Yeah, gacha games use a stamina system so you get X amount of energy to spend per day, and then usually have some kind of reserve items which regenerate stamina. And if you want more past that then you need to use premium currency to refresh it.
That makes it so that you have people keep coming back to the game each day as a habit so they aren't wasting energy, and getting a bit of money from the whales who don't care about how much they spend.
Otherwise you might have a mode that requires currency to enter, like Hearthstone's arena. Where if you do well you can earn back your currency, but if you do poorly then you go negative.
That seems a little like saying “sure we can serve mashed up vegetable paste instead of proper meals at our restaurant! Look at how well baby food sells!” The target audience of mobile games is quite different from the target audience of console and PC games.
One of the major issues is younger demographics aren't familiar with what they missed out on and how they should be treated, and they're willing to accept some discomfort if they've never dealt with it before. It's like predatory developers are Matthew McConaughey in Dazed and Confused: "That's what I love about these [gamers]... I get older, they stay the same age." There are constantly new gamers entering the market whose perception of "normal" is much different than ours, and developers count on that.
On top of that, a lot of gamers are losers who let the whole world walk all over them. We're also talking about the types who enter parasocial Twitch streamer relationships and let all their money get siphoned away through donations and completely useless subscriptions. Those people don't have self-respect and will fritter away 100% of their time and money no matter how unfair the deal is.
How does that make a difference to you, the consumer, though? Obviously, the game would have to be quality to hold your interest either way, but does there being a physical space hosting the machine the game runs on, a distributor who brings the new games in and takes the old games out, and maybe a repairman to work on the machines make that much of a difference to your gaming experience?
okay, there's the local business argument. Granted, but what's wrong with the same model direct from the publisher directly to your own hardware you have anyway? I just don't understand why it's okay in one setting but not the other.
It makes a difference because software as a service is a tremendously anti-consumer practice. Also, if a purchase isn't ownership, then piracy isn't theft.
Sounds like a terrible idea that would quickly spiral out of control. The first game to do so better crash and burn in spectacular fashion.
As I wrote below, mobiles games are already doing that and it makes them tons of money.
Yeah, gacha games use a stamina system so you get X amount of energy to spend per day, and then usually have some kind of reserve items which regenerate stamina. And if you want more past that then you need to use premium currency to refresh it.
That makes it so that you have people keep coming back to the game each day as a habit so they aren't wasting energy, and getting a bit of money from the whales who don't care about how much they spend.
Otherwise you might have a mode that requires currency to enter, like Hearthstone's arena. Where if you do well you can earn back your currency, but if you do poorly then you go negative.
That seems a little like saying “sure we can serve mashed up vegetable paste instead of proper meals at our restaurant! Look at how well baby food sells!” The target audience of mobile games is quite different from the target audience of console and PC games.
It should, but... remember the horse armour?
One of the major issues is younger demographics aren't familiar with what they missed out on and how they should be treated, and they're willing to accept some discomfort if they've never dealt with it before. It's like predatory developers are Matthew McConaughey in Dazed and Confused: "That's what I love about these [gamers]... I get older, they stay the same age." There are constantly new gamers entering the market whose perception of "normal" is much different than ours, and developers count on that.
On top of that, a lot of gamers are losers who let the whole world walk all over them. We're also talking about the types who enter parasocial Twitch streamer relationships and let all their money get siphoned away through donations and completely useless subscriptions. Those people don't have self-respect and will fritter away 100% of their time and money no matter how unfair the deal is.
I dunno about that...it's a model that worked well for quite a long time in the arcade market.
Arcade is different, because you're paying to access a game someone else bought on hardware they own.
How does that make a difference to you, the consumer, though? Obviously, the game would have to be quality to hold your interest either way, but does there being a physical space hosting the machine the game runs on, a distributor who brings the new games in and takes the old games out, and maybe a repairman to work on the machines make that much of a difference to your gaming experience?
okay, there's the local business argument. Granted, but what's wrong with the same model direct from the publisher directly to your own hardware you have anyway? I just don't understand why it's okay in one setting but not the other.
Is this a real question?
"Why does it cost money per-ride to take a taxi somewhere, but I don't have to pay per-ride for a trip in my own car?"
"Why do I have to pay hourly at an Internet cafe when I don't have to pay hourly on my own PC?"
People are okay with paying per-ride or per-time because they understand it's in exchange for exclusive access to someone else's resource.
It makes a difference because software as a service is a tremendously anti-consumer practice. Also, if a purchase isn't ownership, then piracy isn't theft.