Please, no micro-transactions!

Yeah they should do full expansions later on like a respected title should have.

But I don’t understand why are we talking about “keeping the game alive”, a.k.a. releasing-half-product-later-sold-in-parts via DLC and/or microtransactions, for a fully priced AAA game. Oh, the gaming industry today…

You want silly cosmetics? OK, give modders the possibility to create them and people apply them freely if they wish.

I don’t mind paid DLC, as long as it’s handled in a certain way. Basically: the base game is a little cheaper so someone who plays the game for say 10-20 hours gets a full experience for the price they are willing to pay, and people who spend a lot of time on it can expand their experience just that bit more with paid options, getting their expanded experience for a price they are willing to pay. If you play the game for a thousand hours the cost per hour is going to be pretty low regardless of how much extra crap you wanted to have.

There are a lot of ways to do this in absolutely not the way I like it though, lots and lots and lots of ways, so what I would prefer not to see is:

  • Paying for consumable goods. These are the typical microtransactions. For just a dollar you get four extra health potions. Often the objects being sold are things you should not need in the first place, like a special star that let’s you recover more quickly so you don’t have to wait ten minutes to start your next match. That delay is only there to sell you a delay-skip. Or like aforementioned health potions. If their limited supply was meant as a challenge you wouldn’t be able to buy them. It can be sort of acceptable in free games build to be playable without paying, as a sort of premium membership, but even in those cases not paying is often the most enjoyable way to play the game. Ones you’re used to bonus items the normal experience is ruined.
  • Pay to win. Any advantage in the multiplayer. Self explanatory.
  • Paid random loot. You pay a certain amount for five new unit skins, but you don’t get to choose which ones. Can be made extra evil by allowing the chance to get items you already have, making paying for that one item you want a really bad investment. The most devious form of this are the dreaded loot boxes, which make you feel like you already earned the loot, which you didn’t, all you “earned” was an advertisement. Loot boxes containing consumables are just a big flashing sign to quit the game right now and go play something else.
  • Paying for crucial game components. I’m fine with “micro-expansions” featuring extra missions or even extra objectives and heroes and such for existing missions. I am not fine with an expansion containing the final chapter of all the campaigns. If not having it takes away from the full experience rather than having it adding something, don’t do it.
  • Subscriptions. If the multiplayer servers are the most expensive part of your game, have people pay a small sum per month, but if that’s the case you shouldn’t charge them a fixed sum for the game itself on top of it. If the biggest costs are in the development of the game itself, don’t come begging for more money after I already bought it.

So yeah, that’s quite a big list of don’t likes. That mostly leaves extra scenarios, skins for units, and proper actual expansions as stuff I’m fine with. Which is not a lot. But that’s because a lot of these payment models sit somewhere between “way too expensive for no reason” and “now you’re just trying to be a drug dealer”. And I’m still hoping we can keep the worst ones mostly contained to dumb mobile “games” run by semi-criminals. The early “millions of copies of ET still buried somewhere” video game crash was at least in part caused by similar problems: for a good time it looked like the best way to make money is pay a single programmer to write the whole game, make people pay a quarter for playing it for a few minutes at most and then spend all your money on advertising, also coke. And that’s not where the eventual good new titles game from. Do your part for the future, play good games.

Also, I have faith in you aoe4 team, you can do it!

There will almost certainly be microtransactions or - at the very least - a steady stream of minor gameplay and cosmetic DLC.

Yes paid to win…

I seriously doubt it would hurt anyone’s snowflake feelings if there were some cool cosmetic microtransactions, e.g. unit skin, UI variations or alternative sound sets…

@IamDalv said:
Yeah they should do full expansions later on like a respected title should have.

But I don’t understand why are we talking about “keeping the game alive”, a.k.a. releasing-half-product-later-sold-in-parts via DLC and/or microtransactions, for a fully priced AAA game. Oh, the gaming industry today…

You want silly cosmetics? OK, give modders the possibility to create them and people apply them freely if they wish.

