Dragon’s Dogma 2 Getting Review Bombed After Microtransaction Reveal UPDATE: Capcom Responds

Update from Capcom: Capcom gave a response that pointed out what I said below. This stuff is paid, but it can be found in the game.

“Paid DLC
All the items listed below can be obtained in-game or as paid DLC items.
Art of Metamorphosis – Character Editor
Ambivalent Rift Incense – Change Pawn Inclinations
Portcrystal – Warp Location Marker
Wakestone – Restore the dead to life!
500 Rift Crystals / 1500 Rift Crystals / 2500 Rift Crystals – Points to Spend Beyond the Rift
Makeshift Gaol Key – Escape from gaol!
Harpysnare Smoke Beacons – Harpy Lure Item”

Capcom

Original Article: The much-awaited follow-up to the popular action RPG, Dragon’s Dogma 2, has received a lot of criticism from the community and has garnered ‘Mostly Negative’ reviews on Steam since its recent launch. The backlash is due to the unexpected inclusion of microtransactions in the single-player game.

Players were shocked to discover that some parts of the game can now be bought instead of earned. These in-game purchases involve buying Rift Crystals, used to hire Pawns (AI companions) and get special items. This includes items for reviving characters and changing appearance.

The news about these microtransactions has disappointed many fans. Reviews are critical of adding pay-to-win or pay-for-convenience features in a single-player game that has already been paid for. Some players are worried that these microtransactions could change the game’s design, affecting the core gameplay.

When I heard the controversy about Dragon’s Dogma 2, I was also a little mad. I went to the page and saw character editor and wakestones for money. Then I found out that these are still in the game and can be obtained normally. They’re just as rare as they were in the first game.

There is nothing wrong with having microtransactions in a game when they are legitimately extra content that wouldn’t have been there before. What’s wrong is when they’re the only way to get a certain item, or they’re so difficult without paying that it’s clearly a way to get you to pay. EA making you play 40 hours to unlock Darth Vader in Star Wars Battlefront II before it changed is a good example of leading you to pay money.

These are optional, so you don’t have to get them if you don’t want to. You can play the game and earn these same items. They’re difficult to get because they were difficult to get before. If you want to spend a dollar to undo a death, why not? It’s so silly to me that people hate microtransactions because they’re there. This is a good way for the developer to keep the game from being live service and far more expensive and a great way for players to cheat if they want.

There is a future where games can be $100 or more, and there’s a future where they can all be live service. Games are very expensive to make and are only getting more expensive. There’s no escaping the fact that they won’t be a single purchase anymore. Attacking a developer that isn’t hurting the game with its microtransactions will hurt the consumer eventually. All you’re doing by review bombing this situation is telling developers it doesn’t matter if they make it as friendly to the consumer as possible; they’ll get hounded. So why would they continue to try and not just go all in for the games-as-a-service model?

This isn’t a situation where the core elements have been monetized. This is a situation where you can get extra stuff if you pay money, but it won’t hurt you if you don’t. I say we go back to attacking Lootboxes since that’s basically throwing a ton of money at a game.