Top 20 FULL PRICED Games with RIDICULOUS Microtransactions

In 2022, it came out that EA wasn’t going to be making FIFA games anymore over a failed licensing agreement. This put an end to a relationship going back to 1993 that had amassed over 20 billion in revenue from the franchise. EA didn’t stop making soccer games, though; 2023 saw the release of this non-FIFA football title. But would ditching FIFA mean that “Sports FC” wouldn’t be so relentlessly monetized? No, of course not. FIFA Points are now “FC Points”, and they’re just as expensive as they were before. It’s still arguably pay-to-win, too, with the best players included in packs that take a long time to earn in-game. Though, many fans say that no matter how much money you spend, if you’re bad at the game, you’ll still lose.

We’re not just counting outrageously EXPENSIVE microtransactions as “ridiculous”. “Oblivion” really didn’t have many, though it did have two popular expansions, “Knights of the Nine” and “Shivering Isles”. But, you know what we’re here to talk about: the horse armor. This was one of the earliest, cosmetic microtransactions in gaming – particularly in a single-player game – and people were as confused as they were angry. For the low price of $2.50, you could acquire some golden armor for your horse. According to Todd Howard, charging for the horse armor was Microsoft’s decision, not Bethesda’s, but the ramifications of including that horse armor in a single-player game are still being felt today – even if hardly anybody bought it.

Paying for additional characters in a fighting game is nothing new. Usually, we expect that following a game’s release, the developers are hard at work building the new characters that fans want so that there’s real value for money where DLC is concerned. But that wasn’t the case with “Street Fighter X Tekken”. The game was a lot of fun – unless you were playing it on PC – but it eventually came out that twelve of the characters Capcom decided to release as DLC were already on the game disc at launch. They were blocking off existing content on purpose so that they could charge us an extra $20 for it.

Luckily, “Arkham Knight’s” microtransactions were never very intrusive. It’s pretty easy to completely ignore them and have a good time. But, just because you can ignore something, doesn’t mean it’s okay. The problem here is that there are a lot of premium Batmobile skins, but you can only equip and use those skins – which feature many iconic versions of the car - in the Riddler’s challenge races. You CAN use them in the open world AFTER you destroy every single tank drone, which is necessary from a gameplay perspective because the alternate skins have no tank mode functionality. But should we really be charged real money for something that isn’t usable 95% of the time, or should they have been in the base game?

Like “Arkham Knight”, it’s not too hard to ignore the microtransactions in “Assassin’s Creed” – but why does a series like “Assassin’s Creed” need microtransactions in the first place? Well, obviously, it’s so that Ubisoft can make even more money, by locking away some of the coolest weapons and armor sets behind a paywall. It’s true that these items offer minimal change to the gameplay, nor are they pay-to-win since “Valhalla” has no multiplayer. But we still don’t think they should be there; the game is expensive enough on its own, not to mention its equally costly, large expansions. THEY offer value for money, but the Helix store and the non-stop XP boosts definitely don’t.

There are many gamers who resent “GTA Online” for its success, and we don’t doubt that there are many die-hard fans of “GTA Online” who still don’t think the online mode’s success should come at the expense of the single-player. But try telling that to Rockstar and Take-Two. Though “GTA Online” offers plenty of new content in the form of its heists and unique vehicles, it’s definitely sketchy that you’re charged real money – sometimes, a LOT of real money – to buy in-game currency. You don’t actually NEED to do this, because you’ll earn enough through the game to buy everything, but for whatever reason, people are still tempted, and Rockstar won’t say no to that extra cash.

Crucially, “Overwatch” is now a free-to-play game – or, rather, “Overwatch 2” is. This change came after years of Blizzard being criticized for its lootbox model, something which has since been legislated against in many countries. You now unlock new characters and skins by either playing the game a ton or buying each season pass. But there’s something to be said for the way Blizzard updated the original game with its sequel, meaning that the original version is no longer playable anywhere. It might be free now, but if you bought it during the six years that it wasn’t, it’s not as if you got a refund. And it shouldn’t be overlooked how predatory those lootboxes were while they existed.

Thankfully, “Diablo III” isn’t like this anymore, and “Diablo IV” has been a huge success. But the game had many problems at the beginning, chief among them its Auction House feature. Essentially, players could sell and buy in-game items through one of its two auction houses for real money. You didn’t even need in-game currency as a go-between. Unsurprisingly, people were outraged, and this wasn’t even legal in some countries under gambling laws. Blizzard was also skimming off the top of these purchases and taking a 15% cut. To everyone’s relief, the entire system was axed in 2014, but it definitely wounded Blizzard’s reputation and hurt the game.

There are plenty of games that let you pay for new animations through the form of emotes, so to a layperson, NetherRealm adding paid-fatalities in “Mortal Kombat 1” may not look too damning. But fatalities are the bread and butter of the franchise, and having to pay extra to get new, seasonal fatalities was more than many gamers could stomach. And how much was this “Halloween Finisher”? About 1200 Dragon Krystals – that’s almost $10. Worse, later updates to the game locked other things behind paywalls, like various skins. It looks as if this was all Warner Bros’ decision, and they only SLIGHTLY rolled it back in the following months – by giving away some new seasonal fatalities for free.

There’s nothing slimier than releasing a well-made, hugely popular game, waiting a few weeks for all the positive reviews and praise to come in, and then shoving microtransactions in after the fact. But we’d expect nothing less from Activision. That’s exactly what the company did to “Crash Team Racing”, adding microtransactions a month later, after it had received glowing praise. As far as microtransactions go, they’re not that bad – but let’s not forget, this game is rated “E” for everyone. That means that, inevitably, very young players are going to be faced with microtransactions, which makes the decision look even worse.

When you pay top-dollar for a brand-new racing game on release, you expect that you’ll be able to earn every car yourself – even if it takes a lot of time and effort to do that. But that may not have been possible in “Gran Turismo 7”, which locked many of its cars behind paywalls – kind of. You definitely CAN buy the cars by earning in-game credits, but the prices are so steep that you’re all but forced to instead spend real money on virtual currency. If you did want to buy credits to then buy a virtual car, you might be spending hundreds of dollars. The microtransactions changed and players were compensated with $10 worth of credits, but people haven’t forgotten.

The “Call of Duty” franchise is a little complex where monetization is concerned; on the one hand, Activision is still putting out full-priced, annual releases, but it’s also got “Warzone”, which is free-to-play. But does the existence of “Warzone” mean that microtransactions in the main games should be scrapped? Or even that the annual release cycle should be stopped entirely, which they keep promising to do? Maybe, but that hasn’t happened yet. Like previous games, “Modern Warfare 3” has a battlepass system offering you COD points to buy expensive bundles full of cosmetics. The game has almost no new content, either; it’s just a way for Activision to get money for nothing.

This is another case of a game where you really don’t need to invest in microtransactions to do well or have fun. “Shadow of War” may not have reached the lofty heights of “Shadow of Mordor”, but it was a worthy successor nonetheless. It did, however, have microtransactions for a while, with numerous tiers of loot boxes – or “chests” – that offered everything from consumables to powerful orcs. This was missing the point of the game, since a lot of the fun comes from recruiting specific orcs and building out your following. Thankfully, by the following summer, all of this was gone; if you play “Shadow of War” today, there’s no trace of those pesky loot boxes.

The first two “Dead Space” games are masterpieces of the survival horror genre. Taut, dark, and scary, they were the epitome of survival horror. And then “Dead Space 3” all-but eliminated the survival aspect with the promises of God-like items if you just forked over a few extra bucks. Crafting weapons is a major aspect of the game, and the game allows you to bypass exploration in favor of simply purchasing the necessary components to craft better weapons. This completely negates the survival aspect of the game and eliminates any sort of tension, exploration, or fear. When you can simply purchase the best gun around, what could you possibly be scared of?

Microtransactions began to creep into this series back in 2015, with “Metal Gear Solid V”, where you could buy Mother Base Coins to upgrade your HQ. But after Konami acrimoniously cut ties with Hideo Kojima, there was no one to stop them from making “Metal Gear Survive”. What resulted was a critical and commercial bomb, where you mindlessly fought zombies and paid a premium for the privilege. But not only was the game plain bad, you could buy “boost passes” that increase how much Kuban Energy you get; essentially, you’re paying real money to level up and upgrade faster, as opposed to earning your way to the top. Yikes.

“Human Revolution” was a game that struggled to find its audience; it’s a top-tier experience, sure, but it was caught between trying to be a hardcore immersive sim and something more commercially friendly. Part of this conflict manifested in Square Enix seemingly insisting that Eidos add pre-order bonus weapon and mission packs to that first game. But the sequel, “Mankind Divided”, went even further, adding microtransaction packs which allowed you to purchase in-game credits, weapons, and even Praxis kits – essentially, buying experience. The only silver lining is that you don’t need any of this extra stuff, and can have even more fun without paying for it.

EA had a tough 2017 when it came to gamer goodwill due to their greedy microtransactions. “Need for Speed” was no exception, as players noticed that “Payback’s” progression system was far harsher and more restrictive than in games past. Suddenly, it took a curiously long time to unlock upgrades, and there was always the allure of microtransactions in the sidelines should you wish to accelerate the process. The response was so toxic that EA altered the progression system, increasing the amount of REP and Bank given to players and dishing out more frequent Air Suspension in Shipments. But by that point, the damage had already been done.

“Evolve” was meant to be the next big multiplayer experience, similar to “Left 4 Dead’s” surprisingly fun and expansive versus mode. What we got instead was the shell of a good game which required you to pay double to get the full experience. The DLC and microtransactions were enough to bring the entire experience crashing down. The Season Pass cost $25 and gave you access to four unique monsters (also sold separately for $7.50), and skins. The game also forced you to purchase skins for your monsters and weapons, something which could have EASILY been made available through a progression system, similar to “Call of Duty.”

If you thought soccer games were bad, wait until you get a load of “NBA”. Each year, 2K manages to defy expectations for how it’s going to continually monetize a game that remains a full-priced, retail release. “2K24” is the worst so far, adding even more options to pay outright to upgrade your character through its badges. You need in-game currency to do this, and you get very little from actually playing, meaning that you’re at a massive disadvantage if you’re not constantly paying to keep upgrading. And, again, people criticized how little the “NBA” games change each year, recharging you $70 every time you want to buy the newest one.

It still lives in infamy as one of the most egregious examples of microtransactions – one of the few games that had true, pay-to-win mechanics at launch. If you had the money, you could buy better, more powerful items, giving you a very clear advantage over everybody else. EA is unpopular at the best of times, but the backlash over “Battlefront II” was extraordinary. Microtransactions were pulled completely – but not for long. Six months on from the game’s release and EA put them back, though they’d been significantly overhauled to only apply to cosmetic items. If you waited until 2019, though, you could buy a version that had all the cosmetics in it as standard. If only EA had learned its lesson.

Let us know in the comments if you think microtransactions should be banned completely in paid games.