Star Citizen players are upset with the new microtransaction mode introduced in this unfinished space simulation game.
Will this game be the most expensive game in history? Even if not, players alone contributed $800 million, a figure that is amazing enough.Similarly, the game's development cycle is also long - the early version of Star Citizen was released as early as 2012.Although the developer said earlier this year that the project is "nearly completed than ever before", the specific launch date has not been announced so far (its derivative work "42 Squadron" is expected to be released in 2026).
In Star Citizen’s history so far, two things have always been around: free weekends and huge spending from players.Players can try "Star Citizen" for free before May 27.As for player spending, the $800 million mentioned above is enough to illustrate the problem.
However, many players are angry at the new mechanics introduced by Cloud Imperium Games (CIG) - players need to purchase props through in-game stores (currently cannot be purchased in in-game currency) to upgrade the performance of the ship.
"Flight Blades" was announced yesterday, and the official said it can change the "behavior pattern" of vehicles in the player's hangar.There are currently two upgrade types (one to improve the maneuverability of the spacecraft and the other to increase the flight speed) suitable for 8 models of spacecraft. More upgrade types will be launched in the future and more vehicles will be adapted to.
The developer insists that the "Flying Blade" only provides "tuning flexibility, allowing players to control the spacecraft more accurately" and will not bring a "competitive advantage" to buyers.
But most players don't buy it.Just look at the comments under the official announcement or posts on social media to feel the pervasive negative emotions.Only a few players defend the developers, for example, some point out that "Flying Blade" may eventually join the in-game acquisition path ("within 6 weeks"), and that these upgrades are not truly "enhancement" because "improvement" comes at the expense of other attributes of the spacecraft.
Most players disagree with this statement.In their opinion, these microtransactions (to put it more tactfully) are extremely bad and expensive—each "flying blade" needs to be purchased separately for a single ship, and the most expensive one costs about $30 to $43.This is by no means the only thing blocked by a paywall: weapon kits, including bomb hangers, also cost money to buy.The official explanation that "these items are for store purchases for the time being" did not convince most people.
Even if the impact of the "Flying Blade" itself is minimal, players still regard its presence in the store as a dangerous precedent.Previously, only spacecraft needed to be purchased, which has made some players dissatisfied; now CIG has begun selling spacecraft components, which is obviously not a whim.Someone asked sarcastically: "What will be the next charge?"
A popular spoof picture on Reddit clearly reflects the player's emotions: the picture shows a fictional game store, and even the "Login Token" and "Add Friend Token" clearly mark the price.Similar "sarcastic suggestions" are more than that.
What makes players even more dissatisfied is that this controversy occurred during the game promotion event - the event not only includes free week of Star Citizens and 48-hour full vehicle trial, but also launched a new vehicle "Aegis Idris Peace Guardian".As the player said, CIG seemed to annoy them again after just gaining (even if not enthusiastic, at least a little recognition).
Players expressed their dissatisfaction eagerly and expressed their desire to "vote with their wallet" as usual.The real question is whether this resistance can really have an impact - after all, players' fierce statements often may not shake the benefits of developers and publishers.
