Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

How Microtransactions Can Acceptably Be Utilized

OP Ampicillin

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3
Microtransactions are a large part of the success of a video game on multiple fronts. It's not just about greed of the developers, but monetary success of the franchise and the capabilities to move forward.

In recent times, a darker side of transactions has come to light. Players are frustrated by what they, often rightfully(*cough* EA *cough*), percieve to be unfair progression systems that become pay to play. The players feel like thier investment of $60 in the game IS thier pay to play.

The point of this thread is to discuss a way Microtransactions can be utilized to balance the needs of the developers and investing corporate entities with the needs of a strong, dedicated playerbase.

That being said, I'll throw in my first idea.
There should be a new playlist. Social and ranked already exist, so why not include a paid tournament playlist, in which, real rewards can be won. A percentage of the money from people buying into the tournament is taken as profit for 343 and thier investors, while the rest is tiered out to the top 50 %. For example, the 50th to 40th percentile get 5% of winnings and free entry into the next season, 40th to 30th get 10%, 30th to 20th get 20%, with a much higher reward progressing up to the top tier.

The percentages and percentiles I gave are not actually what should be used but help to demonstrate the system I am suggesting as an idea.

Regardless, microtransactions are a part of modern gaming that we as a community need to collaborate on in order to help our franchises succeed. Halo and 343 need us, a community, to help them solve these problems in order to be successful, and to be able to create games we all love.

Leave your suggestions and comments for 343 below. I will not keep up with it, but they very well may take more notice of your words than you realize.
No microtransactions period. Every Halo game up until Halo 5 (coincidentally the least successful mainline Halo in the past decade) thrived without them—so can Infinite.
That's not a bad idea, but I see a few caveats.
  • Depending on your region, there are a lot of gambling laws that may stop you from entering a tournament for money.
  • Not having a moderator in the room that you are playing in will lead to people inevitably calling foul. Due to unregulated gameplay.
All in all the microtransactions were not that bad for H5. I never spent a dime after the purchase of the game, and I have all available unlocks. It also allowed all players to have access to the maps and playlists as to not split the community.
Until publishers and developers start being vastly more transparent with regards to development costs and how they allocate said money, microtransactions of any kind are always going to be exploitative double dipping.

But the easiest way to do more palatable microtransactions would be to not indulge in random lootbox garbarge and don't carve anything out of the main game to try and resell pieces afterward.

Release a full, uncompromised game first. They start development on MT skins or what have you. It may still be nonsense, but at least it is slightly more ethical that way.
Ampicillin wrote:
Microtransactions are a large part of the success of a video game on multiple fronts. It's not just about greed of the developers, but monetary success of the franchise and the capabilities to move forward.

In recent times, a darker side of transactions has come to light. Players are frustrated by what they, often rightfully(*cough* EA *cough*), percieve to be unfair progression systems that become pay to play. The players feel like thier investment of $60 in the game IS thier pay to play.

The point of this thread is to discuss a way Microtransactions can be utilized to balance the needs of the developers and investing corporate entities with the needs of a strong, dedicated playerbase.

That being said, I'll throw in my first idea.
There should be a new playlist. Social and ranked already exist, so why not include a paid tournament playlist, in which, real rewards can be won. A percentage of the money from people buying into the tournament is taken as profit for 343 and thier investors, while the rest is tiered out to the top 50 %. For example, the 50th to 40th percentile get 5% of winnings and free entry into the next season, 40th to 30th get 10%, 30th to 20th get 20%, with a much higher reward progressing up to the top tier.

The percentages and percentiles I gave are not actually what should be used but help to demonstrate the system I am suggesting as an idea.

Regardless, microtransactions are a part of modern gaming that we as a community need to collaborate on in order to help our franchises succeed. Halo and 343 need us, a community, to help them solve these problems in order to be successful, and to be able to create games we all love.

