|
Hi everyone, I hope this is not the wrong forum to post this. I'm writing a legal paper on the regulation of lootboxes (in places like Belgium, for example, they are considered gambling) and right away stumbled upon a problem. What is a microtransaction? Or, more importantly, how are microtransactions different from DLC? I tend to believe that the only real difference between microtransactions and DLC is one of acceptance and popularity, since there does not seem to be a clear criterion that can be used to separate the two. If fans like it, it's a DLC; if they don't, it's a microtransaction. The gaming press is no help here, as they are really terrible (dug) as well as inconsistent when they use either term. So far I have the following criteria to distinguish the 2, none of which I find truly useful: a. Financial: Microtransanctions are cheap (e.g. under 1 buck) and DLC are more expensive. Doesn't seem useful, since determining the right price point would be pretty hard, not to mention that some microtransactions (like cars in TAV) are super pricey. b. Randomness: Microtransactions give you random rewards, with DLC you know what you get. By this standard, power-ups in any of the thousands of SUPER WAR SNIPER 2K BLACKOUT SUPER FREE games would not be a microtransaction. c. Base game: Freemium games use microtransactions, while normal games use DLC. Not really useful, as GTA has microtransactions, and TF2 went from paid to freemium. d. Permanence: DLC stays forever, microtransactions go away (for example, powerups). By this standard loot boxes that give you skins would not be microtransactions. e. Competitive advantage. If it's "pay to win" it's a microtransaction, if it's not then it's a DLC. Again, loot boxes. Skins don't make you any more likely to win. E. Availability: DLC sells from outside the game (e.g. via Steam), while microtransactions are sold in-game. Obvious problem here is that this would mean buying a loot box on steam would not be a microtransaction. F. Modification of the game: Microtransactions modify the game only slightly, while DLC represent a big change. Although this one isn't bad, the problem is quantifying what qualifies as small (is a weapon that allows you to pass a stage "significant"?) I thought it was really interesting to see that even though the terms are used so much, there doesn't seem to be a clear definition of either. I'd love to know what you guys think on this, since I would absolutely benefit from your knowledge and opinions.
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 14:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
The definitions are indeed fuzzy, but if you can buy it more than once, it's definitely a microtransaction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 14:51
|
|
|
cool av posted:The definitions are indeed fuzzy, but if you can buy it more than once, it's definitely a microtransaction. That would apply to powerups, extra lives, etc. I agree with you there. What about loot boxes and skins though?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 16:28
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:That would apply to powerups, extra lives, etc. I agree with you there. What about loot boxes and skins though? Lootboxes are definitely microtransactions, as they can be purchased repeatedly (even if their contents are permanent). I would consider skins to be microtransactions as well, though it's harder to justify precisely why. Perhaps because they're ultimately kind of petty and insignificant?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 22:14
|
|
|
The term DLC rose to prominence as a distinction between things like expansions (which were typically boxed and sold at retail) and horse armor. Those expansions are no longer tied to the retail channel, so DLC is now a catchall for everything that isn't included in the base game. DLC and microtransactions aren't mutually exclusive. If you want to contrast lootboxes to substantial content like expansions, you could pin a dollar amount to microtransactions (Paypal uses $10) and use that as the delineator. Even then, you're going to encounter exceptions like a $5 expansion for a $4 game, or a $1500 spaceship in Star Citizen. Depending on what your paper is about, it might be better to stick to a specific concern (gambling aspect of lootboxes, P2W unlocks, etc.) and find a citable definition.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2019 22:58
|
|
|
cool av posted:The definitions are indeed fuzzy, but if you can buy it more than once, it's definitely a microtransaction. That said, you'd have to consider how people would skirt the edges of any given rule, for example, my lootboxes might not be microtransactions under this constraint because you buy Lootbox 1 once and then the next one is known as Lootbox 2 which is a different purchase! Anyway, I think you might be approaching the wrong things / asking the wrong question here. Definition-wise, a microtransaction is a small amount of money, the term is often specifically used to indicate an amount of money so small that you can't pay it directly so it goes through some intermediate state, like if a thing costs 5 cents you can't usefully pay that with a credit card, so instead you get 500 horsecredits for $5 and then you can spend 5 horsecredits, that last bit is the microtransaction. It's deviated from this meaning quite a bit in games, since they're happy to charge $5 for an energy refill somehow, but that's what the term is. And DLC is content that's downloadable. It doesn't even necessarily have to cost money. But again the definition has slipped, I'd bet more than half of so-called DLC is already installed with the game and is actually pay-to-unlock content rather than downloadable content. Still, that's a decent way to distinguish between them - if it doesn't involve actually DownLoading Content then it's not DLC. (Also this is a superset of "don't buy it more than once" - if you've already downloaded the content then you don't ever need to download it again.) But neither of these things are what you're actually looking for, which is exploitative skinner-boxing. Random purchases, refill purchases, pay-to-win purchases, none of these are necessarily microtransactions or DLC.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 01:31
