• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Activision Blizzard Made $1.2 Billion From Microtransactions In Just Three Months

Lupin3

Targeting terrorists with a D-Pad
Can't wait for that $99 in-game "best value" deal in Diablo 4. Or the $24.99 limited time only legendary armor.
 

Miles708

Member
Mainstreaming ruins absolutely everything. So does the full retard understanding of "maximizing shareholder profits" to the point of exploitation.

I'm all in for mainstreaming (since it helps the niche too, or it'll just die out) but people need to learn what the heck self-control is.

A billion in profits is an ungodly amount of money based on nothing. And it's our fault.

The reality is that we suck.
 
Last edited:

borborygmus

Member
I'm all in for mainstreaming (since it helps the niche too, or it'll just die out) but people need to learn what the heck self-control is.

A billion in profits is an ungodly amount of money based on nothing. And it's our fault.

The reality is that we suck.

I disagree. The "Blue Ocean strategy" brought this on. Mainstreaming turns things into lowest common denominator consoomer products.

Everything in life has a certain balance. Too many people, or too few people both spell ruin and this is for the creators to care about - if they care about their field, that is.
 
Last edited:

Miles708

Member
I disagree. The "Blue Ocean strategy" brought this on. Mainstreaming turns things into lowest common denominator consoomer products.

Everything in life has a certain balance. Too many people, or too few people both spell ruin and this is for the creators to care about - if they care about their field, that is.
A mainstream audience can be useful as a catalyst to new niches, so i don't think it's all doom and gloom. Also, no one would say "there's too many gamers, please go away".

But this, this is crap. You can blame the "mainstream"all you want and yet we're here, trampling each other to pre-order consoles we don't even know how they work, or what they'll offer.

We live and die in hype because it's intoxicating and exhilarating, and some companies rightly noticed that we are suckers waiting to happily pay for nothing.

These corporations are scum, but we're the ones that enable them to this behaviour.
 

borborygmus

Member
A mainstream audience can be useful as a catalyst to new niches, so i don't think it's all doom and gloom. Also, no one would say "there's too many gamers, please go away".

But this, this is crap. You can blame the "mainstream"all you want and yet we're here, trampling each other to pre-order consoles we don't even know how they work, or what they'll offer.

We live and die in hype because it's intoxicating and exhilarating, and some companies rightly noticed that we are suckers waiting to happily pay for nothing.

These corporations are scum, but we're the ones that enable them to this behaviour.

- "A mainstream audience can be useful" - got any examples? Honest question. I'm not being confrontational. I've only seen it dilute and degrade what was once good.

- "no one would say "there's too many gamers, please go away". " I would. There's too many "gamers" who aren't really into games. It's not their fault, it's developers making money at the expense of damaging the ecosystem.

- I try to minimize my support of bad practices, so personally I don't feel guilty.
 
Last edited:
Yea, I’m “guilty” for that success too. Gave them 50$ or so on MTX during that period. Game is so good (best FPS ever IMO) and I felt they deserved it. Don’t shoot me.
 

Concern

Member
And this ladies and gentlemen, is why microtransactions will never die. Round of applause for the casuals constantly supporting this 👏👏👏👏
 

Kssio_Aug

Member
I learned to accept it. That's how it is, and that's how it's gonna be.

I mean, this kind of shit rarely gets into the games I enjoy the most. Thankfully there are still tons of games out there for those who don't like it.

Also, I have NO IDEA of the type of microtransactions that's being sold in COD, but as long as they're purely cosmetics, I think it's no big deal really.
 
Last edited:

Soodanim

Gold Member
This is why modern gaming sucks. Games are designed around getting you to spend on microtransactions.
Yep. But for me that just means there's more to avoid. I barely touch anything the biggest western companies put out, but it's undeniably bad when the business takes over the games.
 

Rbk_3

Member
Good. I am glad this model worked out. Being able to purchase something and know what you're getting is much better than gambling with loot boxes hoping to get what you want.
 
H

hariseldon

Unconfirmed Member
Yep. But for me that just means there's more to avoid. I barely touch anything the biggest western companies put out, but it's undeniably bad when the business takes over the games.

I also don't buy games with microtransactions in them, but the worry has to be that eventually we lose that option. I guess there'll always be retro.

Why though?

