$30 Microtransactions in Destiny

Game News: $30 Microtransactions in Destiny

What do you think of the new $30 subclass boost

Binge Mode

More Game News

See All Game News Videos

Other Videos You'll Like

Comments (43)

  • tanukivilla FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    So microtransactions are the worst thing in the world, unless Destiny does them and then RT suddenly needs to change their stance on them. Interesting........

    Also, Battletoads has several warp points. At least the NES version does. Not sure about the arcade version or the SNES sequel.

  • Vhoxz FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    I don't see the problem. World of warcraft has used a similar feature for over a year now. Some people buy it, others don't. It doesn't rly give you an unfair advantage over others, it just speeds up the process a bit. In the end you'll still have to play the game to gear up.
    And believe me Both in destiny and in world of warcraft you can easily which player has been playing the content to level up and who has not.
    So i woulndt recommend this to any new player, It's really helpful for leveling alts tho. No one wants to grind the same content again and again.

  • PhilYamahaUK FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    people keep yelling at Bungie but it's Activision who makes these choices they literally say so and keep only pointing at Activision products throughout the video. But yea it still isn't great and I don't agree with all the costs to get the "full experience" of a game.

    • tanukivilla FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      Nope, this was Bungie's decision through and through. If you've read about Bungie and all their DLC and production timeline issues, then this becomes obvious.

  • Lynch8man

    1 year ago

    I can no longer listen to Gray without imagining Roman talking.

  • Balarush FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Kneel.

    1 year ago

    Why is an EU PSN dealing in dollars?

  • Andioeast

    1 year ago

    that price can hardly be called a microtransaction.

    Destiny was pay to win when the first dlc was release, because you couldn't get the gear to reach the max level without it.

  • ChristianPed FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    called it...

  • jmac34 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    I don't think Bungie/Activision would start selling high level guns/gear via microtransactions as that would pretty much lose any point to playing the game

    • Andioeast

      1 year ago

      don't forget it's supposed to be a ten year project. this will certainly come.

      also there is no point to play Destiny anyway. It had so much potential and was executed so terrible, completely ripped Bungie apart and set the worst trend in video game history of selling half-finished rng games for the full price with no intention to ever deliver on the rest except for ridiculous amounts of money (halo 5, battlefornt, ...)

    • Vhoxz FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      a ten year project? how? I'm bored with the game already.

    • tanukivilla FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      Bungie will do whatever they have to do to satisfy their contract with Activision. In this case, they negotiated with Activision for less DLC in the lead up to Destiny 2, but it'll have microtransactions so the money all equals out on the spreadsheet.

  • lilmrpimp FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    I don't believe this is a bad thing to do as the grind can be tough and some ppl don't have the time but it sets a precedent and thats the bad effect this will have if enough ppl buy into it, anyone remember horse armor dlc??? Personally if it were maybe 6-10$ and the racing book was FREE or even like 2 bucks I wouldn't mind it too much but things are WAY too overpriced for what you get. All this coming from an XboxOne Day 1 Destiny player with 3 diff classes all 315+light so I know the game well and fear where this will lead . . .

  • McTrusty FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    "Bungie can you say macro?"

    "Micro"

    "No no, bungie macro, maa kro"

    "Ma, ma, Micro"


  • resistorserv FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Toaster Repair Pony

    1 year ago

    Where does Hedeio Kojima fit into this?

  • CoffeeBurps FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    basically... screw Activision. And since we're ranting about awful game publishers.... #FucKonami

    • tanukivilla FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      Why are we screwing Activision when Bungie was the one who messed up their production timeline and DLC schedule? Activision let Bungie delay the release of Destiny 1 by many months so why are we mad that they don't want to move the release date of Destiny 2 by as much time especially when they are the one funding all of this?

    • CoffeeBurps FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      @tanukivilla Because its the publisher's job to hold devs to deadlines and budgets. Its also most often the publishers that push for including microtransactions in games. I wont deny Bungie messed up here, but it was Activision's job to keep Bungie in line and I'm more inclined to give Bungie the benefit of the doubt on the in game purchases than I am Activision.

