NFS Dev on Microtransactions: Games Are More Expensive Than Ever To Make, Hard To Find Golden Path

Need for Speed Payback's Executive Producer chimed in on microtransactions, saying that games are more expensive than ever to make and it's hard to find a golden path liked by everyone, developers and customers.

[-Foxtrot]

Well that's odd because games without MT and get critical acclaim along with sales do well without them

[KaiPow]

A lot of times, it feels like shareholders claim that everything is on fire if games don't sell two million copies on the first day. Micro transactions at least show some additional income to pay those games that might not have as strong of a first launch (but still have sustained sales throughout the first year).

I think the whole business model of AAA games is pretty terrible, but nothing short of another crash is going to change the market in a positive direction.

[-Foxtrot]

Not to mention developers trying to play the sympathy card like they are starving, can't pay the bills or feed their families.

I mean Jeez...I know people in retail jobs, some with kids or single parents and despite being hard they manage to make ends meet so I can't believe doing something you love while working at a top studio you are struggling to make ends meet. I'm not saying it's easy and stress free but I feel as long as you are doing something you enjoy and went to University for to get a degree at least you'd feel a little better then struggling to make ends meet in a job you hate.

[HaveSumNuts]

Its really shitty to think we're paying $60 for games with F2P models. How long till NFS starts charging real world money for fuel in order to drive? Devs will release a game with 8 multiplayer maps because they know you'll purchase the season pass. Congradulations you just spent $100 for a $60 game that should have had more maps in the 1st place.

[freshslicepizza]

@-Foxtrot
"Well that's odd because games without MT and get critical acclaim along with sales do well without them"

So you want to totally ignore games costs more to make, nice. Can I hire you and not give you a raise for 12 years? See, it's easy sitting in your comfy chair being critcal about everything with no real investment from your part.

"Not to mention developers trying to play the sympathy card like they are starving, can't pay the bills or feed their families."

And when game studios shut down you always seem to have a reason don't you. Instead you want to focus on the success stories like Witcher 3 and Horizon to suggest that's all you need to do. Like snap your finger and your game will sell amazingly because you know how the industry works and how to keep it afloat.

[-Foxtrot]

Here we go...making up shit and twisting peoples comments making out like they've said stuff

"So you want to totally ignore games costs more to make"

Didn't say or imply this at all

"Can I hire you and not give you a raise for 12 years?"

Making out some of these don't get raises and the like...how do you know? Some studios get bonuses just if their games get a certain number of metacritic.

"being critcal about everything"

That's rich coming from you

"And when game studios shut down you always seem to have a reason don't you"

Games are usually shit because they haven't got with the times or they are so arrogant they don't want to listen to feedback pretending like nothing is wrong...take Cliffy Bs attitude with Lawbreakers, luckily his studio is still standing (for now). Other times it's publishers who push shit onto the studio but if I was in charge of a studio and knew the backlash a decision would make I'd argue the hell out of higher ups to say "No...you want us to do this fair enough but you've obviously seen the backlash and shit storm against other studios who've done this in the past, some you've closed down yourself, do you really want to gamble with our jobs here". Maybe they do, maybe they don't...we don't know but it's not like the people who've had huge success without MTs or Loot boxes end up closing down because they refused to add them.

"success stories like Witcher 3 and Horizon to suggest that's all you need to do"

More then Witcher 3 or Horizon mate

Witcher 3, Horizon, Persona 5, Nier, Nioh, Evil Within 2, Resident Evil 7, Crash Bandicoot N Sane Trilogy, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Dishonored, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, Super Mario, Zelda, Alien Isolation, Bayonetta...I could go on.

Jeez...you'll argue at anything won't you. We all know you do this because you have a grudge against people who've called you out in the past.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Of course he does. Games have stayed the same price for $60 for the past 20 years Plus. No context is needed. 2017 is the same as 1997. Nothing has changed.

I’ll tell you what hasn’t happened. Wages have not gone up. Nobodies wages have gone up significantly in years. You think video game design is some super lucrative field - don’t kid yourself.

