Truth about microtransactions in Breakpoint | Forums

[JBizzle68]

At least in GRW, I was able to unlock all besides the PvP and DLCs stuff without using real currency.

Doing the challenges which earns you Prestige credits and crates.

The loot in the Prestige crates, if unlocked already, turned into Ghost credits.

This is how I was able to purchase the featured content and offers besides the DLCs and PvP stuff.

[Wild-Recon]

@ Original Poster:

I think you're offering less "truth" and more "your personal opinion" regarding this subject. Which is fine, really. Here's mine, for what it is worth:

The problem was not that this game has micro-transactions. The problem was the sheer extent of them, the implementation thereof, and the implications on game design and player experiences. Just to rattle off a few examples...

My problem is: why some people started to scream about pay-2-win microtransactions when there is nothing new comparing to the previous game in the series - Wildlands? My problem is that some people bash Breakpoint and praise Wildlands for same system that was in both games.

1. This game monetized skill points, letting you effectively max out your character for 20 US dollars. To many pundits, this was pay-to-win because it would give those who bought the skill points a huge lead over rivals in PVP.

1. Same skill point (and resources also as weapons for PvP with better parametrs) was also in Wildlands. And how does these skill points will help player in PvP? Played a lot of PvP and don't understand that: class progression is through completeng challenges, weapons and ammo without any gear levels. Didn't single player skill tree is disabled in PvP?

But anyway - this item is removed from the store already.

2. The game let you buy Mark 1 and Mark 2 upgrade tokens for guns, letting you almost max out that particular weapon drop early (still have MK3 to go). To make things less vague for people who haven't bought the game yet, let's say you get a AUG assault rifle that is gear level 12 and you spend the resources to upgrade it to MK2.

2. Haven't upgraded any weapons and still have no problems killing anyone in campaign or PvP. In PvP tactics matters and who sees enemy first.

3. The most popular cosmetic items during the closed and open beta were "conveniently" changed from in-game currency store items to "premium-currency only" cosmetics. Was the open beta used to gather data about what people wanted to monetize it further? Probably. Is that a good look for the company? No. Furthermore, why premium-currency only? Why not let players pay premium-currency or a larger number of in-game currency?

3. Because some item are trademarks of their manufacturers and there is license need to be paid for using them in the game.

4. The store also sold, and continues to sell, in-game currency. Did this influence the design of the in-game economy? Was the rate of which players earn Skell credits purposefully adjusted to be just low enough that players would feel the urge to buy the currency with real money?

4. For example, Fixit Icon was 50 000 Skell Credits in Beta. Now it is only 1000 Skell Credits. Also noted serious price reduction on other items.

5. This game is a full-priced game. It costs between $60 to $120 depending on the version you buy. WHY DOES IT HAVE A FREAKING BATTLE PASS?!?! It's not a &$&$ing freemium mobile phone game, or a freemium game like Fortnite that uses the battle pass to make up for letting tens of millions of people play on its servers for nothing.

5. Did you forget daily challenges system from Wildlands which is almost the same?

You're within your rights to take offense at the online backlash and consider it hyperbolic. On the other hand, I'm glad for the backlash because Ubisoft would arguably not have scaled back their nightmarish storefront without it. If YouTube stars like YongYea hadn't promoted awareness of this to their audiences, skill points, MK2 tokens, battle pass accelerators, and straight-up actual weapons would still be available for sale.

Yes, but I prefer honest information, not some speculations from people who even hasn't played game. Because if they played they knew that there is no pay-2-win for PvP microtransactions.

[Ingel_Riday]

I'll respond by the numbers.

1) Removed within 24 hours of early access. As far as P2W... Short term gain for long term loss. Most of the skills and only a few of the perks carry over to PvP so I'm not seeing it, though I don't really care for PvP in this game for various reasons. If people want to pay to take much of the challenge out of PvE what is that to me? I prefer to take down wolf bases with only one primary... to each their own.

2) Mark 2 was removed within 24 hours of early access. So again I'm not overly bothered by it.

3) Nope. Everything that could be bought in closed and open Beta is still in store. With the exception of the Warsport helmet which didn't make it out of closed Beta. Some of it(Fixit, and Fixit's always tan G3 pants) are even cheaper.

4) Yup. If people want to exchange IRL money for fake money... well that baffles me, but it does very much diminish the likelihood of loot crates, as Ubisoft has thus established exchange rate and will have a harder time proving that it isn't gambling.