    • tanukivilla FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      @CoffeeBurps

      How do you think a publisher holds a dev in line? You seem to think there are some magic strings or something they can pull. If a dev is behind schedule there are only a few options the publisher has: stop funding the game/cancel the project, adjust the schedule to release an inferior or incomplete product so the net financials stay the same, or throw more money at the project by increasing the staff and/or production schedule. In the case of Destiny, Activision did the last option because the other two wouldn't have garnered as much profit. Basically, Activisions's choices were to not release the game, release an incomplete/broken game, or delay the game and alter the DLC plan to recoup their losses. If you know of other options, please let me know.

      Let me give you an analogy: imagine you order a car and they say it'll take a month to build. A month later you call up the company and ask, "Where's my car?" They tell you it's only half done and will take another month's work to finish. However, they have no more money to do that month of work since the project was more labor intensive than they thought. So what are your options? Cut your losses, pick up your half-finished car, or give them the money for another month's work to properly finish the car. It's the same with video games.

      "publishers that push for including microtransactions in games"
      Activision might have suggested this when Bungie failed to produce a DLC plan that matched the previous DLC plan's financials. However, we'll never know who tossed that idea out first. Regardless, it's irrelevant because ultimately the blame lies with Bungie. If they hadn't gone so horribly off schedule and had a decent backup DLC plan then no one, either publisher or dev, would've had to suggest or implement microtransactions. While Activision may or may not have tossed that idea out, it was solely Bungie's mistakes and lack of alternatives that lead Activision to be put in that position.

    • CoffeeBurps FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      @tanukivilla

      The publisher keeps devs in line with exactly the methods you proposed. But more specifically holding the devs to a specific timeline and budget. If the devs cant finish something on time or within the contractually agreed upon budget then in order to save the publisher's skin the logical thing to do would be cut them off or cancel the project. This leaves the devs in a situation where other publishers will know they had a project that was cancelled, especially with how public game development is, so it will be more difficult for a unprofessional dev to obtain funding from a publisher.


      Besides, publishers (including Activision) seem to have no problem releasing broken games in order to make a quick buck.


      The thing with your analogy is that in the customer/car dealership scenario, there would ideally have been a contract stating these terms. And if the customer was smart they would make sure there would be a clause in the contract saying if the agreed upon product was not provided in the agreed upon time then the customer would receive a refund. The customer would then take their business elsewhere.

      The same thing with game development however instead of the publisher receiving a refund, the contract might say something like if the agreed upon product is not made within the agreed upon terms this agreement is void and no further funding or support will come from the publisher. the best business and PR thing to do would be to cut their losses with the dev that couldn't hold its end of the bargain.

    • tanukivilla FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      @CoffeeBurps
      "If the devs cant finish something on time or within the contractually agreed upon budget then in order to save the publisher's skin the logical thing to do would be cut them off or cancel the project"
      So you wanted Activision to cancel the Destiny project because Bungie couldn't meet their deadlines? Okay, but you do realize that in Activision's mind they were going to make more money releasing the game after spending money to delay the initial launch and thus finish the project. I understand where you are coming from morally, but it's not a very good financial plan. Also, you do realize that if that was always the case with Bungie, then we never would've gotten Halo 2 either because that project was also seriously delayed and even Halo 3 was delayed by a few months.

      "Besides, publishers (including Activision) seem to have no problem releasing broken games in order to make a quick buck"
      There is a difference between broken (especially what the public views as broken versus a developer or publisher) and incomplete. Bungie wanted to axe 75% of their project after looking at the story reel. To release either what they had or just 25% of a game is far worse than releasing "broken" content. This is assuming that they could even release at all since they'd still have to pass certification and it's doubtful in that condition that they could. Also, this was a huge title for Activision. To release it broken wouldn't just reflect poorly on Bungie, but also on Activision. Devs don't want to work with publishers who release bad or incomplete projects and vice versa.

