I have similar feelings to the above poster, it depends on what you expect when you buy something.
For example, let's say you go to a rock concert, and the band stops after 30 minutes. Then they want you to buy another ticket to hear more. What is wrong with that? Technically, you DID hear a concert, but the norm for a concert is 2 hours. The "norm" is changing.
Another issue is with what words mean, for example, you go to a "Steak:" restaurant. But when you get your food, it is a hamburger. Is hamburger steak? Technically, it could be called steak. But it feels like false advertising.
Probably all the consumer can do is vote with their wallet.
If you dont like this sort of thing then dont use it. If you feel taken advantage of by the games company then dont play their game. However you people dont speak for everybody and I for one like micro transaction even in subscription games. I'd like to see more of it, give me options, give me the ability to buy stuff using real money. The rest of you that dont like it, I suggest spending less time moaning about it and use that time to get a better paid job!
I can't help feeling times are a changing. I can see a time where all you can eat buffets are a rare minority. Possibly not a problem if MT are done 'reasonably' but as of today more often than not they do not seem to be, Allods being a good example.
Companies are doing research, and (poor or not), their research is finding that players will pay real money for items even after a subscription fee. They don't even have to ask, really: all they have to do is look at their sales. Just an additional thought: a developer once told me that out of a $15 subscription fee, only a third of that goes toward all the actual costs of playing the game, from development, server maintenance, and staffing. The rest, he said, is profit. Think of where that puts RMTs on the list.
What i wonder is if their research contemplates how much they will cease to make in the long run when their reputation as a MMO company is on the ground.
Or, if the opportunity cost of making more money out of RMT is translated into less monthly subscriptions by those who refuse to get involved in RMT and if it will pay off in the long run.
As you've said, its early days for RMT and so far it has been applied on existing games. I think we'll get a better picture a few months or years down the road.
If this were true, it would end all the "they are a business and need to make money" arguments. I am not saying that it would be wrong for a company to try and increase their profits, as long as it is done by improving their products and services which will naturally result in increased sales; or if they announce their RMT intentions from the get-go and people can decide wheather or not they will buy and play their games.
I just don't understand why you guys ignore the facts. Most people don't care about rmt. If everyone who despised rmt quit it would be a drop in the bucket for mmo developers. Let's just use some quick and dirty calculations. We'll use the basic number of 2 billion gross spent on rmt in a given year. we'll then take the total amount of mmo players at around 20 million (13 million wow, 4 million lineage, a few 500k mmos, and lots of smaller ones. Divide 20 million into 2 billion and what do you get? 100. That says that on average every person playing mmos spends rougly $100 per year on rmt.
Now of course that's not true. You obviously don't spend money on rmt, and plenty of others here don't as well. I also have plenty of friends who wouldn't either. However at a certain point you can make an educated guess as to what the max cap is for any one person. Odds are that most people wouldn't spend more than $200 in a given year on rmt (although we know that people have spent $1000 or more on some accounts), so if you make an educated guess and say the average figure is anywhere from $100 - $200 yearly, you're talking anywhere from 50% to 100% of the mmo population participating in rmt. If you take out the fact that we know that plenty of people don't spend money on rmt, I think it's fairly reasonable to assume that roughly 50-75% of the population spend money on rmt. That's a pretty startling figure.
Now just because people don't participate in rmt doesn't mean they'd ever quit a game over it. Only the most fanatical of the bunch would take something so insignificant to such an extreme. When you take that into consideration, I find it hard for developers to be concerned in any way about the small amount of people who would actually leave their game because of rmt. Furthermore, given the drastic increase of free mmos with cash shop models THAT AREN'T GOING OUT OF BUSINESS, I think that it is abundantly clear just how many people participate in rmt, and have absolutely no problem spending money on a game beyond a subscription.
This all depends upon what the "law of unintended consequences" has to say about how a particular implimentation of RMT effects a particular game. You are probably correct, that very few people willt quit a game they otherwise like just because of RMT. The real question is, will the way a particular implimentation of RMT effects a particular game end up changing the game from an experience alot of people enjoy to an experience alot of people don't.
Depending on the specifics, RMT certainly CAN have pretty profound effects on a game environment beyond just the initial obvious exchange of goods.... effects that may not become readly apparent to the Developers at the time.
Do people quit games because.... "The economy is all screwed up" ?
"Crafting is wortheless"?
"The average player can't compete" ?
"Content is too hard for the average player" ?
"The Community is lousy" ?
"It's too expensive to play" ?
All these CAN (though don't neccesarly HAVE to be) consequences of having RMT in a game. Like everything else, the devil is in the details..... but with complex systems, small changes can have very profound effects that are difficult to predict when implimented.
I think it really behooves Game Exec's, for thier own sake as well as for ours as players, to approach RMT very cautiously....and really try to examine what the details of implimenting it will actualy mean for the long term health of thier products/company.
Unfortunately far too many Exec's... and not just in game companies.... are focused on only the short term and don't spend enough grey matter thinking about the long term consequences of thier policies. It's why we see so many companies having a great quarter or two...and then 5 years later going bankrupt... or holding out thier hands for a bail-out.
