9 ms·

Key takeaways here for me: "The $43.4 billion spent in 2018 was mostly on content, as opposed to hardware and accessories." "Nearly 65 percent of U.S. adults,

Key takeaways here for me: "The $43.4 billion spent in 2018 was mostly on content, as opposed to hardware and accessories." "Nearly 65 percent of U.S. adults, or more than 164 million people, play games. The most popular genre is casual games, with 60 percent of players gaming on their smartphones" The combination of these two items leads me to conclude that microtransactions in casual games are winning in the financial sense, despite the complaints of "hardcore" gamers.

0_gravitas 8y ago
And that's the unfortunate truth of why they arent going away anytime soon. Personally I believe that microtransactions should be considered a Dark Pattern, and I might consider supporting legislation that targets them, if it's ever brought up.
- i_call_solo 8y ago
  Or people could not buy microtransactions or support games and studios that use them. Seems like something the free market could regulate without legislation.
  - bitwize 8y ago
    They could but they won't. The fact that the market rewards behavior from consumers and vendors that's counter to the consumers' best interest is why legislation is needed.
  - jniedrauer 8y ago
    > Seems like something the free market could regulate without legislation. Given that this is not occurring, it does not "seem like" this.
    - ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
      People want to play the game, why is it you (or the government's) job to tell them not to? It's their money, if playing a gacha game is fun for them, I really don't see the problem. With gambling people may be driven to gamble to get out of debt. With gacha games, you can't.
      - jniedrauer 8y ago
        The line between gambling and microtransactions is often very hazy. They tend to exploit the same vulnerability in our brains that leads to gambling addiction. And the target is often children. > With gambling people may be driven to gamble to get out of debt. This is not really the problem with gambling.
        ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
        Is there any proof children are the ones being affected? The biggest source of money in these games has always been whales. And honestly if a kid used there parents credit card to hit $500+, that sounds like a parenting problem (you probably should have put a stop to it earlier). I don't see a problem with a parent giving there kid $60 to spend on Fortnite skins. >This is not really the problem with gambling. Yea it is? People lose money gambling, people bet more money to try and make back what they lost. But you'll always eventually lose money gambling in the long run. It's the most common fallacy that gets brought up in gambling.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - HammerJack 8y ago
        People want to do heroin, why is it you (or the government's) job to tell them not to? ... Microtransaction games are based around exploiting an inherent flaw in human reasoning; predatory behaviors that exploit our weaknesses as humans should be regulated against. edit: to back this up: The wordpress blog linked below references 19 clinical studies and explains in detail much better than I care to write up. https://platinumparagon.wordpress.com/2017/11/16/the-psychology-of-loot-boxes-and-microtransactions/ https://platinumparagon.wordpress.com/2017/11/16/the-psychol...
  - ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
    A lot of times microtransactions simply are time saving. Even in every Gacha game I know of you can technically pay for free, if you're willing to dedicate the time. But in Clash of Clans, for example, you can be very 'good' (idk what word to use with these kinds of games) without having spent money. You will of course, have spent your time instead.
    - grawprog 8y ago
      >A lot of times microtransactions simply are time saving. Even in every Gacha game I know of you can technically pay for free, if you're willing to dedicate the time. Theoretically maybe, realistically many of those types of games would require about as much time devoted as a full time job to be winnable, if not playable, without microtransactions.
    - DanielleMolloy 8y ago
      That's just naive. The slot machine devs deliberately make the game annoying by letting you wait unnecessarily if you don't pay all the time.
      - ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
        How on Earth is it naive to point out these games can be played for free? Countless people do it for Puzzle and Dragons and Fate GO, and these two games are some of the highest grossing mobile games of all times. Just go into their respective subreddits and search F2P. You can play F2P. If you want to save 3 hours of grinding buy spending $5, why do you want to stop them? It's their money, if people enjoy these games, why stop them? You don't need to control every aspect of peoples lives.
        DanielleMolloy 8y ago
        These games are engineered to override your ability to make rational decisions. If you are unwilling to see that and are unaware of why they are called "skinner boxes" or skinnerware, and don't see a problem with games that make you suffer (wait) unless you pay repeatedly, and even excuse the developers for exploiting children's and whale's psychologicall unpatchable vuls then these schemes have already won over you. Just check how the cigarette industry moved public attention from addictive substances they deliberately put into cigarettes to "personal responsibility of smokers".
