Is this newspeech for ripping off their customers?
I don't know their games, but I wouldn't be surprised if their clients are mostly teens maxing out their parents credit cards. Yeah sorry, I am a bit in a cynical mood I suppose.
Is this newspeech for ripping off their customers?
I don't know their games, but I wouldn't be surprised if their clients are mostly teens maxing out their parents credit cards. Yeah sorry, I am a bit in a cynical mood I suppose.
This clearly exploits people's need for instant gratification. However, that need for gratification is up to the user, not the game. The game itself is quite fun and easy without ever spending a dime. There is nothing "game breaking" that has to be purchased with real funds. It's one of the truer time = money models out there.
Is anything that makes money automatically good? After all, somebody is willing to pay for it?
As for chocolate, we still have adverts praising health effects of some chocolate for children (in Germany). I think eventually they might get sued, as happened to the cigarette industry.
This is different from marketing something to children, or making something addictive, or doing both at the same time. And, this shows that you can make something with a big profit margin without relegating to abusing your customers.
Of course, games may be different. At some point everyone and their dog will own Minecraft, and not everyone can live off donations like Dwarf Fortress. I don't think that justifies going into dependency-forming mechanisms, though. If that means you can't ethically fund the rest of your life out of a single game (nor does it automatically make you ultra-wealthy), well, welcome to the movie business. Or book business.
Yes?
It's good business, but not good gaming.