Current Events > Jim Sterling now whining about Sea of Thieves microtransactions

(+) Yeah! (+)

I know about that. I want to know how what percentage of the user base is taking part in it
---

untrustful posted...

It's funny because he doesn't harp on the issue of cosmetic monetization for Warframe, but he does for sea of thieves.

To be fair in that case that game is F2P so that does match his logic.

Here he is praising Monster Hunter World for doing the exact same thing as Sea of Thieves though

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7fJTSZ1vog
---

Darmik posted...

That's lootboxes. Sea of Thieves doesn't have lootboxes.

And shifting to their next cow isn't a crash lol. It's adapting to the market demands.

Shifting to a new cash cow in response to sudden consumer backlash. Use whatever terminology you like if "bubble" upsets you.

Darmik posted...

And I didn't buy or play any of those games

Well that's great. But it's an industry norm.

Darmik posted...

Why? Because you personally don't like it?

How many games do you even buy these days if you're this extreme about it? At this rate you'd need to be opposed to any paid content released for a $60 game.

Because "we aren't fully monetizing the game for a few months" isn't a defense for charging 60 dollars for a free to play game

Darmik posted...

Claiming that Sea of Thieves is a free to play game because it has cosmetic DLC is ridiculous dude. You'd probably piss your pants if you saw how mobile users monetize their userbase.

It's a free to play game because it's forcing players to pay money to skip a massive grind. It's certianly not designed that because it's the way players want to unlock items

Darmik posted...

What continuous fees? Why would you personally need to continuously buy cosmetics to access content?

You don't need to pay for new content just like you don't need to play the game in the first place. But saying that forcing a free to play business model on top of a $60 game is justified because it adds content becomes a non-argument if you're stipulating the content isn't worth paying for in the first place.

Darmik posted...

What bullshit?

Am I really expected to give a shit that I don't get to have a cat on my pirate ship for free when it's added to the game months after launch? Does that seriously bother you down to your core?

You should give a shit about the content they're adding if you're saying they are justified in charging for it. If not then yes, I agree with your earlier point, charging $30 for a chintzy pets expansion is the opposite of pro-consumer
---

Frolex posted...

It's a free to play game because it's forcing players to pay money to skip a massive grind. It's certianly not designed that because it's the way players want to unlock items

What massive grind are you talking about? Where has this been said? I don't think you get any pets if you don't pay for them.

Frolex posted...

You should give a s*** about the content they're adding if you're saying they are justified in charging for it. If not then yes, I agree with your earlier point, charging $30 for a chintzy pets expansion is the opposite of pro-consumer

I am giving a shit about that.

Rare are saying that they're going to constantly add new worlds, quests, whatever and only charge for cosmetics and fluff like pets and potions that make you look old.

I would only pay for worlds and quests. That's what I used to pay for. That's the only DLC I still pay for. If I get that stuff for free because people want to shoot their pet cat out of a cannon that works out better for me.

It's funny because as much as people whine about this stuff I have never spent less on video games when it comes to hours played. I remember when I was expected to pay $20 for a bunch of multiplayer map packs only 20% of the userbase would even play.
---

Darmik posted...

What massive grind are you talking about? Where has this been said? I don't think you get any pets if you don't pay for them.

I'm just going off their claim that you would have buy a specific item to get what you want rather than in their words playing for "60,000 hours".

Darmik posted...

I am giving a shit about that.

Rare are saying that they're going to constantly add new worlds, quests, whatever and only charge for cosmetics and fluff like pets and potions that make you look old.

I would only pay for worlds and quests. That's what I used to pay for. That's the only DLC I still pay for.

It's funny because as much as people whine about this stuff I have never spent less on video games when it comes to hours played. I remember when I was expected to pay $20 for a bunch of multiplayer map packs only 20% of the userbase would even play.

And ultimately, everyone whos playing is going to be locked out of those parts of the game's experience if they aren't paying on top of the entry price. Even at best, it would mean they're charging for content they know isn't actually worth buying
---

Frolex posted...

I'm just going off their claim that you would have buy a specific item to get what you want rather than in their words playing for "60,000 hours".

Pretty sure he's referring to taking your chances with lootboxes.

Frolex posted...

And ultimately, everyone whos playing is going to be locked out of those parts of the game's experience if they aren't paying on top of the entry price. Even at best, it would mean they're charging for content they know isn't actually worth buying

No. It means they're charging for content that doesn't shift the scales unfairly or ruin the experience for people who don't want to pay.

If people want some cute cat on their ship I'm sure they'll find value in it.
---

Darmik posted...

