It's all very "don't let the facts get in the way of a good outrage", and it's an aspect of gamer culture I'm really not fond of. Just as people who hated Ubisoft tried to claim that AC: Origins is level-gated to force you to buy XP microtransactions, despite the fact the game doesn't let you buy XP microtransactions until the post-game to avoid that very example. Folks were just looking for reasons to be angry at Konami. While some of the later changes to MGS V were not great, I remember people claiming that the reason why Metal Gear Solid V had timers was to force people to buy microtransactions to speed up the timers, even though there were not any microtransactions to speed up said timers. They're angry and searching for reasons to justify their anger after the fact. It's the same reason you've got people on the Steam forums wailing about the "loot boxes" the game supposedly has. However I think there's a lot of "screw microtransactions" rhetoric that underpins this and makes it impossible for Konami to actually "win". That tends to grate less, although it's obviously less lucrative.īear in mind the do give you the ingame currency on a regular basis, too, which means you can get some of these features without paying actual money. Instead of giving 1 thing and charging for every other thing, a better scheme is something like give 2, pay for a third. Now one can certainly contest whether Konami got the mixture right and I think this particular example is poorly handled. Your video conversion software might lock that feature behind a paywall. For example, how many people want to burn subtitles into video? Well, probably the "completely legitimate anime" demographic, for instance. You identify features that are not essential, but enough people might want over a period of time.
Click to shrink.It's basically how most software designers approach monetization.
0 kommentar(er)
