I'm thinking justified/unjustified feeling comes from the type of game it is and how much we like it. I mean no duh to the last part, so I'll elaborate on the first part:

Seems to me multiplayer games get a relative amount of grace (Overwatch, CoH2, Destiny) even if we don't agree with the micro transactions (see: Avateur's comments). Perhaps we instinctively understand supporting these games costs money, and we feel ever more grace about it when tons of stuff comes out for free (Overwatch or hell, Mass Effect 3's MP). A lot of it for me personally is "hey thanks for keeping this cool and fresh have some cash yo." It's basically tipping for good service.

Pivoting back to Deus Ex, it's a single player game where the micro transactions actively detract from the experience. In my opinion, the devs basically admitted this. It grinds my gears because a truly excellent single player game is something to behold. Half-Life. Homeworld. Civ. Wolf: The New Order, Dishonored. Pay real money to break the structure?

To quote a Scot I fancy very much, "FUCKIN... BOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!"

I respect this view and the rationale behind it. I'd bet good money there are people at Eidos Montreal who share this viewpoint and argued strongly against having these sorts of microtransactions, or maybe it was even worse, and this was the last stop compromise implemented to avoid something truly egregious. Sometimes the people who care about the right things just have to do what they can to eliminate any real damage. (I think there are people doing this at Bungie, too.)

Yeah, to quote another great game with a bit tongue in cheek (Bioshock), "It's better to be a hypocrite than an unemployed one."

I don't like these particular microstransactions because it does seem like they could interfere with players having the ideal experience, but if they enable players to only finish the game faster, then I don't know how much I'm willing to complain. The one thing I don't want to do is punish the studio who I think have done a good job reviving the series.

After all this, I'll probably get the game once it goes on sale. This was good conversation by the way, thanks all.

I'm thinking justified/unjustified feeling comes from the type of game it is and how much we like it. I mean no duh to the last part, so I'll elaborate on the first part:

Seems to me multiplayer games get a relative amount of grace (Overwatch, CoH2, Destiny) even if we don't agree with the micro transactions (see: Avateur's comments). Perhaps we instinctively understand supporting these games costs money, and we feel ever more grace about it when tons of stuff comes out for free (Overwatch or hell, Mass Effect 3's MP). A lot of it for me personally is "hey thanks for keeping this cool and fresh have some cash yo." It's basically tipping for good service.

Pivoting back to Deus Ex, it's a single player game where the micro transactions actively detract from the experience. In my opinion, the devs basically admitted this. It grinds my gears because a truly excellent single player game is something to behold. Half-Life. Homeworld. Civ. Wolf: The New Order, Dishonored. Pay real money to break the structure?

To quote a Scot I fancy very much, "FUCKIN... BOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!"

I respect this view and the rationale behind it. I'd bet good money there are people at Eidos Montreal who share this viewpoint and argued strongly against having these sorts of microtransactions, or maybe it was even worse, and this was the last stop compromise implemented to avoid something truly egregious. Sometimes the people who care about the right things just have to do what they can to eliminate any real damage. (I think there are people doing this at Bungie, too.)

I don't like these particular microstransactions because it does seem like they could interfere with players having the ideal experience, but if they enable players to only finish the game faster, then I don't know how much I'm willing to complain. The one thing I don't want to do is punish the studio who I think have done a good job reviving the series.

And Mass Effect 3 is one of the rarest of unicorns in which I would argue microtransactions are done so stupidly well that it defies belief that the majority of companies can't figure it out. But ME3 is also a very special game.

Seems to me multiplayer games get a relative amount of grace (Overwatch, CoH2, Destiny) even if we don't agree with the micro transactions (see: Avateur's comments). Perhaps we instinctively understand supporting these games costs money, and we feel ever more grace about it when tons of stuff comes out for free (Overwatch or hell, Mass Effect 3's MP). A lot of it for me personally is "hey thanks for keeping this cool and fresh have some cash yo." It's basically tipping for good service.

Pivoting back to Deus Ex, it's a single player game where the micro transactions actively detract from the experience. In my opinion, the devs basically admitted this. It grinds my gears because a truly excellent single player game is something to behold. Half-Life. Homeworld. Civ. Wolf: The New Order, Dishonored. Pay real money to break the structure?

To quote a Scot I fancy very much, "FUCKIN... BOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!"

Maybe with COH2 it's like a small subscription fee I can pay when I feel like? I am in it mostly for the online modes, and it's nice to give them money once in a while for what I feel is a great product.

DX:MD just... doesn't justify its micros at first past. I dunno.

I dunno either. I don't know where greed ends and survival kicks in. Seems like there are more big games that cost more than ever to make, and I don't know what the market will bear. I know Halo's longevity lessened under Bungie's oversight. A few years ago there seemed to be quite a bit of debate over what was sustainable. Where creativity and commerce meet is often messy and less than ideal from either perspective (investors want profits on a schedule, and creatives want flexibility). I certainly don't have the answer.

I think you both may be on to something on the feeling of "justified" microtransactions when a game first launches. I feel like the "subscription fee" argument is how a lot of people look at microtransactions if it's a game they really enjoy. I really enjoy Destiny, but I'll never give Bungie a penny of microtransaction money. At the same time, I have friends who do and have described it to me like paying a fee since there isn't a monthly sub fee like with some other MMOs from back in the day (or current). I can't get behind that idea personally, but I understand the mentality. It's whatever to me.

I also really love Overwatch. It has microtransactions that I don't necessarily agree with due to the gambling nature of it all, which is also what I'm completely against in Destiny. All the same, I can play Overwatch all day long and not care about what my loot boxes give me. I know Blizzard is making a profit on this game and would be even without the microtransactions. All future updates are free, and patches come quite often. I'm pleased, even if their microtransaction model blows.

