I've been seeing a lot of comments complaining about the regulations and that it's up to the individual's choice but none of those arguments work when you consider that these companies are _delibaretely_ being abusive and predatory. That bit in the video where Dan told about how many of them keep in touch with their whales and send them gifts is proof that this _isn't_ an accident: giving gifts to a victim as a superficial way of making it up to them or showing affection is such a common tactic among abusers that it even has its own name (love bombing). In a scenario like this, the idea that the customer has free will is a dubious concept at best because (like a victim of abuse) while they technically can walk away these companies will do everything to convince the customer to stay and be loyal to them, eroding their ability to actually make their own decisions. And they know it's easier for us to blame the customer than to admit that we could be like them given the circumstances. Which means that yes, we do need laws to keep these companies in line _because nothing else will._ The fact that these companies are doing this in the first place blatantly shows that they couldn't give less of a fuck about morality or even properly doing their jobs/giving the customer a decent product.
+Mohamed Hijazi Agreed. Something along the lines of human thinking and how desperate we are for attention..... witch could easily lead into many other things such as flame wars and such.
South Park also point out these problems with that episode Freemium isn't Free? They mostly focused on the reason "why" people tend to spend so much on something like Candy Crush but you pointed out similar issues they covered. What I find interesting is that if the guys from South Park knows something's up, there's a problem.
Effective laws can still punish bad people for doing bad things and make sure that good people don't don't do things that a lot of people decided that they wouldn't like
Damn dude, when you're stealing from your own kids to support your video game addiction, you need serious help. Because that is low. That is really fucking low!
+BDeerhead Stealing from their college fund. My dad spent my college fund 20 dollars a week for 18 years on beer. And I think I'm the norm. What's the difference?
+BDeerhead Don't blame the addicts, blame the drugdealers. Or in less metaphorical terms, don't blame the people who are vulnerable to this sorta thing, when the whole point of predatory microtransaction games like these is to be highly addictive and explotive of such people.
"THINK OF THE CHILDREN!" Ahh yes, the easiest argument from emotion out there. Any attempt at opposition is quashed by people saying, "What? You don't care about children!?" And logic goes out the window.
I think their also needs to be a discussion on "season passes". Basically some developers are shipping incomplete games at the full price, then are charging the same price AGAIN for the rest of the game. (I'm looking at you Battlefront, Black Ops III, and Evolve).
+HerrCron Really? It's $50 for the season pass for Battlefront and for Black Ops III for very little content. They're incomplete games, with half the content, then they charge you for the rest.
+jamzacez You forgot to mention the part where the publishers are like "Hey, we have a NEW DLC for you guys! Unforunately the season's already over and the season passes don't count.. I hope you will enjoy spending another fifty bucks for two playable classes and the next add-on". *cough*Borderlands2*cough*
Stories like those are saddening, for sure. It's sad that the US has such a bad mental health stigma that people turn to these predatory games in order to try and make themselves feel better. A lot of good could be done both in the gaming world and the world at large if we, as a people, stop seeing people with mental health issues as looneys or weirdos and instead see them as people who need help.
+HeavyMetalBakesale This is not just an American thing, nor is it any larger in the US. "Those laws don't prevent what they say they prevent" is the point they were making.
+TheSwoodestGrommet Go to any non 1st world country and you'll see mental health is MUCH more looked down apart, and it's not like Europe or the Aussies are any better than the the US from what I understand.
TheSwoodestGrommet This isn't just an American thing though, that was one of the points of this video, that this isn't something you can claim as just a one nation thing, nor is it any more of an issue here then in any other nation. The EU laws don't really prevent F2P games from creating victims, its just suppose to be a guideline to try and fix an issue which the writers only half understood at best.
I like how everyone is putting blame on the consumer saying they should have controlled themselves better and their money. That is exactly why this discussion was brought up in the first place, because everyone is different and there are some people who truly cannot help themselves when it comes to spending in these f2p games. If someone cannot help themselves, do you continue to let others abuse that fault to make a profit?
+gravios24 Short of child or a person who is completely mentally retarded (in the medical sense) everyone is competent to exercise free will. People who have a compulsion to keep paying need to be helped personally by friends, family or failing that charity. The government isn't our parents, there to tell us what we can and can't have and in what quantities. Or at least it should't be.
+Alex Laird you do realize that most of those horrible F2P games use a lot of psychological tricks to trick people into buying stuff from the in - game store? Besides, not everyone has friends or family to help them out. The argument 'the government isn't a parent' is a bit invalid since those regulations would force the companies to change their methods, not the consumers!
That's easy to say but it's entirely unrealistic. Have you ever tried to help someone with a compulsive disorder? I was raised by one and they'll tie the value of their lives to their delusions. With many compulsive disorders family and friends can do nothing because it will just lead to the I'll person feeling betrayed. There is no easy fix to mental illness (not retardation) and certain insane predatory practices need to be dealt with on a societal level.
+gravios24 yes. goverment is not there to babysit adults. if someone's fat because they can't control themselves do you blame the person or the fast food industry?
+Alex Laird "everyone is competent to exercise free will." So you consider addiction to be an exercise in free will, then? Or do psychological diseases not count as "medical" enough for you?
There are a lot of parallels to F2P spending and gambling addiction. It looks like has very similar compulsion mechanisms that gambling has, but with a social aspect added on top. I have spent on an F2P game and only looking back at my bank statements over the course of a few months since I started spending did I realize that I spent more than I thought I did or even bargained for (thankfully not more than 60 dollars) because of my competitive nature and the fact that there is some small aspect of pay to win built into the game. That's when I decided that I would no longer be playing that game. It's very easy to keep spending once you start and and the benefits of spending very quickly diminish over time so you feel compelled to keep doing it almost automatically. I know people from that game that have spent hundreds of dollars per month and showed no sign of slowing down.
+zeroangelmk1 It kind of reminds me of how Japanese pachinko devs circumvent gambling laws. It's essentially "like gambling, but". And even more vile a circle since F2P doesn't even dangle the incentive of a random profit return beyond the metaphorical.
+zeroangelmk1 In many cases it is very much like gambling. This is why quite often these purchases involve a heavy RNG as well. Often with an extremely small, less than 1% chance, to actually get the reward you are attempting to get through a purchase. These companies know exactly what they are doing and why, and have heavily researched the psychology behind it in order to compel as many people as they can to spend money, and lots of it. This is why most of these games don't actually charge you real money for the items themselves, but have you buying a secondary currency to use instead. This secondary currency is seen differently from a psychological perspective and you are more likely to spend it without realizing how much money you are using.
+zeroangelmk1 again the big difference is that you don't get anything physical out of f2p. With gambling you do have a chance to walk away with money. This is more like phone sex, compulsive drinking, or substance abuse in that there is no real reward for what you do. you are just compelled to keep doing something even if it is destructive, which gambling does have that aspect, but with a chance for an actual reward which in some ways can be more sinister. As in their compulsion has a chance to actually fix things, rarely. Meanwhile f2p gaming isn't going to possibly pay off back rent and get all your stuff out of hock at the pawn shop.
Cheers for using my track at the end, guys! I've been a massive fan of the show for years and this is a big deal for me! I spat coffee all over the laptop. Good work :D
This is why I absolutely refuse to pay ANY money to any f2p game. I love Hearthstone, TF2, Dota 2, and LoL, but I fear supporting the game in anyway will lead me losing everything I have into the game, because I think I have the personality and am in the situation that these companies would prey on.
+notbobby125 u can try setting goals and then spend. that's how i do it. say a normal game u buy and play for 100 hours is 60 bucks and u find that a good triad, u can aplai it to a free to play. first u play x amount of hours and then u spent the dhow. i am currently at 40 euro per 100 to 150 hours. so in MWO if a mech pack coms along that is 80 bucks i will have to have plaid 200 to 300 hours sins the last time i spend money i am oke whit it. even if u quit a weak later u will still have had a 40 to 30 cents per hour experiences witch is fine, in my case. i know people that wont spend 10 bucks on a free to play the spend 100 hours in but pay full price fore the next AAA 8 hour story en 2 evenings online game. tldr: time /game budget = how much u can spent on shiny stupid ting.
+SoY_FooD Yup. I go by the "1$ for 1 hour" rule. I've even extended it to my steam library. I won't buy any new games until I've "earned back" the ones I've already bought on a summer/winter sale impuls buy.
+notbobby125 Its good you're responsible about your addictive personality, but a 10$ purchase a month is in no way going to hurt you to get a cosmetic for your favorite character. Those games don't have the abusive paying for power/time practices so it's unlikely you'd fall into a sinkhole unless at every skin or hero release you're like "MUST BUY"
+notbobby125 Hearthstone is the LEAST pay to win out of any card game out there. Like if you spend 600 bucks on hearthstone, you practically unlock EVERYTHING you need to make all the competitive decks. Spend 600 bucks on Yugioh, you have enough for one functional meta deck. As for League of Legends, it's just skins man, and it's not like you play all 100+ characters. You probably only ever play a small handful and within that small handful, give enough shits to buy a skin for them. The same applies for TF2/DOTA2. Those games's FTP model is no where near as cancerous as the ones most mobile games have.
Person: Think of the children! Everyone who lost all of their money sinking into f2p games: How about we think of how much these companies are scamming us?
another insightful and well thought through video, great job guys, the quality of your videos is rarely matched on youtube. especially since it doesn't just lay out a topic but opens up discussion and provokes rebellion rather than not thinking about the topic ever again
It's too bad that the mentioned target group is socially discredited. And no grand speech, no brave uprising of compassionate individuals can change that since it is not a political issue but an issue which simply isn't viewed let alone adressed in a objectively reasonable way by the majority. People are just numb towards a needed but different behavior.
Can we stop predatory practices in Free-to-Play? Or do we need laws to protect players of all ages? For more of our thoughts on F2P, check out our playlist: bit.ly/1ZTctlk
+Extra Credits You should NOT put regulations on games. They are an art form, a medium of expression. It'd be the same as limiting cinema, television, art, or literature. The problem lies in the consumer - it should be their job to protect themselves. "A fool and his money are soon parted."
+Maragoras so you say that companies playing on peaples weakness is an art that should not be limited ? there are some countries that put real limitations on games (germany) becouse they hate their own history. I agree there should not be a limitation on the art side of the game but payed dlc on a 60euro game at release is bullshit that should be stopped by law if publishers keep acting like jackasses
+Maragoras The crucial difference here being that while you could go into a cinema 20 times to watch the same movie in a row, the movie will not change. Games, on the other hand, are inherently interactive, and the gameplay itself DOES change if you throw more money at an F2PP2W game. So wrong comparison.
This is one of my favorite things so far about Extra Credits -- going beyond the topics of games, gamers, and developers to the real issues of human feelings and interactions, both healthy and unhealthy.
+Zero Richardson Too many people are in the shadow of ignorance, or just choose to forget about them. Just strolling through the comments, at least 80% of the comments are from people saying things like "That person is responsible for spending the money. They need to be fixed, not the companies". They even watched a video on it, and still missed the entire point of it. This problem will probably need to get a big public event that brings peoples' attention to it, but there is still a huge social stigma about video-games period, nonetheless going into an incredibly specific area. that people that got it specifically explained to them couldn't understand, to where I don't know if it'll do any real good.
+Zero Richardson I don't know how to solve their problem but I know one thing that helps: Set a rule for yourself to stop, and then make the process of paying for anything in game as long and arduous as possible so you can have time to think about what you're working. This means manually entering cc info instead of saving it on the site, and keeping your card out of reach when you're near the computer. Another option is to get rid of the card, and deal with having to carry cash or checks and going to the bank periodically to get more, and not being able to purchase anything online. The final option I can suggest is to quit the game cold turkey, and find other ways to interact with your social circle from the game.
