Comments on: Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare’s Post Release Microtransactions Are Asking For Customer Disappointment

By: MGb

MGb — Wed, 05 Mar 2014 15:28:47 +0000

Clever move by EA after the DK backlash.
I suppose it’s fine as long as they give you the chance for a refund whenever they mess around with the game post-release 😛

By: k

Thu, 27 Feb 2014 03:58:32 +0000

In reply to Phlum.

“The solution is to not buy games unless they were made before 2004”
That resulted in a vocal and hearty gallows laugh because it’s exactly the way I feel these days.
Not cynicism per se, just pragmatism. I’m very much leaning towards out as a consumer unless GOTY/steam sale.

By: Sky Black

Sky Black — Wed, 26 Feb 2014 03:55:04 +0000

Really liked this article, I think reviewers should absolutely mention the possibility of the game having micro transactions added at a later date.

Games remind me more of films these days. Even minor alterations to films like Star Wars or Blade Runner change the consumer’s experience, as does adding micro-transactions to a game post-launch…especially if they are ‘pay to win’.

Glad you’re writing more articles on Savy Gamer, look forward to more!

By: Hobbes

Hobbes — Wed, 26 Feb 2014 03:24:32 +0000

It’s EA.

The default assumption goes as follows : If they can fit micro-transactions in. They will. If micro-transactions are successfully wedged in, they will be placed into the game in such a way that they are of maximum detriment to the customer experience (see Dungeon Keeper Ios for the current example).

EA do not care for the quality of the customer experience, EA care only for how much money they can wring out of their buyers before the end of the quarter to ensure their stock doesn’t tank. How long that strategy will continue working for is anyone’s guess. But with one golden goose already firmly slain (Simcity) and another quite badly brand tainted (Battlefield), they’re fast running out of good income streams.

By: Lewie Procter

Lewie Procter — Wed, 26 Feb 2014 00:18:09 +0000

In reply to Ninja Foodstuff. I'm not suggesting reviewers guess what might/could happen in the future into their reviews, unless they have a functioning crystal ball, but including relevant information that is available to them in a review would be a good bare minimum. Something like "EA are planning to update this game to include at some point in the future to include microtransactions. No details of how they will be implemented are available now, but we will have an update for when they are added down the line" would satisfy me.

By: Ninja Foodstuff

Ninja Foodstuff — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 23:29:02 +0000

Sorry Lewie but I don’t agree. Reviews should be for how the game is at the time it’s reviewed, not based on what might happen. Otherwise reviews have to account for the possibility that any issues might be addressed in the future too.

By: Phlum

Phlum — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 21:41:25 +0000

The solution is to not buy games unless they were made before 2004 😛 it’s all getting a bit ridiculous, this microtransaction/IAP nonsense.
The way I see it, if you’re paying for a game upfront (no matter how much) then there should be zero IAPs. You’ve bought the game, you should get the complete thing.*
On the other hand, if a game is free-to-play, then that’s a situation where IAPs are acceptable, because it’s a method of gaining revenue. A good free-to-play model would be something like Blacklight – everything is useful in some fashion, but (in the case of guns) one receiver may not have a feature that another does, so it’s all about finding what you like playing with, rather than getting something inherently “better”.

*This gets complicated by DLC and things like that. Should we be paying for DLC if we’ve paid full-price for the game in the first place?

By: DY357LX

DY357LX — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 21:35:09 +0000

Sadly, I don’t think we (the gamers, the buyers) can “win” anymore.

The best solution (in my opinion) is to wait for a “Game of the Year” or “Complete” edition.

PRO’S: All the DLC is bundled in at a good (usually) price.
CON’S: You have to wait 12-18 months for these versions to appear… if they do. Not a lot of people can do that.

Failing that, you’ll have to wait for a Steam sale or the like.

The other problem comes down to casual gamers.
They don’t know much better and will happily spend £50+ on recycled crap like the latest CoD or FIFA game. Every year they moan that last year’s version was better but they still throw down their cash on day 1.
They’re also more willing to repeatedly throw down £1.99+ on micro-transactions for the junk in titles like CandyCrush, Dungeon Keeper or Plants Versus Zombies 2. (Which all throw artificial wait times at you unless you get your wallet out.)
They don’t realize that, if NO-ONE succumbed to in-app purchases, we’d all win! The devs provide a fuller/more complete game (maybe charging £1.99 instead of free) and we’d be more willing to recommend said game to friends, generating more cash for the devs.

I miss the days of expansion packs and developers who gave us level editors and modding tools.

By: Andy Bumpkin

Andy Bumpkin — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 21:33:59 +0000

In terms of reviews for games that add micro transactions later, I think readers should be notified and the review altered ( in some cases rewritten depending on the magnitude of the change) to reflect the new state of the game. In fact I believe some sites will be operating like this ongoing now?

As for the actual game I guess it really depends on how they get implemented and *when* is also a factor. TF2 did this well, Battleforge did not (IMO).

By: Lewie Procter

Lewie Procter — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 21:19:05 +0000

In reply to Dean. A worthwhile point, although there seems to me to be a difference between a patch intended to improve the game and a patch intended to maximise revenue. A paying customer disliking the former is a matter of opinion, whereas a paying customer disliking the latter is a result of different priorities.

By: Nicholas Lovell

Nicholas Lovell — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 21:09:30 +0000

I think that there is a decent chance that you will have to start assuming games will have microtransactions unless the publisher or developer give a cast iron guarantee that there won’t be.

And even then, I’m not sure I’d believe them.

By: Dean

Dean — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 21:03:24 +0000

Assuming that we accept that micro transactions can be implemented in a good way, doesn’t this boil down to a fear that the game could be patched into something worse than it is on release, which is a concern for any game these days, multiplayer ones especially.