Patent reveals Activision uses matchmaking to encourage players to buy more microtransactions

LOL at thinking only Activision is doing this...


i dont think they are the only ones doing it. i didnt even say that, so im not sure where you are getting that from.

its in general really fucking annoying
 
EA should be suing them for patent infringement lol
 
100% feels like overwatch already does this being in the Activision family.

I guess, but Overwatch items are all cosmetic. Blizzard does a good job cycling through event skins that people actually want and providing an avenue to achieve Loot Crates that feels easy enough, but also juust annoying enough to make you want to drop some cash now and then.
 
The F2P/P2W/MT model is a slippery slope. The worst part of the model, in my opinion, is when developers purposefully make the gaming experience tedious or frustrating, and then offer a solution to the problem you can purchase. That's just straight up bad game design, and sleezy business practice. I'm also not a fan of developers who create content, then remove it from the game and sell it as DLC later on. Don't sell me a knowingly incomplete product.
 
Wasnt surprised when i read this a few days ago. Its a way to level out revenue on bi-yearly released game franchises whos lifespan is short. Also creates a superior revenue source for prior titles once a newer title is released.
 
Also props to The Division for introducing encryption crates (microtransaction) that were purely cosmetic in a game that literally revolves around hours of grinding for chest pieces
 
I guess, but Overwatch items are all cosmetic. Blizzard does a good job cycling through event skins that people actually want and providing an avenue to achieve Loot Crates that feels easy enough, but also juust annoying enough to make you want to drop some cash now and then.
It's not so much about getting people to buy loot boxes right after a match has ended, as it is keeping people playing so they'll buy loot boxes over time, especially during the events.

Pairing potatoes with people who are far more skilled in order to keep some people thinking they are getting better and progressing when in truth they're not. That way the potatoes are less frustrated and think they are doing way better than they actually are.

I am sure there are many creative methods a game can use to try to keep their gamers coming back.. casinos have been doing it for years and so have some phone apps.

For ow it would be more about keeping players addicted and trying to pry money out of them in the long run.

But obviously it wouldn't be exactly like the one example given in the article, I am sure they have lots of ideas to generate more money from their game as a service product.
 
Possibly they could see that you're a 'Mercy main', and not give you the seasonal Mercy skin. I'm sure they haven't done that in the past, but it's another thing that might be coming?
 
It's not so much about getting people to buy loot boxes right after a match has ended, as it is keeping people playing so they'll buy loot boxes over time, especially during the events.

Pairing potatoes with people who are far more skilled in order to keep some people thinking they are getting better and progressing when in truth they're not. That way the potatoes are less frustrated and think they are doing way better than they actually are.

I am sure there are many creative methods a game can use to try to keep their gamers coming back.. casinos have been doing it for years and so have some phone apps.

For ow it would be more about keeping players addicted and trying to pry money out of them in the long run.

But obviously it wouldn't be exactly like the one example given in the article, I am sure they have lots of ideas to generate more money from their game as a service product.
Indeed, this is a larger issue that I'm seeing across the board. I've had suspicions that certain games suddenly make it harder to get wins in F2P models when wins are the fastest way to acquire meaningful game currency just before you've acquired enough currency for a big new purchase (ex. a locked hero, a major upgrade, a new item or talent, etc.) This capitalizes on the brain reward system they've all been manipulating. It capitalizes on those most vulnerable to the "immediate gratification" stimulus.

That's exactly how casinos think, and how game companies will (or already do) too. We're going to see more and more symmetry between those industries. They are, after all, in essence, exactly the same.
 
Indeed, this is a larger issue that I'm seeing across the board. I've had suspicions that certain games suddenly make it harder to get wins in F2P models when wins are the fastest way to acquire meaningful game currency just before you've acquired enough currency for a big new purchase (ex. a locked hero, a major upgrade, a new item or talent, etc.) This capitalizes on the brain reward system they've all been manipulating. It capitalizes on those most vulnerable to the "immediate gratification" stimulus.

That's exactly how casinos think, and how game companies will (or already do) too. We're going to see more and more symmetry between those industries. They are, after all, in essence, exactly the same.
Exactly!! Things are changing Now that games have gone from being a one time sale that only gets companies money one time when the game is sold, to a service that continues to offer things available for purchase for years after the initial game is sold.
There is a new term floating around, game as a service. This of course is a take off of software as a service or platform as a service, already massively successful models in the IT world.

Once they became GaaS, you better believe they are getting scientific on ways to get people to continue to use their service and generating revenue.
 
I am perfectly fine with dropping some money on a game like Path of Exile. Stash space is the only "p2w" game impacting mtx, but the game itself is free, you can create multiple accounts if you didnt want to pay for stash space, and for the price of a standard AAA title, you could buy a supporter pack, get some cosmetics from that and enough points to buy plenty of extra stash space for convenience.

AAA titles that charge $60 for the base game or 100+ for some bullshit deluxe edition AND tack on another 40+ for a season pass, AND cosmetic mtx.. and now they want to add game impacting mtx?

Ya, go f*ck yourselves.

And I dont know about anyone else, but I couldnt give less of a f*ck what anyone else on my team or an opposing team uses, and the idea of buying something because some aimhack/poopsock streamer has it is next level pathetic.
 
To everyone who said microtransactions were optional and could just be ignored - eat a dick.
 
To everyone who said microtransactions were optional and could just be ignored - eat a dick.
Microtransactions aren't the source of the "disease", here, so to speak.

F2P models are. The smartphone world accelerated this, not the horse armor. It's no different than wives and whores. Turns out paying up front is cheaper.
 
I gave up on multiplayer a long time ago and the state of things as it is today makes me believe i made the right choice for my sanity and wallet.
 
Once the core gaming experience is tweaked in order to continually monetize the product, the changes will be felt no matter how small.

There are so many different games by different publishers that it just doesn't feel right. Whether it's potato pairing, loot box manipulation, forced loss streaks one game away from your goal...etc. ....it's something that gamers feel, even if they can't put their finger on it.
 
I gave up on multiplayer a long time ago and the state of things as it is today makes me believe i made the right choice for my sanity and wallet.
well shadow of mordor or whatever that new game is is a single player with f*cking microtransactions as well, I hope all games don't become like this one day.
 
Back
Top