6 ms·

First, that was an amazing breakdown of what's happening. If you enjoyed reading that you might like Folding Ideas breakdown of Fortnite - https://www.youtube.c

First, that was an amazing breakdown of what's happening. If you enjoyed reading that you might like Folding Ideas breakdown of Fortnite - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPHPNgIihR0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPHPNgIihR0 Second, I've personally become very wary of any mobile app that introduces multiple currency types. There's gold, and rubies, and power balls, and stardust! At some point pretty early on I decide it's not worth it to figure out how much things /actually/ cost and delete the thing. My understanding is that the math shows companies that microtransactions are the winning move over and over again. I hope that eventually there's enough grumpy consumers both parties become worth serving better.

klodolph 4y ago
Multiple currency types are a key part of freemium / microtransaction games, but there are other reasons to have multiple currency types, and it’s becoming more and more common across all types of games. In a sense, games are often about managing resources. Currency is a resource. If you have one currency type, you can come up with a dominant strategy that maximizes production of that particular currency type. If you make multiple currency types, which are difficult / inefficient to exchange for each other, it encourages people to interact with more portions of the game. You can also have certain currency types tied to key parts of the game’s progression. Take a look at games like Hades or Control. Hades has obol, darkness, gems, chthonic keys, ambrosia, titan’s blood, diamonds, and nectar. That’s 8 different currency types, the way I count it. No microtransactions—you purchase the game and play it until you are satisfied. There are a ton of game design reasons why those different currency types exist, rather than using a single currency type. The freemium / microtransaction model just needs one more currency type—something that is slow to acquire, but you can buy it with cash, that directly translates into gacha or something similar, and can be easily converted to other currency types. If Hades had microtransactions, it would probably just have 9 currency types instead of 8.
- nlowell 4y ago
  I think multi-currency systems can be used to juice microtransactions pretty hard still. For example League of Legends gives players free "chests" and free "keys" as a slow-drip, and you can open any chest with a key to get some random loot. If your chest count doesn't match your keys you can buy more of either using real cash. So basically multi currency systems can be used to keep players intentionally in a state of imbalance. It also makes it so their money doesn't go as far in the game if you have to buy separate blue yellow and red coins instead of just yellow coins like it sounds like in your Hades example (just having 9).
  - klodolph 4y ago
    Sure, but multi-currency systems juice anything. Control, for example, has tons of different materials used for upgrades and crafting. In order to get the right mix of upgrades, you have to travel to all different parts of the game world. Nier has something similar. By comparison, there are plenty of games (especially older ones) with only one or two currencies. Maybe you just find the one place in the game world that lets you grind out those currencies the fastest, and you do that over and over until you’re sick of it.
- BoorishBears 4y ago
  You setup a strawman (perhaps unintentionally) with this sentence: > Currency is a resource by ignoring the context of the comment you replied to, and the rest of your comment just builds upon that. Currency in this context is not just a resource, it's specifically resources tied into a system of microtransactions. So that includes currency you buy directly with money and currency that is accepted alongside purchasable currency. Having Rubies, Emeralds, and Gold as three different currencies obviously doesn't mean anything special in isolation. Why would having X resource types in a game be special or predatory in isolation? - What makes it predatory is when only Rubies and Gold can be purchased with money, and some items can be purchased with Emeralds or Rubies, and the pricing for Rubies and Gold are different... the end result is muddying the actual costs of items, and making it more difficult for players to only spend once. The main MO behind systems like that is to make one currency more important at the start, for example, by letting it get you ahead on core mechanics. Then in the later game having content like skins and characters be locked behind another currency which you're now encouraged to buy having naturally accumulated enough of the first currency through gameplay.
  - klodolph 4y ago
