next? Pay for the virtual bullets you shoot in the game? Oh damn I just gave them an idea.
Click to expand...

World of Tanks already has 'premium' ammunition and has for a while.
 
Looks like the publisher had the last laugh. Do not think that the publisher is still not leaning toward banning modding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top