GOOD NEWS! EA’s future games will all feature microtransactions!

[Sir Prince]

Said Jorgensen, “We are building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way; to get to a higher level. And consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of business.”

EA’s chief technology officer Rajat Taneja is overseeing the move. Jorgensen added that Taneja’s team views microtransactions as a key feature moving forward, and they have decided to take payment models in-house, instead of outsourcing them as they used to.

Added Jorgensen, “If you’re doing microtransactions and you’re processing credit cards for every one of those microtransactions you’ll get eaten alive. And so Rajat’s team has built an amazing backend to manage that and manage that much more profitably. We’ve outsourced a lot of that stuff historically; we’re bringing that all in-house now.”

Full article at:
http://www.vg247.com/2013/02/27/eas-future-games-will-all-feature-micro-transaction/

I think its safe to say that Blake Jorgensen is a complete idiot, and that we can all save a lot of money from not buying EA games in the future!

Unless this is VG247 posting stuff that is factually inaccurate again, they aren't exactly an example of journalistic integrity or fact checking.

EDIT: RPS link
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/02/27/in-the-grim-darkness-of-eas-future-there-are-only-iaps/#more-143678

UPDATE

ACTUAL GOOD NEWS! (Or EA is lying again, who knows)

The original quote of his:

"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".

Apparently the only games that will definitely have microtransactions are mobile games, the rest will just have the typical DLC and so on that is already par for the course and may or may not have microtransactions.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-03-06-ea-cfo-backs-off-microtransactions-in-all-games-statement

 

[Kevlar]

Not to different from most free to play games essentially then. Only difference is if they are charging $60 for the game and then want you to pay money for other items. If it is only cosmetics though, who really cares.

 

[Sir Prince]

IF its only cosmetics, the problem is that "free2pay" designs usually don't allow or heavily restrict modding and the gameplay is usually designed to promote the microtransactions.

TF2 was not originally designed for microtransactions, those were added in years after release. The game was already designed like "normal".

 

[Wellenbrecher]

And consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of business.

 

[Sir Prince]

Your post would have been better without the .gif. Now I'm just confused by it.

 

[K-64]

Microtransactions and no singleplayer-only games? Stay classy, EA. Stay classy

 

[Wellenbrecher]

Your post would have been better without the .gif. Now I'm just confused by it.

I actually wanted to use something else, but picked the wrong one from the list. Ooops.

There.

 

[rebelknight]

Its EA what do you expect.

 

[Sir Prince]

Its EA what do you expect.

Well as it turns out, for all my fears to come true.

 

[RalliX]

EA: Making your worst fears come true since 200X

 

[Wellenbrecher]

Ah, RPS once more makes me smile at the most annoying of news:

In The Grim Darkness Of EA’s Future, There Are Only IAPs

 

[PoisonCourtesan]

EA, GFWL, Ubisoft. We're heading to the medieval age of videogames.

 

[rebelknight]

We must rise up and rebel!

I nominate Athenian as our leader.

 

[Splintert]

Don't blame EA for adapting the massively successful business model of your favorite MOBA, League of Legends.

 

[Jhessail]

Remember when I posted that link that Sony patented technology that allows them to feed adverts to players? There were corporate cock-gobblers in that thread, defending it. Can't wait for them to show up in this thread as well.

Sure, cosmetic stuff, to begin with. That's how it started with DLC. Then customers got used to it and now we get on-disc, Day 0, dlc that often includes features that were supposed to be in the game to start with. Going to be the exact same thing with micro-transactions. First, you feed customers with meaningless stuff - "oh, that's not too bad, need to satisfy my craving" - before committing fully into it.

 

[Untitled.]

I hate it when Jhess speaks the truth.

 

[Fehnor]

There are always new developers that aren't corporate shills, who make good games without an inherent demand for increasing profit. TW is one of those ...for now...

I don't have anything against people making money. I have something against people making money through "legal" customer manipulation, and dirty business that comes with the package in almost all publicly traded companies.

 

[Splintert]

In most cases the information is there so the consumer can make an informed decision about the product.

Especially in EA's case, we all know their habits.

 

[Mage246]

Guess I'm a corporate cock-gobbler then. If the game itself is free, I have no problem with a micro-transactions model. Or ad-based model. This is based on the assumption that the free version is not a crippled POS that requires microtransactions to actually be playable/completable.

 

[Vermillion_Hawk]

As long as ads aren't intrusive I don't really have much of a problem with them. My issue, as well, is with the point where microtransactions become mandatory. I like the system Age of Empires Online has currently - play for free, and if you really want microtransaction items you can acquire the bought currency by playing in game.

And yeah, buying a game and then having semi-necessary, non-cosmetic microtransactions is completely unacceptable.