Quantcast

PUBG Dev Says They’ll Never Add Lootboxes or Microtransactions That Affect Gameplay

In the wake of a micro-transaction and lootbox debacle in the gaming industry that has actually caught attention of lawmakers and state officials, the developer behind the wildly popular PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds has sworn they’ll never add similar mechanics that affect gameplay.

The news comes via a developer Q&A at this year’s G-Star Exhibition in South Korea, where PUBG Corp. CEO and lead game designer Changhan Kim said “we will never add anything that affects the gameplay,” but noted they have an interest in adding purely cosmetic items into the game.

“However, there is a relatively strong demand for cosmetic items. Since the official launch is our top priority, we plan on adding new items after that,” says Kim. He also pointed to his team focusing on tackling the issue of in-game cheating, and offering a tutorial training mode.

“Frankly, I think there lies PUBG’s charm. Our thought was, ‘There is no practice in life! It should be tough!’ since delivering the reality was important. However, many players are requesting a tutorial mode or a shooting range, and we believe this could be helpful for some players. So, we will start devising a plan to develop such a feature after the official release.”

PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds is currently still in development, however it’s available via Steam Early Access and the Xbox Game Preview program on Xbox One. The PlayStation 4 version is still up in the air as developer Bluehole is reportedly in talks of extending their console exclusivity with Microsoft.

,
Brandon Orselli

About

Owner and Publisher at Niche Gamer and Nicchiban. Outlaw fighting for a better game industry. Pronouns: Patriarch, Guido, Olive.




Comment Policy: Read our comment policy and guidelines before commenting.
49 comments
  1. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 5, 2017 at 3:45 pm

    Do they think we’re fucking retarded? In a Battle Royale game, cosmetics DO affect the game because it affects visibility on a large map like that

    Of course the average shitter will scream MUH BASED BLUEHOLE, and even if the users revolted it’s being propped up by those retarded chinese shitters who are always desperate for their next fix of lootbox gambling shittiness accompanied by screeching chair throwing when they dump 10k in le epic gear and lose matches during their 480p stream sessions.

  2. Nue
    Nue
    December 5, 2017 at 3:49 pm

    Well… if you’re wearing a yellow jumpsuit from a gacha in the middle of a forest next to some guy who found some cheap camo tee, everyone will see you instead of the other guy. And yes, cosmetics do affect the game somewhat, but if it becomes a problem, I’m sure there will be a fix for that in later patches.

  3. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 5, 2017 at 3:49 pm

    Not really. Models and textures are very hard to blend in with others unless you use the same palette. Considering PUBG’s arena this would be a ghillie suit and would be very unlikely to happen on accident.

  4. Jared Bellow
    Jared Bellow
    December 5, 2017 at 3:51 pm

    Timed exclusivity, lootboxes, poor optimization, ties to Tencent. Is there anything about this game that isn’t a shit?

  5. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 5, 2017 at 3:53 pm

    Yeah like how they fix the performance problems in the game before doing this gacha loot crate shit, amirite fellas?

  6. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 5, 2017 at 3:55 pm

    Not true, in Halo 1 multiplayer on PC, a lot of people used the snow skin color for spartans to blend into sidewinder since they were harder to pick out even in that open expanse.
    And since PUBG has more details and more complicated models to muddle visibility, all it really does take is the right outfit in the right spot. And they fucking know this, I can guarantee you that certain outfits from the gacha lotto will be part of some demeneted money grabbing metagame.

  7. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 5, 2017 at 3:57 pm

    It’s just cosmetics. What’s the harm? If idiots want to buy digital hats and fund free DLC that can improve the game I don’t see the issue. I can agree with the poor optimization though. PUBG did not know how popular the game would get and did not attempt to build a complete game for the mass market.

  8. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 5, 2017 at 4:01 pm

    Because again palettes and textures. Halo 1 was an extremely simple game graphically and that kind of stuff could happen. In a modern game you have to really actively try to make a piece of whatever blend in with something else. That usually requires lighting, textures, frame of reference, and the player’s focus to all be in a semi-controlled enviroment. Yeah, it could fuck up some guy who is playing on ultra low settings, but for the majority of us who don’t use kitched appliances this is not going to be an issue.

  9. Squirrel on crack cocaine.
    Squirrel on crack cocaine.
    December 5, 2017 at 4:14 pm

    I hate gaming today.

  10. DrearierSpider
    DrearierSpider
    December 5, 2017 at 4:14 pm

    Why do I feel like I’ve heard this before?

  11. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 5, 2017 at 4:19 pm

    You really demonstrated that you don’t know what you’re talking about. There are already parts of PUBG that was designed to be visually muddled as to allow players to be sneaky when not in the open field.
    Adding paid for cosmetics that for example, gives players a green suit, whats to stop them from hunkering down in the grassy knolls, because not only do you have to look up, now you have to actively think there could be some lotto playing gacha shit with a piece of shit green suit on blending in.

