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

Viva Piñata: Trouble in ParadiseViva Piñata: Trouble in Paradise

Once upon a time Rare though they had a winner; a game which would end all the confusion between a hardcore console and a kiddie console. Viva Piñata was supposed to change the way we think about Xbox 360 gaming by showing off a title that would make children feel more inclined to game on a “big boys console.”

Unfortunately, execution of Rare’s new franchise title came with a few rough patches, namely Gears of War. Earlier on they had press releases and conferences about how this game was going to interact with users, inspire them to watch Viva Piñata the cartoon to get new recipes for the game which would allow you to create new breeds of Piñata. There were a few flaws in the plan. They didn’t hype the game enough prior to the release and then they decided to launch the game during the over-hyped Gears of War title.

Oddly enough my children (two and four years of age) would rather watch Sponge Bob and Dora reruns than a single episode of Viva Piñata. I thought the show was cute and the bright colors and crazy creatures would draw children like moths to a flame, but they just didn’t care.

My children were too young to play the first Viva Piñata and it didn’t provide enough interest for them to watch me play it and invest the hours. I found the game to be creative and fun… for awhile. Once my happy little Piñatas started eating each other and fighting constantly I realized the joy was gone. If I want to listen to screaming and fighting I’ve got my own children, babysitting Piñatas in a fake garden just wasn’t doing it for me.

Now, Viva Piñata: Trouble in paradise has been given a date of September by Eurogamer. Rare is stating we’ll have 30 new Piñata’s to play with along with new environments, co-op play and other cute options. Admittingly, Drop-in/Drop-out co-op play does sound kind of neat but my emotional scares from the first title have not healed yet.

I was told there would be a great deal of downloadable content (DLC) for Viva Piñata. but found nothing available after I purchased the game and, if content exists now, I’ve long since lost interest in the game. The idea was solid, the demographic was available but the execution went flat. You cannot expect older gamers with children to believe Microsoft or Rare are planning to give us real kids games when you release a single title and show us no other kids games for two years.

At this point, if you’re looking for a console with more kid-friendly gaming you’re going to buy a Wii every single time. Titles on the Wii work for both young adults, teenagers, kids and older grandparents while the 360 goes strong with the 18-34 year-old male demographic.

If you want to be serious about bringing kids on board, Viva Piñata is going to need some friends not just a single sequel. Otherwise, you’re going to find out quick that the 18-34 demographic will simply nod politely and move on to their next great fix… Gears of War 2 perhaps (November, 2008).

If the upcoming Viva Piñata franchise executes like its prior title there will definitely be some trouble in paradise.

Episode 534: Epic ExclusiveEpisode 534: Epic Exclusive

There was a lot of shocking news in the past week — unfortunately, Jonah was at PAX East, so last week’s episode ended up not being published. But there’s still more news this week.

The news includes:

  • Borderlands 3 might be an Epic Store exclusive
  • Videogame news subreddit closes for 24 hours to protest bigotry
  • John and Brenda Romero working with Paradox on new strategy IP
  • Sony unveils PSN refund policy

Let us know what you think.

Wii Will Beat PS2 in Sales, PS3 Like GameCube?Wii Will Beat PS2 in Sales, PS3 Like GameCube?

If the sales continue as they have been for Nintendo and their little white Wii, you’ll be looking at the top-dog for overall console says–best selling console ever. This would push Sony’s PlayStation 2 to the second spot of awesome console victories over the last seven generations of gaming hardware.

gamecubeBefore Sony fans unite to comment storm, remember, the PS2 had a lot of great games and continues to have games coming through for its console. People are still debating the life-span of the Wii product line, regardless to overall sales figures while the PS2 no doubt had a long live and still continues to have a long life, heck 30%+ of gamers still play the darn thing. Sony has been able to utilize the PS2 and its profitability to glide through the initial PS3 sales slump and get the momentum growing for their current generation console.

Yet, some folks are comparing the PlayStation 3 to the GameCube in terms of sales performance.

“During the first 26 month period, the PS3 sold 6.79 million units in the U.S., compared to 6.75 million GameCubes during its first 26 months. While the GameCube finished a distant third last generation, the console was profitable for Nintendo.” (Kotaku)

Before you get out your flame pens, this analogy wasn’t constructed by me, I’m merely the messenger. Again, to defend Sony (read: put on  my flame retardant outfit) Sony’s console is slowly building momentum, depending on who’s statistics you read anyway, and their product will eventually become a profitable sale. The GameCube was profitable as well but boasted “dozens” of great games to play while the PS3 obviously is pushing to become the hardcore gamers console of choice with top tier graphics, blu-ray playback and a free online service. GameCube was really just a cube that played some games, a one-trick-poney as it where.

It still feels odd to say Nintendo is winning and Sony isn’t winning (I avoid the term losing to yet again to kill the flames) and… Microsoft?

Microsoft, in my opinion, is in the best possible situation. They’re not being targetted as the number one console and being critizised for holding such a position and they’re not dragging near the bottom to be poked fun at by the industry and bloggers around the world (mainly, the United States.) They’re stealthing by with good sales compared to the last generation console by “improving its fortunes.” The Xbox 360 “sells 18 percent faster than its predecessor, according to NPD figures, and even turned a profit, something the original Xbox never did” according to VentureBeat.

The PlayStation 3 has many years ahead of it and we’re sure plenty of gamers will eventually buy into the console because the technology within that black box is designed to last many years. Considering only 30% of the United States is rolling with an HD-TV it’s not surprising they’re not jumping at the opportunity to own a PlayStation 3. Why is the news all over the PlayStation 3 and talking trash about it? Sony was the console to beat when the PlayStation 2  reigned the industry, to see the console go from #1 to #3 in a single generation is shocking but not new; we saw Nintendo suffer the same fate when the PlayStation originally launched.

But, is the PS3 like the GameCube? There are too many factors to make that comparison, especially considering the growth in the game industry, the growth of storage and video technology and the general acceptance of video games. Hell, you can buy video games at convenience stores in the United States now, the industry isn’t the same as it was in 2001.

Please discuss…but don’t shoot the messenger. 🙂