4 ms·

What's interesting and gruesome about the "free-to-play" (F2P) game market is this: Game companies can extract the most money from players if they exploit patt

by bravura 13y ago

What's interesting and gruesome about the "free-to-play" (F2P) game market is this: Game companies can extract the most money from players if they exploit patterns of human dependence and addiction. An understanding of techniques for creating addiction is---in fact---a competitive advantage.

dfsdfasgdsgasf 13y ago
They're just like casinos in that respect. The worst part is that some people are very vulnerable to these kinds of tactics, often the people who can least afford it. On the other hand, reinforcement learning requires systems of rewards - meaning that the games do provide something that is intrinsically valuable to the players (i.e. they must enjoy the game or they wouldn't get "addicted" to it). How could you clearly tell the difference between a game that has been designed to maximise player enjoyment and a game that has been designed to exploit human addiction? What kind of legislation could be used to protect players? Personally I don't know, I think it's a fascinating subject though.
- unsignedint 13y ago
  This makes casino look much better then... With casinos, at least you can convert in-store purchase back to real currency... Not only you can't do that with in-app-purchase, it often won't survive game uninstall/reinstall, let alone renewing to new device...
chii 13y ago
an unintended side effect (perhaps) might be that the F2P industry sucks away real talent that could've been working on actual contributions to the gaming genre. Imagine if there is a limit on developer talent/creativity, and that instead of being spent on creating psychological manipulations, they spent their efforts on pushing the boundaries of a genre. How much better off would it be, if there were more games like braid, or FTL, etc, instead of yet another junk game with In-App-Purchases. I m hoping the indie scene will revive creative gaming.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

by bravura 13y ago

dfsdfasgdsgasf 13y ago

They're just like casinos in that respect. The worst part is that some people are very vulnerable to these kinds of tactics, often the people who can least afford it. On the other hand, reinforcement learning requires systems of rewards - meaning that the games do provide something that is intrinsically valuable to the players (i.e. they must enjoy the game or they wouldn't get "addicted" to it). How could you clearly tell the difference between a game that has been designed to maximise player enjoyment and a game that has been designed to exploit human addiction? What kind of legislation could be used to protect players? Personally I don't know, I think it's a fascinating subject though.

unsignedint 13y ago
This makes casino look much better then... With casinos, at least you can convert in-store purchase back to real currency... Not only you can't do that with in-app-purchase, it often won't survive game uninstall/reinstall, let alone renewing to new device...

chii 13y ago

an unintended side effect (perhaps) might be that the F2P industry sucks away real talent that could've been working on actual contributions to the gaming genre. Imagine if there is a limit on developer talent/creativity, and that instead of being spent on creating psychological manipulations, they spent their efforts on pushing the boundaries of a genre. How much better off would it be, if there were more games like braid, or FTL, etc, instead of yet another junk game with In-App-Purchases. I m hoping the indie scene will revive creative gaming.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]