If you dont like this sort of thing then dont use it. If you feel taken advantage of by the games company then dont play their game. However you people dont speak for everybody and I for one like micro transaction even in subscription games. I'd like to see more of it, give me options, give me the ability to buy stuff using real money. The rest of you that dont like it, I suggest spending less time moaning about it and use that time to get a better paid job!
You are a manchild with more money than brains. You start off with the fallacy of like it or leave it, implying that there are no strings attached. That people don't invest days, months, YEARS into these "games" and that it would be reasonable for them to just throw all their effort and relationships away. Then you go off on a selfish, self-hating diatribe pretending the world revolves around you, finishing with the stereotypical internet-cliche of "go get a job!"
You like paying more money for no reason? That is insane and therefore your opinion does not matter! Right now the current generation of gamers is being taught that it's perfectly alright to pay for something you've already paid for. Give it a few years and chinese gold farmers will be out of business... not because of them getting banned or blocked, but because the companies themselves will be pushing the idea that it is acceptable for them to sell you premade accounts and currency directly.
We do need legislation to protect our rights as consumers from this kind of exploitation. Cash shops are quite literally money printing devices. A company can make an infinite amount of SUPER COOL SHINY MOUNTS or BADLY NEEDED BAG SLOTS SINCE THE GAME IS INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED TO HAVE LIMITED STARTING INVENTORY SPACE at a cost of ZERO. Voting with our wallets will not work, because we reasonable adults are out numbered by children who do not know better but have access to their parents credit cards. Children are being taught that paying for pixels is just as reasonable as ordering a hamburger or a bag of chips. Infact, that direct analogy is used often. "Oh it's no big deal, just the price of a happy meal!" After all, these are ultimately games marketed towards children, and the majority of users are children. By the time they grow up and realize the scam, it will be too late and they will be back here... where we are now. Arguing against the next move of mmo monetization while a rabble of ignorant children shout them down.
I think thats a good point: Despite complaints about Stores and the whole 'buying extra's" evidence shows that when such shops open they are hugly successfull !
I remember the first time guildwars put a shop up for extra slots, everyone went mad! Even I bought a slot.. though I dont think to this day I ever used it! lol
It's hard to be unsuccessful when the product you are pushing has no cost and you have an infinite supply of it.
If you dont like this sort of thing then dont use it. If you feel taken advantage of by the games company then dont play their game. However you people dont speak for everybody and I for one like micro transaction even in subscription games. I'd like to see more of it, give me options, give me the ability to buy stuff using real money. The rest of you that dont like it, I suggest spending less time moaning about it and use that time to get a better paid job!
You are a manchild with more money than brains. You start off with the fallacy of like it or leave it, implying that there are no strings attached. That people don't invest days, months, YEARS into these "games" and that it would be reasonable for them to just throw all their effort and relationships away. Then you go off on a selfish, self-hating diatribe pretending the world revolves around you, finishing with the stereotypical internet-cliche of "go get a job!"
You like paying more money for no reason? That is insane and therefore your opinion does not matter! Right now the current generation of gamers is being taught that it's perfectly alright to pay for something you've already paid for. Give it a few years and chinese gold farmers will be out of business... not because of them getting banned or blocked, but because the companies themselves will be pushing the idea that it is acceptable for them to sell you premade accounts and currency directly.
We do need legislation to protect our rights as consumers from this kind of exploitation. Cash shops are quite literally money printing devices. A company can make an infinite amount of SUPER COOL SHINY MOUNTS or BADLY NEEDED BAG SLOTS SINCE THE GAME IS INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED TO HAVE LIMITED STARTING INVENTORY SPACE at a cost of ZERO. Voting with our wallets will not work, because we reasonable adults are out numbered by children who do not know better but have access to their parents credit cards. Children are being taught that paying for pixels is just as reasonable as ordering a hamburger or a bag of chips. Infact, that direct analogy is used often. "Oh it's no big deal, just the price of a happy meal!" After all, these are ultimately games marketed towards children, and the majority of users are children. By the time they grow up and realize the scam, it will be too late and they will be back here... where we are now. Arguing against the next move of mmo monetization while a rabble of ignorant children shout them down.
Sorry but I'd have to side with the guy with more money than brains, rather than the guy with none of either. He's right, if you dont like it, dont buy it/pay for it. There are many many choices out there for gaming, and if a company decides something costs X amount, and you dont want to pay that much, well sucks for you. You can either take it, or leave it and maybe hope that eventually the price will come down. If enough people refuse to pay it, then yeah eventually it will come down, or the game itself will. Pretty simple concept, and the way nearly every other transaction in the world works. Not to mention, its pretty damn pathetic to rant as if it is the game companies responsibility to teach our children. Are the games marketed towards children? In some cases yes (at least to an extent) but the majority of MMOs are geared towards teenagers and up, and the major gaming demographic of people in their 20s which makes up most of their fanbase, NOT children, and certainly not children who are too young to be able to understand simple rights and wrongs (unless theyre legally retarded or just raised horribly without a bit of common sense). Are you giving your kids a credit card to charge whatever they want on? If so thats your own damn fault, not the gaming companies. Dont put some false responibility onto gaming, or any other companies to raise your children. Teach them how to spend responsibly yourself. Teach them some self control and the real value of a dollar. Its about as pathetic as all these fat lazy ass parents who cry "oh no they showed something bad on TV and thats not allowed because im too fking lazy to teach the kid right vs wrong myself, and just leave it up to TV, radio, and the internet to do my job for me" or blame bad things happening (shootings, fights, etc) on the media, when the media shouldnt be the ones raising them to begin with.
