3 ms·

There is a flipside to this. In the last few months I have started playing two new games - Apex Legends and Rainbow 6: Siege. Total cost for those two games is

There is a flipside to this. In the last few months I have started playing two new games - Apex Legends and Rainbow 6: Siege. Total cost for those two games is £8.50. They are both supported by microtransactions for cosmetics, leading to no cost for Apex, and a low price for R6 (which is admittedly also a 4 year old game). As someone who has gone from a significant income to a non-existent one due to founding a company, I quite like that my gaming is subsidised by those who are willing to spend lots of money on cosmetics.

thanatos_dem 8y ago
Don’t you need to pay to unlock characters in Rainbow 6? Not sure that counts as cosmetic. Definitely seems like paywalling game content.
- rkangel 8y ago
  Yes, did oversimplify the situation. Both Apex and Rainbow have additional characters that aren't initially unlocked. In both cases, they can be unlocked through a currency earned in game, and you don't have to pay cash. Apex launched with 6 unlocked and 2 locked. After a couple of weeks of play I almost have 1 more unlocked. R6 you start with none, but can get the 'original' 20 operators unlocked pretty quickly (~15 hours of play). There are another 40 or so that take much more 'renown' to unlock, and I may spend some cash on some of them if I continue to play the game. There is enough learning at the moment that I feel no need for that. The result is I think a beneficial incentive. It's not '£50 whether good or bad, 5 hours or 100 hours' classic purchase model, the profits there are a result of marketing as much as game quality. Instead it's 'low or no barrier to entry, and money will only continue to come in if I continue to be engaged with the game'. I may end up spending more money on a game (over time), than I would compared to a purchase price, but that will only be on games that are rewarding me for a decent duration. To me, this means developers are incentivised to make engaging, interesting games that are worthwhile in the long term!

thanatos_dem 8y ago

Don’t you need to pay to unlock characters in Rainbow 6? Not sure that counts as cosmetic. Definitely seems like paywalling game content.

rkangel 8y ago
Yes, did oversimplify the situation. Both Apex and Rainbow have additional characters that aren't initially unlocked. In both cases, they can be unlocked through a currency earned in game, and you don't have to pay cash. Apex launched with 6 unlocked and 2 locked. After a couple of weeks of play I almost have 1 more unlocked. R6 you start with none, but can get the 'original' 20 operators unlocked pretty quickly (~15 hours of play). There are another 40 or so that take much more 'renown' to unlock, and I may spend some cash on some of them if I continue to play the game. There is enough learning at the moment that I feel no need for that. The result is I think a beneficial incentive. It's not '£50 whether good or bad, 5 hours or 100 hours' classic purchase model, the profits there are a result of marketing as much as game quality. Instead it's 'low or no barrier to entry, and money will only continue to come in if I continue to be engaged with the game'. I may end up spending more money on a game (over time), than I would compared to a purchase price, but that will only be on games that are rewarding me for a decent duration. To me, this means developers are incentivised to make engaging, interesting games that are worthwhile in the long term!