Halo 4 could add microtransactions

Executive producer says 343 Industries currently "looking at" adding cosmetic bonus items for a small fee.

by

Halo 4 could become the latest AAA title to introduce microtransactions. 343 Industries executive producer Dan Ayoub told Digital Spy that the studio is currently "looking at" offering cosmetic items for a small fee, similar to those available for Gears of War: Judgment.

"I think Halo certainly has the potential for those kinds of things," Ayoub said. "We don't have too much to talk about in terms of our plans down that line, but it's certainly something… we've seen the fans of Gears are enjoying, and if it's something we think our community is going to enjoy, it's something we'll seriously talk about."

Gears of War: Judgment currently offers various armor and weapon skins, ranging in price from 240 Microsoft Points ($3) to 400 Microsoft Points ($5), as well as bundle packs.

If Halo 4 does add microtransactions in the future, it will follow not only Gears of War: Judgment, but also Tomb Raider, Call of Duty: Black Ops II, and Dead Space 3, among others.

Microtransactions will be a staple of future games, if recent comments from Electronic Arts and Ubisoft are any indication. EA chief financial officer Blake Jorgensen said in February that consumers are "enjoying and embracing" microtransactions, while Ubisoft Toronto manager Jade Raymond said last month that microtransactions are essential to the future of AAA games.

Halo 4 today introduced the Castle Map Pack, the game's third and final map pack. Developed by Certain Affinity, the expansion adds new maps Daybreak, Outcast, and Perdition. The content is available as a free download for those who hold a $25 Halo 4 War Games Map Pass or as an individual download for $10.

Discussion

263 comments
GothikaGeist
GothikaGeist

If it's just cosmetic items... why the fuck is everyone angry? Weapon Skin/Armor Skins are perfectly fine.

malokevi
malokevi

 @pip3dream @malokevi @CecilChups @Agent_Yevon I couldn't agree more.

Any person who wasn't born yesterday, and been living under a rock, would understand where things might be heading. 

For instance, they would understand that the idea of charging people to run, charging for animations, every step, bullets, and things integral to the game is IMPOSSIBLE.

They would understand that perhaps for F2P MMOs, and maybe even for F2P FPS', some companies may choose to implement these sorts of microtransactions: a pay to win model, so to speak. This is the nature of PC F2P, and thats because developers know that people who play shitty MMO will sit at their computer for 60 hours grinding. Developers know they cant take advantage of that mentality. This is not even remotely true of console gamers, particularly FPS gamers.

They would also undrstand. not living under a rock and all, that to implement this sort of policy for AAA retail titles is never going to happen. Thats because developers wont suddenly become more and more retarded in the future. They know that it would drive away their player base, and that when you pay retail value for a game you should necessarily be abel to play it in its full capacity without any micro-transactions.

Anyone who suggests that micro-transactions will be a requirement in the future, based on these menial additions - in games like Halo - that only serve to enhance the experience for interested parties, IS living under a rock, is speaking out their ass, and is trying to emphasize a doom-and-glood perspective so that they can feel like they have contributed something valuable to the discourse. Its easy to repeat the worst case scenario over and over. Thats just one of those things that stupid people do to make themselves feel smart.

When in reality they are just saying the first stupid thing that comes to mind.

So, to answer your question, I am more then capable of predicting where things might be heading. And I can guarantee that it is NOT where CecilChups is predicting. Anyone who hasn't been living under a rock their whole life could tell you that.

ElFlechero
ElFlechero

I have absolutely no issues with micro-transactions for cosmetic DLC, as long as there's plenty available without paying (like halo 4 does). Personally, I would love to pay $3 in order to unlock the Breach stance--it's the only stance besides recruit that doesn't look stupid, but I'm definitely not getting the UNSC Weapons Master commendation any time soon.

Sefrix
Sefrix

 I am in no way trying to defend any company. That being said why are we hating on M$ or 343? Everyone that goes to GS is out of their equation here. They made micro-transactions and found out that the average gamer (not us) buys it and likes it. They are simply, as a business, giving the customers what they want. I have never purchased DLC and never will, but I am not the average gamer. We are the niche market, the ones that care about the industry, read about it and have a passion for it. There are companies that cater to us out there but that doens't mean all companies have to.

