• Pyr@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        I don’t even mind microtransactions, but microtransactions DO NOT EXIST

        $10 for a skin is not a MICRO transactions, that’s just a transaction.

        The entire game costs $60 but ONE skin out of the thirty that already available or whatever is somehow $10? Why do people pay that? Why would they ever bother making a new game when they can design 6 new skins instead?

  • CallateCoyote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’ve never once paid a microtransaction for anything… fairly priced DLC that adds valuable playable content to the game, of course, but the fact that horse armor took off is pretty baffling to me.

    • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      I’ve done it a handful of times myself. Like after three years of playing DRG, I bought a cosmetic pack at a discount.

      I don’t mind supporting a developer if they continue to support their game long term and are reasonable.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        DRG is a different thing. They just keep developing new content without charging money and support it by optional cosmetics.

  • Penguinz@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Not sure entirely how to feel about this. It incentives genuinely worse experiences, but it also means that as someone who never pays for any micro transaction, my gaming can be subsidized by those who do. That said, it’s also one of the reasons that I’ve moved away from most games where micro transactions are a major element, and the skins in games like CoD are pretty obnoxious

  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 days ago

    Industry that went all in on microtransactions at the expense of game quantity/quality sees increased profits from microtransactions

  • Tinkerer@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 days ago

    Exactly why every game now is online required and is half passed/half finished.

  • ch00f@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    3 days ago

    I want to see the breakdown of spending per user.

    In the mobile games space, like 90% of some games’ revenue comes from a handful of people who drop tens of thousands of dollars.

  • a1studmuffin@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 days ago

    But is the overall market growing? What I’d love to know is if less people are playing non-MTX games now than before, or if we’re just getting more people staying to play games and they happen to be drawn to MTX games, ie. a broader target market, in the same way we saw mobile gaming explode with people who never played games before.

  • Infynis@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    Per to the report, three games led the way for the growth of microtransaction revenue: Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, Roblox, and Fortnite.

    The 58%, or $24.4 billion, represented a slight 1.4% year-over-year (YoY) growth in that area.

    So, nothing new. Fortnite continues to make bank. Not a surprise.

    I’d be interested to see what kinds of other games the people making the majority of these purchases play

  • SuiXi3D@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    NGL, I spent more on Destiny 2 crap I’ll never use than actual new games, and I’m depressed by this fact.