Pretty sure he's referring to taking your chances with lootboxes.

There will be a chance to acquire some of this stuff in the game, by rewards and chance, but if you want to guarantee a specific pet then you have to buy.

seems like he's being pretty specific to this game in the interview

Darmik posted...

No. It means they're charging for content that doesn't shift the scales unfairly or ruin the experience for people who don't want to pay.

If people want some cute cat on their ship I'm sure they'll find value in it.

Things that don't "shift the scale" in terms of stats or w/e are still part of the game experience. It's why the "just cosmetic" excuse is bullshit. Things like having a soundtrack or a character creator are "just cosmetic" but they're still a part of the player experience.
---

untrustful posted...

It's funny because he doesn't harp on the issue of cosmetic monetization for Warframe, but he does for sea of thieves.

uhhh...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vyy5PulC2RM
---

rabbi_baby posted...

uhhh...

In that video he complains that people are unable to buy the particular cosmetic items in the packs. That you use up 80% of a purchase on items you already have.

It's a little different from the position that cosmetic items/microtransactions don't belong in games at all.

He's emphasized in the past that the "it's just cosmetic" argument is particularly failed in multiplayer games, as fashion plays a role in one's enjoyment of a game.
---

Frolex posted...

seems like he's being pretty specific to this game in the interview

I'm referring to the hours comment. You don't need to spend hours constantly opening lootboxes to get what you want because you can just buy it.

That would apply to both microtransactions and buying with in-game currency.

Frolex posted...

Things that don't "shift the scale" in terms of stats or w/e are still part of the game experience. It's why the "just cosmetic" excuse is bulls***. Things like having a soundtrack or a character creator are "just cosmetic" but they're still a part of the player experience.

Neither of those things are locked behind DLC.

I don't see how a pet animal released months after launch is as central as a character creator or soundtrack. it's a cute bonus at best. Something that probably is worth 5 bucks or whatever if you wanted to pay for it. It's not something they've marketed the game with either. It's marketed as their first paid DLC.
---

Jim Sterling now whining

So what else is new?

Darmik posted...

I'm referring to the hours comment. You don't need to spend hours constantly opening lootboxes to get what you want because you can just buy it.

That would apply to both microtransactions and buying with in-game currency.

He made reference to the game in that part of the quote, too. He's using hyperbole when comparing it to other games, but ulitmately the takeaway is that the only realistic way to get the item you want is by buying it.

Darmik posted...

Neither of those things are locked behind DLC.

I don't see how a pet animal released months after launch is as central as a character creator or soundtrack. it's a cute bonus at best. Something that probably is worth 5 bucks or whatever if you wanted to pay for it. It's not something they've marketed the game with either. It's marketed as their first paid DLC.

And they're all part of the game, and they all have an impact on the player experience, especially in a multiplayer game where socializing with other players is meant to be an import part of the gameplay.
---

Frolex posted...

And they're all part of the game, and they all have an impact on the player experience, especially in a multiplayer game where socializing with other players is meant to be an import part of the gameplay.

But it has significantly less of an impact than paid expansion packs. Which is how games used to be funded after launch.
---

Darmik posted...

But it has significantly less of an impact than paid expansion packs. Which is how games used to be funded after launch.

And also offers significantly less value to the consumer as a product, and usually at a higher price.
---

Frolex posted...

Darmik posted...

But it has significantly less of an impact than paid expansion packs. Which is how games used to be funded after launch.

And also offers significantly less value to the consumer as a product, and usually at a higher price.

Why? You can choose what you want to buy.

In the old system you'd need to spend a chunk to get all of the pets, all of the new islands, all of the new clothes and if you didn't buy it you would experience none of it at all. They'd likely need to split the userbase and the worlds.

In this one you can spend money to get things you specifically want. If you want just a monkey and not the cat go for it. But because islands and quests are free you aren't split from your friends if you don't want to pay for anything.

Do you seriously think the first system is automatically better solely because of microtransactions? Imagine sailing with your friends to a new island and suddenly half your crew disappear because they didn't buy the new expansion.

And if you hated DLC that much you could simply play it for the first three month where there isn't any.
---

Darmik posted...

untrustful posted...

It's funny because he doesn't harp on the issue of cosmetic monetization for Warframe, but he does for sea of thieves.

To be fair in that case that game is F2P so that does match his logic.

Here he is praising Monster Hunter World for doing the exact same thing as Sea of Thieves though

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7fJTSZ1vog

Monster Hunter World has no microtransactions, you worthless corporate mouthpiece
---

ZombiePelican posted...

