Microtransaction Madness
What are Microtransactions?
Simply defined, they are optional in-game purchases in which the player exchanges money for digital items. For example, League of Legends has a robust microtransaction system for character skins.
For those unaware, character skins are a recoloring or re-costuming of a character. Skins change the appearance of the character in-game but don’t do anything in terms of gameplay.
Skins are a generally benign example of microtransactions. The player pays a bit extra for a cosmetic item. In this case, everyone wins. The player enhances the experience of a game they love, and no player is worst off as a result.
What’s the big deal?
So far, so good right? There’s nothing wrong with a player wanting to pay a little extra to enhance the experience of their favorite game. Unfortunately, there are less benign variations of microtransactions.
EA recently got into hot water because it was selling characters for real money. Unlike skins, characters fundamental change the game balance.
Buying characters also allows players to skip the power progression entirely. Power disparities can disproportionately sour the experience for lower level players. New players’ get demolished by someone who “paid to win,” thus lowering their desire to keep playing.
Players buying characters may not seem like a big deal. If someone wants to spend more money on a game to have a better experience why not? Unfortunately, this decision affects all the other players they interact with.
In the case of EA’s Battlefront 2, the difference was flippant. Prior to patching, it would cost a player up to 80 hours of gameplay before they could purchase some of the heroes.
At this point, the incentive to buy becomes stronger. Most people would value the time over the $10-$20
This set a dangerous precedent.
Not only is this practice manipulative, but it’s compounded and made worse by the fact that children often play these games.
Because of brain chemistry, children are less able to control their impulses. If an oblivious or careless parent leaves their credit card tied to the game without some form of protection… well, let’s just say they may have a huge surprise at the end of that billing cycle.
More tragically, compulsive buying doesn’t just extend to children. A now common occurrence, loot boxes, utilize casino tactics for handing out rewards. Loot boxes become slot machines, which means people can get addicted to gambling on the loot boxes.
You know the most insidious part? The game developers and companies know this and actively leverage it.
What do I hear about regulation?
What is a gamer to do? Should we never play any game with loot boxes again? Recently, the FTC has declared that they will consider investigating loot boxes.
The FTC’s oversight isn’t a “big brother” type moment. Previously, the government called on the ESRB to curb this practice or at least increase consumer awareness surrounding loot boxes.
Personally, I’m torn by the FTC’s investigation. I do appreciate the government and FTC taking an interest in a potentially serious issue.
I also have to acknowledge that the ESRB dropped the ball. The fact that the government has to ask, yet again, means the ESRB is failing at its goal. At its core, the ESRB was designed so that gamers could keep the government out of their affairs.
Brief history tangent! The ESRB was formed following outrage surrounding Mortal Kombat. Parents demanded a way to know what was in games before they will let their children play. The game industry was threatened with federal oversight. To avoid this outcome, the ESRB was born.
On the other hand, I don’t like the government getting involved with gaming. In my view, it’s one of the last spaces where more radical forms of speech can occur.
Video games often blur the line between art and entertainment. The blurred line lets games do and say things other media would have a hard time doing.
I feel as though this investigation would have the potential to set a dangerous precedent. If the FTC ultimately mandated the removal of loot boxes from games, it could allow government control of game content more broadly.
In the worst case scenario, this may even be suppressing free expression. It would be a shame for genuine criticisms of society, an administration, or anything similar, to be able to be extinguished due to the whims of a few.
Where next?
Given the community desire for regulation on this devious practice, I believe intervention would be good.
I also realize that if the investigation and the resulting action(s) were framed correctly, my fear of broad censorship would be neutralized.
In the meanwhile, gamers should apply pressure to the ESRB. At this point, it’s clear the game developers are unwilling to do anything about this issue unless forced.
Unfortunately, loot boxes have the potential to harm thousands of gamers. Video games are about fun and community. Exploitative microtransactions have torn into this sacred trust.
At a time where developers are squandering our trust, a reconsideration of loot boxes is likely wise.
I love video games. I hate to see the entire industry dragged through the mud by corporate greed. More importantly, I hate to see an art form inflict pain in the chase for the almighty dollar instead.
