KSP 2 Would Have Microtransactions

[llanthas]

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2017/11/08/grand-theft-auto-v-publishers-want-microtransactions-in-all-their-future-games-says-boss-man/

 

Quote

The endless quest for more American dollars continues without respite or clemency at Take Two Interactive, daddy of Rockstar and uber-publisher of Grand Theft Auto V. They want to put “recurrent consumer spending” in all their future games, said CEO Strauss Zelnick in a recent conference call for investors. “Recurrent consumer spending” is how men in suits say “microtransactions”, which is how men in slightly shabbier suits say: “we’re putting a shop in your videogame”.

 

[cratercracker]

No.

NO.

[klesh]

Kerbal Kards©

 

I, for one, certainly wouldn't support any of that nonsense with my wallet.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

KSP isn't even mentioned in the article.

This is pointless fear-mongering and speculation at it's worst.

We don't even know that there are any plans for a KSP2 in the first place. Nice job cherry picking the worst quote as well, you should get a job at FOX news. Here's a much nicer quote.

“We’ve said that we aim to have recurrent consumer spending opportunities for every title that we put out at this company,” said Zelnick. “It may not always be an online model, it probably won’t always be a virtual currency model, but there will be some ability to engage in an ongoing basis with our titles after release across the board.

Supporting titles with purchasable content after release?! Say it isn't so! That'd be like...DLC or something! Y'know, exactly what we have now.

[llanthas]

8 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

KSP isn't even mentioned in the article.

This is pointless fear-mongering and speculation at it's worst.

We don't even know that there are any plans for a KSP2 in the first place. Nice job cherry picking the worst quote as well, you should get a job at FOX news. Here's a much nicer quote.

“We’ve said that we aim to have recurrent consumer spending opportunities for every title that we put out at this company,” said Zelnick. “It may not always be an online model, it probably won’t always be a virtual currency model, but there will be some ability to engage in an ongoing basis with our titles after release across the board.

Supporting titles with purchasable content after release?! Say it isn't so! That'd be like...DLC or something! Y'know, exactly what we have now.

Yes, that's much more reassuring

“We’ve said that we aim to have recurrent consumer spending opportunities for every title that we put out at this company, (you will spend more on every title)” said Zelnick. “It may not always be an online model (DLC), it probably won’t always be a virtual currency model (In-Game Shops), but there will be some ability to engage (spend) in an ongoing basis with our titles after release across the board.

I mean, I appreciate the honesty from them.  It's nice that they feel comfortable in stating outright that they'll expect more-than-full-price for every product in the future. 

And yeah, there may not be a KSP2 (of course there will be, why do you think they bought it), and I certainly can't predict how they'd implement it (eternal DLC, kerbal outfits), but there is cause for concern here (unless you love spending extra money).

Edited November 8, 2017 by llanthas

[Rocket In My Pocket]

11 minutes ago, llanthas said:

And yeah, there may not be a KSP2 , and I certainly can't predict how they'd implement it.

So... why are we having this conversation again?

Is there a point to this thread aside from spreading unsubstantiated assumptions?

Are you trying to organize a boycott of a theoretical sequel and it's hypothetical DLC? Maybe you've jumped the gun just a bit if so.

Edited November 8, 2017 by Rocket In My Pocket

[llanthas]

6 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

So... why are we having this conversation again?

Is there a point to this thread aside from spreading unsubstantiated assumptions?

Are you trying to organize a boycott of a theoretical sequel and it's hypothetical DLC content?

 

Nope, just struck me as an item of interest, relative to the future of a game that we all care about, and it's attendant DLC.  An uninformed consumer is a slave to the merchant, and all that.

Not sure what you see here as 'unsubstantiated', but you're free to bury your head. 

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Just now, llanthas said:

Nope, just struck me as an item of interest, relative to the future of a game that we all care about, and it's attendant DLC.  An uninformed consumer is a slave to the merchant, and all that.

Not sure what you see here as 'unsubstantiated', but you're free to bury your head. 

You're making a lot of assumptions based on pure speculation.

KSP isn't mentioned, no sequel has ever been announced or even hinted at. We have no clue if T2 has any long term plans for KSP, or even if they have thought about a sequel, I mean our first DLC for the original game hasn't even come out yet. Furthermore we have no idea if SQUAD themselves are interested in doing a sequel, or what could change in the video game industry between now and then, which is probably a long, long ways off. We honestly can't even say who will own KSP then or who will be employed in developing it if anyone.

Bury my head? Perhaps if I believed the sky was falling as you claimed; I would.

[llanthas]

6 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

You're making a lot of assumptions based on pure speculation.

KSP isn't mentioned, no sequel has ever been announced or even hinted at. We have no clue if T2 has any long term plans for KSP, or even if they have thought about a sequel, I mean our first DLC for the original game hasn't even come out yet. Furthermore we have no idea if SQUAD themselves are interested in doing a sequel, or what could change in the video game industry between now and then, which is probably a long, long ways off. We honestly can't even say who will own KSP then or who will be employed in developing it if anyone.