  - majos 8y ago
    Legislation already exists either restricting gambling or ensuring that it works in specific, semi-transparent ways. I'm not aware of similar restrictions on microtransactions (though I'm unfamiliar with microtransactions in general).
    - ryandrake 8y ago
      I’m not a lawyer but I don’t think it would be too much of a stretch to apply US gambling laws to pay-to-win games and loot boxes. It wouldn’t surprise me if these games have their own Black Friday [1] soon. Disclaimer: I’m not advocating for this and actually would like to see more relaxed online gaming regulations! 1: https://www.pokernews.com/news/2016/04/black-friday-five-years-later-24506.htm https://www.pokernews.com/news/2016/04/black-friday-five-yea...
  - moorhosj 8y ago
    How's that "free market regulation" working out right now?
  - llamataboot 8y ago
    But isn't the whole point is that companies are exploiting a bug in our biology to profit? In that case, the fix has to happen more upstream... If you want to argue that this could be fixed in libertarian-topia without government intervention, you might argue that I dunno, there could be a class action suit showing that the gaming companies knew that such and such mechanics were resulting in many people becoming addicted/going bankrupt and did it anyway, and maybe that's right. And if you wanna argue that who is so-and-so to argue that X really didn't want to spend all her money on virtual farm upgrades then that's an argument too I suppose. But if the problem is people are buying something they don't want to because of a dopamine hook, then arguing that the solution is to stop buying it isn't satisfactory.
  - ThrowawayR2 8y ago
    > Or people could not buy microtransactions or support games and studios that use them. That's about as helpful as telling people to solve their gambling issue by not gambling. The problem is that many of these microtransaction-based games use the same mechanics as gambling to make them addictive _and_ they're targeting minors with it.
    - jtms 8y ago
      If you are talking about real money loot crates/boxes/packages (as opposed to in game earned virtual currency) you are quite literally talking about gambling. In the case of some games, marketed directly to minors. I am about as free market solution as it gets, but I definitely draw the line at exploiting children (and defrauding their parents simultaneously)
    - watwut 8y ago
      The people who have most issues with gambling addiction play competitive online games. Microtransactions or not, it is competitive online that has people spend all time in game world and their partners wish a new partner.
- mruts 8y ago
  If I want to buy a fortnite skin, who are you or the government to tell me I can’t?
  - jniedrauer 8y ago
    If I want to buy radium water, who are you or the government to tell me I can't?
    - mises 8y ago
      Good question. If I harm no other, and if I am not deceived as to known side effects, why ought I not to be able to do so?
      - jniedrauer 8y ago
        The point of regulation is not to prevent you, the consumer, from making an informed decision to damage yourself. The point is to prevent the producer from exploiting uninformed human vulnerabilities. In the case of quack medicine, we have an easily exploited glitch in our brains that makes us associate exotic substances with medicine. In the case of gambling and microtransactions, we are easily exploited by the "gambler's fallacy." Just one more roll...
        magduf 8y ago
        >The point of regulation is not to prevent you, the consumer, from making an informed decision to damage yourself. The point is to prevent the producer from exploiting uninformed human vulnerabilities. In the case of quack medicine, we have an easily exploited glitch in our brains that makes us associate exotic substances with medicine. So why don't we regulate/ban quack medicine then?
        dTal 8y ago
        We do. Dunno what country you're from, but in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Food_and_Drug_Administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Food_and_Drug_A...
- ThrowawayR2 8y ago
  > I might consider supporting legislation that targets them, if it's ever brought up. Well then, it's your lucky day: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/05/senator-hawley-announces-bill-banning-loot-boxes-pay-to-win-mechanics/ https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/05/senator-hawley-announ... Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) today announced plans to introduce "The Protecting Children from Abusive Games Act," which would target "the exploitation of children through 'pay-to-win' and 'loot box' monetization practices by the video game industry," according to a summary released by Hawley's office.
  - 0_gravitas 8y ago
    Oh yea I saw this, the loot boxes arent even an argument to me, they should have been glassed years ago
  - baybal2 8y ago
    That Hawley, quite a record he got for a novice politician. He is quite zealous, while not seemingly doing that solely for promoting his image. I will watch his progression with a lot of interest
  - dmurray 8y ago
    If you want your bill passed, aren't you meant to make the acronym spell something snappy, and include something no one could be seen to vote against? I'd call it the Protecting American Children from Monetization, Abuse and Narcotics act.
