There will be no micro-transactions in Horizon Zero Dawn

Guerrilla Games on Twitter: "There will be no micro transactions in #HorizonZeroDawn”

[StormLegend]

This is awesome news! Thanks Sony

[Vhampir]

Keep in mind that they say "micro-transactions" , there will be plenty of "DLC".

[UCForce]

Are you for real ?

[PSN_ZeroOnyx]

DLC typically adds more to a game. If you enjoy the game and DLC is available at a reasonable price then it's all good, but occasionally DLC is overpriced for what's offered. Microtransactions however tend to be cosmetic or alter the balance of the game which should be frowned upon.

[MrDead]

Don't thank Sony or Guerrilla Trump just tweeted that this was his doing.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

I assume the tweet had the "alternative facts" that proved it was his doing and in turn disproved the actual facts it was Sony/GG's doing?

[FallenAngel1984]

I can't believe we live in an age where this actually has to be clarified

[_-EDMIX-_]

We have lots of genres in gaming , not all games are created equal.

there are some games that are able to do this properly and it makes sense for it to be implemented and there are some games where it doesn't.

I felt The Witcher 3 did microtransactions really well even though I didn't purchase a lot of them I still like that it was up on the PlayStation Network as opposed to inside of the game ie go in PlayStation Network to buy while you're in game I actually really hate that Capcom did this with some of their games.

There's games like Rainbow Six Siege or Halo 5 that have microtransactions in regards to play or skins and other optional items that I have no problem with existing because I understand they still have to make some money.

I'm sorry but we just can't have this one generalization about microtransactions.

All games are different

[hirobrotagonist]

.

[_-EDMIX-_]

@hirobo- lol

I'm very much referring to those microtransactions.

Even if that contact cost money what I'm stating is I like that it was simply on PlayStation Network and not integrated inside of the main game somewhere on some store menu

Whether or not it cost anything is irrelevant to its existence.

[TheOptimist]

I hope you know the difference between microtransactiosn and DLCs. Witcher 3 had paid DLCs. Deus Ex Mankind Divided had microtransactions as well paid DLCs. Witcher 3 would have had microtransactions of you could buy in game armor/weapon etc with real life money.

[_-EDMIX-_]

@theopt-

A microtransaction is downloadable content

downloadable content is simply describing the distribution method.

Microtransactions are simply describing the degree or significance of the downloadable content. ie armor, weapons, features etc .

I'm sorry but you Fanboys of this game seriously need to give it a rest, both of the Damn games have microtransactions bud.

I'm not sure why anyone is trying to ignore the weapons or the clothing that were available for downloadable content as microtransactions for The Witcher 3.

I'm literally looking at them right now on PlayStation Network lol

[rdgneoz3]

@_-EDMIX-_ Play a F2P game and then you'll understand microtransactions. They tend to be a way for someone to spend real cash to level up or get better gear for their characters quickly. It's one of the reasons why people complain about certain games being pay to win, as if you don't spend real cash you're at a huge disadvantage over those that do. Witcher 3 had zero micro-transactions as it sold 2 DLC expansions and gave away a bunch of free DLC pieces. It never sold in game weapons or armor or offered experience boosts for real cash. Destiny is a case of a game with zero micro-transactions putting in micro transactions with it emotes and experience boosts that you can only get using real cash. Some games do micro-transactions well, like Warframe where you can get everything (except most cosmetics) by just playing the game. It may take a bit longer, but for the most part it's not hard at all and you can sell various loot you earn to other players for platinum (the cash shop currency) to buy stuff with from the cash shop.

[_-EDMIX-_]

@rdg- "Play a F2P game and then you'll understand microtransactions"

Read

"We have lots of genres in gaming , not all games are created equal"

And

"All games are different"

"Witcher 3 had zero micro-transaction"

https://store.playstation.c...

I'm more than positive that this game offered individual items like costumes as post-launch content....Like in the link

"It never sold in game weapons or armor"

https://store.playstation.c...

Ummmmm yes bud.

I've owned this game since the day it released and yes the Witcher 3 very much had microtransactions.

Did you think it being free suddenly meant it didn't exists?

[TheOptimist]

Did you even notice that apart from the exapnsion DLCs all the other things are free? Here is a clearer look

http://www.hardcoregamer.co...

