So, to put my position with Crash into a complete context. I picked up the Switch version Crash Team Racing launch day; it was a game I planned to run at the 2019 Tech Games Fest to... mixed opinions. Did not catch the same crowd as Mario Kart did. As of the day before this gets published, I have updated the game to view the current Pit stop shop (the in game marketplace), and while the prices have been raised to a few thousand (from what I've seen), the ability to purchase the in game currency with real money is not available in the Nintendo Switch version of the game, and the eShop. I am not saying that they are not in the Switch version of the game; I just have not been able to see them. The current price for the regular Switch version (not the deluxe edition) is around $60-$70 AUD, depending on where you buy it. I know it's on the PS4 version, the website though is having display issues at the moment, so I can't get those prices, but based on the prices in the UK, it isn’t cheap, with reports coming out that (proportionate to the release price of the game) transactions costing close to a quarter of the game's prices. From other games I have seen and played (at least on mobile), I am not surprised by that, as some "micro-transactions" can cost upward of a few hundred dollars.
*It should be noted that after writing this, I did get the PSN prices, $3.75, $7.55 and then $14.95, which roughly lines up with the UK prices, in terms of cost to buy compared to cost of game. I'm also seeing reports of them being in the Switch version, but I am still unable to find them*
One of the big things that piss me off when it comes to this is the implementation into the game, and other recent Activision games like last year's Call of Duty. Post launch implementation. Many people have been making a note of the implementation of micro-transactions in games lately, ever since EA's disaster that was Star Wars Battlefront 2... the new one. One thing that the ESRB tried to implement was labels on boxes showing that the game contains in game purchases. While I am personally not a fan of this because I have seen firsthand how little people care about those ratings at times, it was something that would help protect publishers from government regulation. Doing this comes off as a big middle finger to the system (and I use that one over the Australian classification board because let us be honest here, which country would hit them harder if they were removed?) that is meant to protect them. I would say how greedy do you need to be, but this is the same system that thinks that Super Hyper Supreme, $3-400 collectors editions, season pass, expensive DLC outside of the season pass, pre order bonuses, sponsorship deals, tax re-baits, and more on top of the micro-transactions isn't enough money to be made (to which I say "Maybe stop filling our console hard drives with uncompressed graphics at ridiculous resolutions, that might help bring the budget down".
The other thing with the post launch implementation is that we have clear-cut sources of how much these types of mechanics diminish games, regardless of the "it's just cosmetic" bullshit. Before the patch, the games shop allowed you to purchase characters, karts and other cosmetic items for reasonable prices, a few hundred coins, maybe a thousand at most. After the announcement, I have seen character packs go for almost 10,000 coins now ("on sale" mind you), and when I went to check the store earlier, I saw similar items go for 3-4k coins. That is the problem with these types of systems, systems that telling people the odds of randomized loot will not help solve. It is a rigged system that can be changed as needed to try to push more and more players into paying for the game. They may claim it is optional, but the systems are designed to make the options as biased as possible.
While I can tolerate it in phone games, due to the nature of the market now, no one is willing to just buy a game there. It's something that I wish would leave, especially in the AAA industry because claiming these systems help make the game a "Live service" means nothing, especially when some of the games like the sports games and Call of Duty are yearly releases, the items you earn in the games will mean nothing by the time the next game comes out because of the fact that you can't even transfer them to the new games, let alone be able to sell them (because that would push these mechanics from being barely legal to outright illegal). No matter what way you look at these types of things, the fact that these systems are this close to being considered gambling should make you sick, yet people look the other way because "It's just cosmetic", "I don't need to spend money, and I’ll just grind for it". There are reports of kids being bullied because they are using default skins in Fortnite, and companies have released earning reports that show that these systems are making up more than 50% of their total revenue. How do those arguments still stand?
I may end up doing a follow up to this, but there is only one thing I need to say to close this out. I have not heard one valid, genuine argument to keep these mechanics in games. The best I have heard is supporting the developers, and while that may be true for phone games and indie games, it is not true for the AAA scene. That money goes to the publishers, to the higher ups as bonuses. If anyone can give me a strong, unquestionable reason to keep them in, I will change my mind on the matter. However, until then, this system is doing more harm than good.
No comments:
Post a Comment