- Domenic_S 8y ago
  It's been brought up! https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2019/05/08/new-microtransactionloot-box-bill-could-devastate-video-game-publishers-if-it-passes/#2e6829d3676f https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2019/05/08/new-micro...
- jayd16 8y ago
  It's a natural example of unbundled/a la carte content distribution. Gambling can be addictive and predatory but pay as you go content isn't bad in and if itself.
- SkyBelow 8y ago
  If you look at buying games, expansions, etc., there seems to be a trend. Ranking them in order of content/$, it goes as follows: Games > Expansions > DLC > MTX >> MTX that contain temporary boosts only >> Loot boxes. In my mind, banning MTX's seems to be on the same level as banning DLCs in general. They are a worse value, but they are the same kind of thing. Personally I wouldn't support banning MTX's. I would definitely support loot boxes being treated as gambling (ban for those under 18, regulation for adults). MTX's containing only temporary boosts is something I've yet to decide upon. Also, I think that tcg booster packs (like with Magic) should be classified as loot boxes/gambling and treated the same under any loot box law.
  - 0_gravitas 8y ago
    The reason why I mention mtx specifically vs things like normal DLCs is because I do feel that they are a dark pattern, one of the reasons they are so successful is because its intentionally easy to forget how much you are spending, and you often dont realize until it's far too late, if you realize at all. And I agree totally on the booster pack point, I've also always felt that way.
    - baud147258 8y ago
      > intentionally easy to forget how much you are spending Which is why a lot of mtx are using some kind of "prenium" currency that's bought with real money, usually in increments different from the prices in the item shop (so that you always have some left-over); then there's the limited revolving selection, to use FOMO (currently used by Fortnite, for example)
- Lambdanaut 8y ago
  Please don't support more government micro-management of our lives. I agree it's a dark pattern, but if we don't get hurt, we'll never learn.
  - Y_Y 8y ago
    Is this supposed to be a parody of hn libertarian thought? I can't imagine the lesson a child learns from maxing out the credit card of loot crates to be worth more than the money.
  - ergothus 8y ago
    The alternative is hoping enough people "learn" AND reduce their personal short-term convenience to make it financially rewarding for enough development companies to provide worthwhile alternatives AND for that to be obvious enough that enough companies try. That's a lot of footgunning spent hoping a lot of other people footgun. I've been there, and I was the only that suffered, not the companies doing wrong.
  - 0_gravitas 8y ago
    People have been getting hurt for years and they haven't learned yet. Trust me, I'd prefer the market to self regulate, but clearly it hasn't and won't in this regard, as evidenced by the article.
taurath 8y ago
That’s been true since the days of FarmVille, and one of the reasons Zynga was at a time worth more on the market than EA. Financially the gambling engines have eaten classic gamings lunch.
ergothus 8y ago
> microtransactions in casual games are winning in the financial sense, despite the complaints of "hardcore" gamers. I'm not a "hardcore" gamer - I'm incredibly casual. I hate microtransactions because the focus has switched to "addictive" play rather than "rewarding" play. Microtransactions are usually BAD for casuals - You might have 10 minutes to play but can only play for 5 mins without paying up. You might have one night a week to play, but it wants you to log in for a few minutes every couple of hours, etc. BUT the lack of alternatives means that there will be plenty of money spent on them. So I think this is a matter of "microtransactions out-earn flat cost games despite likely player preferences", not "hardcore vs casual".
- taurath 8y ago
  Rewarding play is addictive play - the rewards are why its addictive. There's people who've put 10,000 hours into Diablo 2, for example, a game that is incredibly repetitive at the highest level - they play for the chance of that one great random drop. Microtransaction games generally trade money or time, and then put barriers up on the time, or increase it vastly. The difference is when it feels like you're being asked for money it turns it exploitive, rather than being asked to spend 100 hours waiting for a yellow item to drop (that being more akin to "skill" and "investment"). Players want their reward fix. Microtransaction games are frequently like a watered-down drug. Just like social media, I don't think that just because people use them means they're a good thing - its junk food for the mind.
  - ahartmetz 8y ago
    Good observation about Diablo. Diablo 1 was the last Blizzard game whose art style I liked, but I stopped playing when I realized that I was clicking on enemies until they're dead. The actual core game mechanics are garbage.
    - wil421 8y ago
      I was old enough to play the Diablos, Starcraft and Warcraft when they came out. When I was kid playing Diablo it don’t bother me. When Diablo III came out I played it as an adult and realize it was just clicking. I hated the game. Starcraft is still nice but I don’t play it. Almost bought Diablo for my Switch this year and recalled how much of it is just clicking.