5) Can you define "battle pass"? Because aside from Season Pass which guarantees 15 hours of PvE DLC, a raid and a few other things(15 hours was Fallen Ghosts btw) I don't see anything that you have to pay for. The battle rewards are variant items and possibly some store items that can be earned for doing interesting missions in game. 1 full day of dailies and I'm already tier 8. Yet you have 65 days to complete the 49 levels... I'm not overly concerned. I actually find it fun. A lot of people asked for a random mission generator and that is what this is. I even got to ride and gun from the turret while the AI drove me through road blocks. That checks so many boxes of what we have asked for, and they reward us for doing it.

Also getting g a gear drop in game does unlock the cosmetic for it. No clue where you got the idea that it doesn't.

My personal view on MTX is that if you enjoy the game, want to support continued development, want the pixels they are selling and it is within your entertainment budget, than buy it. If you can't check all of those boxes than don't.

Now I understand that some people don't see it that way, and that it is a discussion that should be had, but it needs to be honest. Make sure your claims are correct.

You do realize that adjustments made to the game to make it more grindy and tedious in order to incentivize micro-transactions do directly affect you, right? That even if you ignored them in Assassin's Creed: Unity, the in-game currency rewards were scaled down to make buying new equipment and/or equipment upgrades so tedious that players would feel tempted to buy the "time-savers." Your experience was negatively impacted, whether you caved and bought into the store or not. It's no different here.

With regards to your break-down of my points, 1 and 2 were only removed after the backlash. That should worry you. These shouldn't have been available on the store in the first place, and likely informed player progression and the in-game economy in ways not at all conducive to the player experience. Even with them gone (for how long, nobody knows), the negative adjustments no doubt remain.

For point 3, other posters more attached to cosmetics than I have made countless threads on this and other forums regarding the issue. They say it far better than I and in far greater detail. I recommend checking them for the further information you seek. YongYea also touches on the subject in his video.

For point 4, that system impacts you. It informs how much in-game currency you can earn per hour. Even if you never buy Skell credits, you are negatively impacted. That you can soldier through is great, but that doesn't change the reality of the situation. Your experience is worse than it should be in order to facilitate this system.

For point 5, you know what a battle pass is. Don't play coy, my friend. The first one is included with the season pass, so most players won't notice it per-say. Not this first round. Again, watch the YongYea video to see exactly what this system is and how horrifically awful it was not a day ago before Ubisoft reacted to the backlash and removed the accelerators from the storefront. That the accelerators were even offered at all should worry you, regardless of them no longer being for sale (as of now). To get people to buy them, the progress to unlock items on the battle-pass was no doubt adjusted to be slower and more tedious.

As for gear you get in-game unlocking the appearance, I'll have to check again. I've gotten four different gloves of three different makes, but my current choices are bare hands or the starting gloves on the appearance menu. I procured a great military hat, but it didn't open up an option in my appearance menu as far as I could tell. I actually bought a baseball hat cosmetic from Maria, dyed it olive green, and had to use that instead once I upgraded my head armor to a higher gear level item. Maybe I'm missing a step.

@Wild-Recon: there is a lot of historical revisionism going on in this thread. Wildlands wasn't praised a few years ago for its micro-transaction system. It was derided for being overly monetized, with people comparing it to previous micro-transaction systems to show what a downgrade in quality it was. Which is what always happens. The lowering of the bar. Bethesda horse armor in 2006 was seen as egregious horror. Now? $2.50 for a horse skin that has custom armor? Wow, what a deal! "Hey guys, stop the hyperbole. They removed the incredibly egregious store items after the YouTube backlash. Now it's pretty much what Wildlands was, only instead of no-duplicate loot-boxes which you could earn in-game through challenges you just have to buy the stuff you want outright with premium currency" is not high praise, at all. It's unknowingly damning praise. I'm flabbergasted.

[topeira1980]

@ Original Poster:

I think you're offering less "truth" and more "your personal opinion" regarding this subject. Which is fine, really. Here's mine, for what it is worth:

The problem was not that this game has micro-transactions. The problem was the sheer extent of them, the implementation thereof, and the implications on game design and player experiences. Just to rattle off a few examples...

