Comment by selfhoster11
3 years ago
The confusion is over what is meant by 'monetisation' here.
Is is "making sure the game is at all commercially viable so I can afford to keep myself alive and well fed", or "making sure that every drop of money is juiced from the customer".
Without a clear statement that he meant the latter, I decided to give him some benefit of doubt unless I have additional context (I never heard of the guy before).
I think using the term “compulsion loop” when taking about monetization is a pretty clear sign that he means the latter.
Making a game that can pay for itself doesn’t really need to trick people into it. Look at stardew valley for instance, or factorio, or minecraft
But Minecraft has a really solid compulsion loop, it’s what makes it so easy to start playing and then realize it’s nightfall. You never have to wait for anything because there’s always something else to do, you get mild gentle pressure from the environment to do things like hunger, night, mobs that inject variety. Every step of building something is set up as a reward, and there’s tiers of progress that reward basically every action. Mining and drops is literally lootboxes.
You picked basically the most addictive game in existence that uses every trick in the book as your shining example. Minecraft just hides it well.
I’m straight up talking about the connotations of using the term “compulsion”. Last I heard these described by game developers they were referred to as “game loops” or “core loop” if they were referring to the main part of the game.
Using the term “compulsion” to describe it instead comes from a certain mindset that I believe is centered around making skimmer boxes
Sad panda, that Microsoft is doing their damnedest to shift Minecraft out of this category.
Just in case there is further confusion here he is talking about how cool it would be if you could charge per reload in shooter.
https://youtu.be/ZR6-u8OIJTE
"You are really not that price sensitive at that time"
That's just effing evil.
There are some real dark vids from GDC and the like talking about the psychology behind manipulating people into MTX and real money economies in games.
Having worked under Ricitiello at EA, I am fairly confident his brain is not capable of distinguishing these concepts. I don't think he even understands the concept of "enough money".
>Is is "making sure the game is at all commercially viable so I can afford to keep myself alive and well fed", or "making sure that every drop of money is juiced from the customer".
yes, because teams typically undertake complex, expensive, and difficult projects for charity with no intention of being paid or making any financial gain
It looks like the intent is to offer tools for taking money from customers. This means that the extent and character of monetization would be up to developers. It might mean adds, it might mean in game purchase opportunities. It does not necessarily mean a choice between two extremes.