Monster Hunter World has no microtransactions, you worthless corporate mouthpiece

I would have done an account bet over it but we all know how that would go.
---

Darmik posted...

ZombiePelican posted...

Monster Hunter World has no microtransactions, you worthless corporate mouthpiece

I would have done an account bet over it but we all know how that would go.

DLC =/= Microtransactions

This is reaching pretty hard
---

Darmik posted...

Why? You can choose what you want to buy.

In the old system you'd need to spend a chunk to get all of the pets, all of the new islands, all of the new clothes and if you didn't buy it you would experience none of it at all. They'd likely need to split the userbase and the worlds.

In this one you can spend money to get things you specifically want. If you want just a monkey and not the cat go for it. But because islands and quests are free you aren't split from your friends if you don't want to pay for anything.

Do you seriously think the first system is automatically better solely because of microtransactions? Imagine sailing with your friends to a new island and suddenly half your crew disappear because they didn't buy the new expansion.

And if you hated DLC that much you could simply play it for the first three month where there isn't any.

You can choose what you want to buy paying an exorbitant mark up and buying a la carte. Character and ship customization are touted to be a huge portion of the game and your interaction. If I were the kind of person who were interested in shutting myself off from a major gameplay feature, maybe the value proposition of microtransactions would be a minor improvement over more robust content updates. But as a whole, just throwing microtransactions into the old $60 model isn't actually giving players more milage out of their money.
---

ZombiePelican posted...

DLC =/= Microtransactions

This is reaching pretty hard

How is $2 gesture DLC not a microtransaction.

Frolex posted...

You can choose what you want to buy paying an exorbitant mark up and buying a la carte. Character and ship customization are touted to be a huge portion of the game and your interaction. If I were the kind of person who were interested in shutting myself off from a major gameplay feature, maybe the value proposition of microtransactions would be a minor improvement over more robust content updates. But as a whole, just throwing microtransactions into the old $60 model isn't actually giving players more milage out of their money.

They've said that fancy gear is still attainable in-game. They're not gonna have 3 months of jack shit.
---

What these conversations always come down to is a group of entitled brats saying "I don't find enough value to pay for something, but I want it, so I should be given it for free."
---

Darmik posted...

They've said that fancy gear is still attainable in-game. They're not gonna have 3 months of jack shit.

And they've been open about the fact that you're not realistically going to get what you actually want unless you pay for it. Locking content behind the choice of extreme grinding or a paywall isn't actual "player choice"
---

Darmik posted...

How is $2 gesture DLC not a microtransaction.

Because DLC and microtransactions are two different things and you know this and are restoring to mental gymnastics when cornered, just because the price of the DLC is small that doesn't make it a microtransaction especially considering they can't be earned through grinding or paying for them with premium currency that Sea of Thieves WILL have
---

Frolex posted...

Darmik posted...

They've said that fancy gear is still attainable in-game. They're not gonna have 3 months of jack shit.

And they've been open about the fact that you're not realistically going to get what you actually want unless you pay for it. Locking content behind the choice of extreme grinding or a paywall isn't actual "player choice"

Then I'm not sure how you've handled any sort of dlc in the last 15 years.
---

ZombiePelican posted...

Darmik posted...

How is $2 gesture DLC not a microtransaction.

Because DLC and microtransactions are two different things and you know this and are restoring to mental gymnastics when cornered, just because the price of the DLC is small that doesn't make it a microtransaction especially considering they can't be earned through grinding or paying for them with premium currency that Sea of Thieves WILL have

A microtransaction... Is a microtransaction. That's it.

Explain why Monster Hunter World is good and Sea of Thieves is bad. From what I can tell they both offer cosmetic DLC for purchase. The biggest difference is Sea Of Thieves isn't doing it until the first content update.
---

Darmik posted...

Then I'm not sure how you've handled any sort of dlc in the last 15 years.

I haven't had a problem in cases where the publisher was charging a reasonable price for well-crafted content. But a lot of the bullshit associated with it (on-disk dlc, horse armor memes etc.) has just been carried through and then some in the more recent monetization trends. I'll be more than happy to give credit to free to play games that handle their microtransactions fairly and potentially provide players a more flexible value proposition compared to $60 games.
---

Darmik posted...

A microtransaction... Is a microtransaction. That's it.

Do your arms ever get tired from reaching so hard?

No, a microtransaction is an industry term for a small purchase to bypass grind

Darmik posted...

Explain why Monster Hunter World is good and Sea of Thieves is bad

One was actually designed to be a fun game and not a "live service" cynically designed to suck as much cash out of my wallet as posisble.

