Beauty of Micro-transaction MMO’s

Taken from Florensia OnlineThere is room to grow in the world of massive multiplayer online gaming. A large online community should not have to subscribe to a monthly charge to play great MMORPG’s because there are other known models that work, including the micro-transaction based MMO.

At first, this sounds like a dirty word, micro-transaction. Often we relate it with being “nickle and dimed” through a video game by means of dirty marketing which feeds our enthusiastic gamer addiction. Put this thought aside for a minute and keep an open mind.

Imagine a game with worlds the size of World of Warcraft and stories as in-depth as Guild Wars (which is not monthly itself) but free from monthly payments (or “playments” a new term that needs to be coined). The reason behind the monthly charge covers service fees, technical support staff, bandwidth, servers and sheer volume of Activision Blizzards user base.

The micro-transaction concept could still help pay for all the overhead of running an online gaming business because gamers tend to be over-enthusiastic about their great addictive games. If you build a game with excellent content, replay value and strive for a community atmosphere a micro-transaction title can work just as well as a subscription based game.

One beautiful aspect to micro-transaction models is paying for content when you’re willing to pay. This includes cosmetic character alterations, basic needs items (health potions) and other products to enhance the playability of the game without requiring the gamer to do so. There will be some gamers that use this as a “free ride” and never buy anything while other gamers spend way too much because they have expendable income which helps balance out costs.

The trick to a micro-transaction game balance is allowing players to enhance their experience without taking away or crippling their game to force a micro-transaction. You do not need a “fire enchantment” which causes a bit more damage and looks really cool, but it can make your character look more sinister and provide slight benefits to battle.

Wouldn’t this make the rich more powerful than those without a lot of cash? It might might them moderately more powerful and definitely more pretty to look at, but it also allows players who would never be able to experience any of the game a chance to play. In some ways, the level ground is already broken in MMO’s like World of Warcraft based purely on game experience… a player who’s been playing for three years and has a level 70 character will dominate a person with casual gaming habits. Nothing in the world is fair, at least this gives lower level characters a chance to spend some cash to get their character on par when they’ve not got time to work through the game with hours of time investements.

A player that can’t play World of Warcraft but would love to play the hot game is worse off than having battled someone with a better ring, more options and a lightening staff. At least gamers with small budgets can have a massive multiplayer experience without having to foot the bill for a monthly subscription.

There is a time and place for subscription and micro-transaction style games, it might be time to try a micro-transaction system in the United States to help compete against the World of Warcraft addiction. The trick will be to provide users with a great game play experience, higher end graphics, professions, side-quests and storylines with many possibilities.

Try a micro-transaction title today, checkout Florensia Online and Silk Road Online.

0 thoughts on “Beauty of Micro-transaction MMO’s”

  1. sure micro-transactions are fine if the people who spent shit loads only played a bit, but the majority of people who spend real money on in-game items are old people, who are retired or in college and play 24/7. The best type of game is one like Guild wars with no monthly fee and no sale of in-game items, because otherwise old people who shouldn’t be on games just beat all the normal players (people under 18).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

EA Listens To The Public: No SecuROM In The Sims 3!EA Listens To The Public: No SecuROM In The Sims 3!

simsIt seems Spore was the staging point for the SecuROM revolt and the massive amazon 1-star reviews and backlash have not gone on deaf ears. Electronic Arts has opted to leave SecuROM out of The Sims 3, an upcoming release for just that reason.

“We have heard your requests over the past months and here is our plan for The Sims 3,” Sims development head Rod Humble stated on the official website. “The game will have disc-based copy protection – there is a serial code just like The Sims 2. To play the game there will not be any online authentication needed. (casualgaming.biz)

We wonder, did they do this primarily because of the Spore revolt or because the demographic for The Sims is even more casual than that of Spore? Casual gamers expect a casual experience from install to un-install because they don’t want to be hassled with silly copy protection. Or, perhaps casual games like The Sims is less likely to be hacked because it’s not a “hardcore” game?

We’re sticking with the thinking that this is a “good faith” jesture to the gamers for how they “rocked the vote” on the last title as The Sims is one of the best selling series on the PC gaming platform. Lots of sales with lots of fans, why interrupt that momentum with ugly DRM whiplash?

Episode 302: Just a TwosomeEpisode 302: Just a Twosome

This week Jonah and Jordan go it alone without Paul, which is unfortunately since the Gaming Flashback is the classic Nintendo 64 title Paper Mario. It might be just as well as the events of the last week made the crew ramble on about the industry at length, making the post much longer than usual.

This week’s impressive news items:

  • John Riccitiello steps down as CEO of Electronic Arts
  • Firaxis announces Brave New World expansion for Civilization V
  • Will fans back an Alice 3 Kickstarter, asks American McGee
  • Lord British explains Shroud of the Avatar‘s offline gameplay and DRM
  • Facebook of Italian automobile company mentionsGran Turismo PS4″
  • Team Meat sitting out on developing for next-gen consoles

Lots of Reader Feedback, but no Question of the Week this week – just too much show.

Video Games Are Entertaining, E3, Not So MuchVideo Games Are Entertaining, E3, Not So Much

Most folks in the game industry are already writing off E3 as an actual event to be attending. Even Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter is calling it “virtually useless” for both retail and investors. The writing is on the wall and the reasons are obvious.

Publishers and developers didn’t want to invest the millions of dollars to make E3 a glamour show of epic proportions anymore. The lights, camera and action are all what the industry is about; the hype wagon in full steam. Gamers eat up the hype, bloggers and journalist rely on the hype and action to build readership and keep them coming back for more and retail uses it to gauge new releases and get a grip of the future.

Without the entertainment value of E3 nobody seems to care anymore. Large scale gaming entertainment is reflected in the large scale events and, at the end of the day, we want our conferences and shows to reflect the emotion and exciting of the industry.

“E3 had much more of an impact when it was a show,” comments IGN.com vice president of games content Tal Blevins. “The video game industry is about fun and entertainment, and we should have a show that reflects it.” (gamasutra)

Everyone is sad to see the state of E3, it’s like a cancer patient waiting for their final diagnosis. It’s unfortunate, it’s going to get worse and life will go on without it. In its wake, new shows will crop up while old shows increase in audience, excitement, intensity and cost.

As one show begins to fade others will grow to replace it and developers will yet again find themselves spending millions of dollars to be the best of show.