If you are going to hate on a group of people over micro-transactions then you'd be best to aim towards the many people buying ridiculous bacon guns. As it stand micro-transactions in video games is no different then re-releasing old movies in 3D. It's a cash grab sure, but it's done because the average joe schmoe actually buys a ticket and enjoys it.

TheSkyrimStatue
TheSkyrimStatue

Forza, Gears and now Halo? I have less respect for M$ that Activision

CriticalCritic
CriticalCritic

"Halo 4 could add microtransactions" well Halo 4 could also get sold back to GameStop, I'll throw in my Xbox and get a Wii U while I'm there.

AMG
AMG

I miss Bungie.

inspectercoley
inspectercoley

I miss the days of buying a magazine for the cheat codes.

Games don't seem to have cheat codes anymore, just micro transactions or extra DLC. Bargain. Sadface.

1234ritchie
1234ritchie

Fact of the matter is, people are using micro transactions. Black Ops 2 is still in the top 10 charts in areas of the world. This stuff SELLS.

If a business believes they can capitalise on this, they will. Apart from Projekt Red. Because they are awesome. 


All I am saying is vote with your wallet, not on a gaming forum website.

TenraiSenshi
TenraiSenshi

So the future of Microsoft involves an always online console, Kinect, paid for online services that should be free and microtransactions. I think this gives gamers plenty to think about when they're considering which next gen console to purchase.

arfy2
arfy2

The Next Xbox is rumoured to be online with no backwards compatibility and no hardware innovation (essentially using pc components AMD CPU and GPU). The only saving grace for me was Halo. To be honest if this is true I'm jumping ship. I bought the original Xbox before I bought the PS2, I bought the 360 before the PS3. No Next Xbox purchase from me at all!!! I wish MS actually saw these comments by outraged gamers and listened. F*ck them.

pip3dream
pip3dream

The language in these things is so fucking slimy, it makes my skin crawl.  Players are "enjoying" microtransactions?  You see it as something your game community will "enjoy" ?  You know what I enjoy?  Playing Halo.  You know what I don't really enjoy?  Paying $60 for it.  But hey, you worked hard on it - so I do it.  But saying something like "Players enjoy paying microtransaction fees" is like saying we enjoy paying taxes.  It's something you are MAKING us do, because YOU ENJOY making a shit ton of money. You are giving us most of a game, and then making us pay for additional assets.  This whole DLC thing has just gotten so out of hand, and has been twisted far beyond what it was intended to be.

Landsharkk
Landsharkk

As if making over $400 million from game sales in about the first month wasn't enough....

sunyatanada76
sunyatanada76

This sucks! in 5 years it will be the norm, they will force to buy shit to finish the game

visionedorange
visionedorange

also they shouldn't have been allowed to call judgment "gears of war" as thats straight up false advertising, watta huge piece of crap that game was, after gears was also the best multiplayer experience of this gen watta shame

visionedorange
visionedorange

so i guess this is how u make an unbalanced and unfun multiplayer experience worse? honestly this game woulda been great if i didn't HALF to play with a full fricken team of pros to win, i'm pretty decent but its the same thing every round, go up against full time in party against my team of randoms, lose miserably, thats the downfall of semi-competitive multiplayer, no team no win

remmy999666
remmy999666

I just got 4000 Microsoft points from this site for free! :D freemspointsforever com

bmart970
bmart970

No, I can't stand it when companies pull stuff like this. Halo is my favorite game, and I would be very, very disappointed if micro-transactions of any kind were added to it. Things like this ruin the idea of earning armor, or in CoD's case, camos.

prsansa
prsansa

It has begun Microsoft has started crapping on their costumers hopes of a good console this year with introducing micro transactions to games like halo

malokevi
malokevi

GAWD I HATE IT WHEN A COMPANY ADDS THINGS THAT I DONT HAVE TO BUY AND DONT ACTUALLY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE TO THE CORE EXPERIENCE! DAMN THEM AND THEIR EVIL HEARTS!!!!!

blackleather223
blackleather223

As long as we continue to pay them and all they will continue to take advantage of us and up the pices astime goes along. Dumb. I still enjoy Halo and that is why I'll continue to buy that game.