Bury my head? Perhaps if I believed the sky was falling as you claimed; I would.

"KSP isn't mentioned" - Well, they did say 'all future games', but I suppose we could assume they sell KSP at some point, for no reason whatsoever?

"..if T2 has any long term plans for KSP" - what do you think they bought it for?  Kerbal plushies?

"first DLC for the original game" - Why do you suppose we HAVE a DLC, after 6+ years of development?

"...if SQUAD are interested in doing a sequel" - They can do it, or T2 will find someone else to.  There shall be a sequel. 

"...what could change in the industry" - Ok, you've got me there.  Maybe they change their minds all of a sudden.  Heck, why bother looking at things that are happening, it's gonna change

 

[Rocket In My Pocket]

7 minutes ago, llanthas said:

Heck, why bother looking at things that are happening, it's gonna change

"It is said an Eastern monarch once charged his wise men to invent him a sentence, to be ever in view, and which should be true and appropriate in all times and situations. They presented him the words: "And this, too, shall pass away." How much it expresses! How chastening in the hour of pride! How consoling in the depths of affliction!"

-Abraham Lincoln

[Greenfire32]

Ok, hypothetically let's say "KSP 2: The Kerbaling" is in development and for the sake of the argument let's say that micro transactions are going to be a part of it.

KSP is very much a niche game. I know sometimes we like to think it isn't, but it is. On the whole, it's core audience is comprised of a group of people who have an invested interest in space travel and not just an "ooh lasers and hyperspace, coooool" level of interest. Couple that with these people also tend to be slightly older than what is considered "target audience" in the general gaming sphere. I'm not saying that there are no young KSP players, just that the ratio of young/old favors more older players than younger ones with KSP specifically (old as in 25 or older, remember this is gaming we're talking about here. Most target audiences are 18-25).

Including micro transactions is a recipe for monumental disaster for two reasons:

1) The older audience is less likely to buy in, because they tend to have more real-life responsibilities or value things differently. They also recognize that patience is a thing and are usually willing to wait for good things more so than when they were younger and wanted everything right away.

2) A niche game for a niche market is not going to print money no matter what. It can be successful and it can make you rich, but it isn't going to be the next big phenomenon. Further limiting your already limited sales by locking content behind hidden paywalls is only going to drive money away, not generate it.
------

All in all, as far as my opinion goes, if there were to be micro transactions in KSP 2, I wouldn't purchase it. KSP is plenty good enough for me.

Edited November 8, 2017 by Greenfire32

[Spricigo]

5 minutes ago, llanthas said:

I mean, I appreciate the honesty from them.  It's nice that they feel comfortable in stating outright that they'll expect more-than-full-price for every product in the future.

BREAKING NEWS!!!

Business want to maximize profits.

</sarcasm>

It's pretty simple: the publisher may explore whatever revenue stream they see fit and I will pay for whatever product/service I think it's worth my hard earned money.

 

[Galileo]

Here we go again. 

Btw, the DLC was already in development before T2 bought KSP. Let’s try not to connect invisible dots, shall we? Until KSP2 is announced, there is no KSP2. Anything beyond what we know now is the definition of speculation. Can we let this thread die now?

spec·u·la·tion

ˌspekyəˈlāSH(ə)n/

noun

1. 1. 

   the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence.

[MinimalMinmus]

...

 

I didn't know there would be clickbait on KSPF!

... Also, @OP, what the guy meant by "All their future games" is "All future games they make"

To say Squad would be affected is absolutely irrelevant.

[Kerbart]

So, based on the interpretation of an interpretation “Gamasutra listened in to the 50-minute call and managed to stay awake long enough to get some hints about the dark (yet unsurprising) future which lies in wait for all of us” you’re ringing the alarm bell? Look up the meaning of the phrase “telephone game”first.

All I get is “after our customers buy a title, we want them to spend more money on it.”

Now, the funny thing is, in any other field this wouldn’t be news. Waterman sells pens. No one, no one is upset over the fact that they sell their ink instead of giving it away. Nike sells shoes. No one, no one is upset over the fact that they sell their socks instead of giving them away. Nikon sells cameras. No one, no one is upset that you have to buy memory cards or film for them, instead of them supplying you with it for free. But as soon as it comes to games we expect ongoing development to be free of charge, eternally? Wake up call: if consumers are not willing to pay for ongoing development, it’s duration is going to be shorter than eternal; a lot shorter.

T2 didn’t say micropayments in every game; they spoke about “recurring payments” for every title and they explicitly said that the specific form in which they would do that would differ from game to game. For some games that will be micropayments; for others it will be DLC.