|
|
|
DLC are good microtransactions, Microtransactions are bad DLC. But fo real, anything which you can buy more than once is MTX. If it involves gambling, it's MTX. If it only alters presentation, it's MTX. If it unlocks gameplay gated content, it's MTX. Edit: Also, if it is bought using a faux currency, it's MTX, even if it used to be DLC when you could by it with actual currency. Cynic Jester fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Feb 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
Sorry for not getting back earlier, but I was really swamped with work!! roomforthetuna posted:Definition-wise, a microtransaction is a small amount of money, the term is often specifically used to indicate an amount of money so small that you can't pay it directly so it goes through some intermediate state, like if a thing costs 5 cents you can't usefully pay that with a credit card, so instead you get 500 horsecredits for $5 and then you can spend 5 horsecredits, that last bit is the microtransaction. It's deviated from this meaning quite a bit in games, since they're happy to charge $5 for an energy refill somehow, but that's what the term is. I don't really agree with your definition there. For starters, many microtransactions are not actually so cheap (not to mention what IS the meaning of cheap in any workable definition), but also that many games allow you to just buy directly, without any need for in-game currency. Cynic Jester posted:DLC are good microtransactions, Microtransactions are bad DLC. I think that this is exactly the case. "Microtransaction" aren't actually a technical term, but actually a moral descriptor of "something the a company is selling, but the price/nature of which I am against." As for why is it relevant, because if you want to create a regulation, you need to have a certain understanding of the terms used in the industry. If you wanted (for the sake of argument) to create a rule against "microtransactions that result in a randomized rewards for the player," you first need to know exactly what the first term means. Basically, I don't see it as a useful term at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 16:36
|
|
|
I think that the best way to look at post-launch monetization is the intent behind it. I'm fine with developers creating additional content to expand a game or take it in a new direction. I absolutely despise and will never be OK with the idea of trickling out little bits of garbage to bait people's desire for completeness. It's very clear that the vast majority of content being released at this point is the latter, and this has been the case for a long time. My personal standard is this : additional content for a game should be roughly equivalent to the base content in terms of value. If you sell me a game that took 200 people 2 years to make for $60, don't you loving dare turn around and try to sell me a skin some guy made in 3 days for 5 dollars. Go gently caress yourself with a rusty railroad spike if you try that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 17:00
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:I don't really agree with your definition there. For starters, many microtransactions are not actually so cheap (not to mention what IS the meaning of cheap in any workable definition), but also that many games allow you to just buy directly, without any need for in-game currency. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 17:08
|
|
|
roomforthetuna posted:That's because they're not microtransactions, they're ripoff transactions. Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with the sentiment. It's just that it was really interesting for me to decide to write about it only to realize that the term has as many definitions as people buying them
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 17:11
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with the sentiment. It's just that it was really interesting for me to decide to write about it only to realize that the term has as many definitions as people buying them Now the virtual currency step (when it's present at all) is not used as a protection against tiny credit card charges, but instead is used for obscuring the fact that you're spending $10.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 17:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
DLC: more content or a la carte choices offered for a (hopefully) reasonable price, more likely to go on sale or promotional campaign Microtransactions: less cost but more of it for piecemeal content; not as likely to get promo pricing, especially in the context of, say, Steam versus mobile phone games. Expansion packs: hey remember when we were asked by (pre-Activision) Blizzard to pay for a resolution upgrade for Diablo 2? And this was a selling point of a $40 boxed product? Oblivion's horse armour DLC: Boy howdy was that a bad first impression on a decent idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 08:03
|
|