Dinostrich
Dinostrich

Don't you dare add microtransaction to Halo 4!  I lost respect for games that add that crap to it.  Whatever happened to unlocking armor by getting all the achievements?  That was an achievement in its self, plus it kept you playing the  game in order to attain the armor.  DLC is already pushing it, we've given into DLC, so then they raised the prices and we gave into that. "Give somebody an inch and they'll take a mile."

blackleather223
blackleather223

All they wont these days are to nit pick you to death. Next they will fnd away to make us pay just to play the game after we already payed for the game you know.

SIDEFX1
SIDEFX1

Skins if any type and for a price is pointless and a rip off.

moridin800
moridin800

Company makes a quality game that people are consistently playing, and decides it wants to monetize on that quality with an absurdly low-cost high return investment? Yeah, how dare they. 


Takeno456
Takeno456

Oh boy more micro transactions. I wonder how long it will be before these damn things start going beyond simple cosmetic items.....

FallenOneX
FallenOneX

"we've seen the fans of Gears are enjoying..."

To be read as, "We see that someone will buy it...".

HomieHesAKlown
HomieHesAKlown

Pay more get less, the future of gaming. Smart from a business view.

xXNutcrackerXx
xXNutcrackerXx

@GothikaGeist  

That was my reaction. I read the headline and thought, "Crap!". Then I read the article and thought, "Oh, cosmetic stuff? Cool. Doesn't make it forced, but gives extra options. I can live with that." I might buy one. I might not. Depends on if I see something I like enough to throw down a few bucks. I think gamers (especially those on forums and stuff) really enjoy getting angry about whatever the buzzword or hot topic is of the past 6 months. Sigh...if only more people utilized critical thinking. Oh well, Geist, have my virtual high five. *high five*

Sefrix
Sefrix

@1234ritchie Exactly. They are not the enemy here. Actually they are providing what "gamers" want which makes good business sense. The problem now is that "gamer" no longer just means GS viewers, but their uncles/nephews and grandma who never go to GS.

If you want to get upset at a group of people for microtransactions you'd have to look at the majority of gamers, not the company.

bilboad
bilboad

@pip3dream Well, if they're just cosmetic upgrades then you're under no pressure to buy them.  While I agree the language used was a bit of spin, if the cosmetic upgrades really do sell well, then it probably is fair to say that players enjoy having the option to buy the upgrades.  Of course they might like it even more if they got the upgrades for free, but still.

bilboad
bilboad

@sunyatanada76 As long as it's just for cosmetic things then I don't have a problem with it.  It's like how you can pay for accessories for you XBL avatar.  I personally don't care enough about what my avatar looks like to do that, but if some people do I don't have a problem with MS making some money off that. 

I do share your worry though about where things might be headed.  There are already mobile games which take this farther and charge for things which actually have an impact on gameplay.  So far they always make it possible to play the game without buying additional items, but they intentionally make the game more tedious to play, or put you at a disadvantage in online play, if you don't buy upgrades.  I hope that trend doesn't move into console games.

CecilChups
CecilChups

@moridin800 The point, friend, is that it use to be  standard to unlock things like this by actually playing the game.

bilboad
bilboad

@PSYCHOV3N0M @bmart970 Agreed.  I'm fine with it as long as they only charge for cosmetic upgrades.  As soon as you can pay real money for a game play advantage, that's a big problem.

bilboad
bilboad

@i_like_pie223 @blackleather223 True.  The difference though is that with a subscription game like WoW everyone playing the game has to pay the same fee, so it doesn't create an imbalance in the game.   If it's possible for some players gain an advantage over other players by buying upgrades with real money, then that's a big problem.

Sefrix
Sefrix

@arc_salvo @Sefrix @TheSkyrimStatue @AMG mmo-style in the same way that SimCity was/is. There is no reason they couldn't make a single player option except that it doesn't line up with their "vision" of the game. Games like Diablo 3, SimCity, and soon Destiny could easily just be played on your local machine, it's their choice to put the extra effort that prevents it from doing so.

Also from GS's coverage: "
Like Halo, Destiny will feature a story campaign"

Including a single player option would have been easier than preventing it. They went out of their way to make it not possible just like all the rest.