I want to shed light on a tactic that involves collecting data as you play, feeding this data into complex algorithms and models that then alter the rules of your game under the hood to optimize spending opportunities.
I want to shed light on a tactic that involves collecting data as you play, feeding this data into complex algorithms and models that then alter the rules of your game under the hood to optimize spending opportunities.
Yeah, no.
I like a bunch of games that do this. I’ve liked games that do this for 40 years.
I mean, technically you just banned all arcade games that ever existed. I liked a bunch of those.
And I like a bunch of free to play games. I spent a bunch of time playing Hearthstone. I’m gonna say that at least some of the millions of people in LoL would like to keep playing what they’re playing. I am looking forward to a bunch of new characters in Street Fighter 6. I kinda don’t want to go back to the days where I had to buy a second full price copy of Street Fighter 2 just to get access to 4 new characters.
I get that it sounds good to say this when thinking about the worst parts of the industry, but… yeah, no.
‘But arcades!’ Are renting someone else’s hardware. Different thing. This did abuse not exist fifteen years ago.
‘But free games!’ Can just be free. Or pay-what-you-want. Or cheap. Or something you already own. How’s your back catalog on Steam?
This Skinner-box horseshit where a game is """free""" but somehow makes a billion dollars is weaponized frustration. The handful of games that were re-released with tiny updates at full price are now the entire industry’s goal, thanks to this specific abuse. (And they still got you chumps to buy three 3D versions of Street Fighter.)
You can pay the price of a whole-ass game for a hat.
Lesser versions of that aren’t better, just lesser. The opportunity to spend one hundred dollars right the hell now is shoved in your face between rounds. Or dangled each time a lootbox animation juuust misses. Or crammed into your inventory, as a gift, mmyes, if only you bought a key.
If LoL wants to keep making money they can charge a subscription or sell expansions. Y’know - rational consumer purchasing decisions. Not playing keep-away and then tickling people’s balls in a controlled environment where fireworks go off each time you click Confirm Purchase.
Inevitably: ‘but people don’t often go for subscriptions.’ Yeah! It’s almost like conscious choices are less generous than engineered decisions! Or: ‘but budgets rely on that immense revenue!’ Then they should shrink. Budgets follow revenue. Always always always. Whatever money these fuckers spent, they expect to extract from you, three times over.
Wait, in what world is a subscription a “rational consumer purchasing decision” where buying characters for a fighting game if you want them as they come out is not?
I would prefer to pay for in-game content of any kind, cosmetics included, over paying a subscription for a game. Any day. Especially if the content is characters, as is the case in LoL or Street Fighter.
And yeah, I bought three 3D Street Fighter games. And a bunch of characters for each. Even a costume or two. I am extremely on board with that. Money extremely well spent, as far as I’m concerned.
Hell, the SF6 community at the moment is begging for more cosmetics. They just announced a handful of horny-ass swimsuit costumes and people went ballistic. It’s not my bag, but if people like them and they know what they’re buying who the hell are you to tell them they’re wrong, let alone that it should be illegal?
I mean, it’s a straightforward enough transaction. You think bikini Cammy with tan lines is hot and will pay some money for that skin. I get subsidized by your teenage hormones and keep playing the game I like. Win/win in my book.
That’s the problem with this train of thought. There’s some stuff where you and I agree there are bad practices and we can probably agree on some common sense regulation for them. But if you’re going to come at me with a maximalist approach that boils down to “games I don’t like shouldn’t exist” we’re going to disagree.
Which, if nothing else, is a good reason for regulation of creative products to be relatively loose whenever possible. I was not on board with Hillary wanting to ban Mortal Kombat in the 90s because she didn’t like hearts being ripped out and I’m not on board with people wanting to ban free to play games now. It made sense to have age ratings in the 90s and it makes sense to have that and other common sense regulations now.
None of this is ever about the game part of the game. Fuck entirely off with pearl-clutching over content. This is about a business model. I want people to sell the most addictive, transgressive, customizable bullshit you can imagine, so long as it is either a product or a service. Like anything else you buy. Imaginary shit inside a video game is neither.
