7 ms·

How can a game developer ethically justify a $4500 price tag for a game? Yes, we can put in limits on spending, but let’s say we didn’t, does that mean a game

How can a game developer ethically justify a $4500 price tag for a game? Yes, we can put in limits on spending, but let’s say we didn’t, does that mean a game could be worth that much money? Ever?

IntelMiner 6y ago
The industry actually has a term for people who spend compulsively like that. They literally call them "Whales"
- nix23 6y ago
  And it all started with a Horse Armor.
  - FloatArtifact 6y ago
    Yep the industry took an arrow to the knee.
    - bzb3 6y ago
      You were downvoted because you referenced the wrong game. ;P
      - nix23 6y ago
        Maybe it passed into Oblivion ;)
- Haga 6y ago
  Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering whale; to the last I grapple with thee; from hell's heart I stab at thee; for hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee. Srsly, if you rip of loners for community status, that's Rock bottom as a game.. a slot machine dev
econcon 6y ago
No one putting gun to their head to cough up $4500. They are paying because of their own weakness or maybe because of market forces as they can't get their fix elsewhere. I can easily justify it ethically as "it's what my offering is valued by market". All my engineering education skills have not gone waste, those sleepless nights, missed dates - all paid off finally! Revs up Lamborghini bought on installment paid with $4500 check
- benologist 6y ago
  They are paying because app stores are allowing "authorize one payment" to mean "unlimited transactions are authorized". This is fraud, which is why Apple had to settle a class action for the exact same problem. Relying on a password, pin or parental control to prevent unauthorized purchases is irrelevant since in their absence, fraud is still illegal. https://www.macworld.com/article/2029384/apple-to-settle-lawsuit-on-in-app-purchases-by-minors.html https://www.macworld.com/article/2029384/apple-to-settle-law...
  - adrianmonk 6y ago
    I think there are basically four categories of big spenders: (1) People who don't understand that they are spending actual money. Kids can fall into this category. Also people who are confused by an intentionally obfuscated user interface. (2) People who are spending someone else's money, so they don't care. Kids can also fall into this category. (And when they do they may pretend they are in category 1.) (3) People who can't afford it but have some kind of compulsive shopping disorder, addiction to the game or spending, etc. (People in this category might pretend they are category 1, i.e. request a refund and blame it on children who might even be fictional.) (4) People rich enough that they will feel no ill effect from dropping $1,000+ on something of little value. Whales are, at least theoretically, presumed to be category 4. There really isn't too much of an ethical problem IMHO with category 4. The real ethical problem comes from the fact that you don't truly know which category the user is in. Anyway, I think you are talking about category 1 and the person you replied to is talking about category 4.
    - 6y ago
Kuinox 6y ago
Devil's advocate: It's not 4500$, but a lot of microtransactions. A lot of mobiles games make most of their money on "Whales" that represent less than 1% of their playerbase.
- Shared404 6y ago
  That doesn't make this pricing model any more ethical. To Roblox's credit however, they did refund the money when asked.

IntelMiner 6y ago

The industry actually has a term for people who spend compulsively like that. They literally call them "Whales"

nix23 6y ago
And it all started with a Horse Armor.
- FloatArtifact 6y ago
  Yep the industry took an arrow to the knee.
  - bzb3 6y ago
    You were downvoted because you referenced the wrong game. ;P
    - nix23 6y ago
      Maybe it passed into Oblivion ;)
Haga 6y ago
Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering whale; to the last I grapple with thee; from hell's heart I stab at thee; for hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee. Srsly, if you rip of loners for community status, that's Rock bottom as a game.. a slot machine dev

econcon 6y ago

No one putting gun to their head to cough up $4500. They are paying because of their own weakness or maybe because of market forces as they can't get their fix elsewhere. I can easily justify it ethically as "it's what my offering is valued by market". All my engineering education skills have not gone waste, those sleepless nights, missed dates - all paid off finally! Revs up Lamborghini bought on installment paid with $4500 check

benologist 6y ago
They are paying because app stores are allowing "authorize one payment" to mean "unlimited transactions are authorized". This is fraud, which is why Apple had to settle a class action for the exact same problem. Relying on a password, pin or parental control to prevent unauthorized purchases is irrelevant since in their absence, fraud is still illegal. https://www.macworld.com/article/2029384/apple-to-settle-lawsuit-on-in-app-purchases-by-minors.html https://www.macworld.com/article/2029384/apple-to-settle-law...
- adrianmonk 6y ago
  I think there are basically four categories of big spenders: (1) People who don't understand that they are spending actual money. Kids can fall into this category. Also people who are confused by an intentionally obfuscated user interface. (2) People who are spending someone else's money, so they don't care. Kids can also fall into this category. (And when they do they may pretend they are in category 1.) (3) People who can't afford it but have some kind of compulsive shopping disorder, addiction to the game or spending, etc. (People in this category might pretend they are category 1, i.e. request a refund and blame it on children who might even be fictional.) (4) People rich enough that they will feel no ill effect from dropping $1,000+ on something of little value. Whales are, at least theoretically, presumed to be category 4. There really isn't too much of an ethical problem IMHO with category 4. The real ethical problem comes from the fact that you don't truly know which category the user is in. Anyway, I think you are talking about category 1 and the person you replied to is talking about category 4.
  - 6y ago

Kuinox 6y ago

Devil's advocate: It's not 4500$, but a lot of microtransactions. A lot of mobiles games make most of their money on "Whales" that represent less than 1% of their playerbase.

Shared404 6y ago
That doesn't make this pricing model any more ethical. To Roblox's credit however, they did refund the money when asked.