[Many-hat5]

I would argue games cost more to make. Or more specifically, games don't need to cost more to make. Developers, like to release AAA games as regularly as possible so they employ huge numbers of staff that aren't really needed. The technology standardization, and other factors suggest it's actually easier to make games now. The massive companies don't care how much they spend on productions, they simply recoup from the punters. I wonder how much Divinity II cost to make? Probably one of the best titles released this gen. Yet it's being sold for £30.00 and no loot boxes!

[The_KELRaTH]

Games cost what studios and publishers think they can get away with. Do we need games with endless videos or near real effect animations that require huge manpower to create? Maybe the answer is to go back and look what makes a great fun popular GAME.

Maybe blocking user content in favor of these often bland studio map packs and season passes was the wrong direction, its stripped the gaming industry of real imagination and talent.

[DillyDilly]

Its the same problem Hollywood is having right now. Perhaps developers should pick a decent budget & stick with it ?

[ShadowWolf712]

Yeah, the entire argument that games cost more to make? That doesn't hold up.

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

[Goldby]

@Foxtrot

you forgot Hellblade, not only a AAA quality game, but self published and is starting to make money.

You dont see any of these AAA companies donating more than 100k to mental health awareness and research... or anything for that matter.

@moldy.

Games cost more to make, theres no denying that, but at the same time, it is a developers choice to use big name actors as either voice actors or for motion capture or for their likeness.

Developers like CD projekt red made a game hailed for its story, characters and world, and yet they didnt include MT and they are worth more now than before Witcher 3 came out. this has nothing to do with Wages but simple greed from the publishers and investors... because if wages didnt go up. wouldn';t that mean the cost of the game doesnt increase? meaning all that money from MT is going into the pocket of the publisher, not the devs. so your point is Moot.

try again moldy

[Imalwaysright]

If they want better wages then they need to take it up to their publishers instead of asking us to deal with predatory business practices. EA already had $4.85 billion revenue this year and this without Fifa, SWBF2 and the holidays season so they have plenty of money to share with their studios. Also this BS about games costing €60 for years needs to end. This industry is much more profitable today than it was years ago. In fact it has already surpassed hollywood which was unthinkable when I started gaming 25 or so years ago. People like you that support these predatory practices are just parrots repeating what publishers say. The same publishers that turned this industry into an anti-consumer joke and have no problems in deceiving us so instead of being a parrot I dare you show us the numbers and I mean all the numbers including the profits that these publishers have.

[Platinum_Fan]

EA is making billions of dollars per year and you guys always brag about Microsoft's wealth yet when it's convenient for your argument of course they are poor as can be. How do you defend a company like EA making 4 billion in pure profits then shutting down Visceral?

If someone pulled up to you in a limousine and asked you for $9.99 to pay for their parking would you give it to them? Because that's what EA is basically doing with microtransactions.

How much profit is too much?

[codelyoko]

Exactly!

[freshslicepizza]

"Jeez...you'll argue at anything won't you"

Because you can't get it through your head games costs more to make and market. So that $60 you paid doesn't stretch as much as it did back in 2005. You think Nintendo makes just as much money off of Mario Odyssey as it did for Super Mario Brothers 3 back in 1988? Adjust for inflation of how much that game costs to the consumer and how much Nintendo paid to make it and how many copies it sold to Mario Odyssey.

Times have changed but you refuse to get on with the times. More money is needed for marketing, developer teams have expanded to the point its not unheard of to be in the hundreds. There is also a heck of a lot more games out now every year trying to compete for your dollar. I bet back in the NES days they had very few people working on games.

Run your own game company because all I ever hear from you is how bad this game is, how games like Hitman shouldn't have online and how this shouldn't have that and so on like you could do better. You're an armchair critic, that's all and ever will be.

[XiNatsuDragnel]

Damn arguing with idiots is insane.

[UCForce]

And you pushing your freaking stubborn head for what it is. For example, Call of Duty World War 2 MP have daily contact called Loot Spectator. Do you know what is mean ? It's said you have to watch people open loot boxes 3 times. You can tell publishers will abuse the heck out of that microtransaction and loot boxes.

