Top
170°

Guerrilla Games New PS4 IP to Possibly Have Microtransactions

A free to play shooter on the cards from the Killzone: Shadow Fall developer?

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
The story is too old to be commented.
TimeSkipLuffy1606d ago

F2P would be a no from me :3 I was hoping for a big retail AAA title T___T

gameseveryday1606d ago

It seems like it will be an open world role playing game. It could be free to play but they can also take the route of micro-transactions.

My bet is that it will be something similar to Bungie's Destiny. No monthly subscription and make profit via micro-transactions.

Massacred1606d ago

Except Bungie doesn't seem to be Microtransactions. (for now)

"Our goal is to absolutely make sure that when we deliver a game for $60 that’s a great experience no matter what type of player you are"

-Destiny Senior Writer Eric Osborn

DOMination-1605d ago

Hopefully its not an rpg because that involves writing an actual story which is something this studio seemingly can't do.

Then again I don't want a generic shooter either. I guess GG are screwed either way. One o the worlds most overrated devs for sure.

Sevir1605d ago

Well they Hired the Writer from FallOut: New Vegas I don't think Sony would have one of its biggest studio's new Ip be F2P when.

UnbiasedOpinions1606d ago

Look guys the 60$ Day one purchase isn't working anymore with the cost of game development rising, Microsoft knew it and so dose Sony, they wanted to protect their investments with their original always online crap, so with that said expect more and more microtransactions and F2P and possibly new business models, mark my words, DLC will rise, Microtransactions will rise, F2P will rise, all kinds of tactics to make money as the Triple A market is in decline, only the COD's and huge games can survive nowadays, i know it sucks but its the truth, indies are also on the rise

GarrusVakarian1606d ago (Edited 1606d ago )

I do agree with you (accidentally hit disagree, my bad), i think MT's and DLC's will be implemented even more than they were last gen due to rising dev costs. It sucks, but honestly, as long as a game isn't pay to WIN and everything can be earned in-game without having to grind for 1000's of hours, i don't have much of a problem with it. I also don't care about MT's for cosmetic things like outfits and skins for weapons.

But if it gets to the point where people who pay for MT's have the advantage over players who don't, then that game won't be supported by me.

In terms of GG though, i don't think this new IP will be F2P, i just can't see that happening. If it does end up having MT's however, lets hope they don't go overboard with them.

chrisgay1606d ago

Despite all the "tactics to make money", I'm playing more and more great games for absolutely nothing. Haven't spent a penny on Hearthstone or League of Legends and they're arguably some of my most played games in recent years. Not forgetting TF2 and I haven't even touched DOTA 2 yet.

Some people feel that they need to spend the money for what are effectively shortcuts, skins or occasionally extra content. And those who do are probably still getting a whole lot of game for their relatively inexpensive microtransaction fee.

F2P and Name Your Price indie initiatives are making gaming more affordable for me than ever. Options are great.

UnbiasedOpinions1606d ago

@chrisgay: i was specifically refering to the 60$ games, and PC gaming is not profitable with all the pirating and what not that they need to go F2P like LoL and so forth

sinncross1606d ago

there are so many other full games sold at normal price that have optional micro transactions...

nothing here really suggests its a F2P title.

For know they are supposedly making a WRPG, so the microtransactions could be anything from paying for buffs or just visual fun for armour etc.

memots1606d ago

Exactly , every games nowadays have some micro transaction/add-on , it's getting a limitless ridiculous

Blastoise1606d ago

I don't want free to play, I don't want a season pass and I don't want microtransactions.

I hope Sony are just letting Guerillla games just do their own thing, I think it's cool they're doing something different from Killzone

Farsendor11606d ago

the only model i like is guild wars 2 model, if they are going f2p with their next title all that should be sold is cosmetic items to make sure it is not pay to win.

Farsendor11606d ago

either the guild wars 2 model or subscription fee.

Riderz13371606d ago

They've been working on this new IP for 3 years, I doubt it's F2P.

TimeSkipLuffy1606d ago

MMO titles do not take less time to develop compared to a standalone game.

KyRo1606d ago

KZSF had micro transactions but they were done relatively well IMO. I didn't buy any myself as I couldn't really get into the multiplayer but I didn't feel like I needed to buy things in order to win.

ravinash1606d ago

My guess is, this is what they mean.
Which these days is about as helpful as saying our game has coding....because nearly all games will have micro transaction in one way shape or form.

Ron_Danger1605d ago

All downloadable maps in KZSF are also completely free.

ravinash1606d ago

I don't understand why people think they can get more money by micro transactions (from F2P games).
I never buy any of these transactions and I'm sure a lot of people don't out of principle.
So are there that many people out the paying over £60 worth of transaction to make up not just the non sale of their game but the cost of me not buying the game as well?
Is it a way to work round tax...I don't know.

Volkama1606d ago (Edited 1606d ago )

They probably think it because there are numerous examples that prove it.

Turbine were fairly pioneering in western F2P, they had Dungeons & Dragons Online and then LotRO convert from subscription models to free and in both cases got orders of magnitude more revenue. Then you have behemoths like League of Legends confirming the theory that it's a profitable model, at least for now. Not to mention casual phone and facebook efforts.

The whole thing relies on getting a massive captive audience by taking away all barriers to entry, and then enticing that audience to drop cash. It's a minority that spend more than $60 on a single F2P game, but the audience is so big that the number of smaller purchases more than make up for it.

The model is here to stay, but we will probably never reach a point where free to play is the standard model for retail games. Before too long the market will be over-saturated and "free" just wont be incentive enough to capture the required audience.

It'll bloom and boom over the next few years before we reach that point though.

Show all comments (53)
The story is too old to be commented.