+Zero Richardson The good thing is, a free to play addiction is normally mobile phone based, swap out your mobile phone for a normal none internet capable phone like a old Nokia and just ask a friend to lock you out of your own computer for a few months...
I think people that realize they have significant issues can probably take steps to help themselves, but I'm asking if there are any services available so that if you know someone with a problem you can help them with information, not just telling them to take steps they won't take like changing their phone or not saving their credit card information.
See. These types of videos are i freaking love you guys at EC! Excellent analysis, all I can think of now is which friends (or all) do I forward it to. Thanks EC team!
I think you're wrong to pin the blame on Apple for responding to these regulations by haphazardly yanking free-to-play games. When regulators say the equivalent of "Nice multi-billion dollar enterprise ya got there; it would be a shame if something...happened to it," you can't expect things to go according to plan. The blame belongs squarely on the regulators for their hamfisted approach.
+The Economics Detective Could you explain precisely what it was about the regulation itself that was so threatening? It sounds more like Apple et al yanked these products because they weren't worth keeping while trying to navigate new legislation.
+The Economics Detective because in all those years of f2p, apple never had time to think about how they could stop predatory practices themselves. sorry, but we will need "regulators" for as long as companies actively support shit like this
+The Economics Detective I disagree. Big companies like Apple have legal teams, who in my experience tend to be hyper-cautious about stuff like this even when they don't need to be. The reason is because it's easier to not read the details of a law and just arbitrarily enforce it in the bluntest way possible than it is to actually investigate the law and implement it properly. For Apple, there's very little negative consequences for doing what they did - angry devs can't do anything, because the App Store is the only way into the iphone market, and they can't complain to the EU because they'll just shrug and say Apple's a private company and you agreed to their rules. On the other hand, actually investigating and properly implementing the law comes with costs in time and effort that Apple feels could be better spent elsewhere.
+z beeblebrox Even a 0.1% chance of a billion-dollar lawsuit has a negative expected value of one million dollars. And when the lawsuit comes, they'll definitely go for Apple and Google's deep pockets rather than some tiny indy dev. So I see Apple's choice to be ultra-cautious as totally reasonable and predictable.
+Jordan Kloosterman That doesn't help people who have mental, or emotional problems. Critical thinking skills don't come to mind when a person thinks if they don't put money into these games, they'll lose the few good things they have left in life.
+Jordan Kloosterman They already are... With "work hard" we're even in an age nowadays where people work all night and get health problems more and more...
+Leivve You just see this classic, bad response everywhere. "Oh they should just work hard." These are people with mental and emotional issues. They are trying, but that doesn't mean they can just flip a switch and overcome these problems. You can't teach someone in school to not suffer from depression. That's just stupid. We need to focus on real solutions, not simply blaming the victim and ignoring it.
+Leivve That's a fair point. Do you have any ideas on how to address such concerns? It seems like what you are describing is not just unhealthy people (or at least people in unhealthy situations) but unhealthy communities. So how can we in the larger community reach out and support these smaller communities?
I'm surprised none of you guys have talked about Japanese F2P mobile games. They have laws about gachas and stuff over there, and trust me: everything you've been talking about goes up to 1000 when talking about JP mobages. I mean, in the communities I'm in, whaling within your means is seen as something to encourage. Good on you for supporting Maki-chan, etc. Try poking around the game Love Live! School idol festival. I quit it recently after my addiction got wayyyy too bad and I realized KLab basically built a sub-par game with really cute girls and no-one really played for the gameplay... just the cards. :/
+blooist I actually stopped playing that myself. Just too much of a time sink XD, grinding through events to get cards. Though to be fair I never actually put any money in there since it didn't seem worth it cost wise. Those gems were way too expensive. Though I think they at least did put in some reasonable effort. It's a solid enough music-based game and they do have a fair amount of voiced events that you get just by playing normally. I'm just not all that good at that rapid-fire finger movement and needed some space on the phone. Don't really miss it.
+FlareKnight I just hate how insidious LLSIF is because they have a HUGE franchise behind them. Though, TBH I quit LLSIF and then started playing Aikatsu! Photo on Stage in the next few days... and I've been playing Battle Girl High School for months but BGHS and PoS aren't jerks. qq
blooist Yeah, that's fair. Though I suppose the power of love live means they can basically get away with anything. I mean damn have you see the sales that show's movie brought in? Insanity.
+blooist I felt like I learned my lesson to never touch another Japanese F2P mobile game ever again. Perhaps it just so happens that the devs/publisher designed the games so poorly. With the games being based around "cards," the biggest flaw was them "selling power" and the potential for power creep. The biggest mistake for any player (admittedly myself included) was to waste money on these "card packs" (I unfortunately paid before I saw any of the EC episodes warning us of such practices). Sure, you may get a nice relative power boost with unique and cool looking cards from random premium packs, but thanks to the power creeping, they eventually become useless. The game then pins the spenders (especially the whales) into spending all their time into keeping up with the relative power level of the "competitive" community by spending hours and hours of their days on "events" (aka pissing contests to see who can either spend the most time or the most money) to get their rewards. While being part of a guild did have great social aspects, it really guilt trips people into going through this never ending hamster wheel. I was so glad to delete those games and not look back at them.
+Cuckoo Phendula Considering I'm still playing 2 mobage currently I'm making sure to not make the same mistakes I did with LLSIF. Too busy to have time for the event? Unlike before where'd play the game before anything else... if I don't feel like playing that day, I just don't play now! And if I don't wanna use my stamina right now? I won't stop what I'm doing and use LP... let that bar fill up!
As a student of political science, I've noticed that, if the victim of some societal problem has ultimate responsibility for their problem (i.e. their actions led to their downfall), society as a whole ignores the issue, with children being an exception due to their age. Rape, systemic poverty, debt, these are all issues that people ignore because of victim blaming. The worst part is, it's understandable. If something is preventable, it's natural to tell people to prevent it, and if someone does something stupid, it can be hard to look past that. So people blame victims and these problems go ignored. Great video, as usual!
+xqtr74 There is no logic in comparing a game, that you download and play voluntary, and can leave without any consequences with cults. Cults usually involve real family members, social pressure, intimidation and so on. Fuck, let's regulate everything then - how many chocolate bars you can buy in a day, how much money you can spend on collectibles, how often you should upgrade your computer based on your salary and so on, and so on. There are idiots everywhere that get exploited.
This has definitely opened my eyes. I always read into what I'm voting for in polls when it affects the video game I'm playing for future content/changes. It's necessary to do the same with the people that work in the Senate office.
The best armour against free-to-play ? Get used to playing good old-school games (I don't mean oldies but games on a classic financial strategy, buy the game and done). NO ONE could make you pay for micro-transactions when you know you could use Cheat Engine to get that number of gold coin. (and I do have an equivalent of Cheat Engine on my phone)
I'm in a similar situation to some of the people in these "stories" but grown up men will never get simpathy for spending too much time or money on videogames.
Want more game studies? Dan is taking an in-depth look at the 12 Principles of Animation, starting with Shadow of the Colossus! Catch that series and more on our sister channel, Extra Play: bit.ly/1PTqkCD
+Extra Credits Could you guys discuss the viability of a possible ad-wall versus a pay-wall within the F2P sphere? I mean, we get ads regardless, but if there were strategically placed, 10 second ads, meaning between events, in order to get that next level item, that ad could generate revenue for the developers, not take the money directly and immediately from the player, and provide a moment where the player can ask themselves "Do I need to take a break?" The lawmakers could restrict the mini-transactions to one per account per day or something similar to help keep the initial revenue flowing. It's not a perfect idea, but it's an idea.
This hit home with me. My dad's never really played or liked video games, but he's been going through a rough patch in his life and he's fairly recently picked up Clash of Clans...
This is one of those videos that gives greater insight into my own actions. Looking back, the games I feel the strongest urge to spend money on are those with clans or similar. In those where it's more or less just myself, I mostly just plug away and be patient, but with clans involved, the fact that I can buy faster progression or more cash to support the guild is one of the biggest incentives for me. As someone who struggles with depression and feeling socially isolated, I can now recognise how that impacts that feeling. I'm fortunate enough to have some strong relationships in my non-digital life so I'm not dependent on games for my social "fix" as it were, but I can definitely imagine how if I didn't, how much stronger that urge would be. Unfortunately, I'm not really sure if there's anything the industry can really do on their end to prevent such occurrences, at least beyond not using a funding model that depends on such people getting roped in. It's a thorny issue that I can only see getting better on the player end. Aside from having good mental health services though, there's no way to legislate people into better mental health.
Wait. How is a company supposed to know when one of their users is addicted as opposed to rich? Also, how they supposed to stop it? Also is it the companies responsibility?
While I agree that these companies are taking advantage of individual's and their desires, no one forces these individuals to spend. People are responsible for the choices they make and must live with the consequences, regardless of what compelled them to make said choices. Personal responsibility is something I feel at lot of today's society has forgotten, and I really hope for its triumphant return....
I think, for the reasons stated earlier in the video that we need fewer laws, not more. Large companies are going to find workarounds anyways and it will just murder small indie app developers. Restriction on the market typically does this unfortunately.
+Timothy McLean Wrong here on half of that since to many laws will still restricts our gaming industry. Add on that those writing the laws haven't got a damn clue what they are doing past what their donors tell them, it's just a money grab for them. Requiring legitimate people who have at least some grey matter on the subject is what's needed but politics doesn't work that way unfortunately.
I think a set maximum ammount you can spend on a game within 24 hours would be good to have. Maybe only having it so that on a daily basis you can only spend $1, but the ammount you get to spend is accumulative, so if you don't spend any money at all for 24 hours, the ammount you are able to spend is still there on the next 24 hours, allowing you to spend $2.
+Coolclev erstone This would cost the company more than you think. Most F2P models are financially supported by a select few whales that buy big and in bulk.
Minngarm Halnhammer Yes, however, what if there was a gift you can randomly get each month that increased the ammount you can spend, maybe by adding... say, $20 to the ammount you can spend, or maybe tripling it? The gift rewards would vary though I think some of the higher up stuff, like quadrupling or adding $50, would have the rng prefer to give said gifts to people who barely spend anything or those who use what they can every day. Not a perfect system, but it could be a start.
I think that won't be an effective system, because f2p still depends upon their users' compulsions, and that model would likely kill any such compulsions if not be ineffective. But a similar model, where you have a much larger limit to how much you can spend in a month, could be the most ideal.
Coolclev erstone I know people who have dropped over 10k in a single F2P game, and they can afford it. Hell one of them dropped 50 bucks on my account just because he was tired of me running around without camo. Restricting it monthly is not a good idea for the business, less F2P games would be able to sustain themselves, which means less content development and more closures. It is not a bad initial idea, but it won't work in the F2P market and community think over the situation some more you'll come up with a better suggestion in time.
The worst examples of the free to play industry that do such things are, clash of clans and candy crush candy crush is just a pain for copyright, and the industry of making such games clash of clans is more guilty of this predatory practice as the former top player would bring 5 iPads into the shower with him so that way he would never have to log off.
+Slimy “Slim Shady” Shade Didn´t they have an episode a while back about how politics could be considered a game, but it´s mechanics were really broken?
From now on every time somebody accuses Extra Credits of being "SJWs" (I hate this term), I'll just point them in the direction of this closing statement and tell them that they're wrong.
Why should we bother trying stop adults from making these sorts of decisions? I don't want to set a precedent of the government acting as everyone's nanny when a few people can't control their finances.
+Trusseck That's not the problem they raise, though; It's the unethical practices that companies deliberately use to abuse people's psychological wants and needs.
CaitSeith Smoking, vehicle licensing, seat belts, various morality laws, gun control, OSHA etc. This guy must live in Somalia if he thinks precedent has yet to be set. All western governments do this and have been like this for many decades.