Leave your suggestions and comments for 343 below. I will not keep up with it, but they very well may take more notice of your words than you realize.
Halo doesn't need microtransactions to succeed and it never did
i dont really support your idea, however i haved play local tournaments where we haved bid some money (10 or 20usd) but in the actual game i dont see how could work, cause pro´s already play for money on tournaments.
I do support microtransactions, but not like EA out of line transactions, more like nintendo.
Microtransactions are pay-to-win systems in most games, including Warzone (to an extent) in Halo 5 and definitely Warzone Turbo. Rocket League is one of the few that did microtransactions right. It’s a simple and straightforward system where players can dish out an extra buck or two to get a car skin they really want. If someone is a collector, there’s a downside here though since he/she would have to spend a ton of money to get every item.

Development costs, according to a few videos from creators with sources in the industry, have gone down, or at least stayed the same, with inflation factored in. Pair that with the immense rise of digital sales and lower expenses on physical discs and it becomes increasingly obvious that publishers continue the practice solely because they can since there’s not enough consumer backlash.

Halo 2 and 3 are still among the best selling games of all time. Hell, GTA IV is still up there too. There are many others and none of them had microtransactions. There’s nothing inherently wrong with wanting a bit more money from a game after a consumer buys it, but such systems shouldn’t be predatory and a hindrance to the gaming experience like they are in most triple-A games like Halo 5.
The RNG element is the biggest problem when it comes to lootbox MTs. Some countries already considered this approach to be a light form of gambling with high risk of addiction and I 100% agree with that feeling. The second factor is building the whole customization aspect of the game and a main playlist around them. Therefore I find it unbelievable how s many people can consider REQs to be a non-invasive form of MT!

The OP however has a point. Game development cost has increased, and brutally so in the last two gens. The price tag however is still 60 to 75 bucks depending on region. Something needs to change, but intrusive MTs can't be the answer!

Btw: the tournament idea would only work in the USA though due to gambling laws - for instance it wouldn't be possible in Italy.
tuhin94 wrote:
Development costs, according to a few videos from creators with sources in the industry, have gone down, or at least stayed the same, with inflation factored in.
I'd like to see those sources, because the coverage I've seen on game development across time has said dev costs are getting greater, especially for AAA games.
Chimera30 wrote:
tuhin94 wrote:
Development costs, according to a few videos from creators with sources in the industry, have gone down, or at least stayed the same, with inflation factored in.
I'd like to see those sources, because the coverage I've seen on game development across time has said dev costs are getting greater, especially for AAA games.
This is the most memorable one I recall watching.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, microtransactions are a good thing as long as they're purely cosmetic. This allows players who want to spend money on the game to do so, the developers make money from it, and the rest of us get free DLC which doesn't split up the community the way paid map packs used to. H5 was Halo's first attempt at microtransactions, and I admit they weren't perfect, but I believe they'll do an even better job with them in the future if that's the path they choose to go down. When done right, microtransactions have literally no downside.
tuhin94 wrote:
Chimera30 wrote:
tuhin94 wrote:
Development costs, according to a few videos from creators with sources in the industry, have gone down, or at least stayed the same, with inflation factored in.
I'd like to see those sources, because the coverage I've seen on game development across time has said dev costs are getting greater, especially for AAA games.
This is the most memorable one I recall watching.
Briefly looked into that. There's alot to unpack and alot of differing opinions on that video. Many people seem to view that video as the end-all, be-all proof that game devs and publishers are nothing but greedy fat cats. But look a little deeper and you see plenty of people who find problems with that guy's analysis, and that it doesn't paint the whole picture.

But rather than get into all that, I'll just say what I took from it: that guy's point is that game's aren't too expensive to make, not that games individually are less expensive to make these days than in previous days. When you take into account the costs with the number of games produced for EA, as an example, in subsequent years the overall costs were less but the number of projects was less, too, resulting in individual games still getting more expensive. There's also a very small sample size of devs/publishers analyzed. So in all, I don't think that video is clear-cut proof of the cost of developing a AAA game going down as time goes on.
All games have some sort of mirco transaction, its this new era of gaming now,
All games have some sort of mirco transaction, its this new era of gaming now,
It doesn't mean we have to blindly accept it...
The good thing about MTs is that all DLC is free. This revitalizes the game's population with every update and keeps the community unified instead of splitting it to any number of DLC owners.

