Are you for or against micro-transactions?

[StevenW]

Who remembers the Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion “Horse Armour” scandal - 200 MS Points for a shield for your old nag?

Well, microtransactions are here to stay and, if anything, we’re going to see them more and more in console games. In the next couple of months both DUST 514 and Dead Space 3 will allow you to buy upgrades with your cold, hard cash.

We’d love to write an article about the Pro and Cons of micro-transactions, but we'd like to also get the input from the PlayStation community.

Please vote in the poll and let us know your opinion on micro-transactions, do you love or hate them?

Personally, I’m 50/50. When I do have the opportunity to buy something and don’t, I do feel that we’re not all on a level playing field. I kind of feel a bit cheated. I think if you pay full price for a game, it shouldn’t offer micro-transactions that allow you to improve your performance. However, in the case of DUST 514, the game is free-to-play, so I don’t begrudge spending £20, £30, £40 to tailor my Merc the way I want to without having to grind.

[Ghost-Rhayne]

Not fussed either way. I will be sinking a fair bit into DUST 514 over the years because it is an experience that excited me and I love the universe. I have bought a few bits and bobs for other games too, like Saints Row 3. If the price is reasonable and I like the game and will play it long term, i'll bite.

[claud3]

I am against actually paying for something so small AKA HORSE ARMOR in oblivion and other games i have got tiny DLC's for

I think that is why SKYRIM has none at all, yes HARTHFIRE was small, but not as small as HORSE ARMOR or the SPIRE etc in OBLIVION

so i hope we do not have to pay anything for TINY dlc's

[rich15]

I'm completely against it. I much prefer buying a game and knowing its the whole game. This is also the reason i rarely buy DLC.

[Mike_Harradence]

Dead Space 3 is the latest title to incorporate this feature:

http://www.psu.com/a018061/Dead-Spac...rotransactions

[DarkVincent07]

I think they are the plague of the industry and anyone that approves of them is mentally disabled

[podsaurus]

If it gets to the point where they're trying to coax people in to paying more money to unlock something after you have already paid $60 for the game then forget it. What a way to nickel and dime people.

Free to play I can understand but not $60 games. Full levels that are DLC fine, but not individual weapons.

[BoyBettaKnow]

As long as the person buying it see's the value in it to them then i have no problem with it. The 'DLC' that the WarZ tried though, that is nothing short of scummy behaviour

[StevenW]

I think they are the plague of the industry and anyone that approves of them is mentally disabled

Why? What's your issue with them?

[Ixion]

I have yet to play a 'free-to-play' game, so I'm interested to see how I feel about DUST's micro-transactions. I think that's a reasonable approach, since the game is free, the expansions and upgrades will be free, and the only items exclusive to micro-transactions are cosmetic equipment.

However, a game like FFXIII-2 annoys me. You pay $60 for the game and then you still have to pay for all the added outfits, characters, quests, etc.

In conclusion, I feel I'll support micro-transactions if the game is free, but not if I already paid full price.

[Yuuichi]

Free to play is fine with micro transactions. In a full price game, so long as items can be easily attained in game, no big deal. It is when they make the item super ultra hard to get in game then charge for it that's the problem. DS3 bringing this in just shows how that series has really changed.

[LastManDancing]

It depends, I mean... in Dead Space 3 or ME3 you don't have to buy them with cash if you invest time in the game and get them the old fashion way (Grinding).

If people want to pay $1-2 for something instead of investing like 1-2 hours to get the same thing then that's them.

[DarkVincent07]

Why? What's your issue with them?

hard to put concisely.

But basically every game I have played or tried that has either a F2P model or micro transactions has either A) Forced them upon me in game breaking ways, or, B) Made content unaccessable at all due to needing to pay real money.

Maybe I was overly harsh, but I think games like Dead Space 3 should be without such rubbish. It saddens me that people will fall into this trap and spend money on something they can get in the game. I am curious to see how rare these 'additional resources' really are

[Kuro]

Mostly against it but I'm fine with it if the game is f2p.

[Blacksite]

Against. Free-to-play games get boring after a couple hours and microtransactions offer nothing but instant-gratification to the consumer. Stick to in-game currency, if you're going to sell items to the player.

[Sir_Scud]

As of right now I'm not against it. They are becoming more prevalent, some types have been around for awhile as "Unlock All" codes or in many sports titles a way to get better performances from athletes or some games having a pay money to get in-game money for games that are easy to obtain money in. However, they didn't limit you, they just were a convenience.

Games already limit content to pre-order codes which annoy me from time to time, but if more content becomes locked for a few extra dollars, I'll be a little pissed.

[Chickenooble]

I'm fine with micro transactions as long as...
1) It doesn't make the game 'Pay to Win'
2) It doesn't prohibit me from experiencing most of the content associated with the game (I'm fine with downloadable expansions and mission packs)
3) It gives lazy players a means of achieving unlocks that could otherwise be earned by playing the game.

[Fenix]

Im fine with micro transactions as long as its not the only way to get through the game, I get angrier with current DLC practices then anything.