I understand that you are against this kind of microtransactions. But keep in mind that without such system games as CS: GO, Fortnite, and Overwatch, Valorant can never exist for more than a year or two because playerbase stops paying for the game at some point. I bought him after ‘Yeah, that’s right, but it wouldn’t help Valve/Riot if they wanted to keep the game for years afterwards with no income. Then you get Fifa and COD mode who release the game every year to generate annual revenue.
Subscribing is also an option, but gamers are vehemently against that, and that’s pretty clear.
It’s a huge mistake to expect multiplayer titles to get content, fixes, and balancing for years if the player base only pays at launch/purchase and then never recurs. These programmers and system administrators also need a salary.
CS:GO, for example, would have been shot a long time ago if no skins were sold because Valve would have gone bankrupt due to maintenance costs. They may have enough money through Steam, but even then, it doesn’t make sense to fix an old game every few months that no longer generates income.
Then people start screaming again, this game is dead and where is the developer. Um, the developer earns money to run his business.
But no, that’s fine, let’s move all that money into the old revenue model. Let’s increase the game’s selling price to over €150 because people expect us to provide updates, fixes, servers and content for free for 10 years. Oh no, now everyone’s still on fire…
As long as the game is clearly not pay-to-win, I don’t think there is anything wrong with microtransactions. I can now enjoy super pure eSports games for free/cheap that people who spend money on skins pay for. Valor as an example. Playing the game is effectively free if you don’t buy skins.
[Reactie gewijzigd door youridv1 op 1 november 2021 12:26]
“Professional web ninja. Certified gamer. Avid zombie geek. Hipster-friendly baconaholic.”