0_gravitas 8y ago

And that's the unfortunate truth of why they arent going away anytime soon. Personally I believe that microtransactions should be considered a Dark Pattern, and I might consider supporting legislation that targets them, if it's ever brought up.

i_call_solo 8y ago
Or people could not buy microtransactions or support games and studios that use them. Seems like something the free market could regulate without legislation.
- bitwize 8y ago
  They could but they won't. The fact that the market rewards behavior from consumers and vendors that's counter to the consumers' best interest is why legislation is needed.
- jniedrauer 8y ago
  > Seems like something the free market could regulate without legislation. Given that this is not occurring, it does not "seem like" this.
  - ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
    People want to play the game, why is it you (or the government's) job to tell them not to? It's their money, if playing a gacha game is fun for them, I really don't see the problem. With gambling people may be driven to gamble to get out of debt. With gacha games, you can't.
    - jniedrauer 8y ago
      The line between gambling and microtransactions is often very hazy. They tend to exploit the same vulnerability in our brains that leads to gambling addiction. And the target is often children. > With gambling people may be driven to gamble to get out of debt. This is not really the problem with gambling.
      - ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
        Is there any proof children are the ones being affected? The biggest source of money in these games has always been whales. And honestly if a kid used there parents credit card to hit $500+, that sounds like a parenting problem (you probably should have put a stop to it earlier). I don't see a problem with a parent giving there kid $60 to spend on Fortnite skins. >This is not really the problem with gambling. Yea it is? People lose money gambling, people bet more money to try and make back what they lost. But you'll always eventually lose money gambling in the long run. It's the most common fallacy that gets brought up in gambling.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - HammerJack 8y ago
      People want to do heroin, why is it you (or the government's) job to tell them not to? ... Microtransaction games are based around exploiting an inherent flaw in human reasoning; predatory behaviors that exploit our weaknesses as humans should be regulated against. edit: to back this up: The wordpress blog linked below references 19 clinical studies and explains in detail much better than I care to write up. https://platinumparagon.wordpress.com/2017/11/16/the-psychology-of-loot-boxes-and-microtransactions/ https://platinumparagon.wordpress.com/2017/11/16/the-psychol...
- ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
  A lot of times microtransactions simply are time saving. Even in every Gacha game I know of you can technically pay for free, if you're willing to dedicate the time. But in Clash of Clans, for example, you can be very 'good' (idk what word to use with these kinds of games) without having spent money. You will of course, have spent your time instead.
  - grawprog 8y ago
    >A lot of times microtransactions simply are time saving. Even in every Gacha game I know of you can technically pay for free, if you're willing to dedicate the time. Theoretically maybe, realistically many of those types of games would require about as much time devoted as a full time job to be winnable, if not playable, without microtransactions.
  - DanielleMolloy 8y ago
    That's just naive. The slot machine devs deliberately make the game annoying by letting you wait unnecessarily if you don't pay all the time.
    - ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
      How on Earth is it naive to point out these games can be played for free? Countless people do it for Puzzle and Dragons and Fate GO, and these two games are some of the highest grossing mobile games of all times. Just go into their respective subreddits and search F2P. You can play F2P. If you want to save 3 hours of grinding buy spending $5, why do you want to stop them? It's their money, if people enjoy these games, why stop them? You don't need to control every aspect of peoples lives.
      - DanielleMolloy 8y ago
        These games are engineered to override your ability to make rational decisions. If you are unwilling to see that and are unaware of why they are called "skinner boxes" or skinnerware, and don't see a problem with games that make you suffer (wait) unless you pay repeatedly, and even excuse the developers for exploiting children's and whale's psychologicall unpatchable vuls then these schemes have already won over you. Just check how the cigarette industry moved public attention from addictive substances they deliberately put into cigarettes to "personal responsibility of smokers".
- majos 8y ago
  Legislation already exists either restricting gambling or ensuring that it works in specific, semi-transparent ways. I'm not aware of similar restrictions on microtransactions (though I'm unfamiliar with microtransactions in general).
  - ryandrake 8y ago
    I’m not a lawyer but I don’t think it would be too much of a stretch to apply US gambling laws to pay-to-win games and loot boxes. It wouldn’t surprise me if these games have their own Black Friday [1] soon. Disclaimer: I’m not advocating for this and actually would like to see more relaxed online gaming regulations! 1: https://www.pokernews.com/news/2016/04/black-friday-five-years-later-24506.htm https://www.pokernews.com/news/2016/04/black-friday-five-yea...
- moorhosj 8y ago
  How's that "free market regulation" working out right now?
- llamataboot 8y ago
  But isn't the whole point is that companies are exploiting a bug in our biology to profit? In that case, the fix has to happen more upstream... If you want to argue that this could be fixed in libertarian-topia without government intervention, you might argue that I dunno, there could be a class action suit showing that the gaming companies knew that such and such mechanics were resulting in many people becoming addicted/going bankrupt and did it anyway, and maybe that's right. And if you wanna argue that who is so-and-so to argue that X really didn't want to spend all her money on virtual farm upgrades then that's an argument too I suppose. But if the problem is people are buying something they don't want to because of a dopamine hook, then arguing that the solution is to stop buying it isn't satisfactory.
- ThrowawayR2 8y ago