1. This game monetized skill points, letting you effectively max out your character for 20 US dollars. To many pundits, this was pay-to-win because it would give those who bought the skill points a huge lead over rivals in PVP. Furthermore, it had dire implications regarding game balance. Did Ubisoft adjust the leveling up process to make it longer in order to incentivize buying the "time saver" to solve a problem of their own making? They did it in Assassin's Creed: Odyssey at launch with their "time saver booster combo" to increase xp and gold drops by 50%. Cost... yep, 20 US dollars, and progress in the game felt slow and throttled without these "time savers." Assassin's Creed: Origins let you buy ability points outright too, and was stingy enough with them that even I caved and bought a few packs rather than play half the game missing key passives. This kind of thing

2. The game let you buy Mark 1 and Mark 2 upgrade tokens for guns, letting you almost max out that particular weapon drop early (still have MK3 to go). To make things less vague for people who haven't bought the game yet, let's say you get a AUG assault rifle that is gear level 12 and you spend the resources to upgrade it to MK2. Such said upgrading isn't specific to just that particular gear level 12 AUG; every AUG assault rifle you get for the rest of the game will have those upgrades baked in from that point forward. Find a gear level 100 AUG assault rifle? It'll already have the upgrades installed. Takes a lot of resources, though. It's expensive, and there are a lot of weapons to upgrade in this game... but for some premium currency, you could out in out BUY MK2 UPGRADE TOKENS to just bypass the whole system and get the second-best version of a gun you like early. For PVP in the first month of release, this is a huge advantage. Also, did these tokens influence system design? It's a huge convenience of life that upgrades are shared across all versions of a particular gun, and I have hope more games do this going forward, but was the resource grind made intentionally tedious to encourage us to buy these upgrade tokens? Probably.

3. The most popular cosmetic items during the closed and open beta were "conveniently" changed from in-game currency store items to "premium-currency only" cosmetics. Was the open beta used to gather data about what people wanted to monetize it further? Probably. Is that a good look for the company? No. Furthermore, why premium-currency only? Why not let players pay premium-currency or a larger number of in-game currency? Probably to pocket more money. Also, did these premium cosmetics influence game design? Is this why we lost AI teams and why a game purportedly about "being a lone wolf behind enemy lines" became a game with a freaking social hub teeming with other Ghosts? To make us interact with other players more often to get tempted to buy cosmetics to look cool too? How does this help the narrative? The first Ghost I met in the hub was named "Gape_Smasher." I was on my way to check on Holt, who I was legitimately worried about because he was my brother-in-arms for 100 hours in Wildlands. I was worried he'd be missing limbs or be hooked up to countless tubes. "Gape_Smasher." Really helped set the mood. :-/

4. The store also sold, and continues to sell, in-game currency. Did this influence the design of the in-game economy? Was the rate of which players earn Skell credits purposefully adjusted to be just low enough that players would feel the urge to buy the currency with real money? Distinctly possible, and I'd truthfully bet money on it. This is a common practice in a lot of AAA games nowadays. The sweet spot where players are annoyed enough to just want to buy in-game currency outright, but not so annoyed that they quit and move on. Monetization at its finest.

It's clear Ubisoft took the incredibly negative press to heart, because the skill points and MK2 upgrade tokens are off the store. I couldn't find the "battle pass accelerators" either, nor the options to just out-in-out buy battle pass progress. Also, you know what...

5. This game is a full-priced game. It costs between $60 to $120 depending on the version you buy. WHY DOES IT HAVE A FREAKING BATTLE PASS?!?! It's not a &$&$ing freemium mobile phone game, or a freemium game like Fortnite that uses the battle pass to make up for letting tens of millions of people play on its servers for nothing. This is a premium-priced, AAA tent-pole release that costs $60 to $120 to access. It's frankly obscene to see a battle pass glued to that price tag. It's pure, unadulterated, repulsive greed. Also, is this why Maria's store sells so few cosmetics? Is this why getting a new gear drop in-game doesn't unlock the appearance for character customization like in Assassin's Creed: Odyssey? To artificially add crap for the battle passes to dole out? Dole out slowly enough that you'll be incentivized to buy the boosters and progression skips, of course.

You're within your rights to take offense at the online backlash and consider it hyperbolic. On the other hand, I'm glad for the backlash because Ubisoft would arguably not have scaled back their nightmarish storefront without it. If YouTube stars like YongYea hadn't promoted awareness of this to their audiences, skill points, MK2 tokens, battle pass accelerators, and straight-up actual weapons would still be available for sale. Vitriol and loss of face got stuff done. Now the store just sells MK1 tokens (which are a waste of money to buy for all but the most impatient), some crafting materials, a few ways to bypass tracking down attachments / blueprints in the wild, and a slew of cosmetics. Far less extreme.

Now will the old offerings be brought back when the heat dies down? Maybe. Will loot boxes be brought back in? Likely. It's a sad age for gaming and shareholders want theirs.

Doesn't make it good, though. Also, Wildlands being egregious too is no excuse. Pointing at the previous entry, which locked most cosmetics behind an excessively covetous loot-box system and had major issues, and saying "that game had it too, so chill" is a weak argument I've seen some people on this thread make. Just because Nancy took a cookie from the jar too doesn't mean it's okay that you did, lil' Jimmy.