That episode was important. This is very serious. This industry is "young" and will face many challenges. If it fails to address the problems it causes on the most vulnerable of consumers... Videogames have a bigger impact on society than movies, books or comicbooks, it is a huge responsabilty, i just hope we can manage it somehow. Very good and relevant episode guys. You are the lighthouse of the industry in my opinion, the light that guides it to a good port. Keep it up, I beg of you.
As someone who does play gatcha style games (a staple of this type of f2play game) I 100% agree with your ending point and we should aim to educate about self responisbility and understanding that essentially, your paying for very little.
I avoid f2p and don't play these games. If a game is good I am willing to pay for it. But F2P isn't free, it's like a rent. Make it free or sell it, but don't sell it trough backdoors.
Good F2P games dont slam you with a paywall and the paid-for (premium) currency is thereto speed up mundane processes or to get unique but not integral items/characters whatever. Good examples of F2P: Anything produced by Supercell Bad examples of F2P: Any F2P produced by EA
+Keith Killner I haven't found a problem with PSO2 yet either. Honestly, looking at the "paid purchases" options, I'm pretty much only tempted to get another Mag (A creature you fed excess items to to gain bonus stats), because my current one is optimized for Magic, and if I wanna run a melee or gunner specialist, I won't have appropriate bonus stats. It's not even a major or essential thing, just something that'd be nice to have. Everything else is just "more storage space" (200 slots is more than enough), or "redecorate your player room" (That you don't spend any time in) or "Temporary rare drop boost!" (the standard drop rate is fine, especially if you do the group quest events, which freakin shower you in them).
Kenpokid4 I peronally stick solely to Supercell developments, mainly because their games dont slam you with paywalls, dont lock key items behind premium currency payments and give you moderate amounts of the premium currency for free over time, yes I've spent money in those games but thats because I both trust the devlopers, enjoy the games and simply felt like treating myself to a little boost. Great example of EA's terrible F2P is The Simpsons: Tapped Out, I played that game and loved it, eventually got bored of it however because multiple key story tasks required that you purchase characters/items/buildings that can only be bought with premium currency (donuts) which you VERY RARELY get for free, essentially only getting them if EA screws up somehow and hands out 20-ish to every player (note that even low cost premium items usually cost 100+ donuts) so you need to spend real money to make progress.
Keith Killner I personally haven't touched their "totally not just FarmVille/Clash of Clans guys" stuff, just Dragon Age Heroes. In DA Heroes, you never need to use the paid rifts, and if memory serves you can pull from them with ingame gold as well as gems (which you get for free, though it's fairly grindy to get them).
Larry Psuedonym I have no idea where you're getting any of this. Are you saying we shouldn't even _try_ to make good laws if they won't be perfect? That said, if we could make a fair, effective, enforceable law against being a dick, I don't see why not (assuming we made the penalties appropriately mild).
Larry Psuedonym It wasn't a serious suggestion to begin with...but trying to find something along those lines will help make better legislation, even if we don't find a perfect answer. Why? Freedom which is being used only to hurt others shouldn't be allowed in the first place, and this holds true at all levels. In principle, anti-dick legislation (you know what I mean) would be a good thing. I don't think there's any way to do it in reality, but in principle it would be good.
If companies are intentionally targeting people that are at risk of losing everything just to get past a level or a certain item, then there should be some legislation. Honestly, a lot of these stories seem to come from people who didn't grow up with video games like senior citizens or older workers who need something new to play on their commute; they aren't aware of the schemes certain companies use so they get duped into them. It's nice to say that there should be an element of self-regulation but not everyone is aware on how games or the industry works.
+Dutchgirl Maan its the same thing with anything we like and has a sad story behind it.. we ignore it and move on. Just like when a family member dies. We humans are really good a moving forward, so much so that a lot of past problems eventually catch up and hit us in the ass.
+Dutchgirl Maan Because most of the companies are not lead by compassionate people who will cut off the broke whales. As for the individual developers, they've got to eat themselves. Getting a job making games is a dream job for a lot of people, and in this economy, nobody is going to be too willing to give up a pretty good job just for ethical reasons. And of course, there's the fact that you'd be hard pressed to find companies that have no skeletons in their closet. Whether it be deliberate abuse like some companies, or simply creating an otherwise fine system that can feed into someones addiction, you're not going to be able to avoid those stories. Somewhere in the world, there is a undoubtely an old lady who has spent every penny she has knitting. Any product that is created for enjoyment, and that can be repurchased (as compared to a re-readable book) is going to leave someone addicted and broke. It may be worth it to refuse to work for Zynga (as you're kinda not really making games there), but other companies are going to have those stories too, no matter how ethical you are.
+Dutchgirl Maan Gambling has been around for a long time too, people have a very easy time just thinking, its not my fault they wont control themselves.
This video is even more relevant now than it was 4 years ago. With games intentionally being made of the poorest quality in the name of profits, going way over the line with monetizing these same games making the whales think they are helping build the game they should have had in the first place. These days games are like this: You pay for a water bottle with no water in it. Companies add water DLC to make you pay for the game again. Or you can be like Crossout and deliberately make your P2W equipment so blatantly overpowered that the only chance free players will ever have at winning is to be on a team that has more whales than the other. The P2W gear in this game is so powerful that people make "seal clubber" builds designed for the sole purpose of infiltrating lower level lobbies with high level guns. [usually cannons or a particular tiny 4 wheeled personification of gaming hell] The fact that such a thing exists not only shows that Gajin knowingly makes the game unfair, but also that whales do not know empathy as they mercilessly kill comparatively defenseless players with shots that are vary capable of disabling your car in 1 hit. Or when the whales bring out the most hated weapon in the game... THE GOD DAMN GRENADIER DRONE! Independent from the player who sent it out, these tiny 4 wheeled terrors have no weaknesses as they blow away your armor and weapons before your even able to aim down far enough to stop them. Worst of all? THIS THING IS DLC! Most common build before I left the game was having Goliath tracks[DLC, most durable mobility item in the game and also tall enough to hide your cabin] hiding a Growl with ether turret cannons or these grenadier drones. Purposefully having the lowest powerscore possible so they could smuggle there high level gear into low level lobbies. Fuck crossout
I don't feel like you reinforced the point well. You need to provide clear examples of when the game is at fault and not when people make bad choices for their gaming addiction.
Any game with more than 100$ of cosmetic day one DLC is shameful plus having no control over what items/cards you receive from paying for loots/packs only multiplies the amount of time/money just to look/play how you want & way too many game genres use this mechanic. Worst by far for F2P games is any kind of purchasable in-game power up, but it seems the creator of this video views more problems with F2P MMO's which have that social factor requiring people to pool resources.
+Minngarm Halnhammer If that happened a lot of DLC would not even exist. (and no, not "they will be added to the basic game" but literally they would NOT exist)
Celio Hogane Which is exactly why it should be done. Either include it in the initial game or package it together in a decent bundle. Tired of this Europa Universalis IV shit.
This reminds me of the "mental health is key to stopping gun violence" argument. It addresses the problem that is easiest to handle without looking the more complicated big picture that has roots in the human condition. People are drawn to companionship and competition, and industries cater to those desires like a buffet, allowing people to harm themselves and/or the people around them in a hardly limited pursuit of happiness.
I don't get american's obsession with "protecting the children" that politicians and scandalous old ladies talk so much about... I mean, almost all of the things your children needs to be protected of YOU SHOULD TEACH THEM YOURSELF damnit, do you need a law to say "A company can't let a kid spends 6000 dollars in a game" when the same effect would happen if you just teach the damn kid how to preserve money, possibly by not giving the kid 6000 dollars available to spend... To me, these people are just bad parents wanting to blame someone for being incompetent
All this comes down to is, people need to watch themselves not someone else... They thought buying that shit was more important so now they suffer the consequences.
+Dexyu Did you just completely not watch the video? The people who are going to suffer and have suffered are the depressed and vulnerable. How the heck are those people going to watch themselves? This is like saying someone who tried to commit suicide should have been more careful and deserved the pain they suffered.
+Dexyu I agree with a addendum that game companies should be looking out for their consumers best interest as well. It only serves you better in the long run. The best example I can think of is Blizzard. Last blizzcon people were so worried the company wouldn't support starcraft 2 anymore after its final expansion that people there actually asked blizzard to put in micro transactions into the game. I guarantee you never heard that one before, (I had to double check,). Its because blizzard sure, cares about making money, but also cares about its consumers. Yes, blizzard has all kinds of other problems but customer loyalty and satisfaction isn't one.
+FlareKnight If their problems are bad enough that they can't manage themselves on that level, it shouldn't be up to the game developers or laws to protect them from themselves. What they need is actual help.
+Dexyu I do agree. Yes, it's sad that some companies will take advantage of people with low self-control, but passing laws to help the few who have emotional or mental problems, only means that they will seek that fulfillment elsewhere: the casino, the lottery, garage sales, wherever. It becomes a never-ending cycle of trying to protect a few people from themselves at the expense of billions of hours and dollars of other people's time. As much as I admire the sentiment behind it, I'm just not a fan of trying to protect people from themselves. Good video though, and self-regulation by these companies would be cool.
But what if the game encourages you to do those purchases even after you've spent a couple hundred of dollars on that game the same day. I don't know what the biggest sums are that people pay for these games daily, but there could be implemented a cap after which the game starts asking if you really want to make the purchase that day. It wouldn't prevent the purchase but it would help the people who are spending unhealthy amounts of money on the game to consider if they should still keep spending their money that quickly.
When companies design f2p around player addiction or trapping players into a pay loop to remain competitive, changes need made. Like Mobile Strike and its numerous clones.
How sad is it that videogame companies can have "victims" now. Not just angry customers, but victims. I mean, we maybe pissed at Konami for all its bullshit during the past year, but we are not being victimized by them. Free-to-play and micro-transactions are a cancer on videogames. All the Hearthstones and DOTAs in the word won't change what is a fundamentally predatory and exploitative business model.
Alan S. Hale In the sense that they believe themselves to be victimised instead of realising that they have their own personal power to withstand & counteract those detestable practices.
Any kind of government regulation is bad. Regulations do more harm than good. Big companies can afford regulations and can find ways around them, but smaller companies cannot afford regulations that, by design, hinder profits. Basic Economics.
+TheCapitalistic So, the government should not regulate child labor? I can't agree that any government regulation is necessarily bad but, you're right that big companies can and will find ways around a lot of regulations so we shouldn't have too much regulations, like most things a balance is needed.
+TheCapitalistic You do know the Food and Drug act is a government regulation, right? Yes, companies get around it in little ways like Tic Tacs with sugar and chikin products, but you are no longer getting a horseradish jar that is half sawdust. It's not just big companies that try to screw people over either. Look at some of the more notorious 'health' websites that prey on sick people with expensive quackery or how many indie games on steam are cons. Like Merc said, it's about balance.
Surprisingly Blank There are some very rich people in America who believe that the FDA should be abolished. The idea that government control benefits large companies in all cases when some large companies specifically desire less government control is plain silly. It's like you've both pointed out, everything is a balancing act.
I just hope that as a community, we can be loud enough that those just getting into gaming can more readily hear the voices of veteran gamers calling out these practices. There are of course veterans of specific games, but is it wrong to assume that it is people who are not seasoned gamers (or at least don't have a large repertoire of games that they play) that most often fall into this? I would hope that those of us in the gaming community will have more ways in the future to warn others of exploitative games.
It sounds like the "biggest problem" isn't the predatory practices of the companies. It sounds like the "biggest problem" is self-control. The gambling addict or alcohol addict isn't a victim of the casino or liquor store. They are just junkies that have a problem.
Krombopulos Michael McDonalds is profiting from people buying cheeseburgers. It isn't the company's fault for selling the burgers, its your fault for buying 13 of them.
+Monochromicornicopia And yet these "F2P" games have $100+ options to buy their ingame currency. They know who they get most of their profits off of, and knowingly cater to them.
