Back when 'Fortnite: Battle Royale' first released, I was the one of the earliest adopters for the new game, partially because it was free and partially because I was interested in getting a glimpse at this new 'Batttle Royale' trend that seemed to be starting up. Since then, I struggled to recognize any other game that had managed to push the genre forward from what Fortnite had to offer. Radical Heights was a buggy clone of Fortnite, Blackout relied on it's COD routes to build a competent shooter but still felt too arcadey to dominate for long, and Firestorm was dead-on-announcement by merit of being thrust upon the completely wrong target demographic. Nothing really caught by attention until early 2019 when Respawn Entertainment (Creators of the spectacularly under appreciated Titanfall Series) debuted Apex Legends.
The game featured the same nail-biting intensity that this genre demands with the iconic solid gunplay one might find from Call of Duty and a revolutionary ping system which mostly eliminated the need for verbal communication. (The worst thing about multiplayer games for people like me.) When it first launched, Apex was nothing short of a craze. Every one was playing it or streaming it on twitch and it wasn't long before the fledgling game was awarded the lofty title of 'Fortnite killer'. It was polished, fun and free; how could it possibly fail to beat out Fortnite? And yet somehow, that is exactly what happened.
Ask anyone and you'll find conflicting reports about why they dropped off from the game but the underlying message would be something along the lines of how the game felt incentiveless. That generally isn't a problem with fully-multiplayer titles like Overwatch, but Fortnite had revolutionized that dynamic with their Battle pass. (For better or for worse.) People no longer binged these games in order to build up their level cap but with the goal of snagging some sweet new skins. It wasn't long before everyone had got all the cool Apex Skins and Respawn didn't have the staff on hand to develop new ones. I suspect this may be because the game had blown up much more than even their most optimistic estimations anticipated, meaning they spent so much time trying to ensure that infrastructure would hold (Whilst battling against the slew of cheaters who descended upon the game) before they could work on creating new content.
Whatever the reason, the effect was that Apex had a huge drop off and Fortnite remained on top of pop culture until the Minecraft renaissance later in the year. (Although I suspect that Fortnite is still the top earner of the year.) It took a while for Respawn to get Apex in a state where they could start adding content; it wasn't until June that they started teasing their second season. (The first season having been pretty lackluster.) "This would be the great revival that bought attention back to Apex", they hoped. There would be a new character, new map areas, and a new mechanic in these lumbering beasts that would hang around the map. Fans received these new additions well and although Apex seems to have already peaked, they managed to build a somewhat stable fanbase.
Fast forward to August. Things were looking up in the world of Apex Legends and even I was thinking of picking the game back up. (After being coerced into doing so, but still.) Then in a flash the entire community turns ablaze in a goodwill-burning event that Respawn called: The Iron Crown. So what happened? Well, The Iron Crown was a special event for season 2 that was supposed to show the breadth of what Respawn can achieve with their events. (Season 1's 'Legendary Hunt' was as forgettable as the season itself.) One way they sought to stand out was to utilize a strategy that many monetisation-dependant games do, event specific cosmetics. So far so ordinary. But that wasn't all.
Those who really wanted to grind at this event had the promise of a very special item from the event; a Heirloom-tier rarity axe skin called 'Raven's Bite'. In multiplayer royale games like these, cosmetics take paramount importance in establishing a player base's social hierarchy. Skill and talent is one facet, of course, but if you want to establish your superiority at a glance then decking out your player in the rarest and coolest gear is the way to go. Developers of these products realize this too, which is why they feed progression through the promise of cosmetic rewards rather than improved equipment, like from the heyday of Battlefield V. Hence, this 'Raven's Bite' would certain work as an incentive for player's to grind through this event.
There was only one problem. 'Raven's Bite' couldn't be obtained by playing through the event. The skin was locked behind the collection of all other 24 items the event had to offer. Fair enough. In fact, that is a really good way to make sure that player's stick around for the duration of the event. However, things aren't that simple. You see, all the event specific items could only be acquired by earning them from randomized lootboxs. (Ouch, not a good look Respawn.) Additionally, playing through the events challenges would only reward the player with 2 lootboxes, all others had to be purchased with real-world money. But it gets worse. Those who have their eyes on the grand prize of Raven's Bite wouldn't unlock the skin by gathering all other 24 items, oh no; They would only unlock the ability to purchase that skin, for even more real-world money.
Due to the obfuscating nature of premium currencies, working out how much all this would set you back requires a little bit of math-work. (Thanks pathetic marketing strategies!) Luckily, Eurogamer did that math for me. So, each event specific crate has a cost of 700 'Apex coins' which translates to £5.59, meaning that one would have to acquire 16800 coins (by spending £134) in order to get everything in the event. (That's 15400 coins for £122 if you earnt the two challenge lootboxes.) That leaves you with the ability to buy Raven's Bite which costs 3500 Apex coins (around about £25 depending on which fixed value coin pack you purchase.) That means that in order to acquire the crowing jewel of this event, one would have to drop at least £147 on microtransactions. (What great value.)
As you can imagine this did not go over very well with the fans. The official Reddit rang with people absolutely astounded by this lunacy, upset not just by this incredibly insulting price tag, but the way in which the team had managed to mess-up yet another event. The precedent set by this plan was one wherein only whales (People who spend exorbitant amounts of money in these products) would ever have anything worthwhile to get out of these special events. No one would deny the fact that Apex is dependant on it's microtransactions to function, but these paywalls and heavy price tags pushed far beyond that desire to make a tidy profit into undeniable avarice. Not to mention the fact that Apex has actually been doing well financially according to EA's last earnings call, so why risk that with such a greedy push?
Thankfully, Respawn did not operate completely out of the loop from it's fans and they noticed the budding discontent from the event. Consequently, in an 'apology' post they came out to announce to fans that they had missed the mark and endeavoured to improve communication for the next event. (Okay?) They also let everyone know that they would be making changes to the event post-haste, by allowing player's to buy specific pieces from the 24 items, and that inventory would be stretched out over 3 day intervals until the end of the event. Some players immediately put down their pitchforks with a confused "I think that's what we wanted." Then, in a few hours, they realized "Wait. This fixes absolutely nothing at all!"
This time the vitriol was darn near apocalyptic. Not only had the Apex team pushed the envelope when it came to pricing their items, but they had feigned remorse and done nothing about it. Some even pointed out how the way Respawn implemented the individual purchases, (Splitting them up over 3 day intervals instead of just allowing to buy them all whenever you wanted) is eerily similar to the way that microtransaction hell-hole games like to put time-offers on their items in order to encourage impulsive spending. Not only had Respawn failed to address the issue, they had literally made things worse in their attempt to make amends.
All of this chaos occurred over the space of a week and has driven many people, including myself, far away from the game. It is hard to say what affect this will have on the game over the longterm, but for the time being it has certainly managed to sully Respawn's reputation. Believe or not there is actually more to this story, but that is still in the process of unfolding so I cannot bring it up yet. (Also I'm still deciding how I want to tackle it seeing as it involves the response of the developers themselves.) All of this has me wondering just how far is too far when it comes to microtransactions? Apex clearly stepped far over the line but I'm just curious as to where that line is. They have had skins that retail at £40 before which is actually more expensive then Raven's Bite, (Not including the +£100 paywall) so why is that okay when this was not? Then there are games like Elder Scrolls Online who retail their Manor homes for up to £200. Where is the middle ground in which we are happy to support developers without feeling like we're being taken advantage of, and can a game like Apex survive with such price points?
No comments:
Post a Comment