There's a finite amount I can spend on MHW's DLC and there's literally no limit to how much I can spend on Sea of Thieves' microtransactions
---

ZombiePelican posted...

No, a microtransaction is an industry term for a small purchase to bypass grind

Microtransaction (sometimes abbreviated as MTX) is a business model where users can purchase virtual goods via micropayments.

ZombiePelican posted...

One was actually designed to be a fun game and not a "live service" cynically designed to suck as much cash out of my wallet as posisble.

There's a finite amount I can spend on MHW's DLC and there's literally no limit to how much I can spend on Sea of Thieves' microtransactions

Where's your source?
---

Darmik posted...

Microtransaction (sometimes abbreviated as MTX) is a business model where users can purchase virtual goods via micropayments.

Again, the point of microtransactions is there's no upper limit to what you can spend,but there is a finite amount that can be spent on DLC because It's not a reoccurring charge like a microtransaction

Just letting you know doubling down when you're losing is a terrible strategy

Darmik posted...

Where's your source?

Are you really asking for a source to confirm there will be no upper limit to how much I can spend on Sea of Thieves' microtransactions? Am I being baited?

Again, resorting to desperate mental gymnastics doesn't automatically make your right
---

TheCurseX2 posted...

Jeff AKA Snoopy posted...

Of course whales exist. The free market is never truly free. Those with more money will spend more to support something they want to support.

Just because people have a bunch of money doesn't mean they will just whilly nilly support ANYTHING.

Some people really like Overwatch, and because they LIKE IT, they will spend a bunch of money buying loot boxes. They don't do it just because they have a lot of money, they have a lot of money and want to support Overwatch.

Yeah, show your support for that indie studio Blizzard.

Fuckin' agents of decline everywhere.

Is this ZombiePelican's alt? If not, you could start a club called "The Elitist Saviors Of Gaming". You could constantly tell each other how to spend your time and money and let others enjoy their hobby the way they see fit.
---

Whoooa, what are the odds of all the billions of people on Earth that use the niche confines of the Internet that two people would hold similar ideals about shitty business practices?

Unfathomable.
---

"It's only cosmetic" is how the Eververse in Destiny started.
---

TheCurseX2 posted...

He's right.

I always said that casuals will slaughter the gaming industry and year by year I'm proven right.

They don't even make games anymore, not games like you're used to anyways. They make 'hooks' and hope to catch as many as possible. More care goes into the UI for an in-game shop than it does to compelling narratives, gameplay, and so on. Low effort dogshit.

this guy gets it

also lol @ the people saying "it's just cosmetic", all you are doing is lowering and lowering the standards for what you expect from a commercial product
---

Microtransactions don't belong in a $60 game.

Cosmetics and stuff should be unlocked or found in the base game.
---

When a game is so reliant on microtransactions that it becomes barely indistinguishable from a mobile game (like Battlefront 2), then the game shouldn't cost $60. It's literally developers trying to have their cake and eat it too.
---

fusespliff posted...

Is this ZombiePelican's alt? If not, you could start a club called "The Elitist Saviors Of Gaming". You could constantly tell each other how to spend your time and money and let others enjoy their hobby the way they see fit.

So you're telling me you actively take enjoyment in being fleeced?

You marketers need to step up your game, this is weak
---

ZombiePelican posted...

fusespliff posted...

Is this ZombiePelican's alt? If not, you could start a club called "The Elitist Saviors Of Gaming". You could constantly tell each other how to spend your time and money and let others enjoy their hobby the way they see fit.

So you're telling me you actively take enjoyment in being fleeced?

You marketers need to step up your game, this is weak

Nah, no one likes to play games with a sore loser. Wouldn't want you to welch or anything.

TheCurseX2 posted...

Whoooa, what are the odds of all the billions of people on Earth that use the niche confines of the Internet that two people would hold similar ideals about shitty business practices?

Unfathomable.

It's not the fact that you hold similar ideals. I happen to share those as well. It's the elitist, douchey way that you both put forth these ideals as if you're the last bastion of sanity and taste. You can't even see that this attitude reflects more poorly on our shared hobby than any of those so-called "filthy casuals and sheep".
I can't help but read both of your posts in Comic Book Guy's voice.
---

I'd rather read that than "OH BOY, IT'S JUST COSMETIC. IT'S FINE GUYS."

Don't shit on my cake and tell me it's frosting.
---

ZombiePelican posted...

Again, the point of microtransactions is there's no upper limit to what you can spend,but there is a finite amount that can be spent on DLC because It's not a reoccurring charge like a microtransaction

Just letting you know doubling down when you're losing is a terrible strategy

That's not what a microtransaction needs to be. It's a small (micro) transaction. This is the definition everyone uses.