    To be honest I’m baffled by this comment. I’m not really trying to argue against anybody or against any specific viewpoint so the idea that I set up a strawman has me confused. If you’re talking about rubies, emeralds, and gold, can you explain where those come from? Maybe provide a link? As far as I know, in Mario Kart Tour the key limited currency is rubies. You can exchange rubies for coins, fire them into a pipe to get gacha, or various other things. This is similar to the other freemium games that I’ve played. Maybe my understanding of Mario Kart Tour is incorrect or incomplete. Yes, there are multiple forms of currency, but only rubies are really limited. The other currencies can more or less be earned freely by playing the game (if I understand the game correctly). The ruby economy exists to get you to spend cash on the game. Likewise, in Hades, the weird economy of titan’s blood, diamonds, and nectar is what encourages you to complete the game using different combinations of weapons and heat levels.
    - BoorishBears 4y ago
causi 4y ago
Mobile games in general are garbage. Considering the number of games, you could just emulate console games for the rest of your life and in doing so only play games that were built as games, not exploitation machines.
- bentley 4y ago
  It feels like there was a sweet spot in between the arcade era (where gameplay was tailored to get your quarters) and the mobile era (where gameplay is tailored to get microtransactions), where game designers saw the most success by providing a complete high‐quality experience in a single purchase. There have been exploitative home console games and non‐exploitative arcade games and mobile games, but to me the overall opposite pattern seems to hold true. Then again, perhaps I’m being blinded by nostalgia for the home console games of my childhood!
  - GartzenDeHaes 4y ago
    It seems to me that there was pressure on game companies from Block Buster to make games that couldn't be completed in single rental period.
    - bentley 4y ago
      Theoretically plausible for an American developer, but it’s worth pointing out that in that era (and maybe still today) video game rental was illegal in Japan.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    I actually think a ton of games from the "16-bit" era up to the first generation to heavily feature online services and game downloads (PS3/Xbox360/Wii—yeah, yeah, I know even the NES had a game download system in Japan, the Dreamcast had a modem, and so on, but you know what I mean) are still damn good, and my nostalgia consoles are the Magnavox Odyssey2 (I'd not... suggest any of those games to a modern gamer without the benefit of nostalgia) and the NES (I'd advance, IDK, maybe ten or fifteen total games on there as still worth playing for sheer fun reasons, not due to historical importance or whatever, despite personally loving perhaps a hundred of them). Like, Super Metroid is just fucking great. Timeless. That goes for a lot of those games from the early 90s through early 2000s. Symphony of the Night? A masterpiece and still absolutely worth playing. Some of the Final Fantasy games? The series has veered into a different genre, so it's hard to compare those with earlier entries, but mid-period FF games are totally on par with or better than many trad JRPG-style games still coming out. Chrono Trigger? Still excellent. Most of the Gamecube-era Nintendo multiplayer games are about as much fun as their modern versions, still. Some fighting games? Mid-period entries in those series are often better than the newer ones. And so on. Most of those I didn't play back in the day, so I don't think nostalgia's blinding me.
xmonkee 4y ago
Folding Ideas is the greatest youtuber
elpool2 4y ago
That video on Fortnite seemed a little unfair to me. It's not nearly as bad as the pay-to-win ilk like this Mario Kart game.
- autoexec 4y ago
  > That video on Fortnite seemed a little unfair to me. What part is wrong? Fortnite has been called pay to win itself from time to time For examples, see https://www.sportskeeda.com/fortnite/the-history-pay-to-win-skins-fortnite-explained https://www.sportskeeda.com/fortnite/the-history-pay-to-win-... or https://old.reddit.com/r/FortniteCompetitive/comments/l2qywf/fortnite_is_current_pay_to_win_or_at_least_pay/ https://old.reddit.com/r/FortniteCompetitive/comments/l2qywf... or https://www.sportskeeda.com/fortnite/fortnite-finally-proves-the-dip-emote-pay-to-win https://www.sportskeeda.com/fortnite/fortnite-finally-proves...
  - elpool2 4y ago
    It is not pay-to-win. There is no way to use actual money to improve your chances of winning. The only things you can buy are cosmetics, and there are no randomized lootbox/gambling mechanics. There have been some cosmetics that give a slight advantage (blending in with the background too much), but they're pretty good about updating these to reduce the impact they have. Basically, those articles are complaining about the game being pay-to-win by accident. Don't get me wrong though. Fortnite does use the psychological tricks described in the video to make you want to buy things, and I'm sure the tricks are very effective at separating kids from their money, so he's not entirely off the mark. I just think it's a bit better than most free-to-play games, and it would have been fair to also call out some of the tricks that Fortnite won't do. I play the game and I feel like I've gotten way more enjoyment out of it than the $10 I spent on a battle pass. But maybe this is just an indication of how much worse it's gotten in the 3 years since the video was made?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