  > Or people could not buy microtransactions or support games and studios that use them. That's about as helpful as telling people to solve their gambling issue by not gambling. The problem is that many of these microtransaction-based games use the same mechanics as gambling to make them addictive _and_ they're targeting minors with it.
  - jtms 8y ago
    If you are talking about real money loot crates/boxes/packages (as opposed to in game earned virtual currency) you are quite literally talking about gambling. In the case of some games, marketed directly to minors. I am about as free market solution as it gets, but I definitely draw the line at exploiting children (and defrauding their parents simultaneously)
  - watwut 8y ago
    The people who have most issues with gambling addiction play competitive online games. Microtransactions or not, it is competitive online that has people spend all time in game world and their partners wish a new partner.
mruts 8y ago
If I want to buy a fortnite skin, who are you or the government to tell me I can’t?
- jniedrauer 8y ago
  If I want to buy radium water, who are you or the government to tell me I can't?
  - mises 8y ago
    Good question. If I harm no other, and if I am not deceived as to known side effects, why ought I not to be able to do so?
    - jniedrauer 8y ago
      The point of regulation is not to prevent you, the consumer, from making an informed decision to damage yourself. The point is to prevent the producer from exploiting uninformed human vulnerabilities. In the case of quack medicine, we have an easily exploited glitch in our brains that makes us associate exotic substances with medicine. In the case of gambling and microtransactions, we are easily exploited by the "gambler's fallacy." Just one more roll...
      - magduf 8y ago
        >The point of regulation is not to prevent you, the consumer, from making an informed decision to damage yourself. The point is to prevent the producer from exploiting uninformed human vulnerabilities. In the case of quack medicine, we have an easily exploited glitch in our brains that makes us associate exotic substances with medicine. So why don't we regulate/ban quack medicine then?
        dTal 8y ago
        We do. Dunno what country you're from, but in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Food_and_Drug_Administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Food_and_Drug_A...
ThrowawayR2 8y ago
> I might consider supporting legislation that targets them, if it's ever brought up. Well then, it's your lucky day: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/05/senator-hawley-announces-bill-banning-loot-boxes-pay-to-win-mechanics/ https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/05/senator-hawley-announ... Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) today announced plans to introduce "The Protecting Children from Abusive Games Act," which would target "the exploitation of children through 'pay-to-win' and 'loot box' monetization practices by the video game industry," according to a summary released by Hawley's office.
- 0_gravitas 8y ago
  Oh yea I saw this, the loot boxes arent even an argument to me, they should have been glassed years ago
- baybal2 8y ago
  That Hawley, quite a record he got for a novice politician. He is quite zealous, while not seemingly doing that solely for promoting his image. I will watch his progression with a lot of interest
- dmurray 8y ago
  If you want your bill passed, aren't you meant to make the acronym spell something snappy, and include something no one could be seen to vote against? I'd call it the Protecting American Children from Monetization, Abuse and Narcotics act.
Domenic_S 8y ago
It's been brought up! https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2019/05/08/new-microtransactionloot-box-bill-could-devastate-video-game-publishers-if-it-passes/#2e6829d3676f https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2019/05/08/new-micro...
jayd16 8y ago
It's a natural example of unbundled/a la carte content distribution. Gambling can be addictive and predatory but pay as you go content isn't bad in and if itself.
SkyBelow 8y ago
If you look at buying games, expansions, etc., there seems to be a trend. Ranking them in order of content/$, it goes as follows: Games > Expansions > DLC > MTX >> MTX that contain temporary boosts only >> Loot boxes. In my mind, banning MTX's seems to be on the same level as banning DLCs in general. They are a worse value, but they are the same kind of thing. Personally I wouldn't support banning MTX's. I would definitely support loot boxes being treated as gambling (ban for those under 18, regulation for adults). MTX's containing only temporary boosts is something I've yet to decide upon. Also, I think that tcg booster packs (like with Magic) should be classified as loot boxes/gambling and treated the same under any loot box law.
- 0_gravitas 8y ago
  The reason why I mention mtx specifically vs things like normal DLCs is because I do feel that they are a dark pattern, one of the reasons they are so successful is because its intentionally easy to forget how much you are spending, and you often dont realize until it's far too late, if you realize at all. And I agree totally on the booster pack point, I've also always felt that way.
  - baud147258 8y ago
    > intentionally easy to forget how much you are spending Which is why a lot of mtx are using some kind of "prenium" currency that's bought with real money, usually in increments different from the prices in the item shop (so that you always have some left-over); then there's the limited revolving selection, to use FOMO (currently used by Fortnite, for example)
Lambdanaut 8y ago
Please don't support more government micro-management of our lives. I agree it's a dark pattern, but if we don't get hurt, we'll never learn.
- Y_Y 8y ago
  Is this supposed to be a parody of hn libertarian thought? I can't imagine the lesson a child learns from maxing out the credit card of loot crates to be worth more than the money.
- ergothus 8y ago
  The alternative is hoping enough people "learn" AND reduce their personal short-term convenience to make it financially rewarding for enough development companies to provide worthwhile alternatives AND for that to be obvious enough that enough companies try. That's a lot of footgunning spent hoping a lot of other people footgun. I've been there, and I was the only that suffered, not the companies doing wrong.
- 0_gravitas 8y ago
  People have been getting hurt for years and they haven't learned yet. Trust me, I'd prefer the market to self regulate, but clearly it hasn't and won't in this regard, as evidenced by the article.

