Keep it clean
If you believe that a wish duplicates another one or is not meant for the category, use Options button above to report a duplicate or spam.
Add your wish
If there is an item you wish to have on GOG.com and it’s not yet on the wishlist, please add your wish
Do not ever allow microtransactions and video games with in game stores to be sold on gog.com
Added by
Johnathanamz I don't like this at all and many people don't like this at all. Please gog.com do not ever allow microtransactions to be sold on gog.com.
I made this wishlist because the other one says until you have a proper way to manage them.
Microtransactions should never be sold on gog.com.
No Free to Play (F2P) video games either.
Pay for the video games and have them with all of the full content is what gog.com should be about.
Zahjoly What a naive and unnessesary post. Wish I had a dislike button.
K1ll3r_Punch why not? let people make them own choice.
BurstingMars I take issue with a company/store deciding for me what games I should or shouldnt have access to. I respect your opinion and your right to disapprove of certain games and there practices/coming being sold on GOG but I ultimately reject any wish that wants to make a store deny people the right to choose if they want to support something or not.
fridgeband Microtransactions NEVER! if steam is doing it, if EA is doing it, ubisoft, bethesda, etc. GOG.COM DON'T DO IT! all those companies are the perfect example of what gog.com should NOT do. I agree with this wish.
fridgeband @misterdc
People are on gog.com because they want to avoid steam, ea, ubisoft, bethesda, activision, and things like that. If people want games that contain all the things Johnathanamz they could easily choose to shop on steam. Here is a good example: if someone becomes a vegan to avoid animal products and they say "I'm going to shop at a vegan store now because every other store in the world has animal products and I personally just don't like that and choose to avoid it" Do you think it's fair or logical for another people to say "hey we have all these other stores but lets put some animal products in the vegan store too" That's very frustrating because all the customers who made the effort to run away from all the other places to go to "vegan store" are now basically back at square one, and might as well go back to shop at all their usual places. It ruins it for everyone. gog.com should stay true to itself, not allow things that made people leave steam/EA in the first place and alienate their core audience. Sounds reasonable right?
fridgeband I agree. It's a very slippery slope and if we allow a little here, a little there, suddenly we're steam. annnnd it's all ruined. god forbid.
misterdc Show some personal responsibility for yourselves, GoG is storefront not your nanny. If you do not want a game that has these features, don't buy it. Personal Responsibility I know it’s an archaic idea nowadays......
rob.liefeld Curiously enough, you cannot rate or review Gwent on it's storepage...
crogonint I would shut down my account if GoG did this and go back to hunting down hacked torrents.
Kominto I agree.
Almost all games with microtransactions are either free mobile games or games reputed for being cancerous (Fortnite, Call Of Duty), so it wont be a big loss if GOG ban all games with microtransactions.
And when it come to games that you have to buy but that still have an in-game store, its just plain stealing, if you buy a game you should be able to play it entirely.
Pangaea666 Too late, as many others have observed, but I've voted for this wish anyway. To show that there are many users that don't like that GOG keep implementing the worst practices in the industry.
##@@##@@ Too late: www.gog.com/game/the_legend_of_heroes_trails_of_cold_steel_ii_shining_pom_bait_value_set_2
& www.gog.com/game/gwent_the_witcher_card_game
Rostelle Full agreement with wish.
Personally I would always prefer to know before purchase if any game (or other application) had any feature which included on-line follow up (I include updates/upgrades essential or otherwise). The better informed a decision is then the better it is.
>noderunner_ I agree. Games on GOG should never have microtransactions, lootboxes, or in-game stores. This means a lot of modern games will be excluded but I say good riddance.
Varacka I agree. The only free to play games that should be added are ones that are truely free like much of the abandonware games gog has gives us over the years.
##@@##@@ I second this.
EraztheRogue I agree with this, it's a shame I can only vote the topic up once.
Games riddled with microtransactions and games with in game stores do not have a place on such a nicely curated and focused storefront. The nice thing about GOG is if I purchase a game from the platform, I know it's a COMPLETE GAME unless DLC is stated on the side, and there'll be no additional purchases to make when I begin playing the game. I'm glad for this and hope this mindset continues into the future.
SIRbossk Fuck microtransactions. GOG should have a no-microtransaction policy as strict as the no-DRM policy.
nopism At the very least games that rely on microtransactions should be marked as such in the store page with a specific icon.
Zxyaelll Frankly, this sounds like something based more on moral principle than practicality. While I don't like micro-transactions either in full priced games, don't see what's the problem with allowing any games that have micro-transaction in them on GOG, especially if, as the other wishlister say's, they figure out how to properly manage them, and do them in a more consumer-friendly manner, like say, having the game Free-to-Play as a starter, and allowing players to buy small bits of the game piece by piece, so they can just buy the content they want instead of buying it whole.