You seem to not understand most games are not half baked products and are intended to be a full price game on release. The thing though is there are always improvements to be had to games. Fixing bugs, adding new maps, cool cosmetics, new characters/features. This is what people want when they invest in a big game.

So when I say I want them to keep supporting AoE4 and keeping it alive. I want them to keep updating the game and adding new content for years to come. I hope we could be playing AoE4 in 5 years from now and they just released a new civ yesterday.

If there wouldn’t be too much microtransactions and it’s only cosmetic, I would agree with that.
But in general they should focus on the main game and it should be possible to unlock some microtransactions without paying. So you can get “Game money” by playing Aoe, by completing campaigns etc.

And what’s very important: The microtransactions have to fit with the age of the game.
So when it’s a World War Game, they shouldn’t add something too crazy (e.g. a pink building).

@GameSkillar has the right of it. I honestly stopped playing Counter Strike: Global Offensive when all the gun model DLC in peoples hands started looking like super soakers and just taking a massive dump on the theme/ setting. I -really- do not want to see Age of Empires go that way. I want the game take itself SOMEWHAT seriously, and I really do not want to see the world stuffed with things that do not fit.

DLC in general is a bit of an iffy one though. Cosmetic DLC is all well and good, but opening the door to that might discourage Relic from allowing actual user mods for simple things like banners and color schemes (both of which were awesome features of DOW 1). But hey, if they have quality things on offer, maybe it could work.

What I do NOT want to see is DLC that has any impact at all on the actual game. No paid techs, no paid civs that feel like they ought to have been in the base game (Hi Chaos of DOW 2!), no relics you can start the game with if you paid…just let me buy a nice paint jobs or models for my houses or whatever, or spiffy uniforms.

Putting a button in settings that turns off vanity items solves the problem. AoEO had that. If you didn’t like my Woad Raiders running around swinging giant fish instead of axes, then you could shut it off. I don’t think anyone really cared though. It’s a game.

@“Andy P” said:
I don’t think anyone really cared though. It’s a game.

Except this stuff does matter. Art style is why a lot of people got put off of AOE online, and other titles for that matter. Granted, fish props instead of weapons might be going a step beyond art style, but it still forms part of the visual. And as I said, stuff like ambiance-disrupting joke-guns in CS: GO impacts the overall feel.

A switch to turn stuff off would be nice, but I would still rather see cosmetic DLC (if it is in at all) take the form of things that are actually consistent with the tone and theme rather than paid trolling.

There won’t be. If there is, keep those in multiplayer mode.

I doubt there are (and I don’t want them if) but in conventional RTS, it’s not very common, isn’t it?

(I didn’t play RTS games for a long time).

@Eklepsar said:
I doubt there are (and I don’t want them if) but in conventional RTS, it’s not very common, isn’t it?



(I didn’t play RTS games for a long time).

It’s not -as- common, but not unheard of. DOW 2 and 3 both have a ton of DLC, and as far as I know COH 2 does as well (never got into it though). For non-Relic titles though…uh…well, there is…
Huh. Yeah, I’m drawing a blank, which is making the entire thing a little bit scarier actually…
(Oh right, AOE Online).

@Mehkind said:
There won’t be. If there is, keep those in multiplayer mode.

Hello! please, do not encourage relic to put micro transactions only on multyplayer … B) :slight_smile:

I 100% guarantee I will not buy the game if it involves microtransactions. Worst thing to happen to PC gaming

I miss the days when games were playable at launch, and you waited a months or a year for a polished expansion (worth the money!)

I would rather pay a 10-15 dollar subcription every month than devoting my time on a game that has microtransactions. I have been burned by those games too many times that I wont even give them a chance, just cut them off my radar cold turkey like any smart drug(game)addict should do.

@Augustusman said:
Why not , i love pay to win.

