While free-to-play, micro-transaction based titles continue to be released into the market, gamers continue to argue and voice concerns of the ‘unfair’ game balance that these systems have the potential to present.
Obviously micro-transaction revenue streams offer small and growing publishers and developers huge potential (and a relatively low time-to-market process when using fatfoogoo’s software), these publishers still must listen to the customer while producing a product that is in a sense, for sale, just not in the ‘traditional’ sense.

The pitfall and issue that gamers raise is the unfair ‘pay to compete’ or my personal favorite ‘pay to pwn’ method.  One of the surefire ways to skirt the issue altogether is to offer micro-transactions as only a system for in-game socialization and customization.  EA’s Battlefield Heroes is doing exactly this.  All micro-transactions within the game are for character customization only.  And who can fault them?  This is EA’s first major foray (and testing ground) into the micro-transaction field, and it’s probably a wise move to try to please the largest amount of people.  With that said, on the other hand, I think we can all admit that the option to purchase the Sword of a Thousand Truths does seem a bit more appetizing than a new leather trench coat.

Enter stage left the marketing and copywriting department.  The trick here is to find the right nomenclature to get the point across without generating a huge backlash.  It’s not that publishers are trying to hide anything, but the North American market has already developed a predisposition to the term, and immediately jumps to the ‘pay to pwn’ supposition.  Granted, I’m generalizing here, but the haters are often the most vocal in their opposition.

One direction develpers can take is the phrase ‘pay-to-win’.  Players of any MMO (myself included) will always seek out better gear and methods of beating a particularly difficult challenge.  Whether it’s running back to the Auction House to pick up a few more potions, or farming a bit of buff providing food to eat before the battle, players will do it.  The downside to providing a ‘pay-to-win’ micro-transaction is that it then DOES provide an unfair game advantage.  By providing this unfair game advantage, publishers have just cut off their nose to spite their face.  In other words, by providing this advantage, the player thereby removes the ‘challenge’ of the game…the thing that keeps them interested in the first place.

The opposite side of the coin is to reduce to advantages of said micro-transaction.  While this preserves a bit more of the game balance and overall perception of fairness, the micro-transaction item has thereby been so watered down that players are bound to be disappointed by the value of their purchase.  This disappointment leads to even less transactions, and eventually stoppage of play.

Hang on one second while I down a Red Bull and munch on a Headshot bar.  Right…Ok.  Back.  Fired up.  Ready to Go!

While that might be a bit of an extreme example, you get my point.  If you want to think about micro-transactions as temporary boosts in blood sugar levels and heightened senses of awareness, you might just be on the right path to providing overall customer satisfaction.  By providing minor, brief enhancements that might perhaps unfair advantages, you’ve satisfied the customers desire to obtain über status, if only temporarily.  On the other side of the coin, by providing this advantage to be used against a difficult challenge, it only provides an advantage for a limited time, thereby maintaining overall game ‘fairness’.  This also follows the average lifecycle for an MMO player: constantly moving in and out of tough challenges and short-lived situations.

By providing micro-transactions via simple ‘click to use: lasts 2 minutes’ items, publishers are providing players with relative ‘instant gratification’ with satisfying, yet reoccurring micro-transactions that will continue to deliver a steady stream of revenue.