Letting whales support the industry is beneficial to the majority. The amount of high quality choice we have, where we don't have to spend a cent is unprecedented.

Do you not think that the design will be adjusted to extract the most from the whales? Have you not considered that this is why we have so many empty skinner-boxes masquerading as games these days?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fuz

Soodanim

Gold Member
I also don't buy games with microtransactions in them, but the worry has to be that eventually we lose that option. I guess there'll always be retro.
Demon's Souls have Deluxe Edition exclusive items is a sign of that.

When the end times arrive, we'll be playing the games from the "For the people, by the people" devs and startups while the mainstream spend $6billion on skins.
 

Men_in_Boxes

Snake Oil Salesman
I also don't buy games with microtransactions in them, but the worry has to be that eventually we lose that option. I guess there'll always be retro.



Do you not think that the design will be adjusted to extract the most from the whales? Have you not considered that this is why we have so many empty skinner-boxes masquerading as games these days?

Yeah, skins, gun skins, emotes, dances etc...

All things that don't impact the mechanics or balance of a game.

Also, let's not act like the "pay me up front, then I ditch you" model was healthy either. It just came with a different set of potential problems.
 
As long as there's a company like Sony who keeps putting out awesome single-player experiences, I will continue to play games.

I don't hate free-to-play games. I play some of them too. But I dread the day when every game is designed around getting the most out of the player's pockets through micro-transactions because devs and publishers see it as the most convenient way to extract the most profit.
 

Danny 117

Member
Good. Rather them make 1.2B from microtransations instead of charging for map packs and splitting the playerbase.
 
Last edited:

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
People talk about lots of things being the "future" of gaming, but more ways to get money out of players is the real future of gaming.

Soon, a majority of games will have online elements that support have MTX, or be pure online services. Not surprising when you look a the money involved. EA makes billions of FIFA UT every year alone and that's just one game.
 

borborygmus

Member
Why though?

Letting whales support the industry is beneficial to the majority. The amount of high quality choice we have, where we don't have to spend a cent is unprecedented.

Can you give any examples of this being beneficial? I keep hearing this argument but I can't think of a case where it was a good thing.

What series improved because of practices like this?
 
Last edited:

BlackTron

Member
Shows how out of touch with reality this forum is.

The overwhelming majority of people that play and buy videos games have by problem with micro transactions, and in fact they like them.

I know that MTX is good business even if I personally dislike it and avoid it like the plague.

Sometimes, or often even, the product you are tasked with designing is meant for a different market than yourself. It's sad but true.

Thankfully there is still more content I'd want to play than I'll ever have time for, everything can coexist. However it is unfortunate that some legendery franchises had to be wrecked by contorting them around this MTX stuff. Fortnite doesn't offend me as it's entirely new. But it's sad what will become of Diablo.
 
H

hariseldon

Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, skins, gun skins, emotes, dances etc...

All things that don't impact the mechanics or balance of a game.

Also, let's not act like the "pay me up front, then I ditch you" model was healthy either. It just came with a different set of potential problems.

1. Skins, guns, emotes - it means that if you want to make money you have to have elements that will be able to sell skins, guns and emotes. That works against single-player experiences.
2. Mechanics are absolutely impacted. Jack up the time it takes to level up and make a boss require said levelling up, but if you spend 50 space points you can level up right away. No incentive to properly balance these things if you want people to pay to avoid the crap design.

You don't make $1.2bn from microtransactions accidentally. You hire experts who know how to extract money from people - those experts will determine the exact sweet spot where levelling up is just a little too slow but this transaction will get you over the hump, or this skin costs 60 space bucks but you can only buy in units of 50 so you have to buy 100 of them, and so on. If you think that microtransactions are not directly impacting game mechanics, that studios are not given targets to meet which incentivise building for microtransactions, then you are very naive. Hell, even when they don't, they feel cheap and detract from the experience (for instance my wife got increasingly fed up with Sims games trying to upsell constantly - it takes you out of the game and certainly for something more narratively-driven it would be a huge immersion-breaker).
 

Men_in_Boxes

Snake Oil Salesman
Can you give any examples of this being beneficial? I keep hearing this argument but I can't think of a case where it was a good thing.

What series improved because of practices like this?

Fortnite, Apex Legends, Warframe, League of Legends, Dota 2...