Im in my 20s, i have a job, i support myself entirely, and make a logical decision wether or not something is worth paying for or not. If its not, i simply go without it. Ive spent a range from $0 to several thousand $ on games over the years, because i decided "what the hell, ive got a few extra bucks and im willing to pay $10 for this extra thing in a game". I was in no way forced or required to play the game, or spend that money. Montin is right, it is JUST a game, regardless of how wrapped up you are in it. It is in no way a need to live, it is a form of entertainment, and should not require legislation. If people need the government legislating and telling you "its ok to pay this much for x amount of entertainment".... well then i dont even know where to begin telling some of you to seek help, i would think it's pretty futile no matter where you seek it.
The article highlights some important problems regarding RMT. Specifically, Presidents of MMO companies telling customers one thing and then doing the opposite. I believe Smed was used as an example of this.
I'm not sure I'd use Cryptic as a better example though. There's debate about whether or not the playable races (available only in STO's RMT shop) affect gameplay. They have stat bonus combinations that are not available in any other starting Federation races. Does that affect gameplay? If it does, then Cryptic pledged to have this option available ingame, and yet, it is not.
Personally, I like the way Gamigo handles RMT. The games are free, and they have an item shop. These aren't run like most item shops though. As a player, you buy a license to an item for a specific period of time. If the item is changed in any way during that time, and you are unhappy, you get your money back.
Having said that, I still prefer a straight subscription model. I like paying for a clearly defined entertainment service on a monthly basis. I don't like hidden fees, especially those that tend to multiply.
As for the playing community speaking more clearly, I think there's a real problem with this expectation. The "community" does not in any way exist as a unified entity. We don't have plans, policies or official representatives. MMO companies may have all of these things (and they do), but gamers do not, and why should they?
MMO companies should have staff who are expert at taking the pulse of their particular target audience. We certainly have this in my industry. When we fail to accurately assess our market, our programming goes awry. It's our fault, not our customers'. The same, I believe, is true of MMOs.
MMO companies, if they want to succeed, need to do a much better job of obtaining, understanding and acting on meaningful consumer input. This means sifting through feedback looking for recurring, significant themes. It also means liaising with players effectively so that these themes are properly understood. Then it involves determining an effective response to the data, once again with consumer input.
Some of the MMOs that have had the most spectacular failures, according to MMORPG staff articles, have also been the worst at gathering, listening to, interpreting and responding to player feedback. The RMT issue is no exception, unfortunately.
Sure, you can't do all the "member" missions or wear ALL the gear or level up ALL the classes. You CAN still do quite a lot for and you don't have to pay a dime to do it. You CANT play MOST MMORPGs for Free. Not even a little bit.
Then, for $5.00 USD a month you have the option of unlocking a ton of content!
$5.00 USD a is far less than most subscription MMORPGS and it's OPTIONAL.
I kind of consider this as just another form of RMT . Each Month I buy a truckload of privileges and extras!
It may not be worth $5.00 USD to everyone, but it is for me.
(To note, If you PAY your $5.00 USD a month you get a 10% Discount on all Market Place Transactions as just one of the perks).
Then there are RMT ... Again, OPTIONAL. The player buys what they want and nothing more. If its too expensive, then they can buy something else. You don't have to be a Paying member to buy stuff off the marketplace nor do members have to spend real life cash beyond their membership for the month.
You can even spend your Station cash to pay for your membership fee if you like.
All of it, its all optional.
I (as the player) get to choose how much I want to invest and spend what I want. Personally, I like having these kinds of options open to me.
To end:
Something I appreciate with Sony Online's (Yes, Sony did do something right for once and they should get a cookie) is their "Station Cash" translates easily to Real World Money. One "Station Cash" point = 1 Cent. Easy. 100 SC and I know it costs $1.00 USD right away.
I really like knowing exactly how much real world cash something is going to cost without having to work it out in my head just to see if its really worth it to me.
That and I can usually reduce my Account to 0 pretty easily.
If online games are going to offer RMT for virtual goods, my only demand is that they be honest about it. No more of this $10.00 USD = 8000 Stupid Points, or working it out so there is no way to spend all of it (I'm looking at you Micro$oft )
Anyway, for what its worth, that's my opinion on the matter.
Have lots to reply to, so I apologize if this comes off fragmented a bit..
First, thanks for replying. Second, I feel the need to state that I'm by no means trying to tar and feather you so if it may look like my writing is doing such I'm not. Eight years as a soldier and I still do the majority of things aggressively but certainly without any genuine malice. That said...
I don't think there is a mixed message being sent by western gamers. Irrespective of what the sales numbers say (even you admitted western numbers were foggy in this thread) I fell comfortable right at this moment making the uneducated (key word there) statement that the number of western gamers who don't use the Items shops is far, far, far greater that the numbers that do. Adding to that let's delve into the actual buyers of those items and I'd have to wonder how many of those transactions were by gold sellers.
As for playing gamer and reporter at once I may be able to sympathize with your inference as I've done the soldier and "diplomat" at once. Smile and grin but keep your thumb on the selector switch and be ready to shoot. I won't ask you to reveal your other "handles" on this or other sites for the obvious reason (and no, I'm not trying to stalk you, heheh).
