3 ms·
They share a lot. They are addictive, and the further in you get sucked, the harder it is to stop. Because of this, the further in you get, the easier it is to
by bumblebird 17y ago
They share a lot. They are addictive, and the further in you get sucked, the harder it is to stop. Because of this, the further in you get, the easier it is to be exploited and taken advantage of.
I don't think it's about being puritan, it's about protecting the most vulnerable members of society from themselves.
For example, say you get 95% of the way through a game, then the game asks for $100 to get past an absolutely impossible stage, they'd probably get a fantastic amount of people spending the $100 reluctantly. Which IMHO isn't a nice way to do things.
- mattmaroon 17y agoYou can't protect people from themselves, that's the problem with those laws. Research shows this time and time again. Anti-gambling laws don't protect gamblers, they just move them from safe, legal, regulated casinos to scammy underground gaming halls and instant bingo ticket parlors. Anti-drug laws don't decrease drug use, they just increase violent crimes. But that aside, thankfully capitalism doesn't require you to find a "nice" way of doing things. I'm as addicted to shaving as any player is to a Facebook game. (We could both stop, but don't want to.) I'm even more addicted to food. But that doesn't mean Gilette and Whole Foods are scammers.
- bumblebird 17y agoI don't think that's a good analysis. Anti gambling laws does indeed push the hardcore gamblers into underground gaming halls. But the important thing it does is stop lots of people getting hooked in the first place. Same with drugs etc. Having said all this, it's clearly extremely lucrative to setup games like this.