***** That's not the company's problem. This is America, home of capitalism. You're trying to shift the responsibility when it clearly lies with the consumer. If you have a gambling problem, its not the casinos fault.
+Monochromicornicopia I'd like to note that I'm not for banning F2P games, just some of the predatory practices - ie. require monthly caps on spending, etc.
Ouch! I didn't realize F2P companies cultivated 'Whales' in the *_exact same way gambling companies did._* Also, you're explaination just helped me over an impasse over why _'If It Will Protect a Single Child/A Govt. Small Enough to fit in your Kindergarten'_ is a false dilemma.
"Think of the children" is an agitprop tactic to push any legislation with little opposition with an emotional push ...like you did but your angle is "think of mentally unstable adults that have uncontrollable urges to spend the money they make" ... let's make laws that treat adults like children that have uncontrollable urges ... that's a sure way to advance the maturity of society ...
The best way I can see for f2p games to mitigate this issue would be to put in systems to let players actively monitor their expenditures. All too often I see games like this ask 'would you like to spend $5 on [insert currency or item here]?', you make the transaction, and that's it. No record, no receipt, and no way to stop yourself from spending again. Not knowing how much you've spent it the biggest reason a lot of people get in trouble. An e-mailed receipt and in-game purchase history can go a long way to helpimg people realize how much they spend. As for preventative measures, the games should allow you to program a spending limit of some sort. I can speak from experience when I say that having an easy means to track and control my spending made a world of difference.
It's their money and they're choosing to spend it that way. Should all gambling be illegal because some have become addicted? Why is it the companies fault that these people can't control themselves?
+Wouldhee Many times it's not their fault. Gambling shouldn't be illegal, but it should be highly regulated to prevent the industry from preying on vulnerable people. Sure, it's their choice to spend the money, but people often don't act rationally, and it isn't moral to make money by exploiting this weakness that many people have. Therefore, there should be some restrictions (don't ask me for specifics though, I don't know much about them).
+Wouldhee There are regulations and laws about gambling though....so what exactly is your argument here? And again, did you even watch the video before commenting on it?
+Wouldhee Honestly I wouldn't mourn gambling for a long time if it was banned completely. Aside from poker almost all of them is completely luck based and they exist solely to get money out of people's pockets by exploiting human psichology. I admit it can be fun time to tome, but I don't think that it justifies the damage it does to people's lives.
+Wouldhee That's not the problem they raise, though; It's the unethical practices that companies deliberately use to abuse people's psychological wants and needs.
We trust people enough to spend their own money. If they can't handle it I can't feel sorry for them. You can have an addiction but still have to pay the bill's. Put down the controller and enter the real world.
+iam2ku4u While it is certainly the responsibility of the addicts to get help, it's also wrong for a company to knowing exploit addicts. Prosecuting companies who can be demonstrated to intentionally and knowing engage in tactics that ruin lives, and feed off addicts, doesn't remove the guilt from the addicts. This kind of abusive relationship takes two people, and I think both need to be held accountable. The only downside is trying to figure out when a company is deliberately bankrupting people, versus just 'happening' to bankrupt people. All companies try to get as much money as they can from clients, but where is the line between "Making money" and "Abusing your customers"? That's the tricky part.
+Sines314 To a company it doesn't matter. They don't care about Paul in Kansas who has to get his nicotine fix. The individual doesn't matter. If Paul leaves they find a new Paul, John. Its never personally, just transactionally.
I'm sorry, but I don't have a lot of sympathy for those few rare instances where someone goes overboard in Clash of Clans or whatever. Call me cold hearted, but even though they are more 'vunerable', they still have free will, and, as such no one is mandating that they spend their life savings on a pointless video game. As I see it, it is no different than those people that go to Vegas and loose a great deal of money. No one said that they had to, but they did regardless, and, as such, should they bot be beld accountable for their actions? Aee people really just mindless automatons who can't help but click on the button with the words 'best value' next to it? In the end, all I'm saying is that, even though such sob stories are sad, I think that people are better than that and are perfectly capable of making their own choices and dealing with the consequences of those actions, thus, they do not need to be 'protected' by ineffective government legislation and should simply be left to use their best judgement.
Thing is though there are regulations on casino's as to how they can present themselves and what kind of tactics they can use. Most want to have similar systems for games.
How I think of situations with kids and spending on F2P games: A rare case, if given attention, will almost always beat out a common case that nobody shows attention towards.
One law that should be implemented: any video game or DLC may be sold at full price only in the first month of its release, after which time there is a cumulative 1% price reduction per week. Yes, that means that a game will be free after two years for those patient enough to wait. As the bulk of games profits are earned in the first few months post-release, this will be seen as a benefit to most, except perhaps for the used games market whose share will be cut by this price drop mechanic.
I usualy like your videos but this is so unclear... How exactly F2P forces players to spend so much money? How can they prevent it even if they want to? I have so many questions...
+Bartosz Golo It's basically the purest form of Skinner Box manipulation. South Park tackled how evil these practices are in their episode appropriately titled "Freemium isn't Free". They explain it way better than I could in the episode.
+Riggbone The design logic behind the energy bars is however not that people fork money over. It's because you want to limit the game session lenght so that the user does not get bored with the game fast. You want them to have things to look forward to so that they keep regularly returning for further game sessions.
+Riggbone There's no contradiction there. It can be good and engaging game but over-saturation and burning through the content too quickly can lead to lower retention. The purpose behind those bars is still the same.
@extracredits after watching all your videos about f2p, loot boxes and monetization of games, I would wholeheartedly like to see what is your opinion on how it was done in Shadow of War. As a mostly single player player (that sounds weird), I wondered why would anyone make a sp game with loot boxes that aren't cosmetic but actually offer almost a paywall to the end of the game. Not that I liked the end that much, but I did spend over 10h grinding my way to it because I wouldn't buy a loot box. Keep the good work.
+Micail de Araújo Laws to make sure game companies don't unethically take advantage of vulnerable people are no joke. Game design can be used in bad ways just look at the sesame credit episode. I would great if those people could protect themselves but they're the vulnerable ones, people are exploiting their metal health issues.
Jordan Kloosterman Laws won't do nothing to protect those people. Instead of that, the way to help those people is to make them not be that vunerable, this is the real problem. Those laws will only be used to difficult business for small companies. My english isn't really good, so i hope you understand what i'm saying.
+Micail de Araújo but when companies are hiring psychologists to figure out what the best way to get people to pay them money on a f2p game is a bit shady.
Lionskull If are not games, people will use another thing, that isn't the real problem. No law can protect someone from himself. Blaming games won't really help anyone. What should be done is to treat the patient rather than the symptoms.
+Micail de Araújo The individual is fucking stupid and doesn't know what's best for himself or anyone around them, that's why there are laws in the first place. If I lived in a world where everyone was responsible for themselves I'd burn tires in my neighbors front yard and make sure all the carcinogenic smoke blows into other peoples homes, since they should be responsible enough to filter all the air that goes into their homes. my neighbor couldn't do anything about it because I took his life. who cares about him? he couldn't be responsible and protect himself from me and my gun. Oh no, that fire I started went out of control and is burning all the surrounding houses, I hope all those people were responsible enough to keep hundreds of gallons of water nearby in case such a thing would happen. If I were to propose a law that said "Micail de Araujo was to be punched in the balls daily and in return no human on the planet would know starvation for the rest of his life"., would you oppose that law? or is your individuality too important in the scope of the billions of people? is it too important for millions of people? is it too important for thousands? where's the cut off for how important you and your individual right to not be punched in the balls repeatedly are against the well being of others? what will a law that restricts free 2 play games do to you, except be a minor inconvenience for you if you even play them? Why do you even care?
A way to solve this is putting some kind of limit you can spend on a game on a determined time. This doesn't means stopping letting the player get the resource that they want, just have a "unlimited" option for them all the time. The pokemon shufle does that. After spend 30 bucks, you get unlimited energy charges to play as much as you want.
I've been seeing a lot of comments complaining about the regulations and that it's up to the individual's choice but none of those arguments work when you consider that these companies are _delibaretely_ being abusive and predatory. That bit in the video where Dan told about how many of them keep in touch with their whales and send them gifts is proof that this _isn't_ an accident: giving gifts to a victim as a superficial way of making it up to them or showing affection is such a common tactic among abusers that it even has its own name (love bombing).
In a scenario like this, the idea that the customer has free will is a dubious concept at best because (like a victim of abuse) while they technically can walk away these companies will do everything to convince the customer to stay and be loyal to them, eroding their ability to actually make their own decisions. And they know it's easier for us to blame the customer than to admit that we could be like them given the circumstances.
Which means that yes, we do need laws to keep these companies in line _because nothing else will._ The fact that these companies are doing this in the first place blatantly shows that they couldn't give less of a fuck about morality or even properly doing their jobs/giving the customer a decent product.
Glad to have given you your 100th like
Muh anarcho capitalism
A very good topic choice, it's fantastic to see you guys cover broader stuff than just game-design "by the books".
+Mohamed Hijazi Agreed. Something along the lines of human thinking and how desperate we are for attention..... witch could easily lead into many other things such as flame wars and such.
South Park also point out these problems with that episode Freemium isn't Free? They mostly focused on the reason "why" people tend to spend so much on something like Candy Crush but you pointed out similar issues they covered. What I find interesting is that if the guys from South Park knows something's up, there's a problem.
Actually south park has always addressed serious social issues, that's kind of it's thing.
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." - Plato
So, so true.
But then again, corporations aren't people, so we need international regulation.
Did he actually say that?
Effective laws can still punish bad people for doing bad things and make sure that good people don't don't do things that a lot of people decided that they wouldn't like
@@wrjtung3456 It seems to be a quote from Philip K. Howard describes Plato's views rather than Plato's own words.
Damn dude, when you're stealing from your own kids to support your video game addiction, you need serious help.
Because that is low.
That is really fucking low!
+BDeerhead Stealing from their college fund. My dad spent my college fund 20 dollars a week for 18 years on beer. And I think I'm the norm. What's the difference?
+BDeerhead Don't blame the addicts, blame the drugdealers. Or in less metaphorical terms, don't blame the people who are vulnerable to this sorta thing, when the whole point of predatory microtransaction games like these is to be highly addictive and explotive of such people.
Unless that relative prepays for a four year state college than that account is just a glorified raining day fund.
+Josh Neubert Yep, rarely do college funds actually make it to a college.
+NGE Fan There is no diference, is equally bad
"THINK OF THE CHILDREN!" Ahh yes, the easiest argument from emotion out there. Any attempt at opposition is quashed by people saying, "What? You don't care about children!?" And logic goes out the window.
The real question is: should we really still be calling them "free to play"?
fee2pay
Free to play is evil
free2pay
yes, because you are not required to spend money in order to play.
free to play but pay to win
I think their also needs to be a discussion on "season passes". Basically some developers are shipping incomplete games at the full price, then are charging the same price AGAIN for the rest of the game. (I'm looking at you Battlefront, Black Ops III, and Evolve).
+jamzacez That's not a thing.
+jamzacez That's not a thing.
+HerrCron Really? It's $50 for the season pass for Battlefront and for Black Ops III for very little content. They're incomplete games, with half the content, then they charge you for the rest.
+jamzacez
You forgot to mention the part where the publishers are like "Hey, we have a NEW DLC for you guys! Unforunately the season's already over and the season passes don't count.. I hope you will enjoy spending another fifty bucks for two playable classes and the next add-on". *cough*Borderlands2*cough*
+HerrCron Are you telling me that BATTLEFRONT was a complete game? It lacked so much content...
Stories like those are saddening, for sure. It's sad that the US has such a bad mental health stigma that people turn to these predatory games in order to try and make themselves feel better. A lot of good could be done both in the gaming world and the world at large if we, as a people, stop seeing people with mental health issues as looneys or weirdos and instead see them as people who need help.