Monster Hunter World and Sea of Thieves literally use the same model so far.

ZombiePelican posted...

Are you really asking for a source to confirm there will be no upper limit to how much I can spend on Sea of Thieves' microtransactions?

Yes. Because what they have said state the opposite. Going by your definition of microtransactions Sea of Thieves doesn't have any.
---

Darmik posted...

That's not what a microtransaction needs to be. It's a small (micro) transaction. This is the definition everyone uses.

No, That's the definition you just came up with to try and desperately reach to save your sinking ship of an argument

Darmik posted...

Monster Hunter World and Sea of Thieves literally use the same model so far.

Holy shit, no they don't. MHW has cosmetic DLC while Sea of Thieves has microtransactions.

They're two different things, stop doing this it's embarrassing watching you do metal gymnastics to defend these corporations who view you as nothing more than a head of cattle

Darmik posted...

Yes. Because what they have said state the opposite.

Because developers and publishers have never lied through their teeth straight to our faces before, nope absolutely never

I'm glad we have users like you to let us know It's ok to take the words of companies like MS and EA at face value
---

ZombiePelican posted...

No, That's the definition you just came up with to try and desperately reach to save your sinking ship of an argument

I quoted Wikipedia

ZombiePelican posted...

Holy s***, no they don't. MHW has cosmetic DLC while Sea of Thieves has microtransactions.

What the fuck?

ZombiePelican posted...

Because developers and publishers have never lied through their teeth straight to our faces before, nope absolutely never

Why does Monster Hunter World get the benefit of the doubt though?
---

Darmik posted...

What the fuck?

What's so hard to comprehend?

Darmik posted...

Why does Monster Hunter World get the benefit of the doubt though?

Because it was designed to be a fun game and not a cynical cash vacuum like Sea of Thieves will obviously be knowing their publisher

If MHW has microtransactions, where the BS premium currency you can buy with real money?
---

Yeah, those $60 card packs you can get in Hearthstone is a real small transaction.

I wish some of the kids defending these shitty practices worked a real job for one day in their life to know the value of a dollar.
---

ZombiePelican posted...

What's so hard to comprehend?

That Sea of Thieves is selling cosmetic DLC ala carte as its microtransaction model? The entire basis for Jim Sterling's video?

Like your position here doesn't even match what he said in the video.

ZombiePelican posted...

Because it was designed to be a fun game and not a cynical cash vacuum like Sea of Thieves will obviously be knowing their publisher

So Capcom deserves the benefit of the doubt now?

ZombiePelican posted...

If MHW has microtransactions, where the BS premium currency you can buy with real money?

What's the BS currency in Sea of Thieves?
---

Are we seriously saying a $2 gesture is the pinnacle of good gaming practices and is totally DLC guys, not shitty microtransactions yet pmuch the exact same thing (non-interactive visual content) is the end of gaming as we know it? Man that Path of Exile game must be the most reviled shit-show known to gamerdom. Oh wait.

Seriously though, charging you for some skins is the absolute least of my worries, and this BF2 debacle has absolutely sent some of you off the deep end. Take a deep breath and objectively look at the practices you're decrying.

Avoiding charges for any content related things. No mention of boosters or skips, just cosmetic DLC funding extra content. This was literally the promised land 8 months ago. Come back down to earth off that space elevator you call a soapbox.
---

So much /r/hailcorporate in this topic lol
---

Darksaber310 posted...

Avoiding charges for any content related things. No mention of boosters or skips, just cosmetic DLC funding extra content. This was literally the promised land 8 months ago. Come back down to earth off that space elevator you call a soapbox.

it's astounding to me that there are people who have experience with video games in the past and yet have no issues consistently lowering the standards for the products they buy.

cosmetics are fun. it used to be that people would beat a game on hard mode, search for secrets, do challenges, etc all to get cosmetics, because it's fun to get little rewards and it's especially fun to show it off online.

now what devs have done is taken that fun stuff out of the game and placed it instead into a digital storefront. sometimes they will throw the player a PR bone by making it so you can do something unpleasant, like incessant grinding, to get it, but at the end of the day it's taking out content from a full-priced game and just reselling it to you.

there's no benefit to the consumer other than a promise that if you pay $10 for a different colored hat, the devs will be able to continue supporting your game and not shut off the servers after a year or something.
---

Romulox28 posted...

there's no benefit to the consumer other than a promise that if you pay $10 for a different colored hat, the devs will be able to continue supporting your game and not shut off the servers after a year or something.

"there's no benefit except continued support of the game"
---