taurath 8y ago

That’s been true since the days of FarmVille, and one of the reasons Zynga was at a time worth more on the market than EA. Financially the gambling engines have eaten classic gamings lunch.

ergothus 8y ago

> microtransactions in casual games are winning in the financial sense, despite the complaints of "hardcore" gamers. I'm not a "hardcore" gamer - I'm incredibly casual. I hate microtransactions because the focus has switched to "addictive" play rather than "rewarding" play. Microtransactions are usually BAD for casuals - You might have 10 minutes to play but can only play for 5 mins without paying up. You might have one night a week to play, but it wants you to log in for a few minutes every couple of hours, etc. BUT the lack of alternatives means that there will be plenty of money spent on them. So I think this is a matter of "microtransactions out-earn flat cost games despite likely player preferences", not "hardcore vs casual".

taurath 8y ago
Rewarding play is addictive play - the rewards are why its addictive. There's people who've put 10,000 hours into Diablo 2, for example, a game that is incredibly repetitive at the highest level - they play for the chance of that one great random drop. Microtransaction games generally trade money or time, and then put barriers up on the time, or increase it vastly. The difference is when it feels like you're being asked for money it turns it exploitive, rather than being asked to spend 100 hours waiting for a yellow item to drop (that being more akin to "skill" and "investment"). Players want their reward fix. Microtransaction games are frequently like a watered-down drug. Just like social media, I don't think that just because people use them means they're a good thing - its junk food for the mind.
- ahartmetz 8y ago
  Good observation about Diablo. Diablo 1 was the last Blizzard game whose art style I liked, but I stopped playing when I realized that I was clicking on enemies until they're dead. The actual core game mechanics are garbage.
  - wil421 8y ago
    I was old enough to play the Diablos, Starcraft and Warcraft when they came out. When I was kid playing Diablo it don’t bother me. When Diablo III came out I played it as an adult and realize it was just clicking. I hated the game. Starcraft is still nice but I don’t play it. Almost bought Diablo for my Switch this year and recalled how much of it is just clicking.