Avatar

YES

by Cody Miller @, Music of the Spheres - Never Forgot, Saturday, March 02, 2013, 21:46 (4043 days ago) @ thebruce

The problem is you're equating intentionally crippling with any and all forms of microtransactions. That is simply wrong.

In the rare case of a developer intentionally crippling a game and pushing the fix to microtransactions, then yes, I'd wager you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks that's a Good Idea.

Every instance of microtransaction use intentionally cripples the game.

1- Items only available through purchase. Intentionally crippled by not including them in the base game. Ask yourself if it would be better with everything available without having to purchase it. The answer is always yes. Intentionally crippled.

2- Items available through purchase and play. Players paying for items are paying not to play, and this means that aspects of the game are unpleasant enough to pay to avoid. Irrespective of player tastes, when a developer creates something under this type of micro transaction, they are admitting that a non trivial amount of players would want to or be tempted to avoid playing the respective part of the game. If they did not think this, it would be pointless to spend the time to implement the microtransaction. They know lots of players will find the part of the game unpleasant. They are counting on it because that is the only reason someone would pay to not play. Therefore, they are intentionally crippling the game.

I am both disappointed and angry when something that by its very nature ruins games is not only not criticized, but EMBRACED. Gaming stockholm syndrome. Dammit people.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread