Full Text
Publication: The Depaulia, , DePaul University, Chicago, IL
The term “microtransaction” ought to send an embittering shudder down the spine of any gamer worth their salt. It conjures in the mind a hellbroth of vile images: storied franchises brought to their knees through onslaughts of corporate bastardization, ornate digital storefronts adorned with virtual trinkets priced as obscenely as metrics would allow and gamers compelled to funnel thousands into products as soulless as the very suits whose pockets they line through their addiction. Pay-to-win? Sometimes. But in the end, it’s the consumer that loses.
Many gamers are quick to lay the blame for the spread of these despicable business practices at the feet of publisher Electronic Arts: the bogeyman to end all corporate bogeymen in the games industry. The EA hate train properly left the station some time in the early 2010s, and it’s been barrelling full steam ahead ever since. If you’re at all active in the gaming scene, it’s probably passed you by more than a few times. Maybe you’re already on that train yourself. In any case, it’s easy to see why EA has become so passionately despised in that time.
EA has an earned reputation of gobbling up beloved studios and reducing them to husks of their former selves or shutting them down entirely: Maxis, Visceral, Bullfrog — the list goes on. It’s also true that they are one of the most prominent purveyors of predatory microtransations and designs which encourage their purchasing, the most notable instance of this being the infamous “Star Wars Battlefront II” controversy from back in 2017. These practices continue to be characteristic of EA titles. It’s also true that they have a history of releasing games in various states of incompleteness. It’s also true that...