Home / Software & Gaming / PlayerUnknown addresses concerns around Battlegrounds’ new CS:GO style crate system

PlayerUnknown addresses concerns around Battlegrounds’ new CS:GO style crate system

Last month, it was revealed that PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds would be receiving a CS:GO style crate system for cosmetic items. This caused quite a stir as previously the PUBG FAQ had stated that cosmetic microtransactions would only appear after the game leaves Early Access. Now, Brendan Greene, the lead on the project, has spoken out in defence of the studio’s change in plan.

Writing over on a Steam Community post, PlayerUnknown/Brendan Greene explained that while the crate system is in the game earlier than expected, this is down to the fact that it needs testing before being fully implemented in the final build:

“While our intention was and still is to add the full feature to the game when we move into actual release, we do need to test it prior to launch and at Early Access so that it is stable and ready to be fully introduced to our community. The idea of testing, prior to full implementation, is at the heart of adding every new game feature in our game, and this includes the crate and key system which we believe will serve as the foundation of a healthy economy after launch.”

While Greene does think that testing the in-game economy is now necessary in Early Access rather than after it, he does agree that the studio’s messaging “wasn’t very clear”.

“I must admit that our messaging wasn’t very clear, so I extend my sincere apologies for the confusion caused. The process of communicating our intentions precisely to our fans and communities should have been done in a more careful and prudent manner. I’ve learned a lot, and we’ll try to communicate better moving forward. “

KitGuru Says: There are plenty of good reasons to disagree with microtransactions in an early access game. However, as long as this doesn’t have a negative impact on the development of the rest of the game, I can’t see it putting off too many players.

Check Also

UK Gambling Commission shifts away from defining loot boxes, explains how to help the situation

Loot boxes and their relation to gambling has been a hot topic of 2017, showing …

  • Patryk Zmyslony

    i think crate and key system is bullshit if you can get the same item twice. (basically gambling style robbery(aka bank always wins and player gets worthless piece of shit.))

  • fatikis

    Crate system is a great way to generate money to keep the game being worked on long term. It is also completely optional. As long as they don’t start releasing super camo gear in these I am all for it.

  • Mace ya face

    Microtransactions are just flat unjustifiable in paid for games. especially one that’s made umpteen millions of dollars more than they ever planned before release.

  • Daniel Anderson

    Which folks like us won’t need to partake in. However for those that like such things its a good option for them and the company to make money. I much prefer it for cosmetic items than for all items under the sun. Although I’m like you, never understood why people would drop money into LoL or Smite, etc for cosmetic items, just factored it under they could do with their money what they wish.

    Won’t lie, I made $7.50 in CSGO as I got in early with one of the crate drops. Was pretty stoked about it as I never opened a case before but I finally made something money from selling one.

  • Or you can test it live by using meaningless items on the market and sending a few thousand players a placement currency or a code to buy/test. This is just them getting into the money train early.

  • Bombshelboy

    I highly disagree. Dude has sold over 6 million copies. That means $180,000,000 has already been spent towards this game. If he needs to pad his wallet more with those figures, maybe he should try a criminal organization?

  • fatikis

    “flat out unjustifiable” what you actually mean is that you don’t like it. Microtransactions have kept games like TF2 and now Dota2 around far longer that would have been possible without these. Well implemented microtransactions systems with little to no affect on gameplay are the greatest possible thing for those that want longevity.

    The implemented system does not in any way damage the gameplay or cost players anything.

    In short if you are crying about this you are a baby. “It is not fair Mommy I want accessorize my avatar too!”

  • fatikis

    They are funding and building a company around this game. I will not deny that it is a fuckload of money. The implementation of a microtransaction system that has very little affect on the game will justify the company to continue working on the game long term instead of abandoning the “finished” product to create a new game in which to sell.

    As long as these transactions remain cosmetic only this is the best possible thing that could happen for PUBG.

  • Mace ya face

    Note ladies and gentlemen that he listed two FREE games. And the fact that, if he had read my comment properly, he wouldn’t have put this.

  • fatikis

    You stupid son? TF2 was a purchased game for years. Not that it really matters. It changes nothing. The fact is this does not in any way negatively effect gameplay. It only gives the company incentive to continue long term support of the game.

    In short you are a baby. It is that simple. You are literally throwing a temper tantrum over wanting in game clothes for free. How fucking pathetic is that?

  • Mace ya face

    There is absolutely no need to personally insult me. Not only is it deplorable behaviour, but weakens your point.

    You said yourself that TF2’s paid past has no real merit in discussion, so why you’re using that as evidence of me being, “stupid”, and “a baby”, is laughably ignorant.

    The issue isn’t that I want free pretty clothes. I don’t. Is wouldn’t use them if they were free. The standard clothing given to the player from the start is arguably the best as it’s brown and grey, so you stand out less. The issue, is making a paid for, Early Access game at a cost of £27 to the user, and then implementing a system of gambling. That’s what it is. You spend money hoping you get a desired return out of it, or hope you get an item of high enough value to sell it and profit from it. Even the EU is looking into classifying these systems as gambling. This is all without mentioning the fact that, even though it’s just cosmetics, it’s presence and psychological effects are there. It’s a system of haves, and have-nots. The game even rates your performance in more ‘BP’ currency.

    So in short, you’re an ignorant apathist who can’t see more than skin deep into any issue, for fear of either being wrong or feeling that your opinion is unstable.