[cash_longfellow]

Especially in single player games.

[Muzikguy]

Me either. Sucks too that it's not the norm to have a game without MTs.

[ger2396]

Welcome to reality.

[Erik7357]

I know, it's sad.

Shows the standard they are held too I guess.

[chrisx]

Hitting all the right notes. Great news

[Majin-vegeta]

GG GG

[tyasia0]

Unlike games from that other company who I guess since their name has micro in it feels like all their big games need to have micro-transactions.

[Relientk77]

Good

microtransactions are beyond stupid

[_-EDMIX-_]

I'm happy that they've made the choice

I don't think anything is really wrong with microtransactions only really how they're implemented.

For example I think something is off-putting about playing something like Dragon Age and you're getting Quest that are basically locked away as a specific transaction in the single player game. ie don't sell me items within the main game.

I'm perfectly fine with people who want to purchase optional outfits and stuff like that but in my personal opinion keep that content on Playstation network not within the game somewhere.

I personally hate games that try to integrate that type of thing within the game.

I personally like the way the Witcher 3 had their microtransactions.

Leave that stuff On the PlayStation Store and move on.

So ultimately I'm not against microtransactions I'm simply against other implemented.

If they can't think of a way it's best for them to just ignore it altogether.

I am interested if they're going to have some downloadable content in regards to Quest afterwards though.

[Ninver]

Nothing is good about micro trans no matter how you slice it. Games didnt need it in the past and they were playable

[_-EDMIX-_]

Who said they needed it?

To my understanding games like Street Fighter literally had multiple iterations with extra content , games like Kingdom Hearts literally had multiple versions again with extra content.

I think you don't fully understand that microtransaction in regards to downloadable content is simply the distribution method but when you look at gaming , gaming has always had some sort of post-launch content where developers and Publishers were trying to get more money for their games post-launch with different versions.

I can't even keep track of how many different versions of Tomb Raider actually exist. Versions with different skins and extra level here in there etc

So from what I've seen and I've been gaming for well over 25 years gaming has always had instances where developers were looking to make more money on added content they simply did not have the distribution method.

Another example could be something like a code Veronica X that had extra content not found in the original Dreamcast version.

Publishers have always been looking to make money on adding extra content but the only way they could Implement such a thing like this in the past was simply making another version of the same game with those added content.

Soooo no. They don't need them to be playable as that's not even what's being stated.

But they've existed for a long time regardless of the method of distribution as I find the method in which they're giving you the content is actually quite irrelevant.

All you need to know it's a cop home very much created another Street Fighter 2 Simply give you two extra characters because they had no other way of Simply charging you for just those two characters lol

I found that only the youngest Gamers don't really understand this history of Gaming.

South Street Fighter II did not "need" several other versions with multiple other characters, simply because the concept of business is not that of something that is rational in that respect, it was not made specifically because you personally may or may not "need" it, it was made because there is a demand for the extra character.

I have no idea why people try to use personal rationality in regards to the existence of products

You not needing a hair straightener does not dissolve its existence...

Sorry but it has happened in the past and I see no reason why it's not going to continue to happen today.

I believe microtransactions just like video games have everything to do with how they're implemented in the first place.

The Witcher 3 have no problem with microtransactions.

I don't purchase them myself but I could care less if they exist or not.

I'm not sure emotionally what it would even have to do with you if somebody else was purchasing any of this stuff anyway, no one's actually putting a gun to your head and forcing you to purchase downloadable content or repurchase a game to get extra content etc.

[UCForce]

Nicely done, GG.

[SilverClock]

Shame something like this is actually a feature nowadays.

[Muzikguy]

Best news of the day, thank you!!! Sooner or later companies have to see that people don't want MTs and that they'll sell more games if they ship a complete package

[81BX]

I dont mind some MTs. Depending on what it is and when its released.

[UCForce]

It doesn't matter. Microtransactions is still bad even it cosmetics or not.

[81BX]

To you they are and i get it 100% but if later on down the road devs come up with some neat stuff to give gamers they should be compensated for their time. Now crap like gears selling a season pass with the game upon release, and have seperate weapon skins for sale... that i dislike

[_-EDMIX-_]

@UCF- I'm not sure I could say all that.

From what I've seen microtransactions are largely based on how the developer implements them.