I have to disagree a little on your take on why players aren't getting listened to. I think it's simply because it's the easiest route to go. Only one time really in the history of MMO gaming have players concerns been listen to with the route you propose and that other media and company officials have said which is to speak with their wallet: SWG. Even with that the company still didn't "listen" to it's player base and open up a classic server or two to give their previously paying customers what they wanted.
As for the summit or conference idea I think it'd give some formal representation for players. It may not make significant impact immediately yet once it had a few years to grow and establish some clout with the media and then gaming companies I think it may be able to effect some positive changes. I agree that having players follow any immediate manifesto because there isn't a clear, central avenue to communicate on such a large scale to MMO gamers. Sites like these are all we have. Efforts such as those that I mentioned would be to bring together various sites like these to get a more far reaching messaging and closer to full and proper representation. Not just for the RMT issue but for various other issues.
Trouble is a grassroots effort just won't work without some support from the gaming media and media sites (which at current will only remain neutral as you state) or by some well established company taking up the torch to get these recurring meeting in place. As I've said above, the companies aren't going to just listen to us at current (gamers want to play games and if this is all they're offering we have not much of another choice other than to not use the item malls or stop gaming). Such an effort needs a well known General to muster all the proper resources.
In terms of handles, 98% of the time I go by missyshade as handles in the community or just by a variation of my name (such as jskelton). One of the reasons I don't post a lot on community forums anymore is because of my "status" as a press member; some games I have press accounts to and so I tread a little more carefully. Plus I get read and watched by companies, some of whom are trying to "figure me out." I do play the mysterious and silent most of the time because of this, because I try to stay a generally neutral party. Cryptic has asked a friend of mine when he visited their studio if I hate them based on my columns (I don't), and I've had other gaming bigwigs message me in regards to posts I've made on forums.
They know how to find me, and sometimes it's creepy, so I tend to walk with soft steps. What I said to girlgeek was quite appropriate: I am not as transparent in my views as people think. I am more devil's advocate than revealer of my own feelings (a trend I started quite young when debating.)
Any way. . .
I think every company case can be different. There are certainly companies out there who are listening very intently about microtransactions and trying to give the players what they want as much as possible (usually these are F2Ps though, and not subbers.) And then there are companies that are clearly disconnected, as Lum/Scott's article brought to light about the Allods Online fiasco. There are certainly plenty in between to some degree.
What is true, though, is that I have yet to see a company take a real in-depth look at what the players want. They do research via perhaps random surveys, or polls on the main page of their site, or read a few forum posts that say "Damn it'd be cool if I could have a unicorn; I'd even pay for it." From what I have seen, most do research ex post facto. So in that, I can agree you're right - many do take the lazier way out of it - but I also will politely hold that the community is still sending some mixed messages.
After all, RMTs in subscription games for the western market are fairly new.
A grassroots effort would be astounding to see from the community in this area though, simply because you don't really see gamers garner behind a cause very clearly, especially one so specific as this - except via those stupid "sign here" petition threads on forums.
Also, I'll leave a quick reminder note to those of you who have piped in to say that this is MMORPG.com being paid to support X and tell you Y, I'll remark again (although it seems to not ever be heard) that I am a freelancer. The only thing MMORPG.com tells me in regards to my column is when they're due and when I'll get paid. The rest is all up to me, so feel to direct your nerdrage appropriately. I don't mind.
Folks, I won't be keeping up on this thread as much now, but if you have something you really want to bring up to me, just send me a message here.
Honestly, I don't know what to do with micro-transactions, other than ignore them as I have been. The cat's out of the bag, it's not going to go back in, and it happens to be made of gold.
I personally don't like them because they're the embodiment of a slippery slope (what *can't* we charge for now!? ), but it's people's choice on what they spend money on, regardless of whether they're *hurting* everyone else. I think item shops have the potential to be interesting akin to drooling over the Skymall catalog, but it never stays that way and necessities start creeping in. I was playing WoW, up until they introduced those two vanity pets. I left for a lot of reasons, and those were one (or would you say two?) of them. I went to joing my boyfriend in DDO, but on top of the game being sort of clunky (though I think this is just because I was coming from WoW), the fact I could barely progress without using the item shop made the game lose it's lustre real quick.
If you don't like it, don't play.
Well I stopped playing, and guess what? Nothing's different other than now I'm bored and nobody gives two craps whether I give them any more money or not ('cept maybe my ex-guildies). Not only are there more vanity pets, they're more expensive (albeit these come with a real plush counterpart), and there's hundreds more people to take my place. I don't even want the pets, but I wouldn't deny those people who really do want them. I would feel better if they thought a little before throwing money at anything shiny, something along the lines of... "Hey, why is that $10? This other game B that's not even pulling a quarter of A's revenue is only charging half to a third for their version of that thing." If you don't like it, is a fallacy and it doesn't work or mean anything, other than a thinly veiled way for people to actually say "shut up and go away/stop making sense at me". I voted with my money and all it got me was irritation and a ton of hard work down the drain.
Stop being cheap. (Or get a job. Or don't tell me how to spend my money.)