And as for Halo, Bungie clocked out I think somewhere during or after Halo 3. They were contractually obligated to make ODST and Reach, which I feel now were Destiny test-mechanic games. Doesn't mean they didn't make them with love or care, but I don't think future success and sustainability was necessarily a major concern. I could be totally wrong on that, but I'm just going on personal observation (especially with how Bungie seemed to cut out competitive play so hard after 3). I'm not sure where greed/survival apply to the Halo/Bungie argument.

A crash. Yes. Frankly, I'd place most of the blame on the publishers rather than the actual developers. That definitely does not excuse all developers, though. I'd like to believe that the video game industry would come out better after the fact. Some AAA devs will make it through, I'm sure.

I've been calling for one since pre-Destiny. The AAA market is so bogged down by bloat, short-sightedness, design-by-committee, publishers who don't care about the product etc. etc.

Course, with the indie scene looking like it is I doubt we'll see an ET-level crash so much as a shift in emphasis. I could certainly live in a world of Devolver Digitals and self-publishers rather than Ubisofts and Warner Brothers.

Sadly, the problem with publishers not caring about the quality of the product is really a problem with shareholders only caring about next quarter's profits rather than the long term growth of the company they bought into. Our free market has created a situation where the most profitable way to buy stocks is to buy short term, generate a shitload of hype, sell at the peak, and let the company crash, then buy up the pieces low, wait for stability, and sell them off at a huge profit to the next company you plan on destroying.

Bam. This, right here.

Regarding the display of purity Kermit mentioned (<3 that phrasing) I have two thoughts: this specific instance pushed a button I didn't realize was there. I'm also possibly the biggest Company of Heroes 2 fan here and THAT sucker is BLOATED with micro transactions.

So hey.

Maybe with COH2 it's like a small subscription fee I can pay when I feel like? I am in it mostly for the online modes, and it's nice to give them money once in a while for what I feel is a great product.

DX:MD just... doesn't justify its micros at first past. I dunno.

I dunno either. I don't know where greed ends and survival kicks in. Seems like there are more big games that cost more than ever to make, and I don't know what the market will bear. I know Halo's longevity lessened under Bungie's oversight. A few years ago there seemed to be quite a bit of debate over what was sustainable. Where creativity and commerce meet is often messy and less than ideal from either perspective (investors want profits on a schedule, and creatives want flexibility). I certainly don't have the answer.

I've been calling for one since pre-Destiny. The AAA market is so bogged down by bloat, short-sightedness, design-by-committee, publishers who don't care about the product etc. etc.

Course, with the indie scene looking like it is I doubt we'll see an ET-level crash so much as a shift in emphasis. I could certainly live in a world of Devolver Digitals and self-publishers rather than Ubisofts and Warner Brothers.

Sadly, the problem with publishers not caring about the quality of the product is really a problem with shareholders only caring about next quarter's profits rather than the long term growth of the company they bought into. Our free market has created a situation where the most profitable way to buy stocks is to buy short term, generate a shitload of hype, sell at the peak, and let the company crash, then buy up the pieces low, wait for stability, and sell them off at a huge profit to the next company you plan on destroying.

Bam. This, right here.

Regarding the display of purity Kermit mentioned (<3 that phrasing) I have two thoughts: this specific instance pushed a button I didn't realize was there. I'm also possibly the biggest Company of Heroes 2 fan here and THAT sucker is BLOATED with micro transactions.

So hey.

Maybe with COH2 it's like a small subscription fee I can pay when I feel like? I am in it mostly for the online modes, and it's nice to give them money once in a while for what I feel is a great product.

DX:MD just... doesn't justify its micros at first past. I dunno.

I've been calling for one since pre-Destiny. The AAA market is so bogged down by bloat, short-sightedness, design-by-committee, publishers who don't care about the product etc. etc.

Course, with the indie scene looking like it is I doubt we'll see an ET-level crash so much as a shift in emphasis. I could certainly live in a world of Devolver Digitals and self-publishers rather than Ubisofts and Warner Brothers.

Sadly, the problem with publishers not caring about the quality of the product is really a problem with shareholders only caring about next quarter's profits rather than the long term growth of the company they bought into. Our free market has created a situation where the most profitable way to buy stocks is to buy short term, generate a shitload of hype, sell at the peak, and let the company crash, then buy up the pieces low, wait for stability, and sell them off at a huge profit to the next company you plan on destroying.

Remember the huge video game crash of whenever-ET-the-game-released? I wonder if anything similar will happen in the AAA scene in the near future...

I know your not saying it did, but it wasn't the sole cause. I just have this urge to point this out when this topic comes up. It was the one-two punch of the failure of this game plus the market being absolutely flooded with crap games by 3rd publishers who couldn't financially handle returns of unsold stock from retailers. This ended up driving prices down and giving retailers a bad taste in their mouth in regards to video games.

I remember being pretty stoked that games were now cheap enough that *I* could buy them as a 6-7 yo, or if I were short on funds convince my mom to. Little did I know that it would lead to a couple years of video game famine.

So you can pay real money to power yourself up in Mankind Divided.

I'm done. Not buying it. It's a shame. I can probably just proclaim now that no RPG will ever surpass the original, even though we definitely have the tools and talent out there to do it. But people are more interested in bullshit.

Dammit.

Well, that's too bad. As I know you're a long-time Deux Ex fan like me, I was looking forward to hearing what you thought of the new one.

I was looking forward to it as well, since I have heard it's very good. Perhaps I can someday when a version is available later on with all DLC included and micro transactions removed, like an ultimate edition or something similar.

Glad to hear there's a chance you'll play it.

I understand, though. As a gaming fundamentalist, you can't abide players having an option that you don't approve of.

Not when that option makes the game worse.

When I know that's true, I'll complain, too.