      "The same thing with game development however instead of the publisher receiving a refund, the contract might say something like if the agreed upon product is not made within the agreed upon terms this agreement is void and no further funding or support will come from the publisher"
      There are a number of things wrong with what you are saying. First off, the reason production stopped was because they were out of money, so how are you going to get that refund? Releasing the incomplete game almost certainly won't earn back what the finished game would, the dev has no money to make a new game to generate profit, and liquidating the dev also wouldn't do much to pay back what the publisher put in. In almost every case, a publisher is better off spending more money to complete a game and then severing ties with the dev afterwards. This isn't to say game projects aren't cancelled by publishers, but usually it's much earlier in the development cycle when far less has been invested. Unfortunately, Bungie was given a lot of rope for which to hang themselves, so these big problems weren't apparent until close to the original release date.
      Second, video game production is an amorphous beast. Things are constantly delayed or moved around either because of the dev or the publisher. Figuring out who is ultimately to blame will take a long, expensive trial and is usually not worth the effort. For example, let's say a publisher asks for a demo for both E3 and PAX when originally they only wanted one for E3. The dev agrees and this is fine until a week later when the sound guy accidentally incorrectly compressed all the original audio recordings and they have to be redone. Not only that, but the dev still wants to cut 3 features, but the publisher's marketing team claims that if they cut these features they'll lose 25% of projected sales. So if the dev cuts them, how do they recoup that money for the publisher or do they argue that the marketing team got their numbers wrong? And so on and so on. The contracts tend to be vague because production is so random that they need to account for things changing basically on day one and every day thereafter.
      Third, the longer a project goes on, whether in production or in a trial, that's money the publisher has wrapped up in that project. They can't spend that money elsewhere to generate more profit since it's already invested. The same thing with the developer. It makes far more sense to either end the game or push the release deadline then go to trial, because then the money is just in limbo and you're probably losing more money on top of what's already been invested. In my car analogy, the company is probably building several other cars so you could sue them because they have other money from other projects. But Destiny is all Bungie has so there aren't other wells to draw from and there isn't enough cash in their coffers to pay Activision back.

      "the best business and PR thing to do would be to cut their losses with the dev that couldn't hold its end of the bargain."
      I'm not sure PR-wise it would. If a huge company like Bungie gets no support or leniency from a publisher, then other, smaller devs certainly would avoid that publisher. Games get delayed a lot. It's a fairly common thing these days. Some games are only delayed a little and some a lot. Some are delayed because of the developer and some because of the publisher. Some delays happen before the release date is mentioned to the public so you at home have no idea that a delay even occurred. Imagine being the publisher that says, "We're not doing that anymore. Either make it by the original due date or we cut ties." I don't think that would attract many developers or inspire confidence.

      I get that you don't like microtransactions, but cancelling a game is an extreme alternative. Especially Destiny since it was supposed to be a 10-year project or series of games. While I like how black and white you'd like things to be, the truth is that production is a hundred billion shades of grey and both the developer and the publisher screw it up. Given their options, I think Acitivision made the best and right choice. They delayed the main game, earned a lot of money upon its release, came up with a financially sound DLC plan, and Destiny 2 is still going to release more or less on time. It might not be the most moral decision, but it was the best financial option.

  • EvieMoon FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Wordsmith

    1 year ago

    I don't think this matters. People are paying to not play the game, not get the gear you can find in the wild, and not understand their characters as well as people who level properly. It's more like paying to lose than paying to win, since it's not likely to go well for them if they head into Crucible straight after using the level boost.

