The thing I'm continuously learning by having a donation-funded game is that I could be making a lot of money if I was willing to trick or guilt people into giving me money, and when you're upfront about the fact that the money goes to supporting the game's developers and all you get in return is a glorified receipt, that's enough to make a lot of people decide not to donate.
That was what I was thinking and its true but you can just aswell extend that to Valve locking you into Steam. Chet immedietly dismissed crypto which would potentially solve this problem (the other being just regular bank transactions or paypal). I dont know whether that was concious or uncuncious but he does have a bias there as an ex Valve employee
I don't feel pressure like this when buying skins for games, but I can see how this manifests in some people. I buy skins because I wanna feel cool, but maybe some do in order to feel some kind of progression instead, as if it was a career for them.
As somebody who is very adverse to spending money on microtransactions (even if the game in question is free-to-play), I 100% agree with this video. I've only purchased microtransactions twice in my entire life, and for those two games I have felt a pressure to keep playing them (even if I don't enjoy them) to make those purchases worthwhile... Part of that pressure comes from the fact I'm aware that live service/always online games have an inevitable expiry date - it sounds stupid, but you can't hold off of playing the game to "justify" your purchase(s) when the game could be shut down at any moment, meaning you wasted money on something you didn't spend enough time experiencing. And this is all from the perspective of somebody who avoids microtransactions as much as possible... goodness knows what it's like for somebody who buys microtransactions on a regular basis.
Ultimately the customer's spending habits is a customer issue. In the same way you don't need 8 of the same hoodie IRL, you don't need 8 reskins of the same cosmetic in a game. Things get even more complicated when you factor in the "stop killing games" initiative, like not only has access been revoked to the games, but also to your hoodies. So my personal take is that MX spending habits need to be taught the same way as regular spending habits, but also with the caveat that you're gambling on the servers to access your MX purchases still being online tomorrow. And before the "blockchain will fix this" commenters reply, no it won't. The blockchain may record that I purchased the hoodies, but it can't give me the hoodies back. The hoodies themselves still need to be stored off-chain, and if they're not, they're not.
@@xXx_Regulus_xXx Yeah as much as I'd love to be able to transfer my Sea of Thieves gold or GTA$$$ to my bank account, it's all funny money and should stay that way.
Heh, this is the reason why the only microtransactions I bought were tf2 and csgo items that I sold many many years later when I got bored or wanted to buy a new game
The funny thing about CoD is that you pay to gain access to a marketplace of absurdly priced skins. Nowadays the gameplay takes a backseat over everything else, purchasing microtransactions literally put you into easier games.
in my opinion CSGO had a really cool military/police theme going in 2012, then valve decided to put skins in around 2013 and that kinda ruined the theme and game for me - i liked the artstyle pre-2013 ALOT back then. idk how they could have kept with the theme (kinda like how TF2 weapons are still in the same artstyle and fit in the world, maybe not so much of the hats? its a cartoon looking game though) and monitized it though. what are your thoughts on this? id love to hear about it from you
Every game tries to be your hobby now. And for a small few games that can work; but it destroys the hobby of gaming (sort of; if you are an indie game enjoyer its not so bad). but the real problem is that when everyone focuses on one model; it focuses on one type of player. And I'm sure there are people who swear off of micro transactions after a bad experience with it (and they might be swearing off of all of games). I'm sure there are people who don't play games because they can't find the right games for them. Like what really is the game industries defense to people who say "videogames are a waste of time with no redeeming qualities that get you addicted to spending all you money on what is essentially gambling." And while there are smaller games and indie games that do not do this... Where are these companies spending their money? Who are the studios that stay open and who gets shut down? I know for a fact that 'games are art (or something like art)' but when you point at the multi-national 1000 person studios spending half a billion dollars to build what essentially amounts to a slot machine with extra steps and say 'that's the gaming industry' whatever I'm going to talk about is essentially a rounding error. If your EAs and your Ubisofts and your Microsofts are all chasing that same dragon, I don't think they get to point to the indies making games in their parents basement and on their girlfriend's income and say 'oh but games are art, you can't regulate me, muh selv expresso' No, they chose to be gambling companies and they should get regulated like it. If they don't want the government to giving them an annual colonoscopy then they shouldn't be an asshole. umm, Play more indie games.
