this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
627 points (97.9% liked)
Games
32736 readers
1236 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
'Try indie games, they don't do this... wait no, banning this will kill indie games!'
'Don't go straight to a solution, we've only let this infect half the industry over one little decade.'
'What about the ethical versions of this innately unethical scam?'
'There's basically no regulation whatsoever, so let's try tiny ineffectual steps against multi-billion-dollar greed.'
'Uh excuse me, making a virtual hat doesn't take literally zero effort, so they only closely resemble the outright scam you're condemning.'
'I've never had cosmetics dangled enticingly or shoved in my face, or at least I don't know what that looks like.'
The worst part is, this is easily one of the better interactions on this topic. There's something about "just sell games, god dammit" that makes people reach for the most ridiculous objections. Plucky little indie title Genshin Impact desperately needs this! Why not chase shifting trends in specific money-extraction techniques, with brisk and responsive congressional action? We've tried nothing and it's worked so far, if we define working as nuh-uh it's fine sometimes. Don't I know that those $600 of tiny variations in onscreen pants took as much effort as ten entire games?
People:
This monetizes frustration.
The product only exists to needle you into paying more and more money. Fun is the bait on that hook. If you're enjoying a game without constantly forking over more actual dollars - these fuckers think you're a freeloader. They openly describe "hunting whales" and discuss creative new ways to slide the siphon into your wallet. How much have you spent so far? They don't want you to think about it. What's the dollar value of this thing priced in gil? They don't want you to think about it. Is paying to "skip the grind" the reason there's a disheartening grind to be skipped? Absofuckinglutely, but they definitely don't want you to think about it.
Maximum revenue comes from addiction despite misery. If we allow this to continue, there will be nothing else.
That isn't what I said.
That isn't what I said.
That isn't what I said.
That isn't what I said.
That isn't what I said.
That isn't what I said.
That isn't what I said.
That isn't what I said.
Look man, I'm more than willing to have a productive conversation about this. I'll be here when you're willing to do the same.
If you meant anything else then you said all the wrong words. I'm not gonna expend more effort on a pile of nuh-uhs, just to rub your nose in how those are, in fact, the thrust of all the things you said, basically blow-by-blow. I'm only stretching a little bit to miss where you nitpicked outright price-gouging and infer you endorsed indie games.
You're against banning this crap because you insist it can be ethical, and your justification is, that'd make the worst people doing it win somehow, and don't I know how games are made?
I never said indie games don't have in-game transactions. In fact, I literally name an indie game that was monetarily successful in large part due to in-game transactions (Battlebits).
I never said "don't go straight to a solution". I just suggested less-extreme solutions than "ban the practice completely" (fines, targeted bans).
You're the one claiming that in-game transactions are innately unethical, not me. And if you think there are no exceptions to your hard-line stance then this conversation won't go anywhere.
You're the one claiming my suggestion would be insignificant and ineffectual, when it's been the standard practice in the business world for decades, and outright bans are left for extreme scenarios.
My point, which I understand to be correct because of my personal experiences with the gaming industry and colleagues that work in the industry, is that adding a cosmetic item to a video game takes a measurable amount of time and effort, which in turn costs money. Putting a price on a good (even a digital one) that requires time and effort to produce is not a scam, and I don't know how much more clear I can make that.
I've literally never mentioned Genshin Impact throughout the entire course of this conversation.
I've never claimed that we've tried nothing and it worked. I've literally admitted that there is a problem, especially with how large, greedy companies like Blizzard do things, and I suggested potential solutions. Again though, they aren't the same as your solutions, so you're dismissing them out of hand I guess.
This statement is hyperbolic to the point of insult, and it's very clear I haven't suggested anything close to this.
You're stretching my words beyond all recognition, to the point where it's becoming hard to figure out what you're even referencing.
I'm against an outright ban because, as I've said from the start, that seems like an extreme overreaction, and yes, it would punish a ton of indie creators who implement ethical in-game transactions to help support their games. I don't know what you mean by "and your justification is, that’d make the worst people doing it win somehow". As I've said before, I'm in favor of punishing companies who abuse or are predatory with in-game transactions. I don't want those companies to win. I believe they should be punished, at minimum in the form of fines, and targeted bans if the fines don't work. I've said as much in my first couple messages to you. I've also never claimed that you don't know how games are made. I've just called into question your understanding of the time and effort that goes into creating cosmetic items. That's it.
Hopefully this makes it clear what I've been trying to say. Sorry for the original confusion I guess.
All of this is predatory. It's a trick being played on you. How else do you make some normal-ass game cost thousands of dollars, and still have some idiots pay that? Smaller numbers don't change anything. Using the trick to get less money is still tricking people out of money.
And that makes 'but what about ethical uses?' relevant to me, somehow. Like this conversation can 'go somewhere' if I'm condemning this entire practice as fundamentally dishonest exploitation of immutable human vulnerabilities, but you want to play whack-a-mole with specific expressions of that underlying abuse.
Yes.
Oh, you think that's a counter.
This is half the industry's profits. That's pretty fucking extreme. The premise beneath all forms is an abuse of predictable irrationality, much the same way as gambling. (And this abuse may outright involve gambling.)
Pitting any legislature's ability to pin down and pick apart specific abusive practices, versus the gaming industry's ability to mutate and adapt those abuses, is very plainly not gonna work. We spent so long bickering about lootboxes that lootboxes went away - and were replaced by even-more-profitable abuses, minus the few details that people recognize as exploitation. If it's not pay-to-win and it's not randomized, apparently people don't give a shit if a "free" game has five thousand dollars worth of waifus and hats. Maybe we'll fine the company for doing that, because that figure will totes mcgoats outweigh the literal billions they make every single year.
Which misses the point. 'It deserves money somehow' does not justify this.
You want money for a new thing? Sell it like regular. Horse Armor that shit. Tell people they can't have the thing, until they give you money, and only then do you give them the thing. But that's never what these products do! They're selling you shit that's already been added to the game. It goes in every copy. They add stuff, and declare some of it's suuuper special, and expect five actual dollars to say you have it. Or five hundred. But always disguised as some made-up currency that's seventeen to the dollar, so you can't think too hard about how many meals this imaginary geegaw costs, and you can instantly blow that money inside the game. Y'know. Where the developer controls presentation, comparison, context, availability, and literally everything else including fuckin' gravity. This is not an environment for rational consumer choices. This is an automated con job.
Would it help to point out, the games will often give you shit shit for free, if you play enough? Diablo especially will gladly take real money for additional whacks at a pinata that routinely gives you a few free whacks. Can you imagine asking for cash back instead? Like if some bullshit item is "worth" $30, can you even picture receiving a check from Activision-Blizzard-Microsoft-Atari-Kunkleman-Chevrolet, because you turned it back in? The number on that check is the true value of the thing.
This is the same 'but games need revenue!' excuse given to gems, and pay-to-win lootboxes, and... whatever you call being forced to wait half an hour or pay a dollar. No shit games cost money. That's not an all-purpose excuse for how they take money! The problem is the business model!
It means you think it would punish a ton of indie creators who do this shit, and somehow be a gift to abusive AAA crap - like Genshin Impact, my example. Actual quote: "Banning the business model will kill indie developers, and make the scale of AAA the only way to make profit on video games."
My guy. Have you seen AAA games lately? They're the assholes making billions off this bullshit. They're the morons who can't turn a profit, without this bullshit. Venture capitalist cult leaders keep gutting beloved studios and making them do "live service" shit, specifically to enable this stupid business model.
The overwhelming majority of indie games have neither the infrastructure nor the back bench necessary to even consider this crap. Your objections are built on the exception to an exception.
Nothing inside a video game should cost money.
I concede, you're right I'm wrong. Have a great night.
I don't want your blatant eye-roll, I want you to take this problem seriously.
I take the problem seriously, but talking about it with someone like you isn't productive.
Like I'm thrilled to get 'it's cosmetic! just don't buy it!' for the zillionth time.
The problem is the business model. Serious discussion requires addressing the business model. The same business model, with lower prices, is the same business model. The same business model, with fewer stats attached, is the same business model. The same business model, without added gambling, is the same business model.
Fines for using the business model will not fix the business model. Even defining misuses worth fining is an immediate error, because the problem is the business model, itself.