I, personally, did not spend a dime on MTs and received in return a vast succession of free DLC content. Also, the "pay to win" effect was only present in Warzone- and even there, by level 20 or so everyone has Scorpion tanks anyway. Meaning, it really wasn't a big deal.

The only problem with the MTs in Halo 5, in my honest opinion, is that the game was rated T for Teen, meaning it was aimed at a PG13 audience. Children are easily duped into gambling and should not have such options available to them. So either get Halo 6 to an M rating (like every other Halo game) or make the MTs cosmetic only.
All games have some sort of mirco transaction, its this new era of gaming now,
It doesn't mean we have to blindly accept it...
Exactly. I'm against MT's in £60 games I don't like it. IF,,, they have to be there I accept buy what you see cosmetics, Titanfall 2 is an excellent example of that, and I think more studios should follow suit.

From talking to friends MT's are acceptable to a degree, However it's the rng loot crate systems that really gets to me, so much so that I don't buy games with them anymore.

Halo 5 has them in the form of reqs, if I had known what they are and how they work I would have passed on Halo 5, I'll be watching Infinite closely, no going dark this time.
All games have some sort of mirco transaction, its this new era of gaming now,
It doesn't mean we have to blindly accept it...
May I direct you to my previous post:
DoubleSama wrote:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, microtransactions are a good thing as long as they're purely cosmetic. This allows players who want to spend money on the game to do so, the developers make money from it, and the rest of us get free DLC which doesn't split up the community the way paid map packs used to. H5 was Halo's first attempt at microtransactions, and I admit they weren't perfect, but I believe they'll do an even better job with them in the future if that's the path they choose to go down. When done right, microtransactions have literally no downside.
There's nothing to "blindly accept" other than good things. Why get so mad about an improvement to the industry at large?
If we have to have micro transactions do it like titanfall 2 where its only extra cosmetics you can buy with real money. You pay, you get exactly what you want, you know like how People have been doing it for thousands of years.
DoubleSama wrote:
All games have some sort of mirco transaction, its this new era of gaming now,
It doesn't mean we have to blindly accept it...
May I direct you to my previous post:
DoubleSama wrote:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, microtransactions are a good thing as long as they're purely cosmetic. This allows players who want to spend money on the game to do so, the developers make money from it, and the rest of us get free DLC which doesn't split up the community the way paid map packs used to. H5 was Halo's first attempt at microtransactions, and I admit they weren't perfect, but I believe they'll do an even better job with them in the future if that's the path they choose to go down. When done right, microtransactions have literally no downside.
There's nothing to "blindly accept" other than good things. Why get so mad about an improvement to the industry at large?
YOU think microtransactions are good. Not everybody agrees. Everybody cannot possibly agree on this. It seems to me like you are suggesting opponents should accept it just because there is potential to improve. Whether or not it does improve is aside the point. They have made no indication pay-to-win will not be present in Infinite so why should anyone give them the benefit of the doubt?
DoubleSama wrote:
All games have some sort of mirco transaction, its this new era of gaming now,
It doesn't mean we have to blindly accept it...
May I direct you to my previous post:
DoubleSama wrote:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, microtransactions are a good thing as long as they're purely cosmetic. This allows players who want to spend money on the game to do so, the developers make money from it, and the rest of us get free DLC which doesn't split up the community the way paid map packs used to. H5 was Halo's first attempt at microtransactions, and I admit they weren't perfect, but I believe they'll do an even better job with them in the future if that's the path they choose to go down. When done right, microtransactions have literally no downside.
There's nothing to "blindly accept" other than good things. Why get so mad about an improvement to the industry at large?
YOU think microtransactions are good. Not everybody agrees. Everybody cannot possibly agree on this. It seems to me like you are suggesting opponents should accept it just because there is potential to improve. Whether or not it does improve is aside the point. They have made no indication pay-to-win will not be present in Infinite so why should anyone give them the benefit of the doubt?
Tell me one way in which microtransactions are bad. I'll wait.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3