In Defense of Microtransactions (Design)

Microtransactions have been a hot button topic in video games for years. Since Bethesda's Oblivion back in 2006, which featured cosmetic armor for your horse locked behind a $2.50 paywall, video game publishers have been trying every way imaginable to add in-game purchases to their titles.

These "microtransactions" most often take the form of fun outfits for your character, experience boosts to make you progress faster, or currency which can be used to buy things in-game. They often are accompanied with a cheaper price up-front, as companies know they can make their money using microtransactions after the initial sale.

Oblivion's horse armor, one of the first examples of a microtransaction in video games

Almost every gamer I know is passionately "anti-microtransactions". They view the entire system as exploitative and greedy, and wish video game monetization could go back to "the way it used to be" (where you spend a set amount once, and have all content in the game for life). I'm here to pointedly disagree with this attitude and show why microtransactions can actually be healthy for video games as a whole.

1. Microtransactions more evenly distribute the cost of the game

Regardless of what monetization system a game developer implements - the bills need to be paid. In a traditional system (the one-and-done pay system mentioned earlier), all the players pay the exact same amount, regardless of how much they play the game or their economic well-being.

By shifting the game's development cost from an up-front purchase to microtransactions, the financial onus is heavily skewed onto the wealthiest members of the playerbase. Players who can afford to spend a lot pick up the cost of the poorer players. Essentially, it's a tax bracket system for the the game's price.

I understand this point might not convince some people - especially if they have different political views from my own. But we can't expect the gaming community to turn a blind eye to societies' unfair distribution of wealth. Microtransactions can help even the playing field.

2. Microtransactions expand the playerbase

Games featuring microtransactions are often free, or are significantly cheaper than their microtransaction-free counterparts. League of Legends is the one of best examples of this. For its entire lifespan, it has been completely free-to-play and solely relied on cosmetic microtransactions for revenue. To say this has been instrumental to the game's success is an understatement. League of Legends never would have grown to where it is today if people couldn't try it out for free.

On the flipside, today I found myself considering trying out Amazon Game Studio's New World. The game was just released and has had a lot of money thrown into it, so I figured I'd at least give it a shot. That was until I realized the game came with a $50 price tag. I had heard mixed reviews of the game and wasn't willing to risk $50 on a game that might be disappointing.

Ten years ago, that's just the way it was - buying a game was an investment into something unknown. But these days, there are far too many free-to-play games on the market to justify taking the risk, unless you are confident you'll enjoy the game.

In game development, getting people to sit down and play an hour of your game is already hard enough - so reducing or eliminating the up-front cost can significantly increase your chances of attracting new players. More new players equals more long-term players, and thus a healthier playerbase.

3. Microtransactions encourage the developer to continue development after release

This one is pretty self-explanatory. In a system without microtransactions, once the developer has your money in-hand, they have no incentive to keep you happy. Any bugs found upon release will likely stay in the game, and there's no chance of extra content being made unless it's locked behind a paywall.

This applies to games that have purely cosmetic microtransactions as well. League of Legends doesn't have any in-game purchases that affect the gameplay, but Riot still releases new characters every year. They understand that maintaining a consistent playerbase through proper design choices keeps players around to spend money on cosmetics. Sure, it's a roundabout way of earning revenue, but the success of League shows that it works.

Examples of "skins" in League of Legends, their system of cosmetic in-game purchases

It's worth noting that this can go too far sometimes. Once a company has a product that can consistently make money, they might be less-incentivized to make the next title in the series. Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto V is a great example of this. The game came out almost a decade ago, yet Rockstar still earned over a billion dollars through microtransactions last year alone. Meanwhile, we have heard almost nothing about GTA VI, and most people aren't expecting it for several years.

4. Microtransactions can make the developer more money

One of the most successful games of all time, Nintendo's The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, sold almost 25 million copies. At 60 dollars a copy, the maximum estimate of revenue from that game is around $1.5 billion. Quite impressive - but it's nothing compared to the billions of dollars annually that games like League of Legends and GTA V can rake in.

It's a little weird that I feel like I need to say this, but I fully support video game developers making more money. With more profit come more developers and interest, meaning gamers can look forward to exciting new titles and franchises. As someone who is deeply connected to the video games as a whole, I'm always happy to see the industry grow.

When are microtransactions harmful?

Critics of microtransactions often cite a few scenarios as "proof" that these systems are unhealthy:

1. Systems designed to be addictive. Some games features in-game gambling and "loot boxes" where the player is paying for a chance of getting the item they want. Players get hooked and ruin their lives by spending thousands of dollars trying to get the best items.

2. Games that require an unreasonable amount of time or money to unlock the best content. Battlefront II is the perfect example of this. Upon its release back in 2017, the best characters in the game were practically unreachable without succumbing to purchasing dozens of loot boxes for hundreds of dollars. The outrage from the community was so large it led to the single most downvoted comment in Reddit history.

3. When children make tons of in-game purchases without their parents' knowledge. This is especially likely to happen with mobile games, where there might not be a password or confirmation that a purchase is legitimate.

These are all completely valid points, and I acknowledge that microtransactions have made many games significantly worse. But I don't think it's fair to blame it on microtransactions themselves. Situations like Battlefront II were simply poor implementations of microtransactions, and critics need to remember games like League of Legends, Overwatch, or Rocket League where these kinds of systems worked well. Even Battlefront II eventually changed its system after the backlash and is widely regarded to be in a better place now.

Battlefront II's loot system

Additionally, if a child can spend their parents' credit card on a video game, there's nothing stopping them from using the same card on any other online store like Amazon. The problem is clearly that the child is able to make purchases without their parents' permission, not that the game makes them able to buy things.

Final thoughts

I often hear critics say: "Some people spend thousands of dollars on a single video game. How are you okay with that?"

You will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on experiences you enjoy in your life. Read that again. Whether it's going out to a movie with your friends, visiting relatives, or going on vacation - doing things you enjoy costs money. The people who spend "thousands of dollars" also play for thousands of hours. It's their version of your trip to the Caribbean.

If you have a problem with people spending that much time and money on video games, your problem isn't with microtransactions. Your problem is with people enjoying their life differently from you.

In summary, I strongly believe if microtransactions are done right, they can be beneficial to both the player and the developer. As long as companies keep their ethics in check, I don't think the video game community should be as inherently against microtransactions as we are.