MetalGearOpz Oh my god. Something optional that can be easily avoided. Yes, please. Don't ever allow something that I can by free will completely ignore onto your platform because I don't care that you have a business to run.
Customs Officer Dragon's Dogma, though...
DOWL Microtransactions are a filthy and dirty idea thought up by some evil demon of a 'human'. I really hope these disgusting things never appear on GOG. That would be a very sad day...
Embrigand I'm alright with crate-based microtransactions in F2P games. That's all though. Have a very strong resentment towards most forms of microtransactions in full paid games.
RetroLinuxGamer Games are a way to escape from the real world (for a healthy amount of time). Why would you fuss it up by including real-world monetary exchanges? This ruins the whole game world. And it is a sort of DRM- You don't get this part of the game unless you pay $$$. Now, buying expansions for a game- that's a different thing, as long as they're not practically essential. I like supporting good developers. But this is not a business model that any good developer would sanely choose.
Video games have always been commercial- But it used to be that once you bought the game, the pressure to spend more on it was gone and you could simply concentrate on the game. Now, the pressure to SQEEEEZEE you for money is on-going and ever-present. The developer doesn't even have to make a new exciting game to get your money. He just pumps out some different colored headphones or gives you a cheat for $$$. This is disgusting.
You can accept it for the sake of "choices", but real-world transactions in a game ruin the game world and ruin the game in a very real sense. It makes it A LOT more about money and manipulating you to get it. Can you imagine what this does to a kid from a low-income family? How does he feel after mom and dad bought him the game, but he is STILL being pressured to spend money in it that he doesn't have. No, this does not belong in real games, my friends.
Genocide2099 Microtransactions are okay as long as they are only cosmetic and do not alter the core game. I would gladly pay for story expansions not story DLCs.
gamefood "Pay for the video games and have them with all of the full content is what gog.com should be about. " AMEN!
ginx2666 Microtransactions in F2P titles are a legit way to earn cash on it.
Microtransactions in titles that have either initial price or subscription model are a scam and extortion scheme, plain and simple. In fact, had they been classified as such, I'd applaud the resolution.
NoX1ous I disagree wholeheartedly with this wish, and am glad it's not getting traction.
DRM is something that isn't optional, it's forced on the user and back in the day could even ruin your computer. So there's a valid reason to create a platform based solely on DRM free products.
In-game transactions are entirely optional and never forced. Some of us are willingly supporting developers with micro-transactions for skins because we like the product. I reckon the majority you speak of have problems with pay-to-play games, that end up offering pay-to-win micro-transactions. For now, these games are a huge minority in the market. Demanding GOG to not sell those without the market having a proper stance on it is premature in my opinion.
And going as far as saying you want 260$ worth of content for 50$ because well, it's DLC / expansions? I don't consider that grounded in reality at all. I don't think you'd want to put 260$ worth of effort into your work, and only getting 50$ in return for it.
Sp1ke I can't agree with this one. Gwent is coming to GOG Galaxy and it will have microtransactions. However i'm fully against single-player games that sell "cheats" for money.
Sturleson There was a great interview a while back(couple years?) with an EA executive talking about microtransactions and how they "weren't screwing players". The great part of the interview was how his examples were the opposite of his claims. About how they want people to get into the game, get emotionally invested instead of thinking about purchases logically. For instance how if you're five hours in and getting stuck, that little $2.99 bonus pack seems so much more reasonable. I won't write a text wall, there are some very good specifics mentioned in this thread. Just let me say:
ANYONE who wants to mindfuck you, even just to take your money, IS YOUR ENEMY. Simple.