You can insist, ‘but it’s new!,’ except it’s already in your game. You’re looking at it, on someone else’s character. This is a dividing line where Oblivion’s infamous horse armor is completely above-board. It was a hundred kilobytes of not much, but it was unambiguously an expansion. You, the human being, received a file you did not have before. Not just permission to say your guy had what anyone else could already wear.
This business model reduces the game part of the game to bait on this hook. Whatever people want, or can be made to want, is dangled at ten bucks a pop, fifty items at a time. Eough rubes get gouged for hundreds or thousands of dollars, such that the total revenue exceeds what the studio would get, even if they sold everybody the full-price game three separate times.
I care about those victims. You delight in their exploitation.
Nothing short of banning the abuse would work. We’re talking about game designers. Manipulating people into enjoying certain behaviors is literally their job. People finally recognized lootboxes are bad - so they sold gave away the boxes and sold keys. Or sold gems. Or insisted it’s just cosmetics. Or-- none of it’s fucking different! It’s all the same shit! You’re all being dragged against the grindstone, using the same tricks that make games fun in the first place. The whole product is an excuse to keep grinding away at you until you decide to open your wallet and look away.
If you want to say that certain types of business models, like paying for RNG where you don’t know what you’re buying, are predatory, I would be with you on that.
But your extreme hardline stance of “nothing should cost money ever” is not a reasonable place to draw the line. At least some of what you’re railing against should be perfectly fine.
Nothing inside a video game. That part is not optional. I’ve dealt with too many cranks who see me arguing - JUST SELL GAMES - and then go ‘you want it for free!’ No, folks, you want it for free. You want to play endlessly-updated games, ‘subsidized by teenage hormones.’ You imagine that you would never be taken for ungodly sums of money.
Even if you’re right, you’re counting on other people being taken for all the money you’re not paying, and more. That’s what it means, when this abuse makes more money.
Predatory abuse is inseparable from this business model. Maximum revenue comes from addiction and frustration. You can be made to want whatever bullshit they’re allowed to push. That’s how games work. They mechanically convince you to value arbitrary nonsense.
edit: oh shit, I thought I hit submit on this five hours ago.
I do want updated games, yes. My favorite games wouldn’t be my favorite games if 1.0 was all we ever got.
Some games have predatory models, and I do oppose that. But only when it actually is predatory. I take issue with how you’re trying to say nothing should ever be sold, even when what’s being sold is perfectly fair.
I take issue with how you’re still lying about what I said. ‘Things being sold’ is my entire drive. Did you miss it, in all caps? The problem is this farce of charging real money for permission to use what’s already in a game you already paid for.
Games were updated before this nonsense was possible. This business model is only like fifteen years old. Unreal Tournament '99 had updates and new content for years, because people kept buying the game.
I’m not missing, I’m saying that your hardline stance against things being sold isn’t reasonable.
I don’t “delight in their exploitation”, I am one of the people who buy this stuff.
I am not a victim just because you decide I am. I have some say in this.
So hell yeah, bait me, daddy. To this day, Dragon Ball FighterZ is probably the best gaming experience I’ve ever had. I was there at ground floor, bought every character, watched every tournament, got competitive. I ended up with three copies of the game, all 100%-ed and with hundreds of hours of play.
And the only thing that bums me out is that they had to bail out of it early, presumably to go make Marvel Tokon.
I will be on ground floor for Tokon, and I will be funding that mouse engine with a bunch of piecemeal cash, I’m sure.
And I need you to listen to me when I tell you that it’s going to be on purpose, that I’m not a victim, that I hope that treadmill lasts for a good long while and that the game is good enough to support it.
So please spare me the benevolent outrage. I don’t need your protection from my own taste. I would very much appreciate an offline-playable version of the game I can buy with all the DLC down the line, like I did for Marvel vs Capcom 3 or Street Fighter IV, and thanks to the weirdly wholesome interaction between developers and the FGC I may actually get that at some point to support tournament play. But otherwise? Nobody is complaining. You can go save somebody else.