    I’m sorry that the idea of people blending in the environment using color manipulation is such a mind blowing topic for you to be talking about, but please understanduru that when two objects of the same color are together, they get harder to distinguish the further you move away from them. Fucking nuts I know.

  12. Jared Bellow
    Jared Bellow
    December 5, 2017 at 4:20 pm

    It just feels too close to “Games as a service” for me and timed exclusives on the failed X Box One don’t endear them to me either. Then again I seldom play online multiplayer games, so it’s not really for me anyway.

  13. Amethyst Eclipse
    Amethyst Eclipse
    December 5, 2017 at 4:44 pm

    Until EA buys them out.

  14. Feniks
    Feniks
    December 5, 2017 at 4:59 pm

    Is it even up to the developers? Who owns their studio? Funny chucklefucks. MS, EA or Ziondyne Industries will buy them up.

  15. Feniks
    Feniks
    December 5, 2017 at 5:01 pm

    CS Go. Never forget.

  16. Arenegeth
    Arenegeth
    December 5, 2017 at 5:23 pm

    “Man says he will not murder or rape anyone, he is also against genocide and torture”

    More news at 11.

    Wow, we should give these guys a prize, for you know, not actively wanting to FUCK US UP THE ARSE!

    Jesus Xmas fucking Christ, with gaming these days, you have to ask developers whether they want to treat you like a walking bleeding cunt of a wallet or not, and they tell you they’ll sell your dumb ass some useless cosmetics instead. How about you get your Microtransactions, shove them up your rectum, and puke them out the other end!

    Fuck I’m in a bad mood today…

  17. Madbrainbox
    Madbrainbox
    December 5, 2017 at 5:24 pm

    I believe they said they won’t have an in game store as long the game was in early access.

  18. Madbrainbox
    Madbrainbox
    December 5, 2017 at 5:24 pm

    Payday 2.

  19. Mr0303
    Mr0303
    December 5, 2017 at 5:35 pm

    Micro transactions and loot boxes are shit regardless of the content. It’s a cancerous practice that should be boycotted, but given how successful Overwatch is I doubt this will happen.

  20. DizzyGear
    DizzyGear
    December 5, 2017 at 5:37 pm

    The same BHS who stuff’s every worthwhile costume in Tera inside a lootbox with a 00000.1% chance of getting the costume.

    Also they ran that game into the ground. Dont trust these assholes.

  21. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 5, 2017 at 8:27 pm

    Fucking nuts to assume that the devs did that intentionally as some sort of pay to win mechanic. You assume 1) That they made clothing with an inherent advantage offering no proof 2) That environment is static enough in PUBG to allow this to be an issue 3) That the human eye is a piece of garbage. Did you know there is already a ghillie suit in the game? Or do you just complain without any authority? So far all cosmetics in game have offered no inherent advantage such as the one you described. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/07948b59285bbe86fdde92faac49ea2c500153473917a33c30284b1cc05a31e3.jpg
    Call me when they charge money for this. For now can the false outrage.

  22. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 5, 2017 at 8:35 pm

    >Fucking nuts to assume that the devs did that intentionally as some sort of pay to win mechanic.

    And this right here is very indicative of your attitude.

    BLUEHOLE DID LITERALLY NOTHING, DEY DINDU NUFFIN WRONG THE GAME IS FUCKING PERFECT AND THE COSMETICS OFFER NO ADVANTAGES. LITERALLY NONE REEEEE

    And yes, before you sperg out, companies do like to screw their customers over. Did you really think that Player Unknown guy would be your friend?

  23. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 5, 2017 at 8:40 pm

    I have no vested interest in this game. In fact I don’t own it. I just don’t support or accept your attitude. You can rage against companies all you want, but expect me to defend them if you can’t offer a solid argument. As for why I do this, so you don’t make this site look like a bunch of monkeys.

  24. kunuri
    kunuri
    December 5, 2017 at 8:46 pm

    “IT’S ONLY COSMETIC!!” BAHAHAHAHA!!
    Nice fucking joke PUBJew, no one is ever going to play your shit again.

  25. kunuri
    kunuri
    December 5, 2017 at 8:47 pm

    They’re not even against lootboxes and microtransactions, their game literally already has those, it’s for cosmetic items, so they can pretend they’re being reasonable with their bullshit. Jewhole can go to hell.

  26. kunuri
    kunuri
    December 5, 2017 at 8:48 pm

    >Just cosmetics.
    Lurk for 20 years, at least, Kike.

  27. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 5, 2017 at 8:49 pm

    Why? What do you find wrong with cosmetic content produced for profit?