klodolph 4y ago

Multiple currency types are a key part of freemium / microtransaction games, but there are other reasons to have multiple currency types, and it’s becoming more and more common across all types of games. In a sense, games are often about managing resources. Currency is a resource. If you have one currency type, you can come up with a dominant strategy that maximizes production of that particular currency type. If you make multiple currency types, which are difficult / inefficient to exchange for each other, it encourages people to interact with more portions of the game. You can also have certain currency types tied to key parts of the game’s progression. Take a look at games like Hades or Control. Hades has obol, darkness, gems, chthonic keys, ambrosia, titan’s blood, diamonds, and nectar. That’s 8 different currency types, the way I count it. No microtransactions—you purchase the game and play it until you are satisfied. There are a ton of game design reasons why those different currency types exist, rather than using a single currency type. The freemium / microtransaction model just needs one more currency type—something that is slow to acquire, but you can buy it with cash, that directly translates into gacha or something similar, and can be easily converted to other currency types. If Hades had microtransactions, it would probably just have 9 currency types instead of 8.

nlowell 4y ago
I think multi-currency systems can be used to juice microtransactions pretty hard still. For example League of Legends gives players free "chests" and free "keys" as a slow-drip, and you can open any chest with a key to get some random loot. If your chest count doesn't match your keys you can buy more of either using real cash. So basically multi currency systems can be used to keep players intentionally in a state of imbalance. It also makes it so their money doesn't go as far in the game if you have to buy separate blue yellow and red coins instead of just yellow coins like it sounds like in your Hades example (just having 9).
- klodolph 4y ago
  Sure, but multi-currency systems juice anything. Control, for example, has tons of different materials used for upgrades and crafting. In order to get the right mix of upgrades, you have to travel to all different parts of the game world. Nier has something similar. By comparison, there are plenty of games (especially older ones) with only one or two currencies. Maybe you just find the one place in the game world that lets you grind out those currencies the fastest, and you do that over and over until you’re sick of it.
BoorishBears 4y ago
You setup a strawman (perhaps unintentionally) with this sentence: > Currency is a resource by ignoring the context of the comment you replied to, and the rest of your comment just builds upon that. Currency in this context is not just a resource, it's specifically resources tied into a system of microtransactions. So that includes currency you buy directly with money and currency that is accepted alongside purchasable currency. Having Rubies, Emeralds, and Gold as three different currencies obviously doesn't mean anything special in isolation. Why would having X resource types in a game be special or predatory in isolation? - What makes it predatory is when only Rubies and Gold can be purchased with money, and some items can be purchased with Emeralds or Rubies, and the pricing for Rubies and Gold are different... the end result is muddying the actual costs of items, and making it more difficult for players to only spend once. The main MO behind systems like that is to make one currency more important at the start, for example, by letting it get you ahead on core mechanics. Then in the later game having content like skins and characters be locked behind another currency which you're now encouraged to buy having naturally accumulated enough of the first currency through gameplay.
- klodolph 4y ago
  To be honest I’m baffled by this comment. I’m not really trying to argue against anybody or against any specific viewpoint so the idea that I set up a strawman has me confused. If you’re talking about rubies, emeralds, and gold, can you explain where those come from? Maybe provide a link? As far as I know, in Mario Kart Tour the key limited currency is rubies. You can exchange rubies for coins, fire them into a pipe to get gacha, or various other things. This is similar to the other freemium games that I’ve played. Maybe my understanding of Mario Kart Tour is incorrect or incomplete. Yes, there are multiple forms of currency, but only rubies are really limited. The other currencies can more or less be earned freely by playing the game (if I understand the game correctly). The ruby economy exists to get you to spend cash on the game. Likewise, in Hades, the weird economy of titan’s blood, diamonds, and nectar is what encourages you to complete the game using different combinations of weapons and heat levels.
  - BoorishBears 4y ago

causi 4y ago

Mobile games in general are garbage. Considering the number of games, you could just emulate console games for the rest of your life and in doing so only play games that were built as games, not exploitation machines.