How come you get to tell me how to spend mine, though? I have the money. I am choosing not to spend it, as I see there will be problems down the road with boundaries on what they can/will charge and what for. Saying no immediately is better (and easier) than waiting til it's too late and then the publishers/developers/blind fanboys will just tell you to shove off because you had no problem with it before, and again, there'll be more people to take your place.
I agree that the biggest problem is that the community will say one thing quite vocally and then have one hand with their fingers crossed and the other waving 'gimme' with a couple of bills in it. Because of that, outside of a colossal screw up (aka Allods), there really isn't anything anyone can do now.
Comments
I have similar feelings to the above poster, it depends on what you expect when you buy something.
For example, let's say you go to a rock concert, and the band stops after 30 minutes. Then they want you to buy another ticket to hear more. What is wrong with that? Technically, you DID hear a concert, but the norm for a concert is 2 hours. The "norm" is changing.
Another issue is with what words mean, for example, you go to a "Steak:" restaurant. But when you get your food, it is a hamburger. Is hamburger steak? Technically, it could be called steak. But it feels like false advertising.
Probably all the consumer can do is vote with their wallet.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
If you dont like this sort of thing then dont use it. If you feel taken advantage of by the games company then dont play their game. However you people dont speak for everybody and I for one like micro transaction even in subscription games. I'd like to see more of it, give me options, give me the ability to buy stuff using real money. The rest of you that dont like it, I suggest spending less time moaning about it and use that time to get a better paid job!
I can't help feeling times are a changing. I can see a time where all you can eat buffets are a rare minority. Possibly not a problem if MT are done 'reasonably' but as of today more often than not they do not seem to be, Allods being a good example.
What i wonder is if their research contemplates how much they will cease to make in the long run when their reputation as a MMO company is on the ground.
Or, if the opportunity cost of making more money out of RMT is translated into less monthly subscriptions by those who refuse to get involved in RMT and if it will pay off in the long run.
As you've said, its early days for RMT and so far it has been applied on existing games. I think we'll get a better picture a few months or years down the road.
If this were true, it would end all the "they are a business and need to make money" arguments. I am not saying that it would be wrong for a company to try and increase their profits, as long as it is done by improving their products and services which will naturally result in increased sales; or if they announce their RMT intentions from the get-go and people can decide wheather or not they will buy and play their games.
I just don't understand why you guys ignore the facts. Most people don't care about rmt. If everyone who despised rmt quit it would be a drop in the bucket for mmo developers. Let's just use some quick and dirty calculations. We'll use the basic number of 2 billion gross spent on rmt in a given year. we'll then take the total amount of mmo players at around 20 million (13 million wow, 4 million lineage, a few 500k mmos, and lots of smaller ones. Divide 20 million into 2 billion and what do you get? 100. That says that on average every person playing mmos spends rougly $100 per year on rmt.
Now of course that's not true. You obviously don't spend money on rmt, and plenty of others here don't as well. I also have plenty of friends who wouldn't either. However at a certain point you can make an educated guess as to what the max cap is for any one person. Odds are that most people wouldn't spend more than $200 in a given year on rmt (although we know that people have spent $1000 or more on some accounts), so if you make an educated guess and say the average figure is anywhere from $100 - $200 yearly, you're talking anywhere from 50% to 100% of the mmo population participating in rmt. If you take out the fact that we know that plenty of people don't spend money on rmt, I think it's fairly reasonable to assume that roughly 50-75% of the population spend money on rmt. That's a pretty startling figure.
Now just because people don't participate in rmt doesn't mean they'd ever quit a game over it. Only the most fanatical of the bunch would take something so insignificant to such an extreme. When you take that into consideration, I find it hard for developers to be concerned in any way about the small amount of people who would actually leave their game because of rmt. Furthermore, given the drastic increase of free mmos with cash shop models THAT AREN'T GOING OUT OF BUSINESS, I think that it is abundantly clear just how many people participate in rmt, and have absolutely no problem spending money on a game beyond a subscription.
This all depends upon what the "law of unintended consequences" has to say about how a particular implimentation of RMT effects a particular game. You are probably correct, that very few people willt quit a game they otherwise like just because of RMT. The real question is, will the way a particular implimentation of RMT effects a particular game end up changing the game from an experience alot of people enjoy to an experience alot of people don't.
Depending on the specifics, RMT certainly CAN have pretty profound effects on a game environment beyond just the initial obvious exchange of goods.... effects that may not become readly apparent to the Developers at the time.
Do people quit games because.... "The economy is all screwed up" ?
"Crafting is wortheless"?
"The average player can't compete" ?
"Content is too hard for the average player" ?
"The Community is lousy" ?
"It's too expensive to play" ?
All these CAN (though don't neccesarly HAVE to be) consequences of having RMT in a game. Like everything else, the devil is in the details..... but with complex systems, small changes can have very profound effects that are difficult to predict when implimented.
I think it really behooves Game Exec's, for thier own sake as well as for ours as players, to approach RMT very cautiously....and really try to examine what the details of implimenting it will actualy mean for the long term health of thier products/company.
Unfortunately far too many Exec's... and not just in game companies.... are focused on only the short term and don't spend enough grey matter thinking about the long term consequences of thier policies. It's why we see so many companies having a great quarter or two...and then 5 years later going bankrupt... or holding out thier hands for a bail-out.