Had some fun with Concord, but it was a non-F2P live service game with microtransactions that also didn’t seem like it was going to last 6 months so it was a hard pass for me.
I don't want GTA to become the everything game... But god I'd love a fun way for players to build their own stories and missions in-game. I mean, general modding is always great too of course. But as one of those players that sighed heavily when they went hard on GTAO instead of more single-player missions, it'd be nice if they encouraged that. But then, I think the same when I see a game like Spider-Man. I think "Wow, I'd really love a short monthly mission set kinda like an issue of a comic to be available in-game." But I obviously don't have the insight into the finances. (Other than apparently GTAO prints money.)
the mannconomy update was a mistake. it's important to recognize that valve created the virus that is the lootbox in the form of team fortress 2 crates.
honestly not a fan of those everything games and it doesn't really make me want to buy them because a game that is trying to appeal to everyone usually appeals to noone. Also not a fan of the damage that all this microtransaction stuff has caused (On a side note I hope you have a fantastic day when you read this)
Definitely not a fan of micro transactions, but I am curious whether or not this really matters all that much. If you are the type to spend money on microtransations in the first place, are you the type to listen to this take? Don't they already know generally the impact of microtranactions and yet still choose to engage with them? So a very good point like this one may not at all matter to them anyway. My comment may not fully consider the addictive aspects of microtransactions, but that's a different discussion.
@@chetfaliszek Not only did they exist before TF2 (horse armour! Remember that scandal?!), TF2's approach was unique (for the time) in that you could freely have these "micro-transactions" with other players, rather than just with the dev. I sold some stupid Sam 'n' Max hat and got the brand new Arkham Asylum game in return!
The sims 4 has the worst micro transactions, nearly about £1000 for all the extra packs.
The thing I'm continuously learning by having a donation-funded game is that I could be making a lot of money if I was willing to trick or guilt people into giving me money, and when you're upfront about the fact that the money goes to supporting the game's developers and all you get in return is a glorified receipt, that's enough to make a lot of people decide not to donate.
Wait a minute...is that why the Steam Marketplace exists for TF2/CS? To allow players to "cash out" and switch to another game if they want?
common tf2 w
That was what I was thinking and its true but you can just aswell extend that to Valve locking you into Steam. Chet immedietly dismissed crypto which would potentially solve this problem (the other being just regular bank transactions or paypal). I dont know whether that was concious or uncuncious but he does have a bias there as an ex Valve employee
It was great cashing out my Dota inventory for a Steam Deck lol
I don't feel pressure like this when buying skins for games, but I can see how this manifests in some people.
I buy skins because I wanna feel cool, but maybe some do in order to feel some kind of progression instead, as if it was a career for them.
So, CS2 skins are an investment in the long run to keep me in the game.
But pretty colors and leather 😍
But at least cs and other valve games allow you to cash out. Well, unless you lose money by open cases a lot
@@ctip7216 that's called a casino. Being able to cash out makes it gambling and its not supported or endorsed by Valve
As somebody who is very adverse to spending money on microtransactions (even if the game in question is free-to-play), I 100% agree with this video.
I've only purchased microtransactions twice in my entire life, and for those two games I have felt a pressure to keep playing them (even if I don't enjoy them) to make those purchases worthwhile...
Part of that pressure comes from the fact I'm aware that live service/always online games have an inevitable expiry date - it sounds stupid, but you can't hold off of playing the game to "justify" your purchase(s) when the game could be shut down at any moment, meaning you wasted money on something you didn't spend enough time experiencing.
And this is all from the perspective of somebody who avoids microtransactions as much as possible... goodness knows what it's like for somebody who buys microtransactions on a regular basis.
Ultimately the customer's spending habits is a customer issue. In the same way you don't need 8 of the same hoodie IRL, you don't need 8 reskins of the same cosmetic in a game. Things get even more complicated when you factor in the "stop killing games" initiative, like not only has access been revoked to the games, but also to your hoodies. So my personal take is that MX spending habits need to be taught the same way as regular spending habits, but also with the caveat that you're gambling on the servers to access your MX purchases still being online tomorrow.
And before the "blockchain will fix this" commenters reply, no it won't. The blockchain may record that I purchased the hoodies, but it can't give me the hoodies back. The hoodies themselves still need to be stored off-chain, and if they're not, they're not.
