What do you think about RNG microtransactions like Overwatch loot boxes, CSGO weapon cases, etc.? Would you rather pay a little more to get the specific item that you want, like a certain character skin?

They make the company money and I don't think theyre bad.

Paying to win is shitty, though

Depends on the quality of the content that comes as a result of them

Microtransactions are cancerous enough as is. They don't need to be compounded.

P2W Systems are pure cancer.

Cosmetics are fine by me.

An enormous scam, like all DLC. Fuck it all.

Do you class expansions (IE like what they do in Fallout/ TES with a new area/ quests/ weapons/ armour) in this or do you just mean like map packs and stuff?

Quote from: BaconShelf on September 02, 2016, 05:57:00 PM

Do you class expansions (IE like what they do in Fallout/ TES with a new area/ quests/ weapons/ armour) in this or do you just mean like map packs and stuff?

The latter is far more egregious, and I hold a lot more contempt for it. But DLC in general is something I've always despised, just on the principle that no one should ever have to pay more than $60 for a complete game. No matter what.

It's a fair enough point, particularly when it's content cut from the original launch (Read: Destiny)

I suppose it depends on your POV. For example, creating expansion content prolongs the life of the game by keeping things fresh, and allows level designers/ prop artists/ environment artists etc to have something to do while the next game is in pre-production (Basic design, engine, concept art and stuff). For a single player game I'd say a good proper expansion that's basically a smaller game in its own right is cool, but stuff like multiplayer maps which are essentially limited time content are a lot more egregious, like you said.

Done (relatively) Right: Halo 5 - Moderatly fast to earn, No Duplicates
Done Wrong: Black Ops 3 - Take fucking forever to earn, Duplicates up the asshole, Only Way to gain the DLC weapons

Here is my thoughts.

Microtansactions have a place in gaming, yes they do. However since the business model has been so widely used it makes it difficult to pick out which set of microtransactions are actually good. With triple A titles with $60 price tags are rolling with $2-$30 transactions. It's clearly the better way to go for most devs as it makes the most money.

Does that make it horrible? When done to a malicious level yes, if you are literally inable to play the game to it's fullest without purchasing something extra(F2P models not counting here, I can understand F2P games doing it) then microtransactions are only being used with money on the mind. With no care of the consumers they are selling it to.
Now, not all microtransactions are bad, some are limited to small things like cosmetics. However the amount of games that adopt the other way of doing things is enormous.

Let's look at the RNG ones now, as OP asked. You pay a certain amount of money, usually around $2-$3, to get a randomized item/multiple randomized items in the game. There is no way to guarantee you'll get what you want, but there is a chance.
I'm generally against this, since it promotes a gambling sense of mind and CS:GO is a perfect example where it literally went the gambling route. Of course there are things like Overwatch and Halo 5 where the items you get are extremely limited to cosmetic or only used in one gamemode, with usually easy access to a new pack or crate you can get for free or by purchase if you wish. None of these items are tradable and have a credit system in which you can buy either the skins or packs with.
Systems like these are 10x better than ones previously mentioned, but still have that...effect on people.
If someone sees another guy with a mythic piece of armor in Halo 5, that guy may say "I want that helmet". Thus breeding this idea that he can get that helmet if he continually buys gold packs. In a system which will give you everything but a mythic helmet first.

Similarly in Overwatch, except there is a much smaller pool of things to unlock and you can get duplicates which gives you a small sum of currency instead. The same rules apply to Overwatch, someone sees a legendary, wants it, buys a bunch of loot packs in hopes of getting it.

So generally, while some of the benefits of microtransactions are nice(free DLC) I would prefer the old method

Overwatch did it good... until, uh, the Summer games. That stopped me from playing until it ended.

I want that freakin Genji skin though

Also it's basically gambling without a free way to acquire it

It's not inconceivable that "entirely new expansions that took the production team months to make and are distinct from the original" could be genuinely made, or have been made, but right now, i think we're at a point where the line between "honest expansion" and "mendacious money grabber" is becoming too blurred to make any meaningful distinction

It's shit like this that annoys me in particular



£8/$10 is way too much for the certification and a few disposable weapons, and to top it off they made the ingame currency amount required so bloody high that it's incredibly tedious to get without paying extra

And where's the money going? Not towards supporting the game.

REQ Pack money goes to HCS which about 10 people watch.

If they're purely for cosmetics and don't alter gameplay, then I'm okay with them.