I think in your pursuit to defend a game you like and a company you appreciate, you're willfully ignoring much of the problematic nature of this game's monetization. I'm also enjoying the game and I also like Ubisoft, but this was too far down the rabbit hole. I'm glad they got grilled and had to take a step back and moderate themselves. Hopefully reviewers note the steps back in their reviews instead of smacking this title down... but we'll see. Hopefully Ubisoft doesn't walk back their moderation over the next couple months, too. We'll see. With the leads on Gears of War 5 overtly calling their customers "entitled' for complaining about that game's monetization and Call of Duty proving utterly obscene in its own right, I think the industry as a whole needs to do some major soul searching.

This is a very very good post. Even though i am usually on the opposite side of the fence.

People complained that there is a need to do side missions to close the level gap in AC:OD but its the same case in The witcher 3. Its just that no one complained at TW3. How come? Same exact mechanics and approach to level gating and level gaps that incentivise doing side missions.

Getting weapons by finding them in the world is a part of many games, and buying items in a store in the world is also something we have and love in games.

Its, in many regards, a more fun way of getting these stuff than simply having them right at the beginning. Getting a weapon by sneaking into a compound, stealthing, cooping with a friend and stealing it during a massive fire fight is just plain fun.

None of these methods of getting gear is an issue in other games and making a fuss of MTs simply because you can also acquire these items in a less and more expensive way its weird to me.

Also, the argument that some people can buy skills faster and gain a few days of advantage is the most silly argument of all. Sorry if im insulting anybody.
If someone is sucker enough to pay to have an advantage for a few days that he's a sad person in my book and not an example to anything.
What about people who prefer to buy the game a month later? What about people who dont have time to play a lot and advance faster?
Is the game poorly balanced because people play for different amounts of time?
Should we only cater to them and stop playing the game so its fair to them?
I have kids. Im not gonna have much time to play like these other kids. Am i entitles to complain that they have an advantage? I dont think i do. Games cant be designed to cater to both people who dont play as much as those who do. Its a ridiculous argument.
In every game those who play more or play earlier have an temporary advantage. So what?

HOWEVER - the real complaint is "does the game feel really grindy? Does it offer less items in-game than other games of its kind or its predeccesaor? If it offers less for the same price than its worth the criticism. If it offers more free stuff than GRW did (which offered a lot already) and you can get these items without ridiculous grind, than i see no issue here.
Most games dont offer nearly the same amount of customization content - not Gears 5, not The last of us, not socom, not Rainbow 6 siege - all considered really good.
So how come we get so much more in one game, yet we see fit to complain we are not getting even more for free? Arent WE also being greedy?

Its a matter of game balabce and the only people who can really judge if the game is overly stretched out to incentivize MTs are those who played it enough for a few days and can judge.

If YOU are one of these people than i think its a really good idea that you report back to let us know about this.

[xWAR-CHIEFx]

……...If YOU are one of these people than i think its a really good idea that you report back to let us know about this.

Man, great post. Well, I have been grinding since the game dropped and to be perfectly honest it has been VERY rewarding. I don't have time to buy anything because I am getting so much loot. I have also opened crates that had face paints, patches, backpacks etc. Also, the Battle Rewards for doing faction missions gives you about 50? Unlocks in 2 months I think. You can unlock vehicles, blueprints, weapon prints, clothes camo, etc. I was just thinking how I have to go home after work and go through my inventory to clean it up already. With a 300 item restriction, which is huge, its almost at capacity and get this...I haven't even played the story missions yet! I have only been working on the Faction Missions and taking down camps (main reason is I'm waiting on my friends but second because its so engaging and rewarding). But that's just me. I am really enjoying my experience so far. It's not what is being portrayed by no means.

I was bored with Wildlands after about 2 hours of play a day. With Breakpoint I can't put it down. Also, one point of edit is that I have played the first 4 or so main story missions but in the Open Beta (the story is solid and I want to experience it with my friends is all). We are going to tackle it this weekend together.

EDIT: Another thing I forgot to mention is that with a little of 8 hours in game already my character is XP Level 17, Assault Level 6, and Gear Score 57. Not bad but still a lot of work to do. Again, this is all from just playing Faction Missions or just looting camps, checkpoints, patrols etc. I like to have the Wolves spot me so I can attack them for their loot as well. Even if you don't play any of the side missions, objectives etc. you can hover over a camp with your cursor while displaying the map and it will tell you what you can get out of that area...that's right "Targeted Loot"...need some gloves...find a camp with them in it. The other thing I like is that for the most part everything you pick up is 1 or more points HIGHER than you currently have on. It's great!!