@@xXx_Regulus_xXx Yeah as much as I'd love to be able to transfer my Sea of Thieves gold or GTA$$$ to my bank account, it's all funny money and should stay that way.
Heh, this is the reason why the only microtransactions I bought were tf2 and csgo items that I sold many many years later when I got bored or wanted to buy a new game
The funny thing about CoD is that you pay to gain access to a marketplace of absurdly priced skins. Nowadays the gameplay takes a backseat over everything else, purchasing microtransactions literally put you into easier games.
in my opinion CSGO had a really cool military/police theme going in 2012, then valve decided to put skins in around 2013 and that kinda ruined the theme and game for me - i liked the artstyle pre-2013 ALOT back then. idk how they could have kept with the theme (kinda like how TF2 weapons are still in the same artstyle and fit in the world, maybe not so much of the hats? its a cartoon looking game though) and monitized it though. what are your thoughts on this? id love to hear about it from you
0:55 locked in 😎
excellent take
Chet didn't you guys have micro transactions in portal 2?
What did you learn from that?
Every game tries to be your hobby now. And for a small few games that can work; but it destroys the hobby of gaming (sort of; if you are an indie game enjoyer its not so bad). but the real problem is that when everyone focuses on one model; it focuses on one type of player. And I'm sure there are people who swear off of micro transactions after a bad experience with it (and they might be swearing off of all of games). I'm sure there are people who don't play games because they can't find the right games for them.
Like what really is the game industries defense to people who say "videogames are a waste of time with no redeeming qualities that get you addicted to spending all you money on what is essentially gambling." And while there are smaller games and indie games that do not do this... Where are these companies spending their money? Who are the studios that stay open and who gets shut down?
I know for a fact that 'games are art (or something like art)' but when you point at the multi-national 1000 person studios spending half a billion dollars to build what essentially amounts to a slot machine with extra steps and say 'that's the gaming industry' whatever I'm going to talk about is essentially a rounding error. If your EAs and your Ubisofts and your Microsofts are all chasing that same dragon, I don't think they get to point to the indies making games in their parents basement and on their girlfriend's income and say 'oh but games are art, you can't regulate me, muh selv expresso' No, they chose to be gambling companies and they should get regulated like it. If they don't want the government to giving them an annual colonoscopy then they shouldn't be an asshole.
umm, Play more indie games.
(I haven't eaten yet, sorry I'm a little cranky)
thanks god people forgot about nft in games (Ubisoft excluded)
Had some fun with Concord, but it was a non-F2P live service game with microtransactions that also didn’t seem like it was going to last 6 months so it was a hard pass for me.
Thank you for the video.
I don't want GTA to become the everything game... But god I'd love a fun way for players to build their own stories and missions in-game. I mean, general modding is always great too of course. But as one of those players that sighed heavily when they went hard on GTAO instead of more single-player missions, it'd be nice if they encouraged that. But then, I think the same when I see a game like Spider-Man. I think "Wow, I'd really love a short monthly mission set kinda like an issue of a comic to be available in-game." But I obviously don't have the insight into the finances. (Other than apparently GTAO prints money.)
the mannconomy update was a mistake. it's important to recognize that valve created the virus that is the lootbox in the form of team fortress 2 crates.
honestly not a fan of those everything games and it doesn't really make me want to buy them because a game that is trying to appeal to everyone usually appeals to noone. Also not a fan of the damage that all this microtransaction stuff has caused
(On a side note I hope you have a fantastic day when you read this)
I don't want TF2 to become unpopular. I take that sacrifice. Newest game I played before is Bendy and the Ink Machine, nothing newer than that.
Definitely not a fan of micro transactions, but I am curious whether or not this really matters all that much. If you are the type to spend money on microtransations in the first place, are you the type to listen to this take? Don't they already know generally the impact of microtranactions and yet still choose to engage with them? So a very good point like this one may not at all matter to them anyway. My comment may not fully consider the addictive aspects of microtransactions, but that's a different discussion.
you created microtransactions with tf2.
Um… no.
@@chetfaliszek Not only did they exist before TF2 (horse armour! Remember that scandal?!), TF2's approach was unique (for the time) in that you could freely have these "micro-transactions" with other players, rather than just with the dev.
I sold some stupid Sam 'n' Max hat and got the brand new Arkham Asylum game in return!