bentley 4y ago
It feels like there was a sweet spot in between the arcade era (where gameplay was tailored to get your quarters) and the mobile era (where gameplay is tailored to get microtransactions), where game designers saw the most success by providing a complete high‐quality experience in a single purchase. There have been exploitative home console games and non‐exploitative arcade games and mobile games, but to me the overall opposite pattern seems to hold true. Then again, perhaps I’m being blinded by nostalgia for the home console games of my childhood!
- GartzenDeHaes 4y ago
  It seems to me that there was pressure on game companies from Block Buster to make games that couldn't be completed in single rental period.
  - bentley 4y ago
    Theoretically plausible for an American developer, but it’s worth pointing out that in that era (and maybe still today) video game rental was illegal in Japan.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  I actually think a ton of games from the "16-bit" era up to the first generation to heavily feature online services and game downloads (PS3/Xbox360/Wii—yeah, yeah, I know even the NES had a game download system in Japan, the Dreamcast had a modem, and so on, but you know what I mean) are still damn good, and my nostalgia consoles are the Magnavox Odyssey2 (I'd not... suggest any of those games to a modern gamer without the benefit of nostalgia) and the NES (I'd advance, IDK, maybe ten or fifteen total games on there as still worth playing for sheer fun reasons, not due to historical importance or whatever, despite personally loving perhaps a hundred of them). Like, Super Metroid is just fucking great. Timeless. That goes for a lot of those games from the early 90s through early 2000s. Symphony of the Night? A masterpiece and still absolutely worth playing. Some of the Final Fantasy games? The series has veered into a different genre, so it's hard to compare those with earlier entries, but mid-period FF games are totally on par with or better than many trad JRPG-style games still coming out. Chrono Trigger? Still excellent. Most of the Gamecube-era Nintendo multiplayer games are about as much fun as their modern versions, still. Some fighting games? Mid-period entries in those series are often better than the newer ones. And so on. Most of those I didn't play back in the day, so I don't think nostalgia's blinding me.

xmonkee 4y ago

Folding Ideas is the greatest youtuber

elpool2 4y ago

That video on Fortnite seemed a little unfair to me. It's not nearly as bad as the pay-to-win ilk like this Mario Kart game.

autoexec 4y ago
> That video on Fortnite seemed a little unfair to me. What part is wrong? Fortnite has been called pay to win itself from time to time For examples, see https://www.sportskeeda.com/fortnite/the-history-pay-to-win-skins-fortnite-explained https://www.sportskeeda.com/fortnite/the-history-pay-to-win-... or https://old.reddit.com/r/FortniteCompetitive/comments/l2qywf/fortnite_is_current_pay_to_win_or_at_least_pay/ https://old.reddit.com/r/FortniteCompetitive/comments/l2qywf... or https://www.sportskeeda.com/fortnite/fortnite-finally-proves-the-dip-emote-pay-to-win https://www.sportskeeda.com/fortnite/fortnite-finally-proves...
- elpool2 4y ago
  It is not pay-to-win. There is no way to use actual money to improve your chances of winning. The only things you can buy are cosmetics, and there are no randomized lootbox/gambling mechanics. There have been some cosmetics that give a slight advantage (blending in with the background too much), but they're pretty good about updating these to reduce the impact they have. Basically, those articles are complaining about the game being pay-to-win by accident. Don't get me wrong though. Fortnite does use the psychological tricks described in the video to make you want to buy things, and I'm sure the tricks are very effective at separating kids from their money, so he's not entirely off the mark. I just think it's a bit better than most free-to-play games, and it would have been fair to also call out some of the tricks that Fortnite won't do. I play the game and I feel like I've gotten way more enjoyment out of it than the $10 I spent on a battle pass. But maybe this is just an indication of how much worse it's gotten in the 3 years since the video was made?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]