[Jinger]

@UCForce

I think that's a cool feature actually socially and when you have a group of friends to see your buddy drop a loot box (not from paying though I'm against that).

It's still all optional to pay for them. CoD: WWII has multiple ways of earning boxes without spending a dime

[Goldby]

"You're an armchair critic, that's all and ever will be."

and you are a padded room critic. justifying only your own opinions from your fantasy world.

the cost of games haven't increase, but the industry has expanded its player base exponentially. meaning even if they removed the MT form games, a game today will make more money than a game made 20 years ago simply due to player base and access.

Personally, i would rather they take MT out of all paid games and increase the cost of games by 20-30 dollars, include everything in it instead of nickel and dime for special weapsons or unique skins. keep MT to free to play games only.

but of course moldy, we all know you'll disagree becuase your lord and savior is building his company for GaaS and MT in every game. i wouldnt be suprised if features of the next xbox are locked behind MT.

[UCForce]

@Jinger No, it doesn't look cool. Calling "optional" is an excuse. This video will explain to you : https://m.youtube.com/watch...

[freshslicepizza]

@Goldby
"the cost of games haven't increase, but the industry has expanded its player base exponentially. meaning even if they removed the MT form games, a game today will make more money than a game made 20 years ago simply due to player base and access."

Where are you getting your facts from? The PS2 sold over 150 million units and had games like GT3 sell like 15 million copies and that GT game costs a heck of a lot less to market and develop than GT Sport does. Super mario Bros. 3 sold way more than Mario Odyssey did and again that game back in 1988 cost a fraction what Mario Odyssey costs to make with marketing today.

"Personally, i would rather they take MT out of all paid games and increase the cost of games by 20-30 dollars, include everything in it instead of nickel and dime for special weapsons or unique skins. keep MT to free to play games only."

I'm sure they thought of it but the problem is people have the mindset that games even now costs too much. Look at how hard it is to sell a $500 game console. Instead they have seasons passes or DLC packs like in Destiny already planned out. They are always trying to test the market and bring in different concepts. Naughty Dog tried online passes. There is a constant battle with how to generate more revenue and how to keep gamers from trading their old games in. Did you know back in the day Blockbuster video had to pay like 1,000 for ONE game because they pay a rental fee? That's because the publisher gets revenue since they know that same game will be reused over and over again. Now Gamestop wants to bring in a $60 plan where you can return your game as many times. You don't think the publishers are going to get upset?

"but of course moldy, we all know you'll disagree becuase your lord and savior is building his company for GaaS and MT in every game. i wouldnt be suprised if features of the next xbox are locked behind MT."

Where did I say I like microtransactions? I have never bought one of them. However I understand why they are here unlike you millenials who thinks everything in life should be free.

[UCForce]

So disappointed from you. Here : https://m.youtube.com/watch...

[freshslicepizza]

UCForce,

This is far more informative and it's from someone who actually does his research,

http://www.gdcvault.com/pla...

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Sales are a small part of the picture.

Devs and staff need to be paid
Marketing
Games sales have remained at $60 for the past 20+ year - that can’t be right

Don’t know the budgets of the games you speak of.

Example Blade Runner 2049 (excellent film btw) made several million dollars but it also made less than it cost to produce. It’s likely to get a sequel but that doesn’t discount that it lost money overalll.

It’s fine being a gamer but people should at least has some perspective.

[UCForce]

Then what ? Publishers will abuse the heck out of it. For example, Horizon Zero Dawn and Hellblade are new IP. But they earned a lot of money for trusting their ability. GG and Sony have a long discussion about making new IP. About devs and staff do need to pay for their families, but it will question consumers trust and hurt staff morality. There must be a better way than this. About SP and multiplayer game, they both need to coexist. Otherwise, it will kill the half of it.

[-Foxtrot]

"Games sales have remained at $60 for the past 20+ year - that can’t be right"

It is...because the gaming audience got bigger and bigger as the years went by

Compare the gaming audience from the early 2000s to 2017...the industry is booming. The bigger the audience, the more games which are sold, that's why games have remained the same price.

