• @SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    208 months ago

    No. Seriously, just fucking no.

    Games that are played for many hours are already rewarded by being more popular, meaning more people buy them, meaning more revenue. That’s the way it’s supposed to be. It’d be like charging people based on how many times they read a book. I must have read LOTR a hundred times by now, and the Tolkien estate has benefitted not only from me buying the books multiple times (softcover, hardcover, kindle, audiobook) and giving them as gifts, but also from every other person on the planet doing the same.

    Make a better product, and people will use it more, and more people will buy it. This is just drink verification can bullshit.

    Honestly, I sorta hope they try it, just so they can blow millions of dollars on something that was absolutely doomed and I would hope it craters the company, or at least some careers.

    • AggressivelyPassive
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -58 months ago

      It’d be like charging people based on how many times they read a book.

      No, it’s like paying more for a thicker book.

      Also, you just admitted to paying more for the same thing by buying it multiple times. So you’re obviously already willing to continue paying for the same entertainment.

      • shanie
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        You’re so close.

        Imagine for me a world where executives want to maximize extraction of funds out of consumers. Now imagine “filler” in video games. Finally, imagine games psychology and how to keep the player running after that carrot on a stick.

        I’m sure you see where this is going.

        (I realise this is even better under your comment here).

      • @fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        18 months ago

        No, it like being charged hourly to read a book, and the book has a bunch of copied and pasted paragraphs saying “protagonist killed 10 chickens.” And the ending to the book costs extra.

        And you still have to buy the whole book before doing any of that.

      • @SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        18 months ago

        No, and no.

        You don’t pay more for a thicker book. That’s an absolutely ridiculous notion and it’s not how the industry works. At all. The value of a book is the quality of the writing, not its length.

        Second, I could have read each of those individual books as many times as I wanted. I was buying different products each time. I’mnot paying for the same entertainment at all. It’s more like buying the same e game on Xbox and on switch, if that makes it easier for you.

        It’s a stupid fucking idea, and it’s exactly what got Unity rightfully smacked down just a week or so ago.