Obsidian Entertainment, which have recently announced their latest videogame in the form of "The Outer Worlds", have now come out of woodwork to assuage some fears gamers might have. In an increasingly microtransaction-ridden digital world, and perhaps not helped by the Microsoft acquisition that Obsidian Entertainment has undergone, fears of microtransactions being added to the game that's expected to be a Fallout spiritual successor naturally grew. Timothy Cain, original creator of Fallout, in an interview with Gamestar, put those thoughts to rest. He said, in no uncertain terms that "There are no microtransactions in the game. You buy it once and then enjoy it forever."

New screenshots and details for the game have also been made known, including an interesting "Flaw" system, which pairs with the now well-known "Perk" to give players debuffs for some of their "weak traits" during gameplay in exchange for perk points. Companions with their own motivations and storylines, choice-driven gameplay with some emergent dynamics, are all part of the recipe. Check out the screenshots and Obsidian's own explanations of some of the games' features after the break.

EA today has announced that which we were already hoping and expecting: remasters of the Command & Conquer series of videogames. The publisher has officially announced thew initiative, which will start in the very beginning of the series: Tiberian Dawn. This will be the first of a series of efforts on the series, though, as EA will be looking to start remastering Red Alert as soon as Tiberian Dawn is released (always pending, of course, consumer reception). As an added bonus, DLC released for the original games will be bundled right alongside the remastered versions, so it really is the definitive package.

EA has partnered with Petroglyph for this undertaking, aided by Lemon Sky Studios, to help bring these original games to 4K glory, with improved assets and visuals that stay true to the original vision for the games. I for one am waiting intently. But i'd just like to take a passing shot at the industry at large here: don't you know the world has turned a sour point when "no microtransactions" becomes a boast and sales marketing strategy?

In a bold, bold move that is already backfiring on them, games publishes 2K put out a statement clarifying their stance on the Belgian Gaming Commission (BGC) ruling against the specific loot box implementations on multiple games. In particular, the gaming commission made it clear that loot boxes were against the gambling laws of the country and several game publishers quickly complied, including Valve with CS:GO. 2K's NBA 2Kxx series (where xx is the year of the current decade) was one of the affected titles, with the "MyTeam" packs using a loot box-based mechanism for microtransactions.

The statement put out says that 2K is working to comply with the ruling and have made changes to the MyTeam mode, but they also disagree with it and are going to be, and I quote, "continuing conversations with the BGC in order to explain our view" to get around the ruling. Furthermore, they are actually asking players to contact their local government representatives, assuming they share this view, to try and get BGC to allow the old loot box system to be placed back in. To no one's surprise, 2K is collecting a ton of flak for this and we can only hope that fans of the NBA 2K franchise vote with their wallet and let the publisher know exactly what they feel about all this.

In another case of new, obnoxious revenue streams being removed from games they were shipped in, Monolith Studios has come forth to announce that their hit sequel, Middle-Earth: Shadow of War will see its microtransactions cut. Implemented via War Chests, Shadow of War's microtransactions traded real money (after in-game Gold was acquired) for what were basically lootboxes, which could earn players powerful companions and other gameplay-boosting items. These features, including the in-game market, will be rolled-out eventually via a slew of free updates to the game, which aim to improve quality of life for gamers on the title, paired with some campaign improvements that will set its Nemesis system back, front and center, on the pedestal it should always have been.

Activision Blizzard held their earnings call a couple of days ago where the company recorded a record-breaking year with $7.16 billion in revenue. According to the video game publisher's breakdown of their sources of income, player investment contributed to more than half of their annual revenue. Activision specifically used the term "in-game net bookings", which is nothing more than fancy jargon for microtransactions. The financial report revealed that Activision raked in $4 billion from microtransactions alone. Popular titles like Call of Duty: WWII, Overwatch, Destiny 2, Hearthstone, and World of Warcraft contain microtransactions where players can spend money on different cosmetic and other in-game items. However, Candy Crush maker King Digital Entertainment, acquired by Activision in 2015, was the strongest performer of 2017 contributing with a little over $2 billion through microtransactions.