  • DannyOhm

    1 year ago

    I think it'll be fine as long as they don't begin selling gear with high light levels

  • Enigmatic_Eagle Commenting Extraordinair

    1 year ago

    I like Gray... and Charlie pictures, so keep it up I guess

  • OniZonda FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Hokage

    1 year ago

    I think it's perfectly fine. People that don't want to put in the time or effort to understand their character will probably struggle to know what each class/subclass does. Or if you're like me and have it on both systems, it's a way to skip the entire grind because you've done it 3+ times already (I have 5 lvl 40 characters, 1 is a 299 light, 2 of them ~285 light, and the other 2 are ~250-260 light. I need to do the grind one more time to get the last character). I may consider dropping another $30 on my last one so I can get to the end without having to spend another 30+ hours in the game. It's not like it's mandatory to buy it, and the people that do buy it are supporting the devs instead of cheating to get there. Is it an unfair advantage? Not really, it's more of a disadvantage for anyone that doesn't know what they're doing. You've spent the time on your character, you know what your class can do, you know what you like. You already hit the max level as well and have all kinds of gear that makes your light level really high. They have to start out at the bottom rung for the level they're at. All this purchase does is simply engage people into the community a little more (even though you're trying to shun them) and it helps maintain the cost of continually running the servers.

  • MrMaxio

    1 year ago

    This came out right when I was debating whether or not to buy the $100 shark card in GTA V for the new yachts. I need to re-think my life decisions...

  • SirDubbington FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Of The Red Mountains

    1 year ago

    First time seeing Gray on an episode of The Know. Better than John or Ryan I gotta say.

    • MrMaxio

      1 year ago

      Jon*

    • Krytos Kittys Named Ash

      1 year ago

      Do not insult our Dark God (All Hail The Mad King)

  • StryfeRyder FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    Well I think the main reason NOT to buy this is that it sets the precedent. Devs will begin adding big pointless grinds just to motivate sales of boosters. It paves the way to pay to win and potentially generates a business model that destroys game play. The fact that no one wants to replay the original story arc to level tells all.

  • DarkTempler7 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    How does this work with the achievements?

    • LonewandererD FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold The Lone Wanderer

      1 year ago

      I would imagine not very well. The achievements are finicky enough as it well. It could work but I would imagine it won't pop straight away

  • tanukivilla FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    What do you mean "came from the moon"? All of this was exposed months ago. Oh wait, you guys glanced through, downplayed, and bypassed all of this stuff and the Marty O'Donnell case because you have fiduciary ties to Bungie. That explains this sudden change of heart whereas before anything that even hinted at "pay to win" you demonized.

    Also, Battletoads has several level skips/warps.

    • AxelDrake FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      If you look back a few months, they had another story about this, which talked about, ANd criticized it.


      And the "came from the moon" line is a joke about a Dinkle-bot line delivery when Destiny first came out.

    • tanukivilla FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      I am aware of where the line came from, however the intent of the line is still "from left field" which is what I was responding to since all of this was information that was known long ago. So it's less "it came from the moon" and more "the moon we talked about months ago is finally in our backyard as everyone said it would be months ago".

      They are far more critical of other games that have done this and even in this video they were rationalizing it, which they had not done in previous videos. They literally had a video earlier in the week with the Funhaus guys going off on this topic and Destiny was not on their radar. Not to mention all the Patch Game Club and the Patch podcasts where they talk about this subject, again demonizing the practice yet never once mentioning Destiny.

  • lucasham FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    $30-$45 is not a micro-transaction

    • abui5 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      I don't even think it's even an Ashley's Transaction. So a Macro Transaction.

  • ghostsniper779 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    also on the Xbox one store now for $30.... definitely going to be happening sadly. level 25 is only 6 hours

    • Vhoxz FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      Yes, one level 25 is 6 hours... multiple lvl 25's with maxed subclass is a wee bit longer

  • Veryk FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    If i want grind i have wow and diablo 3. So for me Destiny is not even worth turning on. Gray is awesome! How dare ye!

  • DanDanGames FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    wow someone I like less than meg

    • Elzee98 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Wizerd

      1 year ago

      Hey...hey guy...












































































      Fuck you!!!

    • StryfeRyder FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      Well I like Gray and Meg but think of it this way, hey, at least it wasn't funhaus!!!