–Sarcasm off—

First of all we probably all agree that pay2win and grind to win was the reason why age of empires online failed almost immediately. It took me 100 hours to grind one civ with some epic gear. With other words: fuck that shit.

But to add to this topic. Open up steam. Go to the shop. Type in: dawn of war II and you will see a shitload of microtransactions for new maps and such. So yes Relic loves microtransactions The main reason why they shouldn’t do things like that is that it will outrage almost every gamer. DAMN IT I CAN’T PLAY THIS MAP BECAUSE I DON’T HAVE THE SAME DLC AS MY FRIEND. It fucks up your pvp experience if you have to grab your wallet all the time.

And to be honest i was almost buying a relic game today (company of heroes 2), to find out about the shitload of different choices of dlc collections i stopped myself from buying the game entirely. #Fuck COH2

The best way they can do things is having standard yearly expansions (30dollars) with new content for every civ+new maps+ new civs+ rebalancing + some solo content. They would also put everything together in a new player package: the vanilla game+ expansion for 55 dollars.

If Relic doesn’t agree, just look at Starcraft2 and it’s succes. SC2 only has 2 multiplayer expansions and some solo player vs ai dlc’s and some new unit skins. The free patches actually often change the entire multiplayer game without charging for it.

Besides that new patches should be done each 3 months, maybe even monthly. Patches could also add new content to the game without charging money for it. For instance adding some new researches, a new map or some balance changes as well as bug fixes.

If they fracture the pvp experience by adding new map dlc’s and new civ dlc’s like crazy that would mean buying 10 dlc’s to be able to have a normal pvp experience i would hate them for doing that.

I would also hate them if they add lootbox systems, grind to win or pay to win systems. PVP should never contain grinding vs ai or grinding xp for unlocking new stuff. Some of those things are only ok inside a solo campaign, where player progression is important.

To characterise things for the fun of it:

Let’s say Relic entertainment is a restaurant.

I would go there and ask for a drink=3 dollars+ diner=50 dollars.

After a while i have to go to the toilet. The waiter asks 5 dollars.
Then i would have to put a dollar into a hole to open the toilet.
Then i would have to pay 5 dollars for toilet paper.
Then i would have to pay another dollar to get soap.
Then i would have to pay another dollar to get running water.
Then i would have to pay another dollar to get a clean towel.
Then i would have to pay another 10 dollar to open up the door.
Then i would have to pay environment taxation: 10 dollars.

Back at the table you ask for the bil and this is what you get:

Clean glas: 1 dollar
Drink: 3 dollars
Clean knife: 1 dollar
Clean fork: 1 dollar
Clean plate: 1 dollar
Rent of chair: 5 dollar
Waiter services: 10 dollars
Candle: 2 dollars
Pepper and salt: 2 dollars
Diner= 50 dollars
Airconditioning: 2 dollars
Light: 1 dollars
CO2 taxation: 2 dollars
Car parking: 20 dollars
Clean air policy: 2 dollars
Creating this bill: 2 dollars

So how would you react? Would you ever go to this restaurant in the first place?

Every normal person would feel like a Fucking cashcow.

Couldnt agree more, and I have said it myself countless times. I dont know where this progression system “lets grind and unlock new powerzzz or weaponzzz in every possible game” started, system which obviously goes hand in hand with micro transactions too, but it would be the absolute worst possible thing to happen to AoE4. One of the devs, Carolina, was talking about ways of implementing a progression system (why? why?? Thats not the reason players are kept engaged with a game like AoE), I really hope it’s just skins, stickers or whatever that doesnt affect gameplay at all if they really cant refrain from using this plague of video games. It would really put me off from playing it, as well as many others, the game would flop hard.

Just look at almost every shooter now. If you just want to come home and have a little nice match and enjoy a “let the best man or the best team win” forget it, you cant… Cause the other guy has played or paid more and he’s got better stuff to use than you. And Im not talking about free to play games.

No microtransactions, please!