Microtransactions - The Discussion!

No, I have never used micro transactions before in any game. I dislike that Halo 5 uses them as well.

^Depends on what you mean by "only during gameplay". You have req packs and a full menu that you can view (if memory serves) anytime you want, but the reqs themselves and how they're deployed in actual gameplay is like I described.

There were even people complaining on Waypoint awhile back, that they were being trolled... literally bounced out of the req menu by their own team mates who found out they could interrupt you and keep you from accessing your reqs by Spartan charging you,
which I guess bounced you back into the game.

I literally cannot imagine who thought it would be fun to interrupt game play in that manner, just to keep power weapons, vehicles and power up items off the maps in order to put them in a MT system.

Saw this after I posted:

" There are good ways to do this. "Evolve"'s Microtransactions were all 100% cosmetic, whereas the DLC actually added new hunter characters and monsters.

Then there are bad ways to do it like "HALO 5" with the REQ Packs or the upcoming "Gears Of War 4" where if you want the complete experience you'll be asked to purchase their version of REQ Packs. "

Not sure about Evolve really since I did not buy any. How did Evolve do it? Where all hunters and monsters free and supported by the unnecessary microtransactions? Or did you have to buy them? Maybe I am missing something with this. But in Halo 5 I
have never needed a microtransaction for anything. I get a ton of Reqs. just by playing and have yet to find the system game breaking. Evolve, at least I thought, you had to PAY to get more hunters and monsters. At least those is what I thought. How is
that better than the Halo 5 system? Not implying it is not and I could be missing something.

"If a game wants to charge $60 upfront then it doesn't get to do Microtransactions, even if they are cosmetic only."

Well, I am fine if it is not required. I do not care about skins. I would much rather that as compared to dlc. I guess one could argue that dlc is a no as well. But I remember playing games and wishing there were more maps but this was during the early
online stuff where you where pretty much stuck with the original purchase. 5-6 maps and no real hope for more. And the games where $50-$60 (even NES games I remember paying $50 for many times when I was young).

The big issue is that some of the content is honestly not even made by the same team. They outsource the making of that. No $$ then no more content. Sure, there are cases where the main big company pulled content to resell and that is bad. But I know
of a decent number of cases where the content was done by another team and it cost. And without the $$ from the dlc or some kind of microtransaction that content would not get made. It is not a case of held back content. Or that the content should have
came with the game at $60. You, I, or anyone else that purchased the original game received all the content in those cases. It is just that some of that money was re-invested in more content hoping to make a little more profit and keep the game viable longer.

I haven't bought them. If the game is free than sure, but if we paid 60 or so then no regardless of what they are. It's a scummy thing to do.

Doesn't matter to me.

In all games that i played with microtransactions feature,i never had to buy anything because i was able to get what i want by simply play.

And never made me a better or worst gamer.