This is 100% a fantastic thing. (Destiny)

by Harmanimus , Monday, October 05, 2015, 23:12 (3432 days ago) @ someotherguy

It's about greed over art, and shitty anti-consumer business practices.

I don't see this. I really, really don't. Providing a service that many, many people have requested (purchasable emotes, emblems, shaders, and ships have all been things I've seen community requests for since Day 0) and keeping it at a reasonable individual cost (i.e., the general purpose of micro-transactions) is pretty far from exploitative. Especially when the valuation by consumers is so anti-business/provider that you're more prone to see someone complain that it costs a whole two dollars for an emote, as they go spent four on coffee and consider that price fair.

I would suggest that micro-transactions are more pro-consumer business than anything in these sorts of contexts. If it improves the maintenance and provides free services/additions to the community on individual choice purchases that have only a cosmetic bearing on the game, then you cannot claim it being anti-consumer. If the consumer wants something, they will decide if it is worth it for them to pay the requested amount for it or not, and they will make the necessary decision of any consumer.

Micro-transactions that influence the game negatively for the community could be considered anti-consumer, but cosmetic items are not that. Neither would things that expedite processes for individual players who have more money than they have time. The ability to automatically level your gear or automatically level your character is not something that negatively impacts the community. In fact, it impacts no one but the player using those expedites.

In contrast, some players will continue to value their money over their time, and that is their choice, and they are not attacked by the developer providing an alternative for making this decision.

Argue slippery slopes all you want, but if the game suffers for micro-transactions, then micro-transactions likely won't survive. If the community benefits from them instead, then I consider complaints limited on a scale of merit. But you don't harm a consumer by providing them additional choices, benefits, or expanded services that they (in the royal they) have been asking for.