As video game players around the globe pinch pennies to accommodate rising game and hardware prices, embattled French publisher Ubisoft appears to be leaning even further in.
In its annual financial report, the media brand contends that controversial “microtransactions” — auxiliary in-game purchases like skins, equipment, and the like — actually make gaming more fun:
” … the adoption of monetization and engagement policies that respect the player experience and are sustainable in the long term. At Ubisoft, the golden rule when developing premium games is to allow players to enjoy the game in full without having to spend more. Our monetization offer within premium games makes the player experience more fun by allowing them to personalize their avatars or progress more quickly … “
For the uninitiated, it’s worth noting that players pay for exclusive in-game minutiae in addition to what they have already paid for the game itself. But as shareholders celebrate, those of us willing and able to read a room aren’t. As rising living costs continue taking a toll, one recent report found that even “doom spending” Gen Zers are making intensive cuts to their fun budgets.
The contentious business model far predates contemporary PC gaming and current-gen releases. Disregarding costs associated with arcades, the earliest instances of ancillary buys date back to the early aughts, with some free-to-play online multiplayer games launching special mini-purchases for quality of life content and cosmetics.
Browser games like pixel-art social sim Habbo Hotel and virtual pet game Neopets had me by my parents’ wallet. The former offered premier room decor, called “furni,” for those who thought real-life furniture was too sensible. The latter, a family-friendly hit that predominately advertised to young gamers, pushed an in-game currency called “Neocash,” which, when purchased with real-world funds, padded players’ Neopian bank accounts. Two decades later, similar digital currency exchanges remain prevalent, most notably with Roblox‘s Robux.
Even in “freemium” multiplayer hits like Fortnite and Overwatch 2, the premium upgrades’ allure transcends aesthetics. What’s more, some games keep skill-buffing accessories behind paywalls, meaning only players with expendible real-world funds can participate. Whether requiring players to shell out for upgrades to their characters’ skills, equipment, or ammunition, this corporate strategy turns games from once-accessible, kid-friendly games into “pay-to-win” loot crate-laden letdowns.
Naturally, free-to-play titles require some revenue to keep things up and running. Some AAA studios behind big-budget blockbusters, however, aren’t deterred from including costly content. It’s even harder for these conglomerates to step away from microtransactions when they’re working as intended. Despite vocal outcry from concerned hobbyists, a recent study found that nearly 60% of all gaming industry revenue in 2024 came from microtransactions — a colossal $24 billion. The top performers? Roblox, Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, and Fortnite.
The popularity of “free-to-play, pay-to-win” games puts players at an ethical impasse. Fans of Fortnite and other purchase-packed IPs can take a stand and skip superfluous buys, though that may mean their in-game performance suffers at the hands of those with new, not-yet-nerfed weaponry. Conversely, those that opt to pay may outperform competitors, but subsist in an inequitable system they’ve helped perpetuate. While consumers are ultimately left to decide for themselves, arm-twisting from studios complicates an already sticky situation.
Follow us on MSN for more content you love.
Read more:
A lifelong gamer raised on classic titles like Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, and Croc, Stephanie brings her expertise of gaming and pop culture to deliver unique, refreshing views on the world of video games, complete with references to absurd and obscure media.
Leave a Reply