[Many-hat5]

I'm looking forward to 2049. Got it pre-ordered on 4K+Blu ray edition. Trouble is, financially, in the cinema, it's flopped. Hopefully, with disc sales etc it'll make a profit. As for games, we have reached a situation where the developers wish the gamers to subsidize their bad decisions. Rather like insurance companies only wan't to take policies out on people who won't claim. What I mean is, they want to ensure they can't loose money, even if, they produce a crap game. Hence the introduction of loot boxes, DLC etc etc. Making a big AAA games comes with risks, if you over budget and it flops, don't expect your customers to bail you out.

[Jinger]

@UCForce

Sure those games did well, but they still made less than a game with MTs. Hence why Sony said they may be looking into adopting the model into more games besides UC and TLoU

[Goldby]

@jinger.

but at the same time, have you heard of EA, or Ubisoft or any other big name publisher donate over 100k to research and awareness for mental health or anything.

you dont see any money leave activision's or EA's pocket from call of duty sales or battlefield sales go towards the vetrans.

those companies are greedy, they just want more and more money and will make weak excuses to justify it

[Jinger]

What's funny is even if a SP game sells 3mil+ without MT's it will still make less profit than the game that only sold 1mil with MT's.

MT's are 100% profit straight to the publisher, game sales get cut up between multiple parties

[Goldby]

and that is exactly why its an issue.

devs put time in to make these assets, and aren't seeing any of it.
or devs put in the time to make it and dont charge and see more people buy their game, = more money for the devs who actually do the work.

Witcher 3 says hi. its worth more today than it was before Witcher 3 came out becuase of GoG and the fact they didnt charge for the DLC they released after launch

[UCForce]

This video will explain you well : https://m.youtube.com/watch...

[Jinger]

@UCForce

Stop with this stupid YouTube video haha

[UCForce]

Well, at least that YouTuber is smarter than you are.

[Jinger]

@UCForce

Haha no

[UCForce]

You and @Moldybread are just blind. One day, major publishers will force you to buy more their content. This is why I hate MT and this video explains well : https://youtu.be/6Fz6eUSdUL...

[Testfire]

.

[ccgr]

Players have plenty of choices when it comes to games and can vote with their wallets

[Many-hat5]

With the wealth of opinions posted, your comment condenses perfectly. I just hope people do this.

[Cobra951]

Voting with your wallet is very different from voting in in an election. It's not one person, one vote; it's one dollar, one vote. So you vote by withholding your $60, while some moron drops $600 on in-game gambling--loot boxes, crates, or whatever. He voted 10 times as much as you did, in the other direction.

Nobody in the big businesses cares about your votes. They care about how the whales are voting.

[XiNatsuDragnel]

Why you guys lying? Just to EA sama happy jeez you guys made my choice easier not to buy your product.

[strayanalog]

"We see more people playing fewer games for longer. Engagement is important. But how do we deliver longer experiences?"

Fewer games for longer you say? Well, that's because most everything these days is an MMO or has online multiplayer tagged on. But, yes, engagement is important. In my opinion, they need to focus on the core single player experience and let multiplayer take a backseat. I'm not saying get rid of the online or multiplayer aspects, but it seems essential to focus on what's fun about the title/franchise and go from there; a developer reboot so to speak. They just need some quality practice by going back to the basics. Give someone something overwhelmingly fun and you better believe they're going to share it and replay it with no microtransactions required.

[Cobra951]

That's what we want, but not what they want--which is more money. They get more money from all the suckers who drop a chunk of change on never-ending MTs, mostly in connected MP games.

[SheenuTheLegend]

"Give someone something overwhelmingly fun "
man. those are god lines.
i have a parlor here and you know what people still play the most? i will not go for others but the article is about a racing game so i will go for that.
the most played racing game is blur. why? coz its fun, split screen 4 player and hell of a blast.
all the previous nfs came and gone. and i m still buying blur dvd's for xbox 360's and ps3's.
so no microtransactions and they are still getting sales from me.
it was not that successful back then but now its one of the best for me.

[Hardiman]

It's true games have stayed pretty much the same for twenty years but on the flipside more people game now as opposed to twenty or thirty years ago. Also devs like Ninja Theory have shown there are other ways to develope a game.