And hey, I say this being a big fan of single player games, and a big supporter of physical media and game preservation. But you come here to tell me that some of my favourite games —and I’m talking game-changing experiences I cherish deeply— should have been illegal and I just don’t know better? Yeah, not gonna fly, Hillary.
Uh huh.
Nope, pulling the chute on this conversation.
That’s somehow worse than the continued lying about banning games when I am talking about a bu-si-ness mo-dellll. Go fuck your strawman alone.
We’re saying the games we like couldn’t exist without the business models you want to ban. How does something like Dragon Ball FighterZ continue to expand if you are forbidding them from selling anything that would make character expansions possible?
If you want to say “nothing should cost money ever”, then the natural outcome of that is that we just don’t get new characters anymore. In effect, you are banning these games by making it impossible for them to exist like this.
Stop lying about what I said. “Nothing inside a video game” does not mean “nothing ever.”
And you know goddamn well that fighting games had incremental re-releases, decades before this abuse was possible.
Or, sell actual expansions. You want characters to cost twenty bucks each? Fine, sell that like a game, not like a fucking hat. If it’s on your hard drive, in your game, you already fucking have it, and charging real money is a scam.
Or, if you want continuing revenue for an online service - make it a service. Sell subscriptions. Oh sorry, do people not like that? Yeah no shit, because it’s up-front about how much it costs, rather than luring people in and gouging them for untold sums.
Or, a game comes out, and plainly exists, and doesn’t become the version that’s squeezed a billion dollars out of ten percent of players over ten years. Oh well! TF2 without this bullshit would still be TF2. People would still be playing 2fort, forever, the same way they’re still doing Ryu vs Ken on Street Fighter 2 Turbo. I do not respect the dishonest conflation of ‘FighterZ doesn’t get to expand forever’ with ‘FighterZ would be banned.’
Zero thought for all the games that genuinely don’t exist, because publishers killed projects to demand live-service flops. Zero thought for all the novel software people could have spent money on, instead of dropping hundreds in one game that barely changes year-to-year. You’re stuck on what exists, as if any change would mean all of it disappears, and you’re magically robbed of that past.
Nah, some thoughts.
But not everything is black and white. And in the spectrum of grey there are plenty of in-game sales that are better than the alternative.
Again, I would much rather buy the characters one by one and have the all-in-one box come out later than have to wait for the big box and pay full price for it.
I am genuinely baffled about why you think that’s worse than “pay me for the game every month or I take it away”. I am even more baffled by how you think that distinction is somehow logical beyond personal preference. Your being adamant about this doesn’t make it make sense.
Of course I know, I know how much it fucking sucked! No one wants to go back to that!
You’d rather spend $60 on Street Fighter II: The World Warrior, then spend $60 on Street Fighter II’: Champion Edition, then spend $60 on Street Fighter II Turbo: Hyper Fighting, then spend $60 on Super Street Fighter II: The New Challengers, then spend $60 on Super Street Fighter II Turbo?
That’s better to you than being able to get the patches for free, with the option of buying characters at a reasonable price, all while still retaining compatibility with opponents on the latest version even if you don’t spend a dime?
How is that better? How?
No, no I don’t like that! I would much rather buy a character once than have to subscribe to them forever! If I buy a character I get to keep them, if I subscribe I don’t. And I’m not getting gouged, I know what the price tag is. If anything, a subscription is gouging because I have to keep paying again and again in order to keep what I should’ve only had to pay for once.
I’m actually baffled that you’re seriously trying to suggest subscriptions as a better alternative. Like… seriously? Really?
FighterZ as we know it would not exist in your world. In your world, it’d just be the 1.0 base game and that’d be it, but I know you know we’re talking about what FighterZ was able to become over the course of its lifespan thanks to DLC.
You’re taking this needlessly aggressive tone accusing us of misconstruing you, but I know you know damn well what we’re saying here while you keep misconstruing us. Don’t accuse me of being dishonest when you’re playing dumb like this.
Hey, if latching on to the jokes helps you ignore the point be my guest, but the point stands with or without your acknowledgement.
Yes it did, and even longer. Quite a few arcade games were made with intentional difficulty spikes to suck up as many quarters as possible, not to be a fair game.
Read what you quoted.