I don't necessarily think that Gamers hate microtransactions as much as Gamers don't care for how they're specifically being implemented case in point The Witcher 3.

I don't think people hate The Witcher 3 having microtransactions simply because people were okay with that it was free and they didn't need to pay for it.

Imagine if they did....

I think you would see a different reaction regarding its implementation.

I can't say 100% no simply because if a developer has an idea for a feature or for costume for weapons I am I to say no?

So are some of you people forgetting that new game plus was added as an add-on after The Witcher 3 released?

So no to more content?

Is this really about no to microtransactions or simply no to the price?

[RedPill86]

Is this game not single player only? Seems like an odd thing to announce, people just put 2 and 2 together. Then again, wouldn't hold it against this industry if micro transactions became a thing in single player games. They always manage to find new and inventive ways to screw themselves.

[UCForce]

Really ?

[Yohshida]

Ye sp only games usually dont have Micro transactions

[joab777]

I would hope not. Why would there be. It will make its money the old fashioned way, by being good and worth our investment!

Though it is unfortunate these days that in order to make the most possible money, companies that don't make mp games must look for some other way. Paid DLC like TW3 is perfect!

[Razzer]

Great games make money on DLC because they are great games. Just like TW3. THAT should be the norm.

[Rippcity]

I think it really depends on the game and how it's implemented. There are a lot of toxic DLC practices like with Destiny where content was cut from the original game to be added later as paid DLC. Now in games like Halo 5 where people could spend a ton of money on cards and just spawn wraiths the entire game and win, that to me is a poor implementation of micro transactions. If people want to blow money on skins and cosmetics, let em. At least the money is going to the developers in the hopes they might make better games in the future. Cosmetics don't give players any advantage and are purely optional. I think that is a perfectly acceptable way to have micro transactions in a game.

[SynestheticRoar]

W0w. Thank you very much. GG

[GrimReaperGamer]

Best gaming news of the day.

[medman]

Guerilla gets better by the day.

[EpicZinger]

Thank goodness this game is developed by sony and not M$.

[Elda]

Fabulous!

[Bathyj]

How refreshing.

[AstroCyborg]

better not be its a single player only rpg

[Ruegrong]

Why was it even considered?

[Aloy-Boyfriend]

Because Lazy gamer = profit?

[Artemidorus]

This is unacceptable, the millennials will demand to spend their money on something DLC related.

I however am pleased they don't have any.

[il-JumperMT]

Microtransections are only OK if they are skins which give you 0 advantage.

[andrewsquall]

Damn, they should have broken it into "parts" and then when they complete the first 6 levels only, announce that it is now going to be broken into "seasons". Then it will be a masterpiece like Hitman 2016 lol. And announce it 4 months before the game was supposed to launch, people will love you even more then apparently.

[TheOptimist]

I really don't understand why everyone is so happy? This was the norm 10 years ago. Now is this a feature or something? A 60$ game shouldn't have microtransactions.

[yeahright2]

My guess would be they're happy because it's not 10 years ago and it's becoming more rare everyday.

[TheOptimist]

And who do you think is responsible for it being a rarity?

[yeahright2]

Honestly? us.
They came up with it as a way to gain some extra cash as they saw cost rise and revenues stay flat. But our refusal to pay more for games that cost more to make caused them to look for other ways to make up the difference. Heck, if memory serves superman 64 retailed for over $100. this $60 per game standard just came out of no where last gen.
Now the counterpoint I keep hearing is "Yeah I'd rather spend 60 then buy DLC's if I like the game than be out a full 90ish I end up not liking it." Hard to argue with that as I now realize we're stuck with this. As even if all gamers decided we'd be willing to pay more for quality games, the EA's and Ubisoft's of the world won't go "Oh ok, we'll give you the full game and charge an extra 10 or 20." Heck no, they'll just see it as extra revenue and do something like change from DLC's to pushing "signature editions" or some other crap.

[game4funz]

Didn't think there would be anyways. Its a single player game no?

[Ninver]

A complete game from start to finish? You don't say.

[arkard]

GOTY for this fact alone!

[PurpHerbison]

Suddenly I'm interested in the game.

[Nathan_Hale53]

I find it pretty sad that, this is such a positive. Pretty bad that gaming is succumbing to micro-transactions so often, that this is surprising news.