  28. Mr0303
    Mr0303
    December 5, 2017 at 8:55 pm

    Nothing. I have a problem with microtransactions and loot boxes.

  29. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 5, 2017 at 8:58 pm

    Fair enough. Although considering those models have allowed for the advent of free DLC I can’t agree.

  30. Mr0303
    Mr0303
    December 5, 2017 at 9:02 pm

    I’d rather have paid DLC than MTs and loot boxes.

  31. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 5, 2017 at 9:24 pm

    How do you defend microtransactions?

  32. Ron Burgandy
    Ron Burgandy
    December 5, 2017 at 9:36 pm

    Yo Shiggy, you got a steam where I can add you? You always say shit I agree with whenever I scroll down haha. Probably get along pretty well

  33. iswear12
    iswear12
    December 5, 2017 at 10:20 pm

    REMINDER THAT TENCENT IS ACQUIRING SHARES OF PUBG AND PLANNING ON BRINGING IT TO CHINA AS WE SPEAK AND NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT IT
    http://archive.is/jkAzv
    http://archive.is/RUFc7
    THIS IS A LOAD OF SHIT

  34. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 5, 2017 at 11:33 pm

    As in microtransactions that block content? I don’t. As in cosmetic stuff that ends at that? Well usually on release stuff like that isn’t actually made in conjunction with the game. It’s upper management that gives the art team that job because they finish their work earlier than the rest of the team. Should it be free if it’s completed before the game drops? Probably, but I don’t crave cosmetic virtual items. In fact I see them as a benefit when done right, for they give me free DLC thanks to the generous waste of money others users provide. In summary, if it doesn’t block or add an advantage to gameplay content I have no issue with it.

  35. SLoWMoTIoN
    SLoWMoTIoN
    December 6, 2017 at 1:11 am

    If I could get “gold” everytime I won on overwatch and just buy what I want I’d prob give it another try. Problem here is the random shit.

  36. SLoWMoTIoN
    SLoWMoTIoN
    December 6, 2017 at 1:15 am

    Nigga you gay

  37. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 6, 2017 at 3:11 am

    Why are you using quotation arrows out of an image board or e-mail?

  38. JohnnyCageFan2
    JohnnyCageFan2
    December 6, 2017 at 3:16 am

    Your post was probably one capitalized word away from being marked as spam. Now interested in seeing how to invest in Chinese companies, thank you.

  39. JohnnyCageFan2
    JohnnyCageFan2
    December 6, 2017 at 3:39 am

    If you’re not playing with ultra-low settings you’re not playing to win. I don’t know about you, I play to win not look at the environment.

  40. Mr0303
    Mr0303
    December 6, 2017 at 3:55 am

    Agreed. The problem is not cosmetic unlocks in games, but rather the randomness that’s there only for profit, by exploiting gambling impulses.

  41. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 6, 2017 at 7:30 am

    That’s a longm long answer to say that you were cool and supported the horse armor back in the day.
    So with that knowledge in mind I already know what I’m dealing with in you, so I’m out. Have fun getting reamed, brudda.

  42. Tubsiwub
    Tubsiwub
    December 6, 2017 at 11:09 am

    “…that affect gameplay” So they still are behind this concept fully then?

  43. Johnny “Beat” Medina
    Johnny “Beat” Medina
    December 6, 2017 at 11:12 am

    Yeah I did. Because I’m not an idiot who would spend a dime on that. Let idiots enjoy what they want to enjoy. No skin off my back if somebody pays for overpriced garbage.

  44. Nue
    Nue
    December 6, 2017 at 4:44 pm

    You do know they have separate teams for that right?

  45. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 6, 2017 at 4:44 pm

    >COMPANIES ARE LITERALLY ALLOWED TO REMOVE CONTENT FROM THE GAME TO SELL FOR A PREMIUM HBECAUSE LOL I’M SO EDGY xxDD
    -Johnny “Beat” Meatdina

  46. Nue
    Nue
    December 6, 2017 at 4:45 pm

    If it means getting the Chinese off our servers, then I’m all for it

  47. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 6, 2017 at 4:45 pm

    Doesn’t matter. Fix your game before selling DLC, fullstop. The fact that you’re okay with a broken game getting DLC while in early access says enough anyway

  48. Nue
    Nue
    December 6, 2017 at 4:48 pm

    Not sure if you read my comment but like I said, there are separate teams for these things, I’m sure fixing their game is a priority, but they also need to focus on other things as well. Hence, separate teams.

  49. Shiggy Diggy Doo
    Shiggy Diggy Doo
    December 6, 2017 at 5:35 pm

    Yeah and I bet thats the same team that ported it to the Xbone before fixing it as well so they essentially doubled their “WE’RE GUN FIX IT” workload.
    That excuse doesn’t fly.