Would You Pay For An In-Game Item You Lose When You Die?

Upcoming zombie survival MMO The War Z doesn't want to hold your hand. It wants to grab it and try and bite it off. Preferably after you've spent some money on it first.

The game, like many others, will allow players to purchase items using real money from an in-game store. But if you're playing on the game's "normal" or "hardcore" modes, you can lose them when you die.

Sounds awful, and in some ways I guess it is, but developers Hammerhead do make a convincing case in support of the move.

"Yes, you'll lose what you have in your backpack when you die — both in Normal and Hardcore modes", Hammerfront's Alex Josef told GamingBlend. "And yes, if you bought something using real money, you'll lose that item as well. This is a price you'll have to pay. We've discussed that a lot and at the end decided that this will provide a pretty good incentive for players to either be extra cautious while playing, or just not spend too much money in the game and, instead, try to procure all items by finding them in the game world."

Interview: The War Z And Surviving A Zombie Apocalypse MMO [GamingBlend, via PC Gamer]


    I avoid the whole argument but not buying in game items in any game.

    Also, I think games that give incentive for players to be "extra cautious" are usually boring games, since trying the risky strategy can sometimes be a lot more fun.

    I think it's a better incentive to play Day Z.

    I wouldn't pay for an in game item at all.

    Sounds to me like a pay to win game that rewards rich players who have the money to waste buying replacement gear if they lose it when they die. I guess it'll come down to how easy it is to get items in game of the same level/quality as what's being offered for real money. Too easy and there's no point spending real money, too hard and the game favours the RL rich too much. Either way I can't see it going over well with most gamers.

      The devs themselves have said that nothing you buy using real money can give you an advantage over other players so I'm guessing its mostly vanity shit or stuff that's spawns quite frequently in game (food, drink, etc), they specifically mentioned that weapons, armor, etc would not be purchasable.

        F2P game publishers always say that buying stuff doesn't give you any in game advantage. It's rarely true. If there's no up front cost for the game, such lies can be forgiven. But if you've purchased the product (eg; Guild Wars 2, or this War Z), then you're being sold something where post-purchase microtransactions make a huge difference to the online environment when you've already paid an upfront product purchase price.

    Thanks for this article, I will make sure my friends and I steer clear.. GW2 = how to f2p.. the warz = how not to..

    Hope War Z gets sued for cashing in on the Day Z popularity.

      The Wars Z was in production before DayZ came into the light of day.

        That doesnt mean anything. Its concept is so similar to DayZ its uncanny. The direction of game development can change at any moment during the production stage, it probably started off looking more like Left for Dead than DayZ

        Take a look for yourself: http://imgur.com/a/SvNg5/

        They only changed it to WarZ after the success of DayZ. Its a complete rip off.

    I usually avoid in game purchases, but in this case I think there is a point to it, and hey, no one is forcing you to buy anything.
    My friends and I have longed for a game where there is actual incentive to play cautiously. It creates a more realistic, invested experience. I'm curious to see the prices they decide are justified however.

    Going by the comments, I don't think many people made it to the end of the last sentence.

    "We’ve discussed that a lot and at the end decided that this will provide a pretty good incentive for players to either be extra cautious while playing, or just not spend too much money in the game and, instead, try to procure all items by finding them in the game world.”

    What exactly is wrong with what he said here? People who have more money than sense can go about spending their money, people with more sense than money can play the game (and possibly grind) for the exact same things the paying players get.

    ITT, l2read.

      ITT go back to 4chan this isn't a thread newfriend.

    The surprising thing for me about this post, is that for once, one of Luke's posts is more intelligent/informative than the comments. Seriously, what is this crap about steering clear and hoping the devs get sued. FFS, at least the Luke bashing was relevant.

    "And yes, if you bought something using real money, you’ll lose that item as well. This is a price you’ll have to pay."

    I cannot WAIT for the first batch of legalities involving this. I cannot see them honestly, legally enforcing this for very long before someone sues them succesfully. This is such a bad idea, it's stinking already and it's not even in action.

      I seriously doubt anyone will be able to sue the developer. Does make you wonder if other players could be liable - do we have digital property rights?

        I believe you do to a degree if youve paid for a service. That being said if its spelt out in black and white you lose it wheb you die... It can be argued caveat emptor. Conversely one can argue this is a well designed scam. Conning people out of money... Unless you still get to use said equipment on easy servers no matter what?

          This is the assumption made when they specifically mention only Normal and Hardcore modes. Assuming there is an Easy mode server then it's expected you keep all the stuff you buy.

          Now, when you install a game and all that there's the EULA, I don't expect them to be as bullshit as EA when it comes to that, but assuming they put up big notices; if you buy this item, with real money, you run the real risk of losing this item, where is the legal trouble?

