Now everyone knows that the gaming industry is going in a dark direction. Developers are trying out different ways to get money which have included paying for on disc content and micro-transactions. Sadly, this seems to be the future of gaming which got me wondering.
What if Capcom started using micro-transactions? It would work out like this:
It would be a F2P game but with the quality of a retail priced game. For the exception of offline and online training room; every 5 losses would cost $0.25. That would mean 240 losses would cost the full price of a game ($60) Each day you unlock 5 free losses.
Now what they could do is give an incentive for players to buy losses in large quantities by offering bargain prices. $60 = 400 losses for example. They could always make even better deals during special occasions like the initial release, anniversaries, and EVO. During these special occasions the fee could be lifted for a limited amount of time letting people play as much as they want.
This would mean the product would have to have a quality online experience which would consist of:
Optimal netcode
This is a given. If payments go by losses than their should be no reason to have a subpar net code.
Incentives
Integrate costumes into the ranking system so that for each letter grade a new costume would be unlocked starting with B rank. This is something that you see in a lot of FPS games. The ranking system is cool but their is almost no sense of reward and this would give rank a lot more meaning especially if you consider how difficult it can be to move up rank knowing that a loss could lose you more points than you would get points for winning. Since the costumes are part of the game it would stop people from complaining about on disc content.
Double point weekends. This would help motivate people to play more while earning their rank at a faster pace. There would be 2x points for winning but the normal rate for a loss would remain the same the frustration of the unfair point system. It would also help Capcom make money.
All of this could help the ethics of online play as well. Arcade players mention the sense of risk and how it leads them to playing smarter and on top of losing money, the net code would be a lot better. Instead of having people buy the game and leaving the players with a shitty net code, Capcom would be held up to the standards of their online experience because the people now have the choice not to pay full price. This would also help the offline community because it gives people the option to avoid the overall cost and opting for the offline experience instead at the expense of playing in their boxers/thongs/briefs/granny panties/naked at home. Unless your friends are into that. Totally cool, not judging.
That’s where I got the idea. The difference between normal EA practices and the model I mentioned above is that the payments are much more condensed and many options are given to work around it. I understand micro-transactions piss off customers but like I mentioned; this seems to be the direction the industry is going in.
Instead of dismissing the idea; you could contribute in how to make it better. But I suppose your mindset would be, “Why would I contribute to a shitty idea.”
In which case, don’t. I understand. I prefer how the industry works now as well. I was simply entertaining an idea; how do you make micro-transactions a good thing?
I don’t like how online play is dismissed. The thing is it’s often dismissed because of lag and the ethics that come into play. I was looking to incorporate benefits, risk, and a good net code to help with the ethics of online play while combining a possible business model for the future.
400 losses is a lot of losses and on top free days, special deals, and free DLC I thought it would be worth it. Not to mention offline would be free.
Absolutely abysmal idea with devastating repercussions. KI has shown us that it it’s impossible to detect who disconnects from a match. This either means players lose a credit when someone quits on them, or Capcom has a stupidly simple to exploit system. That is just the surface. Paying per match is a format for arcades, not for home consoles. This system punishes new players… It’s just fucking terrible. Like… There are no words that can truly describe what a horrible, horrible idea this is. We also don’t need Capcom passing off more crap like “double points” as “incentives”… We don’t need to further trivialize the value of something already so frivolous.
If anything remotely close to this happens to any fighting game, I will immediately boycott that company. I could literally write a novel citing the countless reasons this system would be completely unbalanced, restrictive, unfair, technically broken and 100% against the philosophy of fighting games in general.
Pay to play model is not suitable for the home market. In Japan’s arcades I’m paying for the use of the venue and playing against great competition in a lagless fashion. Shitty online FG play at home is simply not worth as much.
If you disconnect in Street Fighter 4 you lose points. So how is it impossible to detect who connects from a match when it’s already been done?
I said you’d be paying for losses, not matches and I had the arcade format in mind. But that being said you’re right, it would deter new players. That was one of your better points.
Doubles points and incentives are often done in FPS games and people like these things.
All in all the only productive thing you said was about how it would hurt beginners; which is a good point and maybe that in itself warrants reconsideration to my idea. Aside from that the rest of your criticisms were, “I don’t like this. This is not what I would want and I would hate it.”
Welcome to SRK! This forum, Fighting Game Discussion, is for discussion of fighting games. Since this isn’t doing that but is instead on some meta tangent about micropayments, I’m going to lock this thread.
I would encourage you to read the “FGD Rules: Read or Be Banned” thread.