Johnathanamz No thank you I do not want absolutely any video games that have microtransactions to be sold on gog.com. Single-player only video games should have all of the content added if it's going to be sold on gog.com like Deus Ex: Mankind Divided and with no microtransactions. I don't even want $100+ dollars (USD) DLC's to be sold, just have expansion packs being sold. Paradox Interactive needs to sell their video games on gog.com with all of their DLC's included at $50 dollars (USD) and expansion packs that have 10 hours of gameplay or 10+ hours of gameplay for their video games can be sold. Take a look at Crusader Kings II on Steam you can purchase all of the expansion packs and DLC's for Crusader Kings II for a total of $262.75 dollars (USD). Crusader Kings II costs $39.99 dollars (USD) on Steam. I want to purchase Crusader Kings II from gog.com, so I'm willing to have Paradox Interactive sell it on gog.com for $50 dollars (USD) to be 100% Digital Rights Management (DRM) free with all of the DLC's that add new kings, new dynasties, shields, new customizations like beards and hair for free. Just have the expansion packs sold that add 10 hours of gameplay or 10+ hours of gameplay, 10+ new units, 10+ new anything. I don't want Train Simulator to be sold either on gog.com with it's $3,000+ dollars (USD). Or Free to Play (F2P) video games I'm already upset gog.com has GWENT: The Witcher card video game, when they should of sold it for like $20 dollars (USD) and release card packs and new units and whatever for free and sell 10 hour gameplay expansion packs for GWENT: The Wiitcher card video game. I do want this greed to infest gog.com. Let this greed stay infested on Steam. Otherwise I hope very much some other rich person on this planet who isn't so greedy goes on and decides to open up her own or his own 100% Digital Rights Management (DRM) free video game retailer website to sell 100% Digital Rights Management (DRM) free PC versions of video games on it and slowly get Activision, Bethesda Softworks, Capcom, Deep Silver, Electronic Arts (EA), Ubisoft, etc to start selling their video games on like gog.com did and when they get as big as gog.com in 10 years or so to just never allow microtransactions to be sold on their digital retailer store.
like2omg Dibsy is good in their knowledge, and I highly recommend gamers, game developers (including those learning, no matter if just starting out or well into it or indie or AAA...), and game publishers to watch the series "Extra Credits" on YouTube starting from the first episode of the first season. (Their playlist for all the Extra Credits episodes is correctly ordered from first to newest, which makes it handy.)
Microtransactions is good as long as it doesn't remove too much from the "pay once for the game only" crowd... and DLC is great for the publishers as long as the content is actially tested before released. (Blizzard delays their games, patches, and DLC, if they find out it needs more bug-testing as a great game / patch / DLC is low on bugs on release day, not numerous fixes in.)
.... oh my.... I just ranted :/
Dibsy Just a resource for anyone who'd like it: If you'd like to learn more about Monetization from a developers point of view, or just learn more about it in general there's a youtube show called Extra Credits that talks about it in more depth in Season 3, Episode 1. I'm not 100% if it's okay to post links here so I'll leave it at that, but it might be good for anyone looking to find out why devs do the things they do. :D
juzcallmeneo The worst part of IAPs/microtransactions, is when the devs make the game pay to win, or just start removing a bunch of content from the game just to sell it back. The only time I don't mind a bunch of cosmetic stuff is when it supports a 0 monthly fee MMO like GW2. When it's a game like COD, it's just pure greed. CDPR has the right idea with the free DLC, but paid expansions. If they want more money, proper expansions are great. (Destiny was the wrong way to do it).
I understand that games should be more expensive, but thousands of microtransactions and pay to win should never be the substitute for a quality game. (Looking at you, EA)
t0suj4 If this was no P2W games I would give it a +1. But this vague term could rule out games that use microtransactions to purchase cosmetic items.
Personally, I would allow games using microtransactions purely to accelerate obtaining of game features, that don't alter gameplay formula. Many of those features should be available though normal gameplay.
As an example... If a weapon with different stats is sold as a part of microtransaction, that's not okay. Selling alternative skins, if many (let's say 95%) are accessible through gameplay, is okay. But there should be things, that can be only obtained though normal gameplay, especially in MMOs.
In general... listen to the community... The community decides of a game's fate
Sarang Lots of great comments, especially from dibsy. I think that part of the issue right now with microtransaction games is that they create half-finished games, where YOUR constant money is expected to be paid to finish it. It's not just that they're Indie games but Forza and others fleece you with these microtransactions.
"Cheap" new digital games on PSN/XBL which put the truth to the lie that we were going to pay less for digital because there isn't the cost of a case, manual or disc. The myth/lie that we would get games of the same breadth as disc-based if they were digital only...LIE, LIE, LIE. There are exceptions like Megaman 9 and 10, but they are definitely exceptions, not the rule.
Look at Wipeout HD, digital only. How much more are you paying(via transactions) for a complete game with comparable content to the past Wipeouts?
One of the ONLY companies that gets that you need to give people a full game and can microtransact PAST that is Bethesda with Elder Scrolls. Skyrim IS a full game imo. Asura's Wrath is the complete opposite, screwing you out of the full ending unless you pay a microtransaction(this makes me want to buy the game at at least $5 or less).
Adventuring Through Games I wish there was a downvote button for wishes. Nothing inherently wrong with microtransactions or F2P.