Destruction All Stars.

If you look at the top F2P games over the last 10 years, and compare them to the most successful traditionally priced games you'll see a pattern.

The F2P games are generally new IP that innovate in terms of gameplay mechanics.

The traditional games are long in the tooth franchise sequels who play it boringly safe in terms of design.
 

TheSHEEEP

Gold Member
You hire experts who know how to extract money from people
tenor.gif
 

TheContact

Member
how long until they become macro transactions?
with all of that money, you would think they could afford to treat their employees better,
or not completely fuck up WC3
 

borborygmus

Member
Fortnite, Apex Legends, Warframe, League of Legends, Dota 2...

Destruction All Stars.

If you look at the top F2P games over the last 10 years, and compare them to the most successful traditionally priced games you'll see a pattern.

The F2P games are generally new IP that innovate in terms of gameplay mechanics.

The traditional games are long in the tooth franchise sequels who play it boringly safe in terms of design.

We have very different standards for what's innovative. Dota 2 and LoL are reboots/sequels of very old games. Fortnite and Apex Legends are arguably what's wrong with gaming now (though I don't pretend this is an objective fact). I shouldn't have asked "What series improved" but rather "what net benefits to the ecosystem were gained by these practices?" Don't forget to consider opportunity cost. It's not quantifiable, of course, but I think we'd have had a better top 10 without these practices.
 

faraany3k

Banned
Season Passes are great. They are like trophy hunting or acheivements. They also open another form of progress after games become stale in few months.
 

Sub_Level

wants to fuck an Asian grill.
This is what happens when you discount your games to suck in a user base. How many people buy CoD on sale during the holidays? They take a cut on the disc sales for DLC and MTX. It’s the Walmart strategy.

CoD sells year round.


vS9HD6u.jpg


ipcDz3L.jpg


rXKiNwP.jpg


People bought it at launch, in the holidays, in spring, in summer, and still in september 1 year after it launched.
 
And this is exactly why game prices being raised next gen is totally justified.

Games just dont make money like they used to.....oh wait
 

Soulja

Member
If this is the reason we get free maps and expansions in games then I would like to thank the idiots that pay £15 for a skin.
 

AJUMP23

Gold Member
I assume a battle pass is considered a Microtransaction. I have bought 3 of those in COD this year. I don't really buy any skins or extra content I just get the battlepass. I am done after this season though there are other games I am more interested in.

Despite how vocal the crowd is that yells about hating microtransactions the wallets of the gamer speaks louder than ever.
 

manfestival

Member
I bought an anime truck skin for $15 and it was worth it. You haven't accomplished anything until you've killed someone with this:

sUgHL6J.jpg
My buddy has all of the "Notice Me" skins. You shoulda included a picture of the bed of the truck.

I know people complain about microtransactions and more so when egregious but for this game? I have dropped about $40 extra for battle pass and a few skins. No shame considering I have like 600-700 hours in it so far.
 

Trogdor1123

Member
I don't understand why people spend so much on this stuff. Some, sure, but the amounts are staggering.

My kids play Roblox and spend money on clothes for their avatars... Digital clothes! I don't get it at all
 

Men_in_Boxes

Snake Oil Salesman
We have very different standards for what's innovative. Dota 2 and LoL are reboots/sequels of very old games. Fortnite and Apex Legends are arguably what's wrong with gaming now (though I don't pretend this is an objective fact). I shouldn't have asked "What series improved" but rather "what net benefits to the ecosystem were gained by these practices?" Don't forget to consider opportunity cost. It's not quantifiable, of course, but I think we'd have had a better top 10 without these practices.

Benefits to the ecosystem are this...

They exist.

You might not like them, but there's no denying they serve social, competitive gamers exponentially more than any single player game has ever done. A market historically underserved.

As Sid Meier once said "A game is a series of interesting choices" and those four games are interesting choice generators for a massive population of gamers.

We can debate about their merits, but they're all fresh franchises that provide newer gameplay mechanics.

Without F2P, the industry would be dominated by Uncharted 9, Gears of War 7, Final Fantasy 18, Gran Turismo 7, Mario 22 etc...

I think most people can appreciate how boring franchises generally are.

F2P gives developers an opportunity to take riskier chances in terms of gameplay design, and that's why it's objectively the healthier model.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom