We love the big spenders, but the biggest group of players that we WANT is long-term players who drop a few dollars here and a few dollars there, but to DO that we discovered we needed to add depth & breadth to the game. It works. And we’re NOT tailoring features to try and trap thousands of dollars out of individual players, we are in fact just trying to get the players that are spending, to spend a few times maybe once every 1-2 months. I feel okay about that.
5. And the people with a problem?
I agree with the sentiments above, and I think we need some form of regulation. In fact, if they bring it in (and they WILL eventually), I’ll pretty much welcome it. It’s NOT going to hurt the business model we’re using because our features aren’t dependent upon people with a problem, but I WILL sleep a bit easier knowing we’re not accidentally ruining somebody’s life.
Could we be doing more to help the process of regulation?
Please keep in mind that any of the statements made in these quotes should be read in the context of the entire post and thread in which they appeared.
I thought this might be relevant for the current discussion, even though addiction is the more extreme end of the spectrum.
Obviously, lots of things have changed about the game, and probably its production, since then, but I don’t think the statements in there ring as true for me as they once might have.
Abuse harms in many ways.
A casino taking advantage of a gambling addict is abusive, even without any threat of bodily harm or outward coercion.
So, too, is a video game if it knowingly and willingly affects the emotional or mental well-being of a player in a negative way. Mechanics designed to get players to play more hours than is healthy, or spend more money than is wise, are abusive in this manner; it’s exactly the same as a cigarette company claiming no responsibility for the potential harm(s) of their product(s) just because their customers “willingly participate.”
You are right, of course, that at this point the key distinction between the types of domestic violence you outline and the abusive, commercial relationships many in your playerbase probably experience (at least to some degree) is criminality, —rarely do cigarette makers or gacha-game-devs go to jail—but that doesn’t make the underlaying power structures at play any more dissimilar or less problematic.
6 Likes