[r3f1cul]

if i actually thought game devs wouldnt skimp on content exactly as they do now i would gladly pay $80 for a brand new, full game at retail ... but i know they would still lower the content amount and quality and continue with the shit practices all while still bumping up the initial price of the game so its basically a no win scenario if you are a smart customer in the gaming world nowadays ... only thing you can do is wait for a sale or good used prices... that or wait a year or so for the game you should have gotten in the first place to be bundled together at a reasonable price for content ratio :/

[Many-hat5]

I suspect you are correct. Just because you pay more, wouldn't reduce their greed. If anything it would increase it.

[Enter_Gaming]

I wouldn't be surprised if they make an episode about Microtransactions and DLC for AMERICAN GREED t.v. show

[Hardiman]

Good point and it's true if the price of a game went up to $80.00 publishers and developers would begin to say that price point isn't enough and the same conversation would be happening again. What Ninja Theory did with Hellblade shows there are other ways to do things than the same old model. Cutting budget and production costs is a great way to ensure profits but it remains to be seen if others will try their method.

[Enter_Gaming]

AAA games don't need MT. You can't make a great game with your 200+ developers without putting MT in it? These people have no confidence in their games to sell well, so they add MT as "security". This is what happens when studios have too much money and they hire incompetent developers and promote low level programmers to Game Director.

It's actually better and faster to make a game nowadays than it was 15 years ago. Today they have game engines and much more capable software than back in the day. The technology improved and it actually got a little easier. Of course it's more expensive when it comes to AAA games, but that's bc they hire so many people. They also make a lot more profit than 15 years ago, this business keeps growing.

Andromeda is a good example of too many idiots getting hired to create a decent game.

[joab777]

I’ll probably get crucified, but as someone who is fairly well versed on the nature of business, Friedman v CSS, etc. The main issue is do you believe that the sole objective of a business is to make money, or are their some responsibilities to society and to individuals?

Obviously, if you are young and cash strapped you want to pay as little as possible. And you can do that, by looking for sales, joining programs etc. But if you rare a stock holder, you want to maximize profit. What we need to remember is thatbstockholders are only one member of the stakeholder family, and if we want changes, we must change the stakes.

This gen was a big deal that opened the door for this mess. We screamed loudly last gen about console prices, and thus we got minimal upgrades for a reasonable price. But in no way were Publishers gonna charge $70 or $80 for their game at launch. The increase in competition due to mobile devices and the rise in video game popularity has also changed the landscape.

Now, when shareholders consider the profit that can be made from a game, they must consider ALL options. As stakeholders, we have allowed these methods to remain the most pleofitable choice, and thus, they MUST use them, until the bottom line is effected.

Bottom line. Only we can alter this landscape.

[Omnisonne]

Alright so, what actions should gamers take? It's either pay less/wait for sale and minimize the influx of money to the industry, or pay more and have larger businesses take advantage of you.

[Cobra951]

I understand all that. And I agree that people throwing their money at MTs is the driving force behind this. That doesn't mean it's right. It's awful for the games themselves, and for us. I already posted somewhere above how wallet voting is useless when so much money is getting sunk into MTs. Everyone here might sincerely agree never to buy MTs or even games that push them aggressively. It would change nothing. The situation is rather dire right now. Without some successful legal challenge to the gambling nature of some of these for-pay mechanics, I have a feeling I'll be moving on to indies and my back catalog in the near future, at least.

[staticall]

So that's why EA, Ubisoft, 2k, WB Games and many more big publishers are going out of business. Wait, what, they aren't? So game sales are still enough to keep whole publisher's and developer(s) teams afloat and microtransactions just another scummy way to take money from customers, gotcha!

[ZehnDrachen]

Would be more transparent if we had the info on how much a game took to make. Either way, MT's are not an excuse.

[ShadowWolf712]

So yeah, this doesn't hold up. https://www.youtube.com/wat...

It would hold up a LOT better if they were placed in games that may not have sold as well. Your Medal of Honors, your TItanfalls, etc. That it's in guaranteed sellers like your Battlefronts, your Need for Speeds, your FIFAs, etc. while these other franchises are left to flounder in uncertainty is telling.

