Ghost Recon: Breakpoint was met with a lot of criticism when it launched last month, with one of the biggest complaints being that its microtransaction store was ridiculous. The game lets players buy hundreds of different items with real money, making for a marketplace that just seems completely tone-deaf in the current climate. However, Ubisoft says that it had a reason for implementing such a store to begin with.
During the publisher's most recent financial call -- in which Ubisoft basically called Breakpoint a disappointment -- the company cited the success of the microtransactions in Ghost Recon: Wildlands, Breakpoint's predecessor. According to Ubisoft, in-game purchases were quite popular in the Bolivia-based open world shooter, and so it decided to include them in Breakpoint.
"We understand it has been seen as too big a store and that it was really not appreciated at all, but it came from the fact that players were spending time in the store and buying things in Wildlands, and our teams thought they could give them the opportunity to have more choice. Which has not been well-interpreted, but that was the goal," said CEO Yves Guillemot.
The thing is, Wildlands' microtransactions were only expanded upon and properly explored later in the game's life, whereas Breakpoint's been pushing them from day one, and it's easy to argue that the latter's store is much more aggressive. But hey, at least Ubisoft's actually bringing it up.
It all comes back to the fact that, despite all the backlash against them, microtransactions do make big publishers a lot of money. If you really want to get rid of in-game purchases, everyone's going to have to stop opening their wallets.
[source gamingbolt.com]
Comments 14
"...give them the opportunity to have more choice."
No one had a choice in having Breakpoint be excessively grindy with gear levels and power requirements for missions in order to push monetization.
And, no, them removing the XP boosters should not be applauded. If people hadn't rightfully criticized their existence, we all know damn well Ubisoft would have kept them in there. It wasn't an "accident".
Player Choice in the publisher lexicon is double speak for restricting player choice behind a paywall.
Fed up of the microtransaction BS.
Wallet is well and truly closed. This kind of practice irritates the hell out of me.
"It came from the fact that players were spending time in the store and buying things in Wildlands, and our teams thought they could give them the opportunity to have more choice. Which has not been well-interpreted, but that was the goal"
Well I feel stupid. Sorry, Yves. I'll try not to misinterpret things in future.
What they meant was, we don't care what you say we just want your money and because you are stupid you will give it to us.
I was hoping they were going to disclose the the numbers.
@supergurr Sad but true. Arguments are starting to seem loud on the internet but the truth is there are many, many gamers out there that buy them.
We that don’t like these practices, but we definitely are not the majority.
Loved wildlands, I don't remember a store. Maybe it wasn't forced on me. But breakpoints is awful. And this news makes it worse.
@supergurr The tragic thing is, they're right.
@Cutmastavictory Yeah, I haven't played it for a while now, but I don't recall a store in Wildlands either. I guess it was tucked away in a menu somewhere, rather than shoved in my face.
But as I've said several times on other related articles, it wasn't the microtransactions which stopped me buying this game... it was the gear score and looter-shooter elements.
I find it quite easy to ignore in-game stores and just play the game without spending a penny more than the initial purchase price; to me, if they look at the stats, that tells them "I like the game you've made, but don't care for this other crap". But you just can't avoid those unwanted gameplay elements.
@Paranoimia Thats where these things should be in menu tucked away not i your standard menu. 😩
people need to have a read of this to see just how far this microtransaction garbage can go. i don't know if there's evidence that console games have gone this far, but quite frankly this is scary stuff about using AI to target direct monetisation at specific types of players, and how getting people to make in-game MT purchases is more likely to keep them engaged in the game, to buy more MTs.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2019-10-21-yodo1s-ai-driven-whale-hunt-is-a-bad-look-for-the-games-industry-opinion
Man, I hope Beyond Good and Evil 2 doesn't end up like this....
Any game that sells timesavers as MTX has affected gameplay to make it more grindy.
@OmegaStriver @supergurr As a wise man once said... "Never underestimate the stupidity of the general public."
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...