Page 1 of 1

Dodgy Activision Matchmaking Microtransaction Patent

Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:56 am
by Cruizer
http://metro.co.uk/2017/10/18/activisio ... s-7008495/
metro wrote: 'For instance, the microtransaction engine may match a more expert/marquee player with a junior player to encourage the junior player to make game-related purchases of items possessed/used by the marquee player. A junior player may wish to emulate the marquee player by obtaining weapons or other items used by the marquee player.’
So I grew up with the N64 and PS2; you'd buy a game and it either worked or if it was buggy there was no opportunity for online updates. It either made a profit from only the sell of the initial game and there was no season passes, in game purchases or DLC. I don't partake in DLC or microtransactions myself (only 2 exceptions are Mario Kart 8 and Assassins Creed Syndicate) but I don't particularly have a problem with them charging for additional skins or added content, so long as they aren't dilberately restricting the main game or putting you at a disadvantage for not having something games developers are charging you extra for and at a push I'm even ok with games advertising currency and item that maybe advantageous (but non-essential) to you in game as long as it isn't too down your throat about it.

But this mechanic that Activision (CoD, World of Warcraft, Destiny) have patented which is basically designed to sell people microtransactions seems particularly shady. Contained in the farticle I've linked to is a flow diagram explaining how this works - but essentially in online matches the game will match you against a player that has a particular item you are likely to desire - it could even pair you a bunch of players all of whom have this item so you are basically outnumbered in order to pressure you into buying said item. Then if you do purchase that item you will be dropped into a game, where you are now much more powerful and have a greater opportunity to outlevel your opponents or if you choose not to purchase you may continuously be dropped in games where you are in a much weaker position than your opponents.

I should build into this OP that Activision may chose not to utilise this patent, but the whole concept of this patent of matchmaking to purposefully put you in bad games so that vulnerable people (I think vulnerable is probably the right word in this case - the kind of people that this system would target are probably also the kind of people that are susceptible to being exploited by the gambling industry) or use you an ingame advertisement to other players if you do decide to purchase a certain item is kind of disgusting.

Thoughts?

Re: Dodgy Activision Matchmaking Microtransaction Patent

Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:33 pm
by danbish
That is disgusting.

Activision should be publicly shamed and flogged for it. I'm only pleased I don't play their games.

Re: Dodgy Activision Matchmaking Microtransaction Patent

Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:34 pm
by Vtheyoshi
big video game corporation makes plans to gooseberry fool their consumers even harder
people still buy their games

Re: Dodgy Activision Matchmaking Microtransaction Patent

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:43 am
by OrangeRakoon
Companies patent things all the time and never use them

It's a neat concept and one I hope is never in any game I play

Re: Dodgy Activision Matchmaking Microtransaction Patent

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 1:48 pm
by imbusydoctorwho
In a world where Lego games have season passes and a single player Lord of the Rings game have loot boxes, nothing really surprises you these days. Still sounds horrible and I really do hope this crap doesn't start appearing in their games.

Re: Dodgy Activision Matchmaking Microtransaction Patent

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 5:50 pm
by JenovaPX
Tbh when Blizzard announces they've made $1bn off of Overwatch lootboxes why would anyone assume a publisher isn't going to push anything like that into games. It's literally free money for them, it always has been ever since inception really.