After the media coverage and customer response to some of the latest games to ship with the current gamers industry parasite of microtransactions or loot crates, it's only fair for media outlets to provide coverage for known companies that might take up that path, but choose not to. There's nothing inherently wrong with microtransactions, per se - it's up to each user to choose whether or not they want to take part in that particular economic bit of gaming. That said, it's just the way of the beast that microtransactions' implementation usually end up affecting progression systems and the ability for players to unlock what would otherwise be behind a paywall - just ask Destiny 2 or Star Wars: Battlefront 2 players. But while microtransactions of some kind may not have anything inherently wrong with them, loot boxes, by their very nature, actually might.

As such, here's some free coverage for Obsidian Entertainment, makers of Alpha Protocol, Fallout: New Vegas, Tyranny, and Pillars of Eternity 2: the company has said in a blog post that users should not, will not, can not expect any kind of microtransactions whatsoever to appear in their upcoming, super secret game, being developed in partnership with publisher Private Division. Obsidian's "emoney" said that "We're extremely excited about our upcoming RPG, and we know you are too. We wish we could tell you all about it right now… but we're going to hold off until the time is right. What we did want to talk about was a question a lot of you have been raising: "Will this upcoming game feature any lootboxes or other microtransactions?" To which he added: The answer is simply: "no." No microtransactions, of any kind, in our game." For me, that's one point more for Obsidian (whose Tyranny was actually amazing, in this editor's humble opinion). Vote with your wallet and all that.

In an announcement on EA's website, Oskar Gabrielson, General Manager at DICE, came forward to respond in no uncertain terms to the issues looming over Star Wars Battlefront 2. In the post, Gabrielson vows that EA and Dice have "(...) an ongoing commitment to constantly listen, tune and evolve the experience as it grows. But as we approach the worldwide launch, it's clear that many of you feel there are still challenges in the design. We've heard the concerns about potentially giving players unfair advantages. And we've heard that this is overshadowing an otherwise great game. This was never our intention. Sorry we didn't get this right."

This culminates on a decision to abandon all microtransactions as they were coded into the final version of the game, or, as Gabrielson puts it: "(...) we're turning off all in-game purchases. We will now spend more time listening, adjusting, balancing and tuning. This means that the option to purchase crystals in the game is now offline, and all progression will be earned through gameplay. The ability to purchase crystals in-game will become available at a later date, only after we've made changes to the game." So, it's not a total, definitive cut as it is; it's more of a "back to the drawing board" kind of approach. which only makes sense, as EA has been loud and clear in saying that they consider these microtransactions as essential components of a given games' development.

Ubisoft has announced on its latest Q2 financials that earnings from microtransactions have exceeded proceeds from digital game sales. Digital revenue increased by a very respectable 69%, but Ubisoft says that Player Recurring Investment (PRI), or the sale of in-game items, DLC, season passes, and subscriptions, increased by a staggering 83% year-over-year, being responsible for €175 million (~$202.6 million) earned during the first two quarters of the year. This amounts to a cool 51% of total digital income, which means that actual digital games sales earned less than DLCs and microtransactions.

Total sales across both Q1 and Q2 came in at €466.2 million (~$539.9 million), up 60% year-over-year, but that's hardly the key point to this story. The key point here is that while a company that heavily focuses on linear, story-driven, single player games has just announced a 25% reduction in its workforce, Ubisoft has just announced tremendous games seemingly on the back of microtransactions and DLC, or, as the company puts it, Player Recurring Investment. We can say what we will regarding the chronicle of an announced death for story-driven single player games, but one fact remains: players love microtransactions, even as there's a universal understanding of loathing towards them.

A report from monetization service company Digital River has found that the gaming industries' value has roughly tripled since the inception of the G"Games as a Service Model", which includes DLC (like Destiny and Destiny 2' content modules) and microtransactions (of which loot boxes are all the rage these days). The report, titled "Defend Your Kingdom: What Game Publishers Need to Know About Monetization & Fraud", noted that developers of all sizes are benefiting from the "steady stream of in-game content that both serves player expectations and increases their revenue per user." And this doesn't apply to free-to-play games: the report states that "In 2016, a quarter of all digital revenue from PC games with an upfront cost came from additional content."

According to the report, "Consumers are less willing to pay $60 for a boxed game and instead choose titles with a steady stream of new content. Publishers seek to meet these expectations and have adopted a 'games as a service' model, releasing fewer titles over time while keeping players engaged longer with regular updates and add-ons." The fact that PC users are less willing to pay the full upfront cost of games, usually waiting a few weeks before taking the plunge so as to take advantage of lowered pricing - which occurs much earlier compared to other platforms - leads the report to say that PC gamers are "gaming the games market".