          A developer has come out and said that this would encourage people to play smart, or play the game to earn those items. I'd underline all of that really, for everyone who seems to have trouble with the idea.

          Now if they turned around and said "Nope there's these things here that will definitely help your game and you can buy them for X amount but you also run the risk of losing these items" then that's a dick move and no mistake, but here it seems that you can get all that you need from simply playing the game. I honestly do not see the reason for this kerfuffle.

          Were I to play this game, knowing what I know here, I would simply not pay for anything beyond the base game, unless there's certain items that would make the game more fun than it already is for a fairly reasonable price (and that I don't mind losing).

            You're aware Eula's aren't as mightily protective as companies want them to be right? The law does request 'fairness' in trades, this may not be deemed a fair trade given the circumstances. I guess we will have to wait and see.

    Given that this game has a sticker price to play, this seems like a particularly cynical money grab. Buy the game, get confronted with a cash for in game items store, then get ganked and lose the stuff you paid additional money for. Not so appealing.

    more zombie games? ugh!
    isn't the market getting crowded with zombie games...

    2 ways i can look at this
    1)In gameplay terms;
    In a post-apocalyptic world run down by zombies (or any major disaster that crushes society as a whole), there will undoubtedly be people who scrounge around for items and sell or trade for them at a price, which you may choose to pay for, in order to save time looking (or grinding) for it. Obviously if you die you loose it, or if it were food you'd eat it and that would be the end of that. Looking at it this way i don't really see any difference, you save time by having it quickly, but at a cost, which you, as a user can decide to agree with or not.

    2)The reality;
    Pointless and a bad idea, in that what's to guarantee that after buying something with real game money, you aren't killed, griefed, or something happens within minutes of you making the exchange and your money and item goes up in a puff of smoke? A problem many people encounter in Day Z is the lack of real consequence and thinking of the repercussions of their actions. You see people just kill people for fun and for no reason, and allowing people to pay for items gives them more incentive to go and kill people to take it off of them

    This is a terrible idea in my opinion. My reasoning behind this (purely my perspective, and isn't indicative of others) is because in the successful F2P models that I've played, whenever I spend real money in-game I buy items that will be permanent. I want to own things which other people do not have, and I want to show them off.

    The closest thing you could possible get to not selling permanent items, is putting an 'expiry in x days' kind of approach to them. Which for me, still isn't enough to elicit real money investment into the game.

    The concept of buying an item which I lose upon death in this kind of genre, turns me off completely.

    First of all, if I make a stupid mistake, if a glitch happens, if my friends are trolls and shoot me for fun, if my internet plays up and a plethora of other possible reasons I could die, I lose any investment I put into the game, and I'll either not have anything refunded, or I'll have to spend my own time chasing up some compensation in the case of their technical glitches.

    Second of all, if this game involves people shooting each other with items lost upon death, people aren't admiring my cool crap, people won't care that I have fancy this and that, they'll shoot me, I'll die and I'm back being the same as rest of them except with an emptier wallet.

    Perhaps this appeals to some, but for me, it's a total turn off.

    A zombie survival game with a magical gypsy caravan that gives you fairy weapons? Hells Yeah!

    It just defeats the purpose. Noobie buys say... An AUG Steyr or something, dies and Semi-Noobie now has something he didn't find or probably even earn. Repeat constantly and before long you end up with servers flooded with mil-grade weapons that are supposed to be rare.

    Before the haters say "But Dayz has servers flooded with mil-grade weapons!", the difference is that Dayz is in Alpha and its problems are engine limitations, not micro-transaction greed.

    No thanks.

    From the games FAQ:

    Is the game free to play or is there a subscription model?

    Neither. The game will be available at launch as a single-purchase download with no payments required to play after that. No subscriptions or hidden fees. You'll be able to spend money in the game for items of convenience or to rent game servers.

    You mentioned that there will be a store or marketplace in the game. Is it micro-transaction based?

    As you explore the game world, you'll find two types of currency - Dollars and Gold Coins. Both can be used for barter between players if you want or to purchase certain consumables (food, medicine, ammo) at the General Store in one of the safe settlements and in the Marketplace in the frontend. Not all items that you find in the world will be purchasable, and by no means do you need to use the store at all - everything can be found in the game world.

    I want PAY FOR WIN! I have lots of money to spend!

    Sorry pal, but this is the wrong game. Like in a real-world, post apocalyptic scenario, your money will mean much less than your natural survival skills, training and wits.

    Think i'll be sticking with Day Z.

    If its anything like War Inc, they'll move the goal posts every 5 mins...

    If you can obtain the items in-game already (as hinted in the last sentence), and aren't either a) forced to buy them or b) not have them at all... then let the stupid people buy and the smart people find.

    On the other hand, if it's pay2win only, then I'll just stick to DayZ.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now