Fearmongering on the claim that T2 wants more money is pointless. Acting like it’s unreasonable to expect more than one paycheck for work delivered... if you think that’s how the world should work, let me know. My employer would love to offer you a job!

 

 

Edited November 9, 2017 by Kerbart
Fixed font problems that couldn't be fixed on a tablet

[TheSaint]

And, worst case scenario, I can think of a ton of ways to add microtransactions to a game like KSP without ruining it. Vanity/decorative parts packs, extra planets/moons, custom flag packs, custom spacesuits. I wouldn't buy any of this stuff because, as was so graciously pointed out above, I'm a miserly old fart. But I'm sure there's a market segment who will blow $0.99 on a horned spacesuit for Jeb or a Joolian moon made of rainbow sherbet. (Doubly so if Take Two worked out a way to push them into the console game.) More power to them.

[Gaarst]

17 minutes ago, TheSaint said:

Vanity/decorative parts packs,

Mods.

Quote

extra planets/moons,

Mods.

Quote

custom flag packs,

Mods.

Quote

custom spacesuits.

Mods.

Microtransactions in KSP would not work for a bunch of reasons already discussed. DLC is the only way developers can make money out of KSP in the long run (and even then, you could compile a "free Making History" using a dozen mods together).

 

Also, if you don't like microtransactions, don't buy the game, simple as that.

[Helmetman]

This is dark suit robberbaron gorillas from the gaming industry telling you...

We need more of your money!

However, we wont tell you in your face because we deceive. Is honesty a word? 

For you to buy this scam we make custom designed gourmet flourished mini content. You only have to pay a few cents. You probably get addicted to our new shop system. So you will probably over expend on stupid pixy BS you'll never need.

I'm against reccurent transactions in any game. In mmorpg's it's often used for extra items and sometimes to be better then your mates. A game = a game. Someone elses ability to spend his/her dough in a videogame is a cancer imo to the concept of a 'game'

Someone elses desperate will and/or affluence should not tip the balance in a game that's not about money. For this I want you to go to a casino.

That said, I always despised those gamers that throw bank at such things. That's just stupid. If you want to be better at a game, then play more and fail less and leave money out of it.

Just my 2 cents...

uh

I mean no cents.

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, llanthas said:

"KSP isn't mentioned" - Well, they did say 'all future games', but I suppose we could assume they sell KSP at some point, for no reason whatsoever?

Assuming we'll get a KSP2 instead of an endless series of DLC for a wildly successful indie franchise.

2 hours ago, llanthas said:

"..if T2 has any long term plans for KSP" - what do you think they bought it for?  Kerbal plushies?

That sweet DLC money they think they'll get. Other related titles. The Kerbal IP which might include Saturday morning cartoons or random merch. Who knows?

2 hours ago, llanthas said:

"first DLC for the original game" - Why do you suppose we HAVE a DLC, after 6+ years of development?

That's a simple one to answer: Squad needs money to continue development. KSP may be pretty successful from an indie perspective (and even in terms of non-indie sales) but at some point the money from the base game was going to dry up.

2 hours ago, llanthas said:

"...if SQUAD are interested in doing a sequel" - They can do it, or T2 will find someone else to.  There shall be a sequel. 

[citation needed]

There could be any number of titles based on the KSP IP, a direct sequel isn't a given.

[Ultimate Steve]

I do not want microtransactions.

I realise there may not be many people who agree with me, but if SQUAD/Take Two/Whatever we're calling them now really needed more money, they could honestly just reopen their donation button and be honest about it. I've gotten my $23 of enjoyment out of this game over and over and over and over again. If I knew then what I had known now, I'd have easily paid $200 for this game.

[JK_Kerbineer]

First off, there will be no KSP2

Name one thing that can't be added to normal KSP or can't be added with mods.

Even if there are some things, they would not be enough to make KSP2  its own game.

Second, they can't really adapt microtransactions to KSP. Anything that can be bought in-game could just be added by editing the persistent file or Hyperedit.

The worst they could do is make KSP merchandise, which I would strongly support.

Edited November 8, 2017 by JK_Kerbineer

[llanthas]

All fun and games, until the 'cease and desist' letters start flying.

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

I realise there may not be many people who agree with me, but if SQUAD/Take Two/Whatever we're calling them now really needed more money, they could honestly just reopen their donation button and be honest about it. I've gotten my $23 of enjoyment out of this game over and over and over and over again. If I knew then what I had known now, I'd have easily paid $200 for this game.

A better idea would be to create new content for the game and put it up for sale. IIRC they're working on new content right now, keeping people employed, doing actual business.

What do we call that kind of thing?

DLC?

[DAL59]

Can you please change the title since it is not certain that this is actually happen?  

[Hay]

1 hour ago, llanthas said:

All fun and games, until the 'cease and desist' letters start flying.

Just look at what happened when T2 tried to ban GTAV mods.