3 ms·

That's not really the user's fault though. They didn't pay because the things to buy were not appealing enough. The developers should've either chosen a better

That's not really the user's fault though. They didn't pay because the things to buy were not appealing enough. The developers should've either chosen a better monetization strategy or made the optional items sufficiently appealing. I've seen some other games too where people felt compelled to throw money at them because they feared that otherwise development would be halted and the servers shut down, and it has always been indicative of a game in a bad state (since it typically means that the players are seeing the player count on Steam etc and realizing that the game is likely financially unsustainable).

phkahler 3y ago
>> That's not really the user's fault though. They didn't pay because the things to buy were not appealing enough. My point was that people not only don't pay if they don't have to, they ridicule those who do, even while enjoying the benefit provided by those who do. It's a weird disconnect rooted in selfishness.
ghaff 3y ago
>They didn't pay because the things to buy were not appealing enough. There are a lot of things I don't buy (both online and off) because I'm not willing to pay what they're sold for--which may or may not be what they cost. I don't have an unlimited pile of money. And most things end eventually although if they're commoditized enough they may end up continuing to be offered by somebody/somebodies at some price.