You are a manchild with more money than brains. You start off with the fallacy of like it or leave it, implying that there are no strings attached. That people don't invest days, months, YEARS into these "games" and that it would be reasonable for them to just throw all their effort and relationships away. Then you go off on a selfish, self-hating diatribe pretending the world revolves around you, finishing with the stereotypical internet-cliche of "go get a job!"
You like paying more money for no reason? That is insane and therefore your opinion does not matter! Right now the current generation of gamers is being taught that it's perfectly alright to pay for something you've already paid for. Give it a few years and chinese gold farmers will be out of business... not because of them getting banned or blocked, but because the companies themselves will be pushing the idea that it is acceptable for them to sell you premade accounts and currency directly.
We do need legislation to protect our rights as consumers from this kind of exploitation. Cash shops are quite literally money printing devices. A company can make an infinite amount of SUPER COOL SHINY MOUNTS or BADLY NEEDED BAG SLOTS SINCE THE GAME IS INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED TO HAVE LIMITED STARTING INVENTORY SPACE at a cost of ZERO. Voting with our wallets will not work, because we reasonable adults are out numbered by children who do not know better but have access to their parents credit cards. Children are being taught that paying for pixels is just as reasonable as ordering a hamburger or a bag of chips. Infact, that direct analogy is used often. "Oh it's no big deal, just the price of a happy meal!" After all, these are ultimately games marketed towards children, and the majority of users are children. By the time they grow up and realize the scam, it will be too late and they will be back here... where we are now. Arguing against the next move of mmo monetization while a rabble of ignorant children shout them down.
It's hard to be unsuccessful when the product you are pushing has no cost and you have an infinite supply of it.
You are a manchild with more money than brains. You start off with the fallacy of like it or leave it, implying that there are no strings attached. That people don't invest days, months, YEARS into these "games" and that it would be reasonable for them to just throw all their effort and relationships away. Then you go off on a selfish, self-hating diatribe pretending the world revolves around you, finishing with the stereotypical internet-cliche of "go get a job!"
You like paying more money for no reason? That is insane and therefore your opinion does not matter! Right now the current generation of gamers is being taught that it's perfectly alright to pay for something you've already paid for. Give it a few years and chinese gold farmers will be out of business... not because of them getting banned or blocked, but because the companies themselves will be pushing the idea that it is acceptable for them to sell you premade accounts and currency directly.
We do need legislation to protect our rights as consumers from this kind of exploitation. Cash shops are quite literally money printing devices. A company can make an infinite amount of SUPER COOL SHINY MOUNTS or BADLY NEEDED BAG SLOTS SINCE THE GAME IS INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED TO HAVE LIMITED STARTING INVENTORY SPACE at a cost of ZERO. Voting with our wallets will not work, because we reasonable adults are out numbered by children who do not know better but have access to their parents credit cards. Children are being taught that paying for pixels is just as reasonable as ordering a hamburger or a bag of chips. Infact, that direct analogy is used often. "Oh it's no big deal, just the price of a happy meal!" After all, these are ultimately games marketed towards children, and the majority of users are children. By the time they grow up and realize the scam, it will be too late and they will be back here... where we are now. Arguing against the next move of mmo monetization while a rabble of ignorant children shout them down.
Sorry but I'd have to side with the guy with more money than brains, rather than the guy with none of either. He's right, if you dont like it, dont buy it/pay for it. There are many many choices out there for gaming, and if a company decides something costs X amount, and you dont want to pay that much, well sucks for you. You can either take it, or leave it and maybe hope that eventually the price will come down. If enough people refuse to pay it, then yeah eventually it will come down, or the game itself will. Pretty simple concept, and the way nearly every other transaction in the world works. Not to mention, its pretty damn pathetic to rant as if it is the game companies responsibility to teach our children. Are the games marketed towards children? In some cases yes (at least to an extent) but the majority of MMOs are geared towards teenagers and up, and the major gaming demographic of people in their 20s which makes up most of their fanbase, NOT children, and certainly not children who are too young to be able to understand simple rights and wrongs (unless theyre legally retarded or just raised horribly without a bit of common sense). Are you giving your kids a credit card to charge whatever they want on? If so thats your own damn fault, not the gaming companies. Dont put some false responibility onto gaming, or any other companies to raise your children. Teach them how to spend responsibly yourself. Teach them some self control and the real value of a dollar. Its about as pathetic as all these fat lazy ass parents who cry "oh no they showed something bad on TV and thats not allowed because im too fking lazy to teach the kid right vs wrong myself, and just leave it up to TV, radio, and the internet to do my job for me" or blame bad things happening (shootings, fights, etc) on the media, when the media shouldnt be the ones raising them to begin with.
Im in my 20s, i have a job, i support myself entirely, and make a logical decision wether or not something is worth paying for or not. If its not, i simply go without it. Ive spent a range from $0 to several thousand $ on games over the years, because i decided "what the hell, ive got a few extra bucks and im willing to pay $10 for this extra thing in a game". I was in no way forced or required to play the game, or spend that money. Montin is right, it is JUST a game, regardless of how wrapped up you are in it. It is in no way a need to live, it is a form of entertainment, and should not require legislation. If people need the government legislating and telling you "its ok to pay this much for x amount of entertainment".... well then i dont even know where to begin telling some of you to seek help, i would think it's pretty futile no matter where you seek it.