MaximeMartyr Well Scrooge, it is funny that you support micro-transactions, according to your avatar. :-3
Stingy McDuck Just don't pay for microtransactions,end of the drama. I wouldn't like this store losing some games just because it has microtransactions that some people find so hard to ignore.
Padye What about Gwent? I'm super excited about this game, and it being free to play may make it very popular E-Sport.
Dibsy I think drawing a hard line on this (Or most things really) isn't super beneficial. I believe microtransactions are fine and a good way for developers to continue to earn money in order to support the game. But ONLY if said microtransations are purely cosmetic and don't change the actual gameplay or pacing in any way. This way a system can be developed where you have the base game that is complete and fully featured but have options to say, purchase a skin for a character or buy something that makes the sky a different colour. This way of doing microtransactions also acts as a motivator for developers to make their content high quality, so people will actually want to buy something that is purely cosmetic and has no actual effect on the game whatsoever.
That said, I also understand many microtransaction systems are not like this and have burned a lot of people and it would also be a tough task to sort through games and make sure their microtransaction system is balanced.
In the end, I believe GOG should have good games. And I don't think games should be defined by their microtransaction systems unless they are very detrimental to the game, in which case the game wouldn't be considered good and in turn, wouldn't end up on GOG. <3
cyberchief1984 What about Gwent? Gwent has microtransactions. Sure, it's to buy more cards, like Hearthstone, but still...
AZZYPICS @addictedtosleep - just because we have opinion that is different to yours doesn't mean we're trolls. There's always a positive side to things, even to microtransactions and F2P stuff. Microtransactions are a great alternative to retail price, because they allow the player invest amount of money they thought was right in this or that game in particular. They don't necessarily break the game.
neglesaks I tend to agree with a ban on µTrans-games, but I'l propose a compromise:
Any such game should be
1) clearly labelled as such. Screamingly clearly labelled.
2) thoroughly vetted by GOG staff and contributors, with testimonials from other game review sources, that the microtransaction are not required to get the near-fulles out of the game, before being allowed on GOG.
I'm fairly sure GOG would not do this anyway, but just in case.
Lord_Midas Microtransaction/pay-to-win is the bilge of gaming. By GoG not supporting this sort of money grabbing technique we could hopefully eradicate it for good.
Some say that it's all down to the gamers choice, but it's just a way for publishers to make money, and I believe that it stifles creativity. Buy the game and that's it.
I have dabbled in this hypocrisy, though. Marvel Puzzle Quest on my phone. It's free, but I've supported the developer by buying gold packs for £7. The game is worth the money, and I wonder if I would have paid for the game upfront? I don't need that Gold, but the Devs need a payday.
TheGreatTave I sort of agree with this. I despise microtransactions in any pay-to-own game. But at the same time there are some games that are 100% free to play with cosmetic microtransactions (see League of Legends). So I think as a rule of thumb, no microtransations is a good call, but there are some cases where they aren't bad. But yes usually they're terrible.
crazydaisy Crazdaisy's son speaking. As long as GOG clarifies THOROUGHLY that this stuff is in the games that have them, I see no reason that they shouldn't add them.
This should be user choice, and while I hate such games I also value freedom. If you've got the money and want to play such games that is up to the individual.
P.S. Would GOG even add F2P? Would that make any sense?
Kru5ad3r The big problem with pay as you you play micro transactions is that an average game that is slightly addictive could cost you thousands, just to speed up a build or get a certain armour etc, it leads to average game development as in story, thought process, longevity, playablility, enjoyment, especially if you refuse to pay in game and just grind, which takes days/weeks out of your life. And for what? These games are designed to dangle a carrot infront of you and take your cash, great idea to make money but not great for good games. Imagine 15/20 years ago with Age of Empires and you had to pay £1.99 to hurry up your castle build or another £4.99 to get the Teutonic Knight unit. No, we paid £30 quid and that was that, and if the game had promise, we paid another £10 for the expansion which added alot more to the game, these games are still playable today and people still talk about them. Micro transaction cash cow money making games (candy crush anyone?) Pre order bonuses and DLCs are only becoming the norm because people havent got the patience to wait anymore. Take a step back, if you dont pay, they wont charge and maybe certain developers will invest in releasing something quality to begin with instead of a shoddy unpatched waste of space that gives to just enough to keep you interested but not enough for you to still be talking about it in 20 years time!
Tomis01 I get where you're coming from but I don't agree. There are some amazing games that have microtransactions as business models (I'm thinking Planetside 2, you owe it to yourself to be part of a foot zerg at least once in your life, it's one of the most epic things you will ever experience).
I think that GOG should publish quality, DRM-free titles; for everything else, you vote with your wallet. Don't blame GOG for bringing people good games.
100 comments about this wish