RaevenlordEA has reported its FY 2017 results (from April 1st 2016 through March 31st 2017), and the results are astonishing: for all the outcry from the gaming community, it would seem that users really like microtransactions, season passes, and the "games as a service" conundrum. Some might be amazed at how a company makes more money from services, DLC and microtransactions associated with their games than through the sale of games themselves, but alas, that is the world we live in. This year alone the company pulled in $1.297 billion solely via digital content (excluding full game downloads) for their PC and console platforms.

EA has been known for their studios' season passes and DLCs - one of the biggest offenders when it comes to DLC was Dragon Age: Inquisition, as well as most recent Bioware games, while the verdict is still on the table regarding Mass Effect: Andromeda's DLC efforts. These and other microtransactions, such as "packs" and other shenanigans in FIFA and other IPs, have helped bring in the bulk of the money. Truth be told, EA isn't the only publisher that's aggressively pushing for micro-transactions in its games (Microsoft and Ubisoft come to mind), though an argument can be made in how these microtransactions based on packs and other cosmetic elements can be an attractive prospect when coupled with free game updates and additional, free content. Some users will rush in and acquire these, in turn putting the proverbial coal on developer's coffers to pump out additional content which everyone can enjoy. But for all the people saying "No" to DLC and microtransactions, I'd say wallets speak louder than words.



Source: EA

RejZoREveryone making games for consoles and using PC as a milking cow. What really surprises me is how can people be so monumentally dumb to spend hundreds of dollars on pointless, useless hats and really butt ugly weapon skins (just ugly ass texture, not even a full model which you can get for free from PS Banana and they look trillion times better). It's just crazy.

So far I've only bought base games from EA, because the "Premium" ones were like 15€ more and all you got was some stupid badge, an extra nothing special skin and/or some extra in-game credits. And people just gobble it up like there is no tomorrow. It's just mind blowing how dumb people are.

64KGamers shed tears on forums about DLC and microtransactions but in reality the majority seem to be gobbling up the DLC and microtransactions or there wouldn't be so much of it.

Different Publisher, 2K Games, had Gearbox churn out 47 DLCs for Borderlands 2.

Riot Games reported 1.4 billion dollars in microtransactions for League of Legends in 2016 and 1.6 billion dollars in microtransactions in 2015. One game is generating billions of dollars of revenue in microtransactions for them.

SteevoNot a dollar or dime of mine.

TheMailMan78There are a few things missing from this statement from EA. 1. What do they define as "micro-transaction"? 2. When you by a "premium" game does this account as a micro-transaction as its DLC over a period of months? 3. I would like to see this broken down into region. South east Asia loves micro-transaction games. Lets see these numbers where and how they are broke down before we go out and say "You love micro-transaction". To me EAs statement sounds like a positioning for shareholders.


None of the guys I play with do this on TPU. I really wonder how much of this statement is legit from EA.

RaevenlordThere's certainly much posturing, as there always is in these reports. However, with the recent increase in news regarding microtransaction values and the amount of money they bring in - and considering the amount of games that are including them in some form or another - these clearly pay off.

Updated the image, had inadvertently cut the legend for the image. That should shed some more light on this. For what it's worth, I'd count premium or deluxe versions in the "Extra content" category, but only by their premium over standard editions. EA knows fully well the difference.

CAPSLOCKSTUCKRockstar arent far behind with Shark cards in GTAV

HopelesslyFaithfulThis is why i own basically no EA/Ubisoft/MS games. DRM, DLC, micro transaction bs.

Also not owning a game but only have a license with strings attached is another reason why i will not pay more than 5 dollars for any game let alone add ons....unless it is GOG of course. I have no problem paying a fair price for a game i want there since i basically own the game. 0 DRM involved.

Only time i have bought DLC as far as i recall is in the Game of the Year editions where i get the 40 DLC for 5 bucks like Tropico or Saints Row and the like.

I rarely buy new news and if i do it is on GOG vs steam for obvious reasons. I dont mind waiting 6 years and getting it on a 90% sale lol.

64KGamers shed tears on forums about DLC and microtransactions but in reality the majority seem to be gobbling up the DLC and microtransactions or there wouldn't be so much of it.

Different Publisher, 2K Games, had Gearbox churn out 47 DLCs for Borderlands 2.

Riot Games reported 1.4 billion dollars in microtransactions for League of Legends in 2016 and 1.6 billion dollars in microtransactions in 2015. One game is generating billions of dollars of revenue in microtransactions for them.

TheGuruStudKids are dumb (especially nowadays) and have easy access to mommy's CC. How else are so many squeakers on every online game?

RockarolaI'm pushing 44 and I'm somewhat puzzled about all this "gaming was better before"
I've run (more or less) every major CPU/OS, including Spectrum 86 and OS/2, and I'll claim that gamers are more spoiled for choices, more pampered...and more demanding than ever.
I could go in to a full "gaming on the C64 meant you had to work for it... in the snow" rant, but I'm raiding with people from 3 continents in five minutes.