It's not actually about cost, it's about maximizing profit and minimizing risk, especially given all these big publishers were already having immensely profitable years well before turning to MT's. In short, it's all about greed and keeping those investors from getting nervous in a market that's always fluctuated.

[justsomeoffdude]

The interviewee says "We see more people playing fewer games for longer.". Of course when you fill the game with MTs and loot boxes wtf do you expect? What do Witcher 3, Horizon zero dawn, nioh, nier automata, PUBG have in common?? They don't have MTs and loot boxes!!! But players have sunk in more gameplay time in those games than most EA/ubisoft/activision games that only care about MTs and loot boxes.

[datriax]

It's called "budget control and sensible restraint". F**k you and your MT's and your excuses with them.

[senorfartcushion]

Nonsense. Games are not more expensive to make. You also would be ignoring many other monetary elements to support MTs like

Special editions
Season passes
Sponsorships and deals

Let's just point out that Call of Duty 4 had no Microtransactions while The Remastered Edition does. It's not a need, it's a want.

Free to play games? Sure. Put in as many as you want, but if I'm paying one price, I shouldn't be asked to pay for things like in-game-currency.

[justsomeoffdude]

Games don't need to cost an arm and a leg to make.. Ninja theory delivered hellblade on a budget that seems like chicken feed when compared to most AAA games and that game rocked.. EA/activision/ubisoft are just greedy plain and simple. Left to them, games should cost $100, cannot be bought/sold 2nd hand since they can't get any profit from it and players must buy every in game item to finish the game. Heck players must actually buy individual levels to progress in the game!! They don't care about gaming, their ONLY interest is money.

[Yi-Long]

Including DLC greed and Micro-transactions only achieves in 1 thing with me; I won't buy it Day 1. I won't buy it at full price. And most likely I'll either wait for a cheap GOTY/Complete release, or just skip it completely.

It's very simple. Make a great game, and good reviews and positive word of mouth will hopefully result in great sales, and people still willing to pay 40-60 bucks for it 6-12 months later.

[AnubisG]

This bitching by devs needs to stop. Either raise the price for games or don't set such large budgets and let's be honest, most of the budget goes into advertising which could be done for free by gaming journalists. I see studios flying journalists to their headquarters paying for airplane tickets and hotel rooms and food. That's a shit ton of money. There is E3, TGS, PSX, etc. Advertise there! No need to do deals with Mountain Dew and Doritos all the time. No need for bilboards on times square. Big publishers think that these games need to be advertised like movies. They don't.

Reforms need to be made in the gaming industry.

[lnfiniteLoop]

"saying that games are more expensive than ever to make" - yeah right, its not as big a cash cow as it used to be (no business is) but its still a cash cow...

all I can say is why are you making games if your supposidly not making money... oh thats right you are making money, its just you'd have to put a bit more effort into it... thats why you resort to micro transactions, DLC packs etc, lots of extra cash for very little effort...

[SirBillyBones]

Hmmm, REALLY? https://www.youtube.com/wat...

[Tru_Blu]

When EA, Activison ect post quarterly earnings they aren't doing bad. Go to them for the money quit nickel and diming the customers.

[Retroman]

Marcus Nilsson full of it if he think gamers willing to pay for microtransaction content . i rather re-buy The RUN , criterion Hotpursuit than this Crapfest .......... I'm out.
Other night watched payback on YouTube impress me not one bit. most of the gameplay driving alone like in 2015 reboot , the game jump from one event to another without selecting . the truck and escaping with Aggura not till damn near end of game .

[MunchMiller00]

Cry me a river. Get bent.

[kwijgaming]

Just budget your money better. Seriously, how can other developers do it but EA sounds like it's trying to stay afloat while raking in billions?

If I can learn how to budget and I'm an idiot, then EA should be able to do it too.

[IGiveHugs2NakedWomen]

I think the devs are reluctant to say that the overpaid managers and executives want most of the money the game makes leaving little for developers to share.

[quent]

Overblown budgets are no excuse to fleece you're customers or to ruin and kill off the reputations of devs along with their once respected ip's because of it