The article highlights some important problems regarding RMT. Specifically, Presidents of MMO companies telling customers one thing and then doing the opposite. I believe Smed was used as an example of this.
I'm not sure I'd use Cryptic as a better example though. There's debate about whether or not the playable races (available only in STO's RMT shop) affect gameplay. They have stat bonus combinations that are not available in any other starting Federation races. Does that affect gameplay? If it does, then Cryptic pledged to have this option available ingame, and yet, it is not.
Personally, I like the way Gamigo handles RMT. The games are free, and they have an item shop. These aren't run like most item shops though. As a player, you buy a license to an item for a specific period of time. If the item is changed in any way during that time, and you are unhappy, you get your money back.
Having said that, I still prefer a straight subscription model. I like paying for a clearly defined entertainment service on a monthly basis. I don't like hidden fees, especially those that tend to multiply.
As for the playing community speaking more clearly, I think there's a real problem with this expectation. The "community" does not in any way exist as a unified entity. We don't have plans, policies or official representatives. MMO companies may have all of these things (and they do), but gamers do not, and why should they?
MMO companies should have staff who are expert at taking the pulse of their particular target audience. We certainly have this in my industry. When we fail to accurately assess our market, our programming goes awry. It's our fault, not our customers'. The same, I believe, is true of MMOs.
MMO companies, if they want to succeed, need to do a much better job of obtaining, understanding and acting on meaningful consumer input. This means sifting through feedback looking for recurring, significant themes. It also means liaising with players effectively so that these themes are properly understood. Then it involves determining an effective response to the data, once again with consumer input.
Some of the MMOs that have had the most spectacular failures, according to MMORPG staff articles, have also been the worst at gathering, listening to, interpreting and responding to player feedback. The RMT issue is no exception, unfortunately.
Another article about Item Malls.
And this time they imply its "controversial".
Its not controversial. People hate it. Its bad. Its objectivelly bad.
MMORPG.com spoonfeeding again. I wonder how much $ selling this beliefs is worth for them.
Oh BTW I was paid to say this to you buy the secret society of item malls: Your handle name is wasted on you.
Here is my take.
FTP + PTP + RMT = Options.
I'm going to take FreeRealms as my example.
It offers quite a bit of content for "Free".
Sure, you can't do all the "member" missions or wear ALL the gear or level up ALL the classes. You CAN still do quite a lot for and you don't have to pay a dime to do it. You CANT play MOST MMORPGs for Free. Not even a little bit.
Then, for $5.00 USD a month you have the option of unlocking a ton of content!
$5.00 USD a is far less than most subscription MMORPGS and it's OPTIONAL.
I kind of consider this as just another form of RMT . Each Month I buy a truckload of privileges and extras!
It may not be worth $5.00 USD to everyone, but it is for me.
(To note, If you PAY your $5.00 USD a month you get a 10% Discount on all Market Place Transactions as just one of the perks).
Then there are RMT ... Again, OPTIONAL. The player buys what they want and nothing more. If its too expensive, then they can buy something else. You don't have to be a Paying member to buy stuff off the marketplace nor do members have to spend real life cash beyond their membership for the month.
You can even spend your Station cash to pay for your membership fee if you like.
All of it, its all optional.
I (as the player) get to choose how much I want to invest and spend what I want. Personally, I like having these kinds of options open to me.
To end:
Something I appreciate with Sony Online's (Yes, Sony did do something right for once and they should get a cookie) is their "Station Cash" translates easily to Real World Money. One "Station Cash" point = 1 Cent. Easy. 100 SC and I know it costs $1.00 USD right away.
I really like knowing exactly how much real world cash something is going to cost without having to work it out in my head just to see if its really worth it to me.
That and I can usually reduce my Account to 0 pretty easily.
If online games are going to offer RMT for virtual goods, my only demand is that they be honest about it. No more of this $10.00 USD = 8000 Stupid Points, or working it out so there is no way to spend all of it (I'm looking at you Micro$oft )
Anyway, for what its worth, that's my opinion on the matter.
First, thanks for replying. Second, I feel the need to state that I'm by no means trying to tar and feather you so if it may look like my writing is doing such I'm not. Eight years as a soldier and I still do the majority of things aggressively but certainly without any genuine malice. That said...
I don't think there is a mixed message being sent by western gamers. Irrespective of what the sales numbers say (even you admitted western numbers were foggy in this thread) I fell comfortable right at this moment making the uneducated (key word there) statement that the number of western gamers who don't use the Items shops is far, far, far greater that the numbers that do. Adding to that let's delve into the actual buyers of those items and I'd have to wonder how many of those transactions were by gold sellers.
As for playing gamer and reporter at once I may be able to sympathize with your inference as I've done the soldier and "diplomat" at once. Smile and grin but keep your thumb on the selector switch and be ready to shoot. I won't ask you to reveal your other "handles" on this or other sites for the obvious reason (and no, I'm not trying to stalk you, heheh).
I have to disagree a little on your take on why players aren't getting listened to. I think it's simply because it's the easiest route to go. Only one time really in the history of MMO gaming have players concerns been listen to with the route you propose and that other media and company officials have said which is to speak with their wallet: SWG. Even with that the company still didn't "listen" to it's player base and open up a classic server or two to give their previously paying customers what they wanted.
