Altering Franchise Mode : Microtransactions

[pats_rule]

Hey all, so like many people here I'm frustrated with the lack of improvements to franchise mode in the past few years. We can all agree that the mode has gotten extremely stale! Furthermore, I feel every year we offer all these suggestions for new features and improvements for franchise mode, but they fall on deaf ears. So, I'm suggesting an idea that will be criticized here in the community, but may be the only chance to save franchise mode based on the direction of micro-transactions the video game industry has turned to in the past several years.

Let's face it, most of the money made in video games comes from micro-transactions either through card packs or add-ons. It's a cycle that I hate, considering I grew up with MLB 2001 when there were zero microtransactions and game developers made all their profits by purchasing the game on day one. But, it's clear that companies are going to try and make the most bottom line possible, so DD features and modes will get the first priority every time until another mode is more financially feasible.

Bring in the notion of Franchise microtransactions. It's a way for companies to bring in more money toward franchise mode, so that they can focus on adding new features and more man hours to making franchise a more intricate experience. Want to have the option of creating a new stadium in the game? Want to have the option of playing with more historical teams? Want to have the option of playing the World Baseball Classic? By charging a microtransaction fee for the above content, it will incentive the developers to focus on Franchise mode more.

Now I know most of you will be saying that it should just be included in the game during game launch. That is definitely a good argument and I would have agreed with you a few years ago. But clearly with the new direction companies are going toward, this may be the only solution to improving the mode or face the yearly frustration of a stagnating franchise mode in the inevitable future.

[Caulfield]

if they can make a buck doing it, they will. regardless of some balking at the idea. I'm sure they've looked at many things similar but decided they can't make that buck, for whatever reasons

[jrnlgrn]

The problem with introducing micro-transactions is they would ultimately lock everything but the most basic of things behind a paywall. Oh you want to use a uniform besides just standard home/away... $$ please. Okay we'll make minor league games sim only and what's that you're interested in playing with your teams minor league club cool that's $$ per playable minor league club. It's a slippery slope to go down that won't end well. There more likely to ditch career modes before adding micro-transactions IMO.

The problem with franchise is that there is nothing forcing us to by another version of the game. If you were happy with MLB the Show 14 (the first on PS4) there is nothing forcing you to upgrade. You often see offline guys say how they skip a year or two between versions.

The Diamond Dynasties, Ultimate Teams all of these card collecting games were created as pure money making machines. The cards become obsolete with each year and a majority of the player base moves on to the new version so you're basically forced to upgrade. Of course you can choose not to pay money but you want to get that top ranking don't you need the best cards right, get those bragging rights. DD and those type of games feed into a different psychological need. No knock on anyone who chooses to do so but it's just the reality of things and ways to make extra cash.

Just my 3 cents on the idea

[StateoftheFranchise]

They won't want to alienate the fanbase by charging for what is already in the game (alt uniforms, scouting, rebranding, etc), so what features specifically would they charge for (btw I fully expect some sort of stadium creator/generics come MLB 21)?

[JHodges57]

I don't buy games that have microtransactions for the modes I play. I'd rather pay a large price to buy a game, $150 for example, then have to spend extra money on microtransactions. I realize developers claim microtransactions are not "forced", but in reality they develop the games so they are just about required to play them.

These game companies are not hurting for money. When looking at junk they spend that money on, for example, paying someone to be a commentator in the game (Heidi) when no one even asked for it, well I think the company makes enough money as is. That wasted money could be used on something else. Also, there is no guarantee that money would be put back into franchise. I'd be curious to know if franchise has a growing user base. I doubt it. DD is the bread winner and has a growing base so it will remain that way.

I am probably different than most game players as I am not married to any particular game that could ultimately go the microtransaction route.

I have so many to play that I can easily walk away from them if I need to start shelling out more money than what I paid for the game.

[countryboy]

The reason we haven't seen some of the additions to franchise mode that we would like has nothing to do with the fact that its not tied to microtransactions. Including microtransactions in franchise mode wouldn't do anything to advance the feature set or add significant improvements to the mode.

Reason being is that the reason franchise mode is in its current state is due to the older code that it is written on, resources, and current platform limitations.

Quote: Originally Posted by woodweaver

One additional point of clarification, this feature is not stopping us from developing/implemting new features. It is just one more (of many) consideration when maintaining and extending a feature set for a large, complex, and aged code base. Our main choke points are time and man power (in that order)...and platform limitations come into play especially at the end of their lifecycle.

This is from discussions with Woodweaver in regards to whether the carryover save feature caused issues in adding new features to franchise mode.

Whether you choose to accept that or not, is up for each individual to decide.

I fully expect we'll start seeing some of the additions/improvements/quality of life changes that we've been wanting starting next year with '21 on the PS5, and continuing going forward.

[zello144]

Quote: Originally Posted by countryboy

Reason being is that the reason franchise mode is in its current state is due to the older code that it is written on and current memory space. This is from discussions with the dev(s). Whether you choose to accept that or not, is up for each individual to decide.

I don't buy the memory space excuse. There are far bigger games that take up more memory than the show does on PS4. The old code though could be a valid reason I guess.

I don't know anything about game development though.

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by zello144

I don't buy the memory space excuse. There are far bigger games that take up more memory than the show does on PS4. The old code though could be a valid reason I guess. I don't know anything about game development though.

I was going to edit my post but since you responded I'll just quote your post to "make changes"

I'm searching for the discussion I had to ensure that "memory" was the exact wording or how it was worded in the discussion. But it had something to do along the lines of hardware limitation to put it in broad stroke terms.

EDIT

Here is what was said. My apologies for saying memory instead of what was actually stated:

For context I was discussing with him if the carryover save feature was an issue in adding new features to franchise mode:

Quote: Originally Posted by woodweaver

One additional point of clarification, this feature is not stopping us from developing/implemting new features. It is just one more (of many) consideration when maintaining and extending a feature set for a large, complex, and aged code base. Our main choke points are time and man power (in that order)...and platform limitations come into play especially at the end of their lifecycle.