+HeavyMetalBakesale Trust me, it's not just the US that has a stigma around mental health...
+HeavyMetalBakesale This is not just an American thing, nor is it any larger in the US. "Those laws don't prevent what they say they prevent" is the point they were making.
+Rocksteady It is though.
+TheSwoodestGrommet Go to any non 1st world country and you'll see mental health is MUCH more looked down apart, and it's not like Europe or the Aussies are any better than the the US from what I understand.
TheSwoodestGrommet This isn't just an American thing though, that was one of the points of this video, that this isn't something you can claim as just a one nation thing, nor is it any more of an issue here then in any other nation. The EU laws don't really prevent F2P games from creating victims, its just suppose to be a guideline to try and fix an issue which the writers only half understood at best.
I like how everyone is putting blame on the consumer saying they should have controlled themselves better and their money. That is exactly why this discussion was brought up in the first place, because everyone is different and there are some people who truly cannot help themselves when it comes to spending in these f2p games. If someone cannot help themselves, do you continue to let others abuse that fault to make a profit?
+gravios24 Short of child or a person who is completely mentally retarded (in the medical sense) everyone is competent to exercise free will. People who have a compulsion to keep paying need to be helped personally by friends, family or failing that charity. The government isn't our parents, there to tell us what we can and can't have and in what quantities. Or at least it should't be.
+Alex Laird you do realize that most of those horrible F2P games use a lot of psychological tricks to trick people into buying stuff from the in - game store? Besides, not everyone has friends or family to help them out. The argument 'the government isn't a parent' is a bit invalid since those regulations would force the companies to change their methods, not the consumers!
That's easy to say but it's entirely unrealistic. Have you ever tried to help someone with a compulsive disorder? I was raised by one and they'll tie the value of their lives to their delusions. With many compulsive disorders family and friends can do nothing because it will just lead to the I'll person feeling betrayed. There is no easy fix to mental illness (not retardation) and certain insane predatory practices need to be dealt with on a societal level.
+gravios24 yes. goverment is not there to babysit adults. if someone's fat because they can't control themselves do you blame the person or the fast food industry?
+Alex Laird "everyone is competent to exercise free will."
So you consider addiction to be an exercise in free will, then? Or do psychological diseases not count as "medical" enough for you?
There are a lot of parallels to F2P spending and gambling addiction. It looks like has very similar compulsion mechanisms that gambling has, but with a social aspect added on top. I have spent on an F2P game and only looking back at my bank statements over the course of a few months since I started spending did I realize that I spent more than I thought I did or even bargained for (thankfully not more than 60 dollars) because of my competitive nature and the fact that there is some small aspect of pay to win built into the game. That's when I decided that I would no longer be playing that game. It's very easy to keep spending once you start and and the benefits of spending very quickly diminish over time so you feel compelled to keep doing it almost automatically. I know people from that game that have spent hundreds of dollars per month and showed no sign of slowing down.
+zeroangelmk1 It kind of reminds me of how Japanese pachinko devs circumvent gambling laws. It's essentially "like gambling, but". And even more vile a circle since F2P doesn't even dangle the incentive of a random profit return beyond the metaphorical.
+zeroangelmk1 You make it sound like you think gambling doesn't have a social aspect.
+zeroangelmk1 In many cases it is very much like gambling. This is why quite often these purchases involve a heavy RNG as well. Often with an extremely small, less than 1% chance, to actually get the reward you are attempting to get through a purchase. These companies know exactly what they are doing and why, and have heavily researched the psychology behind it in order to compel as many people as they can to spend money, and lots of it. This is why most of these games don't actually charge you real money for the items themselves, but have you buying a secondary currency to use instead. This secondary currency is seen differently from a psychological perspective and you are more likely to spend it without realizing how much money you are using.
+zeroangelmk1 again the big difference is that you don't get anything physical out of f2p. With gambling you do have a chance to walk away with money. This is more like phone sex, compulsive drinking, or substance abuse in that there is no real reward for what you do. you are just compelled to keep doing something even if it is destructive, which gambling does have that aspect, but with a chance for an actual reward which in some ways can be more sinister. As in their compulsion has a chance to actually fix things, rarely. Meanwhile f2p gaming isn't going to possibly pay off back rent and get all your stuff out of hock at the pawn shop.
+zeroangelmk1 Ive made profit in csgo.....
Cheers for using my track at the end, guys! I've been a massive fan of the show for years and this is a big deal for me!
I spat coffee all over the laptop. Good work :D
This is why I absolutely refuse to pay ANY money to any f2p game. I love Hearthstone, TF2, Dota 2, and LoL, but I fear supporting the game in anyway will lead me losing everything I have into the game, because I think I have the personality and am in the situation that these companies would prey on.
+notbobby125 u can try setting goals and then spend. that's how i do it.
say a normal game u buy and play for 100 hours is 60 bucks and u find that a good triad, u can aplai it to a free to play.
first u play x amount of hours and then u spent the dhow.
i am currently at 40 euro per 100 to 150 hours.
so in MWO if a mech pack coms along that is 80 bucks i will have to have plaid 200 to 300 hours sins the last time i spend money i am oke whit it.
even if u quit a weak later u will still have had a 40 to 30 cents per hour experiences witch is fine, in my case.
i know people that wont spend 10 bucks on a free to play the spend 100 hours in but pay full price fore the next AAA 8 hour story en 2 evenings online game.
tldr: time /game budget = how much u can spent on shiny stupid ting.
+SoY_FooD Yup. I go by the "1$ for 1 hour" rule. I've even extended it to my steam library. I won't buy any new games until I've "earned back" the ones I've already bought on a summer/winter sale impuls buy.
Scoldpedia
and the cool thin is on ftp is u can pay after u get the time, i hate haven to force my self to play a game
+notbobby125 Its good you're responsible about your addictive personality, but a 10$ purchase a month is in no way going to hurt you to get a cosmetic for your favorite character. Those games don't have the abusive paying for power/time practices so it's unlikely you'd fall into a sinkhole unless at every skin or hero release you're like "MUST BUY"
+notbobby125 Hearthstone is the LEAST pay to win out of any card game out there. Like if you spend 600 bucks on hearthstone, you practically unlock EVERYTHING you need to make all the competitive decks. Spend 600 bucks on Yugioh, you have enough for one functional meta deck. As for League of Legends, it's just skins man, and it's not like you play all 100+ characters. You probably only ever play a small handful and within that small handful, give enough shits to buy a skin for them. The same applies for TF2/DOTA2. Those games's FTP model is no where near as cancerous as the ones most mobile games have.
OH MY GOD THIS. I've spent the past couple weeks binge-watching your entire catalog, and this is one of the most important points made yet. WOW. DAMN.
Person: Think of the children!
Everyone who lost all of their money sinking into f2p games: How about we think of how much these companies are scamming us?
another insightful and well thought through video, great job guys, the quality of your videos is rarely matched on youtube. especially since it doesn't just lay out a topic but opens up discussion and provokes rebellion rather than not thinking about the topic ever again
It's too bad that the mentioned target group is socially discredited. And no grand speech, no brave uprising of compassionate individuals can change that since it is not a political issue but an issue which simply isn't viewed let alone adressed in a objectively reasonable way by the majority. People are just numb towards a needed but different behavior.
Over three years later and things are arguably even worse now
Can we stop predatory practices in Free-to-Play? Or do we need laws to protect players of all ages?
For more of our thoughts on F2P, check out our playlist: bit.ly/1ZTctlk
+Extra Credits You should NOT put regulations on games. They are an art form, a medium of expression. It'd be the same as limiting cinema, television, art, or literature. The problem lies in the consumer - it should be their job to protect themselves.
"A fool and his money are soon parted."
+Maragoras And what would you know, they do limit all of those.
+YonTheTan how? is there a limit to how many times you can watch a cinema movie or how many seats can you buy?
+Maragoras so you say that companies playing on peaples weakness is an art that should not be limited ? there are some countries that put real limitations on games (germany) becouse they hate their own history. I agree there should not be a limitation on the art side of the game but payed dlc on a 60euro game at release is bullshit that should be stopped by law if publishers keep acting like jackasses
+Maragoras The crucial difference here being that while you could go into a cinema 20 times to watch the same movie in a row, the movie will not change.
Games, on the other hand, are inherently interactive, and the gameplay itself DOES change if you throw more money at an F2PP2W game. So wrong comparison.
This is one of my favorite things so far about Extra Credits -- going beyond the topics of games, gamers, and developers to the real issues of human feelings and interactions, both healthy and unhealthy.
is there any sort of help people can seek out that have trouble regulating their game finances? like the helplines they have for gamblers?
+Zero Richardson
Too many people are in the shadow of ignorance, or just choose to forget about them.
Just strolling through the comments, at least 80% of the comments are from people saying things like "That person is responsible for spending the money. They need to be fixed, not the companies".
They even watched a video on it, and still missed the entire point of it.
This problem will probably need to get a big public event that brings peoples' attention to it, but there is still a huge social stigma about video-games period, nonetheless going into an incredibly specific area. that people that got it specifically explained to them couldn't understand, to where I don't know if it'll do any real good.
+Zero Richardson I don't know how to solve their problem but I know one thing that helps: Set a rule for yourself to stop, and then make the process of paying for anything in game as long and arduous as possible so you can have time to think about what you're working. This means manually entering cc info instead of saving it on the site, and keeping your card out of reach when you're near the computer.
Another option is to get rid of the card, and deal with having to carry cash or checks and going to the bank periodically to get more, and not being able to purchase anything online.
The final option I can suggest is to quit the game cold turkey, and find other ways to interact with your social circle from the game.
+Zero Richardson The good thing is, a free to play addiction is normally mobile phone based, swap out your mobile phone for a normal none internet capable phone like a old Nokia and just ask a friend to lock you out of your own computer for a few months...
I think people that realize they have significant issues can probably take steps to help themselves, but I'm asking if there are any services available so that if you know someone with a problem you can help them with information, not just telling them to take steps they won't take like changing their phone or not saving their credit card information.
Its incredibly rare for a person to be addicted to a free-to-play game. We shouldn't make laws based on a few sensationalized examples.
See. These types of videos are i freaking love you guys at EC! Excellent analysis, all I can think of now is which friends (or all) do I forward it to. Thanks EC team!
And we have the exact same situation here in 2017... with full priced games.
I think you're wrong to pin the blame on Apple for responding to these regulations by haphazardly yanking free-to-play games. When regulators say the equivalent of "Nice multi-billion dollar enterprise ya got there; it would be a shame if something...happened to it," you can't expect things to go according to plan. The blame belongs squarely on the regulators for their hamfisted approach.
+The Economics Detective Could you explain precisely what it was about the regulation itself that was so threatening?
It sounds more like Apple et al yanked these products because they weren't worth keeping while trying to navigate new legislation.
+The Economics Detective
because in all those years of f2p, apple never had time to think about how they could stop predatory practices themselves.
sorry, but we will need "regulators" for as long as companies actively support shit like this
+The Economics Detective
I disagree. Big companies like Apple have legal teams, who in my experience tend to be hyper-cautious about stuff like this even when they don't need to be. The reason is because it's easier to not read the details of a law and just arbitrarily enforce it in the bluntest way possible than it is to actually investigate the law and implement it properly. For Apple, there's very little negative consequences for doing what they did - angry devs can't do anything, because the App Store is the only way into the iphone market, and they can't complain to the EU because they'll just shrug and say Apple's a private company and you agreed to their rules. On the other hand, actually investigating and properly implementing the law comes with costs in time and effort that Apple feels could be better spent elsewhere.
+z beeblebrox Even a 0.1% chance of a billion-dollar lawsuit has a negative expected value of one million dollars. And when the lawsuit comes, they'll definitely go for Apple and Google's deep pockets rather than some tiny indy dev. So I see Apple's choice to be ultra-cautious as totally reasonable and predictable.
The Economics Detective
a: well, i'll take it for the dodged taxes
b: you forget that they are very much able to TALK with "The Regulators".
Well you know what they say, "A fool and their money are soon parted". That said every time there's a steam sale I obliterate my budget.
Way to insult people who might have something really serious going on
Self regulation and the ability to work hard should be taught in school. Also maybe in games.
+Jordan Kloosterman That doesn't help people who have mental, or emotional problems. Critical thinking skills don't come to mind when a person thinks if they don't put money into these games, they'll lose the few good things they have left in life.
+Jordan Kloosterman
They already are... With "work hard" we're even in an age nowadays where people work all night and get health problems more and more...
+Leivve You just see this classic, bad response everywhere. "Oh they should just work hard." These are people with mental and emotional issues. They are trying, but that doesn't mean they can just flip a switch and overcome these problems.
You can't teach someone in school to not suffer from depression. That's just stupid.
We need to focus on real solutions, not simply blaming the victim and ignoring it.
+Leivve Yeah, I think I get your point. I wonder if there's any online infrastructure to help them out?
+Leivve That's a fair point. Do you have any ideas on how to address such concerns? It seems like what you are describing is not just unhealthy people (or at least people in unhealthy situations) but unhealthy communities. So how can we in the larger community reach out and support these smaller communities?
I'm surprised none of you guys have talked about Japanese F2P mobile games. They have laws about gachas and stuff over there, and trust me: everything you've been talking about goes up to 1000 when talking about JP mobages. I mean, in the communities I'm in, whaling within your means is seen as something to encourage. Good on you for supporting Maki-chan, etc.
Try poking around the game Love Live! School idol festival. I quit it recently after my addiction got wayyyy too bad and I realized KLab basically built a sub-par game with really cute girls and no-one really played for the gameplay... just the cards. :/
+blooist I actually stopped playing that myself. Just too much of a time sink XD, grinding through events to get cards. Though to be fair I never actually put any money in there since it didn't seem worth it cost wise. Those gems were way too expensive.
Though I think they at least did put in some reasonable effort. It's a solid enough music-based game and they do have a fair amount of voiced events that you get just by playing normally.
I'm just not all that good at that rapid-fire finger movement and needed some space on the phone. Don't really miss it.
+FlareKnight I just hate how insidious LLSIF is because they have a HUGE franchise behind them. Though, TBH I quit LLSIF and then started playing Aikatsu! Photo on Stage in the next few days... and I've been playing Battle Girl High School for months but BGHS and PoS aren't jerks. qq
blooist
Yeah, that's fair. Though I suppose the power of love live means they can basically get away with anything. I mean damn have you see the sales that show's movie brought in? Insanity.
+blooist
I felt like I learned my lesson to never touch another Japanese F2P mobile game ever again. Perhaps it just so happens that the devs/publisher designed the games so poorly. With the games being based around "cards," the biggest flaw was them "selling power" and the potential for power creep. The biggest mistake for any player (admittedly myself included) was to waste money on these "card packs" (I unfortunately paid before I saw any of the EC episodes warning us of such practices). Sure, you may get a nice relative power boost with unique and cool looking cards from random premium packs, but thanks to the power creeping, they eventually become useless. The game then pins the spenders (especially the whales) into spending all their time into keeping up with the relative power level of the "competitive" community by spending hours and hours of their days on "events" (aka pissing contests to see who can either spend the most time or the most money) to get their rewards. While being part of a guild did have great social aspects, it really guilt trips people into going through this never ending hamster wheel. I was so glad to delete those games and not look back at them.
+Cuckoo Phendula Considering I'm still playing 2 mobage currently I'm making sure to not make the same mistakes I did with LLSIF.
Too busy to have time for the event? Unlike before where'd play the game before anything else... if I don't feel like playing that day, I just don't play now! And if I don't wanna use my stamina right now? I won't stop what I'm doing and use LP... let that bar fill up!
As a student of political science, I've noticed that, if the victim of some societal problem has ultimate responsibility for their problem (i.e. their actions led to their downfall), society as a whole ignores the issue, with children being an exception due to their age. Rape, systemic poverty, debt, these are all issues that people ignore because of victim blaming. The worst part is, it's understandable. If something is preventable, it's natural to tell people to prevent it, and if someone does something stupid, it can be hard to look past that. So people blame victims and these problems go ignored.
Great video, as usual!
There is no victim here, those exchange were voluntary and not forceful.
+Im Tabe And this bullshit fucking reason is the exact reason why no one ever does anything about shit like this.
+xqtr74 There is no logic in comparing a game, that you download and play voluntary, and can leave without any consequences with cults. Cults usually involve real family members, social pressure, intimidation and so on. Fuck, let's regulate everything then - how many chocolate bars you can buy in a day, how much money you can spend on collectibles, how often you should upgrade your computer based on your salary and so on, and so on. There are idiots everywhere that get exploited.
+CaitSeith Lottery type things are legal. That's a type of gambling. There's a no regulated addiction problem there too.
I got an advertisement for a free-to-play game when I began watching this video.
Coming back to this video after the lootbox outrage. It's harrowing how well you predicted this.
it's annoying how many games are still like this, have all or nearly all the cash items locked behind loot boxes.
This has definitely opened my eyes. I always read into what I'm voting for in polls when it affects the video game I'm playing for future content/changes. It's necessary to do the same with the people that work in the Senate office.
The best armour against free-to-play ? Get used to playing good old-school games (I don't mean oldies but games on a classic financial strategy, buy the game and done).
NO ONE could make you pay for micro-transactions when you know you could use Cheat Engine to get that number of gold coin.
(and I do have an equivalent of Cheat Engine on my phone)
I'm in a similar situation to some of the people in these "stories" but grown up men will never get simpathy for spending too much time or money on videogames.
Want more game studies? Dan is taking an in-depth look at the 12 Principles of Animation, starting with Shadow of the Colossus! Catch that series and more on our sister channel, Extra Play: bit.ly/1PTqkCD
+Extra Credits yeah we are going to need theses laws.
+Extra Credits notice me senpai.
+Extra Credits this is only one of the reason that F2P is pision
+Extra Credits Could you guys discuss the viability of a possible ad-wall versus a pay-wall within the F2P sphere?
I mean, we get ads regardless, but if there were strategically placed, 10 second ads, meaning between events, in order to get that next level item, that ad could generate revenue for the developers, not take the money directly and immediately from the player, and provide a moment where the player can ask themselves "Do I need to take a break?" The lawmakers could restrict the mini-transactions to one per account per day or something similar to help keep the initial revenue flowing.
It's not a perfect idea, but it's an idea.
+catseye10000 warlight look it up a prime example of good ftp
This hit home with me.
My dad's never really played or liked video games, but he's been going through a rough patch in his life and he's fairly recently picked up Clash of Clans...
"Responsible self-regulation"
I got Brave New World -shudders.
+Anston [Music] You and me both.
+Anston [Music] Of course, because accepting responsibility for your actions is not something that every child has to learn.
Maxben L It was not criticism, just a notion of an autonomic response I had to the specific phrasing.
This is one of those videos that gives greater insight into my own actions. Looking back, the games I feel the strongest urge to spend money on are those with clans or similar. In those where it's more or less just myself, I mostly just plug away and be patient, but with clans involved, the fact that I can buy faster progression or more cash to support the guild is one of the biggest incentives for me. As someone who struggles with depression and feeling socially isolated, I can now recognise how that impacts that feeling. I'm fortunate enough to have some strong relationships in my non-digital life so I'm not dependent on games for my social "fix" as it were, but I can definitely imagine how if I didn't, how much stronger that urge would be.
Unfortunately, I'm not really sure if there's anything the industry can really do on their end to prevent such occurrences, at least beyond not using a funding model that depends on such people getting roped in. It's a thorny issue that I can only see getting better on the player end. Aside from having good mental health services though, there's no way to legislate people into better mental health.
Wait. How is a company supposed to know when one of their users is addicted as opposed to rich? Also, how they supposed to stop it? Also is it the companies responsibility?
If James writes these pieces, then he's really self-congratulatory.
While I agree that these companies are taking advantage of individual's and their desires, no one forces these individuals to spend. People are responsible for the choices they make and must live with the consequences, regardless of what compelled them to make said choices.
Personal responsibility is something I feel at lot of today's society has forgotten, and I really hope for its triumphant return....
I'm glad you guys bring these issues up. Would not mind a more substantial follow up ie what better laws and implementation would look like
I think, for the reasons stated earlier in the video that we need fewer laws, not more. Large companies are going to find workarounds anyways and it will just murder small indie app developers. Restriction on the market typically does this unfortunately.
+machcharge The problem isn't too _many_ laws, it's too _low-quality_ of laws.
+Timothy McLean
Or rather, too many low-quality laws.
+Timothy McLean Wrong here on half of that since to many laws will still restricts our gaming industry. Add on that those writing the laws haven't got a damn clue what they are doing past what their donors tell them, it's just a money grab for them.
Requiring legitimate people who have at least some grey matter on the subject is what's needed but politics doesn't work that way unfortunately.
A String of Code One or two bad laws aren't better than a dozen. Although the one or two can ruin ten or eleven good ones.
Dead Panther If the laws restrict things we shouldn't be avoiding, they aren't very good laws, now are they?
Instant classic. Favorite episode by far. Very informative!
Great episode, and some very interesting concepts. Awesome.
YAY! Going to get a birthday episode next time!
Nice job as always, guys!
I think a set maximum ammount you can spend on a game within 24 hours would be good to have. Maybe only having it so that on a daily basis you can only spend $1, but the ammount you get to spend is accumulative, so if you don't spend any money at all for 24 hours, the ammount you are able to spend is still there on the next 24 hours, allowing you to spend $2.
+Coolclev erstone This would cost the company more than you think. Most F2P models are financially supported by a select few whales that buy big and in bulk.
Minngarm Halnhammer Yes, however, what if there was a gift you can randomly get each month that increased the ammount you can spend, maybe by adding... say, $20 to the ammount you can spend, or maybe tripling it? The gift rewards would vary though I think some of the higher up stuff, like quadrupling or adding $50, would have the rng prefer to give said gifts to people who barely spend anything or those who use what they can every day. Not a perfect system, but it could be a start.
I think that won't be an effective system, because f2p still depends upon their users' compulsions, and that model would likely kill any such compulsions if not be ineffective.
But a similar model, where you have a much larger limit to how much you can spend in a month, could be the most ideal.
Yea, that would work too. I just wanted to focus on the small ammount of time to experiment with.
Coolclev erstone I know people who have dropped over 10k in a single F2P game, and they can afford it. Hell one of them dropped 50 bucks on my account just because he was tired of me running around without camo.
Restricting it monthly is not a good idea for the business, less F2P games would be able to sustain themselves, which means less content development and more closures.
It is not a bad initial idea, but it won't work in the F2P market and community think over the situation some more you'll come up with a better suggestion in time.
This needs to have hundreds of millions of views.
Really surprising how many people here are jumping to defend consumer exploitation. What a strange psychological phenomenon.
The worst examples of the free to play industry that do such things are, clash of clans and candy crush candy crush is just a pain for copyright, and the industry of making such games clash of clans is more guilty of this predatory practice as the former top player would bring 5 iPads into the shower with him so that way he would never have to log off.
I Vote Extra credits In place of Donald Trump!!!!
+Oby 1 I wouldn't, they are game designers. Not politicians. (I think this comment was a joke not sure tbh)
They sure sound like trust worthy polititions (Lol)
+Slimy “Slim Shady” Shade Not being a politician isn't really a point against James' favor.
+Slimy “Slim Shady” Shade Didn´t they have an episode a while back about how politics could be considered a game, but it´s mechanics were really broken?
Oby 1 ***** My point being that game design has way less paper work, or bureaucratic work.
Man at the beginning of the vid, I was all psyched for the intro, sigging along to it...then 5 seconds in i realized there is no intro
From now on every time somebody accuses Extra Credits of being "SJWs" (I hate this term), I'll just point them in the direction of this closing statement and tell them that they're wrong.
It took me a few days, but I'm *finally* caught up with the series!
Why should we bother trying stop adults from making these sorts of decisions? I don't want to set a precedent of the government acting as everyone's nanny when a few people can't control their finances.
+Trusseck
That's not the problem they raise, though; It's the unethical practices that companies deliberately use to abuse people's psychological wants and needs.
Dargona1018 Yeah, that's called marketing. Or maybe you think businesses shouldn't be aggressive in getting people to part with their money?
That precedent was set a long, long, long time ago my friend.
CaitSeith
Smoking, vehicle licensing, seat belts, various morality laws, gun control, OSHA etc. This guy must live in Somalia if he thinks precedent has yet to be set. All western governments do this and have been like this for many decades.
JewTube Well, most of those are reasonable. I'm talking about business decisions in particular.
That episode was important. This is very serious. This industry is "young" and will face many challenges. If it fails to address the problems it causes on the most vulnerable of consumers... Videogames have a bigger impact on society than movies, books or comicbooks, it is a huge responsabilty, i just hope we can manage it somehow.
Very good and relevant episode guys. You are the lighthouse of the industry in my opinion, the light that guides it to a good port. Keep it up, I beg of you.
The thing about self-regulation is that it does not work. In fact, in the totality of human history, self-regulation has *never* worked.
As someone who does play gatcha style games (a staple of this type of f2play game) I 100% agree with your ending point and we should aim to educate about self responisbility and understanding that essentially, your paying for very little.
I avoid f2p and don't play these games. If a game is good I am willing to pay for it. But F2P isn't free, it's like a rent. Make it free or sell it, but don't sell it trough backdoors.
Good F2P games dont slam you with a paywall and the paid-for (premium) currency is thereto speed up mundane processes or to get unique but not integral items/characters whatever.
Good examples of F2P: Anything produced by Supercell
Bad examples of F2P: Any F2P produced by EA
+Keith Killner I haven't found a problem with PSO2 yet either. Honestly, looking at the "paid purchases" options, I'm pretty much only tempted to get another Mag (A creature you fed excess items to to gain bonus stats), because my current one is optimized for Magic, and if I wanna run a melee or gunner specialist, I won't have appropriate bonus stats.
It's not even a major or essential thing, just something that'd be nice to have. Everything else is just "more storage space" (200 slots is more than enough), or "redecorate your player room" (That you don't spend any time in) or "Temporary rare drop boost!" (the standard drop rate is fine, especially if you do the group quest events, which freakin shower you in them).
+Keith Killner I'd argue that at least the Dragon Age mobile game is fine, though that's probably because I have self-control on pulls.
Kenpokid4 I peronally stick solely to Supercell developments, mainly because their games dont slam you with paywalls, dont lock key items behind premium currency payments and give you moderate amounts of the premium currency for free over time, yes I've spent money in those games but thats because I both trust the devlopers, enjoy the games and simply felt like treating myself to a little boost.
Great example of EA's terrible F2P is The Simpsons: Tapped Out, I played that game and loved it, eventually got bored of it however because multiple key story tasks required that you purchase characters/items/buildings that can only be bought with premium currency (donuts) which you VERY RARELY get for free, essentially only getting them if EA screws up somehow and hands out 20-ish to every player (note that even low cost premium items usually cost 100+ donuts) so you need to spend real money to make progress.
Keith Killner
I personally haven't touched their "totally not just FarmVille/Clash of Clans guys" stuff, just Dragon Age Heroes. In DA Heroes, you never need to use the paid rifts, and if memory serves you can pull from them with ingame gold as well as gems (which you get for free, though it's fairly grindy to get them).
Got me with the amiibo. That's so me.
Smash line is almost done, though.
Step one: Find objective, legalese ways to define what practices are bad and which are good.
I hope someone figures that one out...
StraightOuttaJarhois There _is_ a middle ground between "ideal laws" and "no laws".
StraightOuttaJarhois Even if it's impossible to be perfect, we should still try.
Larry Psuedonym I have no idea where you're getting any of this. Are you saying we shouldn't even _try_ to make good laws if they won't be perfect?
That said, if we could make a fair, effective, enforceable law against being a dick, I don't see why not (assuming we made the penalties appropriately mild).
Larry Psuedonym It wasn't a serious suggestion to begin with...but trying to find something along those lines will help make better legislation, even if we don't find a perfect answer.
Why? Freedom which is being used only to hurt others shouldn't be allowed in the first place, and this holds true at all levels. In principle, anti-dick legislation (you know what I mean) would be a good thing. I don't think there's any way to do it in reality, but in principle it would be good.
4:09 hit the nail on the head
1:33 Sounds like a cult.
If companies are intentionally targeting people that are at risk of losing everything just to get past a level or a certain item, then there should be some legislation. Honestly, a lot of these stories seem to come from people who didn't grow up with video games like senior citizens or older workers who need something new to play on their commute; they aren't aware of the schemes certain companies use so they get duped into them. It's nice to say that there should be an element of self-regulation but not everyone is aware on how games or the industry works.
These stories are terrible... how could anybody possibly listen to that and not hate their own game...
+Dutchgirl Maan people who choose not to listen to them.
+Dutchgirl Maan its the same thing with anything we like and has a sad story behind it.. we ignore it and move on. Just like when a family member dies. We humans are really good a moving forward, so much so that a lot of past problems eventually catch up and hit us in the ass.
+Dutchgirl Maan Because most of the companies are not lead by compassionate people who will cut off the broke whales.
As for the individual developers, they've got to eat themselves. Getting a job making games is a dream job for a lot of people, and in this economy, nobody is going to be too willing to give up a pretty good job just for ethical reasons.
And of course, there's the fact that you'd be hard pressed to find companies that have no skeletons in their closet. Whether it be deliberate abuse like some companies, or simply creating an otherwise fine system that can feed into someones addiction, you're not going to be able to avoid those stories.
Somewhere in the world, there is a undoubtely an old lady who has spent every penny she has knitting. Any product that is created for enjoyment, and that can be repurchased (as compared to a re-readable book) is going to leave someone addicted and broke. It may be worth it to refuse to work for Zynga (as you're kinda not really making games there), but other companies are going to have those stories too, no matter how ethical you are.
+Dutchgirl Maan Gambling has been around for a long time too, people have a very easy time just thinking, its not my fault they wont control themselves.
+Dutchgirl Maan that is why people stopped making alcohol and cigarrets after hearing stories like that right
This video is even more relevant now than it was 4 years ago. With games intentionally being made of the poorest quality in the name of profits, going way over the line with monetizing these same games making the whales think they are helping build the game they should have had in the first place.
These days games are like this: You pay for a water bottle with no water in it. Companies add water DLC to make you pay for the game again.
Or you can be like Crossout and deliberately make your P2W equipment so blatantly overpowered that the only chance free players will ever have at winning is to be on a team that has more whales than the other. The P2W gear in this game is so powerful that people make "seal clubber" builds designed for the sole purpose of infiltrating lower level lobbies with high level guns. [usually cannons or a particular tiny 4 wheeled personification of gaming hell] The fact that such a thing exists not only shows that Gajin knowingly makes the game unfair, but also that whales do not know empathy as they mercilessly kill comparatively defenseless players with shots that are vary capable of disabling your car in 1 hit.
Or when the whales bring out the most hated weapon in the game... THE GOD DAMN GRENADIER DRONE! Independent from the player who sent it out, these tiny 4 wheeled terrors have no weaknesses as they blow away your armor and weapons before your even able to aim down far enough to stop them. Worst of all? THIS THING IS DLC!
Most common build before I left the game was having Goliath tracks[DLC, most durable mobility item in the game and also tall enough to hide your cabin] hiding a Growl with ether turret cannons or these grenadier drones. Purposefully having the lowest powerscore possible so they could smuggle there high level gear into low level lobbies.
Fuck crossout
I don't feel like you reinforced the point well. You need to provide clear examples of when the game is at fault and not when people make bad choices for their gaming addiction.
Any game with more than 100$ of cosmetic day one DLC is shameful plus having no control over what items/cards you receive from paying for loots/packs only multiplies the amount of time/money just to look/play how you want & way too many game genres use this mechanic. Worst by far for F2P games is any kind of purchasable in-game power up, but it seems the creator of this video views more problems with F2P MMO's which have that social factor requiring people to pool resources.
Josh Neubert Agreed, purchasable DLC should be regulated to at least be 3 months after release.
+Josh Neubert Escuse me? is not about the price of the cosmetics, (What, do you need to buy 40 hats? then the problem is about you not the game)
+Minngarm Halnhammer If that happened a lot of DLC would not even exist. (and no, not "they will be added to the basic game" but literally they would NOT exist)
Celio Hogane Which is exactly why it should be done. Either include it in the initial game or package it together in a decent bundle. Tired of this Europa Universalis IV shit.
This reminds me of the "mental health is key to stopping gun violence" argument. It addresses the problem that is easiest to handle without looking the more complicated big picture that has roots in the human condition. People are drawn to companionship and competition, and industries cater to those desires like a buffet, allowing people to harm themselves and/or the people around them in a hardly limited pursuit of happiness.
I don't get american's obsession with "protecting the children" that politicians and scandalous old ladies talk so much about... I mean, almost all of the things your children needs to be protected of YOU SHOULD TEACH THEM YOURSELF damnit, do you need a law to say "A company can't let a kid spends 6000 dollars in a game" when the same effect would happen if you just teach the damn kid how to preserve money, possibly by not giving the kid 6000 dollars available to spend... To me, these people are just bad parents wanting to blame someone for being incompetent
Self-regulation has never worked on a large scale ever.
All this comes down to is, people need to watch themselves not someone else... They thought buying that shit was more important so now they suffer the consequences.
+Dexyu Did you just completely not watch the video? The people who are going to suffer and have suffered are the depressed and vulnerable. How the heck are those people going to watch themselves? This is like saying someone who tried to commit suicide should have been more careful and deserved the pain they suffered.
+Dexyu I agree with a addendum that game companies should be looking out for their consumers best interest as well. It only serves you better in the long run. The best example I can think of is Blizzard. Last blizzcon people were so worried the company wouldn't support starcraft 2 anymore after its final expansion that people there actually asked blizzard to put in micro transactions into the game. I guarantee you never heard that one before, (I had to double check,). Its because blizzard sure, cares about making money, but also cares about its consumers.
Yes, blizzard has all kinds of other problems but customer loyalty and satisfaction isn't one.
+FlareKnight If their problems are bad enough that they can't manage themselves on that level, it shouldn't be up to the game developers or laws to protect them from themselves. What they need is actual help.
+Dexyu I do agree. Yes, it's sad that some companies will take advantage of people with low self-control, but passing laws to help the few who have emotional or mental problems, only means that they will seek that fulfillment elsewhere: the casino, the lottery, garage sales, wherever. It becomes a never-ending cycle of trying to protect a few people from themselves at the expense of billions of hours and dollars of other people's time.
As much as I admire the sentiment behind it, I'm just not a fan of trying to protect people from themselves. Good video though, and self-regulation by these companies would be cool.
But what if the game encourages you to do those purchases even after you've spent a couple hundred of dollars on that game the same day. I don't know what the biggest sums are that people pay for these games daily, but there could be implemented a cap after which the game starts asking if you really want to make the purchase that day. It wouldn't prevent the purchase but it would help the people who are spending unhealthy amounts of money on the game to consider if they should still keep spending their money that quickly.
When companies design f2p around player addiction or trapping players into a pay loop to remain competitive, changes need made. Like Mobile Strike and its numerous clones.
Ooh the relevance this has today.
On point, I love this channel. Keep it up guys!
How sad is it that videogame companies can have "victims" now. Not just angry customers, but victims. I mean, we maybe pissed at Konami for all its bullshit during the past year, but we are not being victimized by them.
Free-to-play and micro-transactions are a cancer on videogames. All the Hearthstones and DOTAs in the word won't change what is a fundamentally predatory and exploitative business model.
+Alan S. Hale The sadder thing is that people have been conditioned to believe that they in fact are victims of a videogame company...
+Stephen O'Brien How So?
+Alan S. Hale
Don't bother. He's a troll, spreading bullshit.
Dargona1018 No I'm not. But making baseless accusations is characteristic of one. Maybe you were projecting?
Alan S. Hale In the sense that they believe themselves to be victimised instead of realising that they have their own personal power to withstand & counteract those detestable practices.
That's the first time I've seen "oops" spelled wrong lol. Great video regardless
You can stop them by not buying them...
Why am I getting a sense of Dejavu from this episode?
Any kind of government regulation is bad. Regulations do more harm than good. Big companies can afford regulations and can find ways around them, but smaller companies cannot afford regulations that, by design, hinder profits. Basic Economics.
+TheCapitalistic So, the government should not regulate child labor? I can't agree that any government regulation is necessarily bad but, you're right that big companies can and will find ways around a lot of regulations so we shouldn't have too much regulations, like most things a balance is needed.
+TheCapitalistic Absolutism is nearly always bad. Real life problems aren't normally about true/false questions, they're about essay questions.
+TheCapitalistic You do know the Food and Drug act is a government regulation, right? Yes, companies get around it in little ways like Tic Tacs with sugar and chikin products, but you are no longer getting a horseradish jar that is half sawdust.
It's not just big companies that try to screw people over either. Look at some of the more notorious 'health' websites that prey on sick people with expensive quackery or how many indie games on steam are cons.
Like Merc said, it's about balance.
Surprisingly Blank There are some very rich people in America who believe that the FDA should be abolished. The idea that government control benefits large companies in all cases when some large companies specifically desire less government control is plain silly. It's like you've both pointed out, everything is a balancing act.
I just hope that as a community, we can be loud enough that those just getting into gaming can more readily hear the voices of veteran gamers calling out these practices. There are of course veterans of specific games, but is it wrong to assume that it is people who are not seasoned gamers (or at least don't have a large repertoire of games that they play) that most often fall into this? I would hope that those of us in the gaming community will have more ways in the future to warn others of exploitative games.
It sounds like the "biggest problem" isn't the predatory practices of the companies. It sounds like the "biggest problem" is self-control. The gambling addict or alcohol addict isn't a victim of the casino or liquor store. They are just junkies that have a problem.
Krombopulos Michael
McDonalds is profiting from people buying cheeseburgers. It isn't the company's fault for selling the burgers, its your fault for buying 13 of them.
+Monochromicornicopia And yet these "F2P" games have $100+ options to buy their ingame currency. They know who they get most of their profits off of, and knowingly cater to them.
*****
That's not the company's problem. This is America, home of capitalism. You're trying to shift the responsibility when it clearly lies with the consumer. If you have a gambling problem, its not the casinos fault.
+Monochromicornicopia You're that guy who is upset when payday loan companies have the rate they can charge capped.
+Monochromicornicopia I'd like to note that I'm not for banning F2P games, just some of the predatory practices - ie. require monthly caps on spending, etc.
Ouch! I didn't realize F2P companies cultivated 'Whales' in the *_exact same way gambling companies did._*
Also, you're explaination just helped me over an impasse over why _'If It Will Protect a Single Child/A Govt. Small Enough to fit in your Kindergarten'_ is a false dilemma.
"Think of the children" is an agitprop tactic to push any legislation with little opposition with an emotional push ...like you did but your angle is "think of mentally unstable adults that have uncontrollable urges to spend the money they make" ... let's make laws that treat adults like children that have uncontrollable urges ... that's a sure way to advance the maturity of society ...
The best way I can see for f2p games to mitigate this issue would be to put in systems to let players actively monitor their expenditures. All too often I see games like this ask 'would you like to spend $5 on [insert currency or item here]?', you make the transaction, and that's it. No record, no receipt, and no way to stop yourself from spending again. Not knowing how much you've spent it the biggest reason a lot of people get in trouble. An e-mailed receipt and in-game purchase history can go a long way to helpimg people realize how much they spend. As for preventative measures, the games should allow you to program a spending limit of some sort. I can speak from experience when I say that having an easy means to track and control my spending made a world of difference.
It's their money and they're choosing to spend it that way. Should all gambling be illegal because some have become addicted? Why is it the companies fault that these people can't control themselves?
+Wouldhee Many times it's not their fault. Gambling shouldn't be illegal, but it should be highly regulated to prevent the industry from preying on vulnerable people. Sure, it's their choice to spend the money, but people often don't act rationally, and it isn't moral to make money by exploiting this weakness that many people have. Therefore, there should be some restrictions (don't ask me for specifics though, I don't know much about them).
+Wouldhee There are regulations and laws about gambling though....so what exactly is your argument here?
And again, did you even watch the video before commenting on it?
+Wouldhee Honestly I wouldn't mourn gambling for a long time if it was banned completely. Aside from poker almost all of them is completely luck based and they exist solely to get money out of people's pockets by exploiting human psichology. I admit it can be fun time to tome, but I don't think that it justifies the damage it does to people's lives.
+Wouldhee
That's not the problem they raise, though; It's the unethical practices that companies deliberately use to abuse people's psychological wants and needs.
+Wouldhee
A predatory F2P game in a nutshell:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_aggression
Whenever i listen to this channel with headphones its like i can hear 2 voices.. its jarring!
We trust people enough to spend their own money. If they can't handle it I can't feel sorry for them. You can have an addiction but still have to pay the bill's. Put down the controller and enter the real world.
+iam2ku4u While it is certainly the responsibility of the addicts to get help, it's also wrong for a company to knowing exploit addicts. Prosecuting companies who can be demonstrated to intentionally and knowing engage in tactics that ruin lives, and feed off addicts, doesn't remove the guilt from the addicts.
This kind of abusive relationship takes two people, and I think both need to be held accountable.
The only downside is trying to figure out when a company is deliberately bankrupting people, versus just 'happening' to bankrupt people. All companies try to get as much money as they can from clients, but where is the line between "Making money" and "Abusing your customers"? That's the tricky part.
+Sines314 To a company it doesn't matter. They don't care about Paul in Kansas who has to get his nicotine fix. The individual doesn't matter. If Paul leaves they find a new Paul, John. Its never personally, just transactionally.
+iam2ku4u And now you see the problem and why the world can't simply be left to the corporations.
+JewTube When the masses are spending hundreds of hours analyzing Five Nights or 50 shades I think PnG is best.
I don't think you know what addiction means.
Pro tip, if you are going to mention conference talk, link to the conference if it has been put on youtube (or somewhere else for everyone to see)
I'm sorry, but I don't have a lot of sympathy for those few rare instances where someone goes overboard in Clash of Clans or whatever. Call me cold hearted, but even though they are more 'vunerable', they still have free will, and, as such no one is mandating that they spend their life savings on a pointless video game. As I see it, it is no different than those people that go to Vegas and loose a great deal of money. No one said that they had to, but they did regardless, and, as such, should they bot be beld accountable for their actions? Aee people really just mindless automatons who can't help but click on the button with the words 'best value' next to it? In the end, all I'm saying is that, even though such sob stories are sad, I think that people are better than that and are perfectly capable of making their own choices and dealing with the consequences of those actions, thus, they do not need to be 'protected' by ineffective government legislation and should simply be left to use their best judgement.
Thing is though there are regulations on casino's as to how they can present themselves and what kind of tactics they can use. Most want to have similar systems for games.
How I think of situations with kids and spending on F2P games:
A rare case, if given attention, will almost always beat out a common case that nobody shows attention towards.
Well, that was a depressing episode. :s
Very well articulated. Well done :)
Responsable self regulation is a good idea. Sadly, capitalism doesn't do this.
One law that should be implemented: any video game or DLC may be sold at full price only in the first month of its release, after which time there is a cumulative 1% price reduction per week. Yes, that means that a game will be free after two years for those patient enough to wait. As the bulk of games profits are earned in the first few months post-release, this will be seen as a benefit to most, except perhaps for the used games market whose share will be cut by this price drop mechanic.
Why invest on helping people who need help when we can exploit them for financial gain?
*facepalm*
Music at the end was a nice touch this time.
I usualy like your videos but this is so unclear...
How exactly F2P forces players to spend so much money?
How can they prevent it even if they want to?
I have so many questions...
+Bartosz Golo It's basically the purest form of Skinner Box manipulation. South Park tackled how evil these practices are in their episode appropriately titled "Freemium isn't Free". They explain it way better than I could in the episode.
+Riggbone The design logic behind the energy bars is however not that people fork money over. It's because you want to limit the game session lenght so that the user does not get bored with the game fast. You want them to have things to look forward to so that they keep regularly returning for further game sessions.
+Riggbone There's no contradiction there. It can be good and engaging game but over-saturation and burning through the content too quickly can lead to lower retention. The purpose behind those bars is still the same.
@extracredits after watching all your videos about f2p, loot boxes and monetization of games, I would wholeheartedly like to see what is your opinion on how it was done in Shadow of War. As a mostly single player player (that sounds weird), I wondered why would anyone make a sp game with loot boxes that aren't cosmetic but actually offer almost a paywall to the end of the game. Not that I liked the end that much, but I did spend over 10h grinding my way to it because I wouldn't buy a loot box. Keep the good work.
Only the individual is reponsible for himself.
Laws to protect people from games is a joke. We should take more responsability for ourselves.
+Micail de Araújo Laws to make sure game companies don't unethically take advantage of vulnerable people are no joke. Game design can be used in bad ways just look at the sesame credit episode. I would great if those people could protect themselves but they're the vulnerable ones, people are exploiting their metal health issues.
Jordan Kloosterman Laws won't do nothing to protect those people. Instead of that, the way to help those people is to make them not be that vunerable, this is the real problem. Those laws will only be used to difficult business for small companies.
My english isn't really good, so i hope you understand what i'm saying.
+Micail de Araújo but when companies are hiring psychologists to figure out what the best way to get people to pay them money on a f2p game is a bit shady.
Lionskull If are not games, people will use another thing, that isn't the real problem. No law can protect someone from himself. Blaming games won't really help anyone.
What should be done is to treat the patient rather than the symptoms.
+Micail de Araújo The individual is fucking stupid and doesn't know what's best for himself or anyone around them, that's why there are laws in the first place. If I lived in a world where everyone was responsible for themselves I'd burn tires in my neighbors front yard and make sure all the carcinogenic smoke blows into other peoples homes, since they should be responsible enough to filter all the air that goes into their homes. my neighbor couldn't do anything about it because I took his life. who cares about him? he couldn't be responsible and protect himself from me and my gun. Oh no, that fire I started went out of control and is burning all the surrounding houses, I hope all those people were responsible enough to keep hundreds of gallons of water nearby in case such a thing would happen.
If I were to propose a law that said "Micail de Araujo was to be punched in the balls daily and in return no human on the planet would know starvation for the rest of his life"., would you oppose that law? or is your individuality too important in the scope of the billions of people? is it too important for millions of people? is it too important for thousands? where's the cut off for how important you and your individual right to not be punched in the balls repeatedly are against the well being of others? what will a law that restricts free 2 play games do to you, except be a minor inconvenience for you if you even play them? Why do you even care?
A way to solve this is putting some kind of limit you can spend on a game on a determined time. This doesn't means stopping letting the player get the resource that they want, just have a "unlimited" option for them all the time. The pokemon shufle does that. After spend 30 bucks, you get unlimited energy charges to play as much as you want.