As for the summit or conference idea I think it'd give some formal representation for players. It may not make significant impact immediately yet once it had a few years to grow and establish some clout with the media and then gaming companies I think it may be able to effect some positive changes. I agree that having players follow any immediate manifesto because there isn't a clear, central avenue to communicate on such a large scale to MMO gamers. Sites like these are all we have. Efforts such as those that I mentioned would be to bring together various sites like these to get a more far reaching messaging and closer to full and proper representation. Not just for the RMT issue but for various other issues.
Trouble is a grassroots effort just won't work without some support from the gaming media and media sites (which at current will only remain neutral as you state) or by some well established company taking up the torch to get these recurring meeting in place. As I've said above, the companies aren't going to just listen to us at current (gamers want to play games and if this is all they're offering we have not much of another choice other than to not use the item malls or stop gaming). Such an effort needs a well known General to muster all the proper resources.
In terms of handles, 98% of the time I go by missyshade as handles in the community or just by a variation of my name (such as jskelton). One of the reasons I don't post a lot on community forums anymore is because of my "status" as a press member; some games I have press accounts to and so I tread a little more carefully. Plus I get read and watched by companies, some of whom are trying to "figure me out." I do play the mysterious and silent most of the time because of this, because I try to stay a generally neutral party. Cryptic has asked a friend of mine when he visited their studio if I hate them based on my columns (I don't), and I've had other gaming bigwigs message me in regards to posts I've made on forums.
They know how to find me, and sometimes it's creepy, so I tend to walk with soft steps. What I said to girlgeek was quite appropriate: I am not as transparent in my views as people think. I am more devil's advocate than revealer of my own feelings (a trend I started quite young when debating.)
Any way. . .
I think every company case can be different. There are certainly companies out there who are listening very intently about microtransactions and trying to give the players what they want as much as possible (usually these are F2Ps though, and not subbers.) And then there are companies that are clearly disconnected, as Lum/Scott's article brought to light about the Allods Online fiasco. There are certainly plenty in between to some degree.
What is true, though, is that I have yet to see a company take a real in-depth look at what the players want. They do research via perhaps random surveys, or polls on the main page of their site, or read a few forum posts that say "Damn it'd be cool if I could have a unicorn; I'd even pay for it." From what I have seen, most do research ex post facto. So in that, I can agree you're right - many do take the lazier way out of it - but I also will politely hold that the community is still sending some mixed messages.
After all, RMTs in subscription games for the western market are fairly new.
A grassroots effort would be astounding to see from the community in this area though, simply because you don't really see gamers garner behind a cause very clearly, especially one so specific as this - except via those stupid "sign here" petition threads on forums.
Also, I'll leave a quick reminder note to those of you who have piped in to say that this is MMORPG.com being paid to support X and tell you Y, I'll remark again (although it seems to not ever be heard) that I am a freelancer. The only thing MMORPG.com tells me in regards to my column is when they're due and when I'll get paid. The rest is all up to me, so feel to direct your nerdrage appropriately. I don't mind.
Folks, I won't be keeping up on this thread as much now, but if you have something you really want to bring up to me, just send me a message here.
Honestly, I don't know what to do with micro-transactions, other than ignore them as I have been. The cat's out of the bag, it's not going to go back in, and it happens to be made of gold.
I personally don't like them because they're the embodiment of a slippery slope (what *can't* we charge for now!?
), but it's people's choice on what they spend money on, regardless of whether they're *hurting* everyone else. I think item shops have the potential to be interesting akin to drooling over the Skymall catalog, but it never stays that way and necessities start creeping in. I was playing WoW, up until they introduced those two vanity pets. I left for a lot of reasons, and those were one (or would you say two?) of them. I went to joing my boyfriend in DDO, but on top of the game being sort of clunky (though I think this is just because I was coming from WoW), the fact I could barely progress without using the item shop made the game lose it's lustre real quick.
If you don't like it, don't play.
Well I stopped playing, and guess what? Nothing's different other than now I'm bored and nobody gives two craps whether I give them any more money or not ('cept maybe my ex-guildies). Not only are there more vanity pets, they're more expensive (albeit these come with a real plush counterpart), and there's hundreds more people to take my place. I don't even want the pets, but I wouldn't deny those people who really do want them. I would feel better if they thought a little before throwing money at anything shiny, something along the lines of... "Hey, why is that $10? This other game B that's not even pulling a quarter of A's revenue is only charging half to a third for their version of that thing." If you don't like it, is a fallacy and it doesn't work or mean anything, other than a thinly veiled way for people to actually say "shut up and go away/stop making sense at me". I voted with my money and all it got me was irritation and a ton of hard work down the drain.
Stop being cheap. (Or get a job. Or don't tell me how to spend my money.)
How come you get to tell me how to spend mine, though?
I have the money. I am choosing not to spend it, as I see there will be problems down the road with boundaries on what they can/will charge and what for. Saying no immediately is better (and easier) than waiting til it's too late and then the publishers/developers/blind fanboys will just tell you to shove off because you had no problem with it before, and again, there'll be more people to take your place.
I agree that the biggest problem is that the community will say one thing quite vocally and then have one hand with their fingers crossed and the other waving 'gimme' with a couple of bills in it. Because of that, outside of a colossal screw up (aka Allods), there really isn't anything anyone can do now.