No, people don't like MT, but it gets people to spend more because psychology. Like a selling point of BG3 was that it had no microtransactions, people published articles about that aspect alone.
5 Star reviews still are good because you can still do the 5 or 1 star review, but you have the option to add some granularity if you choose, which is objectively better. A 3 star review still gives me information about the thing. Worst you could argue is that it reduces simplicity which... Are you seriously telling me you can't handle a number from 1 to 5?
Maybe not all that important, but broken features are there. However the competition doesn't have many of those features at all which means comparatively, those features are much more broken elsewhere. At least that's how i like to look at it.
No, people don't like MT, but it gets people to spend more because psychology.
That's... actually not 100% true. People don't like microtransactions when they don't feel like it was worth the cost. Most of the time that's true; microtransactions tend to be expansion content that was parted out and sold in pieces. However, sometimes microtransactions make sense, or are even preferable to larger expansions. For an example: single levels that don't thematically fit into an expansion, officially-distributed community-content (like Warframe's Tennogen program), or if you want something from an expansion but don't want to pay for the whole thing.
Now, all of these reasons can be sketchy and open to scrutiny (did the level actually not fit a theme? Is the community creator getting a decent cut? Is the single item priced proportionally to the cost of the whole expansion?), however if done correctly, they can give the consumer more options.
That said, I dunno if microtransactions are really worth it. On the one hand, they can give consumers more options, but on the other hand, they tend to be used to milk the consumer.
Just a couple points.
No, people don't like MT, but it gets people to spend more because psychology. Like a selling point of BG3 was that it had no microtransactions, people published articles about that aspect alone.
5 Star reviews still are good because you can still do the 5 or 1 star review, but you have the option to add some granularity if you choose, which is objectively better. A 3 star review still gives me information about the thing. Worst you could argue is that it reduces simplicity which... Are you seriously telling me you can't handle a number from 1 to 5?
Maybe not all that important, but broken features are there. However the competition doesn't have many of those features at all which means comparatively, those features are much more broken elsewhere. At least that's how i like to look at it.
That's... actually not 100% true. People don't like microtransactions when they don't feel like it was worth the cost. Most of the time that's true; microtransactions tend to be expansion content that was parted out and sold in pieces. However, sometimes microtransactions make sense, or are even preferable to larger expansions. For an example: single levels that don't thematically fit into an expansion, officially-distributed community-content (like Warframe's Tennogen program), or if you want something from an expansion but don't want to pay for the whole thing.
Now, all of these reasons can be sketchy and open to scrutiny (did the level actually not fit a theme? Is the community creator getting a decent cut? Is the single item priced proportionally to the cost of the whole expansion?), however if done correctly, they can give the consumer more options.
That said, I dunno if microtransactions are really worth it. On the one hand, they can give consumers more options, but on the other hand, they tend to be used to milk the consumer.