[Bone_Frog]

Its a matter of game balabce and the only people who can really judge if the game is overly stretched out to incentivize MTs are those who played it enough for a few days and can judge.

If YOU are one of these people than i think its a really good idea that you report back to let us know about this.

I'm two days in. First day felt grindy trying to get gear level up. Then I put two primaries on my second Preset and started doing side missions with that... and my gear score skyrocketed. I'm sitting on 30k+ Skell Credits and don't see anything to buy with them. Weaponized Helo? Nah... Don't want one. Car? Got three pre-order and Ubiclub rewards. Motorcycles? Already got two from battle rewards... Cosmetics? Got all I need(I did buy a knife, coyote brown gear paint, and a head set). Some times I'll buy gear, and every six or seven levels I'll buy a couple of weapons on demand. To be honest as I don't see what I'll need skell credits for, I'll buy six or seven of the same rifle to get the gear score on it that I want... So I'm not see any problem with earning credits.

Really I don't know what a battle pass is... Oh well... I don't see the problem with getting rewards for playing side missions/challenges. No one was upset about it in GRW.

So from what I can tell from the Y1 Intel the boosters were put in the store too early:

Two weeks after launch you will be able to purchase a Rewards Booster using Ghost Coins for that Act if you want to gain the rewards more quickly. However, engaged players will always be able to unlock all of the tiers for free by earning enough Battle Points.

https://forums.ubisoft.com/showthrea...asable-Content

Also nowhere does it say you need to have a season pass to partake in these battle rewards.

[FranzJeger2009]

You do realize that adjustments made to the game to make it more grindy and tedious in order to incentivize micro-transactions do directly affect you, right? That even if you ignored them in Assassin's Creed: Unity, the in-game currency rewards were scaled down to make buying new equipment and/or equipment upgrades so tedious that players would feel tempted to buy the "time-savers." Your experience was negatively impacted, whether you caved and bought into the store or not. It's no different here.

With regards to your break-down of my points, 1 and 2 were only removed after the backlash. That should worry you. These shouldn't have been available on the store in the first place, and likely informed player progression and the in-game economy in ways not at all conducive to the player experience. Even with them gone (for how long, nobody knows), the negative adjustments no doubt remain.

For point 3, other posters more attached to cosmetics than I have made countless threads on this and other forums regarding the issue. They say it far better than I and in far greater detail. I recommend checking them for the further information you seek. YongYea also touches on the subject in his video.

For point 4, that system impacts you. It informs how much in-game currency you can earn per hour. Even if you never buy Skell credits, you are negatively impacted. That you can soldier through is great, but that doesn't change the reality of the situation. Your experience is worse than it should be in order to facilitate this system.

For point 5, you know what a battle pass is. Don't play coy, my friend. The first one is included with the season pass, so most players won't notice it per-say. Not this first round. Again, watch the YongYea video to see exactly what this system is and how horrifically awful it was not a day ago before Ubisoft reacted to the backlash and removed the accelerators from the storefront. That the accelerators were even offered at all should worry you, regardless of them no longer being for sale (as of now). To get people to buy them, the progress to unlock items on the battle-pass was no doubt adjusted to be slower and more tedious.

As for gear you get in-game unlocking the appearance, I'll have to check again. I've gotten four different gloves of three different makes, but my current choices are bare hands or the starting gloves on the appearance menu. I procured a great military hat, but it didn't open up an option in my appearance menu as far as I could tell. I actually bought a baseball hat cosmetic from Maria, dyed it olive green, and had to use that instead once I upgraded my head armor to a higher gear level item. Maybe I'm missing a step.

@Wild-Recon: there is a lot of historical revisionism going on in this thread. Wildlands wasn't praised a few years ago for its micro-transaction system. It was derided for being overly monetized, with people comparing it to previous micro-transaction systems to show what a downgrade in quality it was. Which is what always happens. The lowering of the bar. Bethesda horse armor in 2006 was seen as egregious horror. Now? $2.50 for a horse skin that has custom armor? Wow, what a deal! "Hey guys, stop the hyperbole. They removed the incredibly egregious store items after the YouTube backlash. Now it's pretty much what Wildlands was, only instead of no-duplicate loot-boxes which you could earn in-game through challenges you just have to buy the stuff you want outright with premium currency" is not high praise, at all. It's unknowingly damning praise. I'm flabbergasted.

All hail this awesome post! Good job man!