Originally Posted by The Verge

Microtransactions have become an increasingly important part of the gaming landscape, and it looks like EA is embracing the concept with open arms. EuroGamer reports that Blake Jorgensen, the company's CFO and executive vice-president, discussed the tiny transactions at the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media, & Telecom Conference yesterday — saying EA would be adopting them in all of its upcoming titles. "The next and much bigger piece is microtransactions within games," he said when asked about the company's digital revenues. "We're building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way, either to get to a higher level, to buy a new character, to buy a truck, a gun, whatever it might be, and consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of the business."

He went on to explain that EA has built a new back-end system to process the transactions, a departure from its previous efforts. While plans for specific games weren't detailed, the emphasis on microtransactions — as well as EA's new unified login system — make it clear that EA sees its digital initiatives as important not only to consumers, but to the company's bottom line as well.

Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel (Post 11596026)

Valve makes microtransactions work because it doesn't affect gameplay, i.e. F2P games like Team Fortress 2 and DOTA 2. The gameplay stays the same, but you can spend as much as you like purchasing hats to your heart's content. DLC is one thing, but microtransactions are entirely different.

Originally Posted by fumanstan (Post 11596058)

That's not necessarily true, you can buy items and weapons in Team Fortress 2, can't you? If not directly, then also by buying pieces to use to craft items. They most definitely let you spend money on things that affect gameplay.

EDIT: Just logged in to TF2, you can most definitely buy weapons directly. So I guess Valve is evil too.

Originally Posted by adrenaline78 (Post 11596130)

So in the future madden game, you'll have to pay extra for the football.

Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel (Post 11596118)

Yes, but the game also drops you said items as you play. If you wanted the weapon right away, you could pay for it. However, you can wait for it and chances are you'll get it sooner rather than later.

I've never paid for items in TF2 and I've managed to do just fine in the game.

Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel (Post 11596026)

Fuck you, EA. Fuck you.

Originally Posted by shumway (Post 11596133)

^^That is the same thing EA does in games like BF3, BF:BC2, and Burnout Paradise. In the first two they sell unlocks so you can have early access to all weapons or tools for specific classes or the like. In Burnout they sell an unlock all token. Players can earn everything still without paying or they can pony up if they don't feel like they have the time. I actually find this reasonable. You aren't hitting a pay-wall. If this happens to change on console games in the future then I can see a problem with it, otherwise whatever.

Originally Posted by Adken (Post 11596429)

The only EA game I currently play is the FIFA series. As long as its just extra stadiums, balls, kits, or other cosmetic things, I don't care.

The only time I spent real cash on in-game purchases was for Diablo3. I spent $10 bucks to get "uber" gear, but ultimately it lessened my enjoyment of the game due to not needing to earn better items by actually playing.

Originally Posted by foxdvd (Post 11596523)

having the ability to buy in game items is one thing....I am more worried about things like the double XP for Gears...or XP boost in EA games. Might not be a big deal for a shooter, but the first time a game like Dragon Age is designed to be brutally hard unless you buy the xp boost...I am out.

I also worry about the rumored price of 70 bucks for EA games next gen.

Originally Posted by fumanstan (Post 11596143)

Ok, but that's still contrary to your initial defense that purchasable items don't affect gameplay. I last played when the Man vs. Machine stuff came out, but I didn't get many drops at all.

Until EA actually has a game out there where you can buy a competitive advantage in multiplayer, who knows if they're going to actually do anything different from other companies out there. Especially if they just end up being cosmetic items or single player enhancements, or the same as TF2 where the items are obtainable via other means in game.

Originally Posted by chuckd21 (Post 11596731)

We can say it's gross all we want, but until you go kick someone in the dick when they hit the button on one of these microtransactions, all the bitching in the world won't change a thing.

Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel (Post 11596749)

I've never encountered drops anytime I've done co-op on TF2, only when I'm playing the rest of the game modes. That might be Valve's doing as all your focus should be on the co-op game and not checking your inventory.

If EA's recent release of Real Racing 3 on the iOS is any indicator, you'll have to pay to enjoy the game. It's a shame as all of the commenters mentioned that they would've rather paid $4.99 - $19.99 on the game rather than have a F2P with microtransactions model.

Originally Posted by mattysemo247 (Post 11596837)

With as fast as Dead Space 3 dropped to $40, they should have just done that from the get go. Then market it as "We gave you the full game for $40 that you can enjoy as it is, but you can also spend some money on micro transactions to unlock the extra stuff if you would like." I'm really not down with micro transactions as it is, but this way it gives people who buy games at launch more incentive to spend a little more on micro transactions since they got the full game at a lower price.

Originally Posted by uteotw (Post 11596768)

Gotta agree. I LOVE the Dead Space franchise, but the stuff they want you to pay extra for, after the $60 price tag, is a complete joke. Want your little scavenger robot to pick up more loot? That's extra money. Want a cool gun? That's extra money. It's ridiculous. On principle alone I will never, ever buy any of this stuff. It's one thing to charge for some big expansion DLC, but nickel and diming gamers to death for every gun and suit disgusts me.

Originally Posted by MoviePage (Post 11597134)

Not to defend this practice, but to be fair, the scavenger robots picking up extra loot can also be done with ration seals that are earned in-game. If there are people who actually chose to pay instead of, or in addition to, using those, well..."a fool and his money." The guns are, from my understanding (since I completed the game and never paid for any of that crap), purely cosmetic, because you can build any uber-weapon you want in-game as well.

The day these things become available only by paying extra money, I'll be protesting as loud as anyone else. I'm more put off by DLC practices in general than these optional microtransactions.

Originally Posted by bippitty (Post 11597358)

I recently got The Saboteur. The game was supposed to have a free DLC that was only available from EA. EA shut down access to the DLC.

I also get tired of EA games that require me to cancel out of logging into their online service every time I play the game. I don't want to socialize my achievements and I don't do multi-player.

I don't believe that EA is worse than Satan. Run by Satan? Certainly. Worse than? No.

Originally Posted by Raul3 (Post 11597740)

There wasn't a DLC.

There was an unlock, to get access to some place where you can see some naked ladies, but it was timed. It actually still unlocked some time after it was supposed to end.

Originally Posted by Krayzie (Post 11597981)

This all started with horse armor!!