Assassin's Creed III Supports Microtransactions

[Mike Richards]

No one is making you buy it so whats the issue? There is always some idiots willing to pay to cheat, as it were. I wouldnt let it effect your enjoyment of the game. Just see it as there are always suckers that are easily parted from their money.

It's the idea that they're withholding content that should've been in the game.

But I get your point, I'll buy the game but not the content.

It sounds like they aren't holding anything back, all they're doing is letting you buy multiplayer unlocks without having to level up.

I don't remember hearing that many people complain when Valve started letting you buy guns in TF2. It looks like the same deal here

 

[Falterfire]

No one is making you buy it so whats the issue? There is always some idiots willing to pay to cheat, as it were. I wouldnt let it effect your enjoyment of the game. Just see it as there are always suckers that are easily parted from their money.

It's an issue because it affects multiplayer balance (Based on reading this) which would affect my enjoyment if I were to play Multiplayer. Mass Effect 3 had a similar thing, but it was coop only, so the worst that happened was you were slightly less responsible for a successful run. When your opponents are the ones paying to win, it's a whole lot more annoying.

 

[Cowabungaa]

The unfortunate thing here being that the reigns of the multiplayer are essentially handed over to those who paid to win, they'll have a significant advantage which may affect personal enjoyment, depending on who's paid to win.

Except that that isn't the case. They're not getting premium items you can't get otherwise. That would be the case in, say, Star Trek Online where certain (top of the line) ships are only available for real cash.

In AC3 it's just a shortcut to get items everyone can get anyway. Lame, yeah, but completely optional.

 

[kommando367]

Eh, I never played AC games for the multiplayer anyway.

 

[COMaestro]

This is not a big deal. Sure, people in multiplayer will be able to use abilities as if they were level 20 right out the gate if they want to pay for it. So what? By the time I get to multiplayer, I will be dealing with both them and people who earned their abilities the hard way. I'll still be level 1 in either case with no cool abilities and I'll still be getting a decent score because the special abilities are just tools to help you, not replace your skills as a gamer. It's not like they get armor or a longer life-bar in this game.

I will admit that the wording in the article regarding F2P is a bit off, but many games that have microtransactions were still full-priced games. I believe Guild Wars 2 has items you can purchase, but cost $60. Diablo 3 has the auction house. Lots of MMO's started as games you purchased, and then paid monthly fees for, but then became F2P and get by on microtransactions or expansions. It's the same thing in my mind.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

As long as it won't be pay-to-win and is completely optional, I don't mind.

If idiots are willing to part with their money for this crap then let them.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

but we should at least wait till we have played the game before deciding this is the worst thing.

I totally agree with everything else you said, but what I've singled out here sounds pretty stupid. I don't want to buy the game in order to find out it's a piece of shit. As a consumer I want to make sure I get my moneys worth, not gamble it away and hope for the best, that's why reviews exist.

 

[putowtin]

It's for the multiplayer people
Do I agree with it, no, but there's always people out there willing to pay to get more quicker (be it levels, ammo, guns, whatever!)
Get the game, play the game, enjoy the multiplayer, just don't buy these "Erudito packs"

 

[Nurb]

It's going to come to the single player games eventually, you just wait. People have been defending the abuse of microtransactions as they've gotten worse and worse over the years, and soon we'll be paying for chunks of a single player game.

 

[KoudelkaMorgan]

Was already not getting the game, because the setting interests me not at all and the series has been run into the ground. Actually aside from bits and pieces of AC2 and a few, maybe 1 in 30, multiplayer sessions across the others I don't think I even like the series to begin with.

I liked AC1 oddly enough.

But adding this (the stuff in the article) to their list of "how to milk our only remaining viable franchise to death" ideas just makes me not want to follow the company anymore. They have quite talented people, but their management of their IPs is amateur at best.

People liked PoP, and I even think the movie was at least a solid 5 or 6 but I never liked any of the games. Then they went and did a remake, of a game that was already a remake and people didn't really care for it.

They have Rayman, but made so many shovelware Rabbids games that people were astonished that they went back to Rayman Origins. I have never played a Rayman game and likely will not.

I couldn't even name another of their IPs without checking GameFAQs. Tom Clancy stuff right?

 

[Sansha]

Clearly they've not learnt that free-to-play games have micro-transactions because they're otherwise free.

Core concept, Lana.

+1 Archer.

Assassin's Creed is an excellent game, and having played a bit of AC3, I love it. The running-jumping-climbing-trees is so much damn fun. I don't care if a couple of idiots cheat for items with real money, because let's face it - Ubisoft has made AC an extraordinary game.

I don't get the Ubisoft hate. I've never run into DRM problems, and microtransactions... I just don't give a shit. Why would you?

 

[eternal-chaplain]

Fools, none can fight the microstransactions and win!

 

[BBboy20]

Considering we're now fighting the British, I'm not surprised they probably thought of "Hey, since we now at a point where a currency that was used then still exists today, why not have UK players trade in their real pounds for virtual ones".

 

[WanderingFool]

What bullshit...

using microtransactions to allow people to buy things before they unlock them in game...

wait...

The Erudito Packs, so named for an enigmatic supporting character [http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Erudito] in the Assassin's Creed series, will allow players "to acquire some game items, disregarding your current level."

... actually, I cant see anything wrong with making money of the gamers who are to lazy to put the effort to unlock the items in game...

Good for them... I guess...

 

[Reaper195]

Wow... I was remotely considering getting this game too. Well, at least my mind's been made up for me now. Is there anything that publishers won't charge extra for at the moment?

You should still get the game. Just not the multiplayer DLC...

 

[Snowblindblitz]

No one is making you buy it so whats the issue? There is always some idiots willing to pay to cheat, as it were. I wouldnt let it effect your enjoyment of the game. Just see it as there are always suckers that are easily parted from their money.

It's the idea that they're withholding content that should've been in the game.

But I get your point, I'll buy the game but not the content.

It sounds like they aren't holding anything back, all they're doing is letting you buy multiplayer unlocks without having to level up.

I don't remember hearing that many people complain when Valve started letting you buy guns in TF2. It looks like the same deal here

This guy, this guy gets it.

Anyways, I do disagree with the concept, but as long as they keep it cosmetic/items you can unlock through gameplay, I'm fine. Just, be careful on the slippery slope to charging for content that affects gameplay.

Micro-transactions will have to be killed through not buying them.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

While I'm not getting the game just yet seeing this is making me have second thoughts.

Also I really love how many will say "concept is lame/dull" and pair it with "just ignore it/you don't have to buy it" just allows that kind of crap to grow and grow and ignoring it all doesn't really make it go away if there's a market to pander to (the rich market that is).

 

[Dandark]

You know, Maybe I have been too harsh on Ubisoft, I enjoyed other AC games so maybe I will actually give the third game a try despite them doing everything they can to put me off it.

*reads article*

Nope never mind. If I by the full £40 for a game I expect to get everything. Microtransactions are for F2P games because they are you know? Free!