Pay-to-Win Video Games: Blessing or Curse? - Annotated Bibliography

Introduction

Pay to win video games enable the players to purchase points or viral products which guarantee them the advantage in the game, and may trigger overspending by the players with a motive of winning the game. The entertainment software rating board started labeling games that encompassed in-game buying in 2018 (Hamari et al., 2017). However, the pay to win model has attracted attention because a number of the game players have larger gaming bills on their own and some have the bills on their parents' credit card, the utilization of the loot boxes are the things that have informed high inspection from out of the industry (Hamari et al., 2017). A loot box refers to an in-game I which the virtual content is shown after buying the game, and can have a valuable virtual element. Most critics argue that, when the players use the money for buying the loot boxes, the activity can be similar to gambling.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The first question to answer in the pay to win videogame is what are the effects of micro-transactions in the video game? Gaming has increased due to the use of micro-transaction (MTX). MTX is the most important revenue system in which the developers can use for selling in-game items for actual money from the game players. Mobile games are regarded as the most common games which explore the use of the MTX system; for example, it enables some players to pay money for purchasing new and extra lives on the candy crush (Hamari et al., 2017). Contrarily, the way the system is utilized can be toxic and may ruin a wonderful game. The players who used the beta have shown an improvement in gameplay o the initial monotonous installment. Initially, loot boxes were the fundamental units for obtaining weapons, new skills, and game heroes, and it was being bought with real money. Unfortunately, the loot box system cannot work in online gaming, and that is the reason MTX is key has led to a significant improvement in video gaming.

The second question would be, are loot boxes a form of gambling? Loot boxes in the video game should be regulated like gambling, and underage children should be barred from buying them. The game should be categorized as loot boxes under gambling because the boxes are purchased with real money. More imperatively, the government should control the activities of the game and be portrayed as a game of probability under the Gambling Act of 2005 (Hamari et al., 2017). The loot box contains elements of probability since the players of the game do not understand what they can get, but the game is not regulated like gambling because the items won do not have a monetary value. Contrarily, the report by Digital Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) revealed that the winnings from the loot box are exchangeable for money. Therefore, the game can be classified as gambling.

The third question would be, what does pay to win means in the video game? A pay to win means that the developer has executed a system in which the players who purchase extra in the game are guaranteed competitive advantages over the other players without extra. The concept is also referred to as buying power. The "Battlefront 2" had recently received critics concerning this since the EA executed a star card system (Hamari et al., 2017). A player gets upgrades in a loot box system, and the upgrades are random drops. When a player opts for purchasing these boxes, the player may have an advantage while opening the boxes and getting the best upgrades while the other players who do not buy boxes may be limited to their tie of playing the game, as well as limited for the randomized drops for the upgrades.

Alha, K., Koskinen, E., Paavilainen, J., Hamari, J., & Kinnunen, J. (2014). Free-to-play games: Professionals' perspectives. Proceedings of nordic DiGRA, 2014.

The article examines a free to play income model from the perspective of game professionals. In courting large playing audience while addressing their broad willingness to pay range, the game developers have highly adopted the free to play income model. Despite the adoption of the model by developers, there are critics of the free to pay income model who is deeming the model unethical and exploitative. The study employed a thematic qualitative analysis while interviewing game professionals on their opinion about the model. The study found that the model I viewed by the developers to be favorable, but the public writing about the game is negative and hostile. But there are some ethical issues to be addressed. More significantly, the free to play has a brighter future despite the current problems.

Golynchev, A. (2019). Microtransactions as a way of monetization in the video game industry.

The study seeks to collect and analyze the kind of feelings that the journalists and the gamers have towards the execution of the micro-transaction system in the video games. The study collected data from online articles, journal articles, and academic literature. The study employed a quantitative research method. Interviews were carried out, and it involved 12 interviewees. The study also used expert semi-structured interviews and a video game journalist. In analyzing the execution of the system, a cross-case analysis was employed. The research found that journalists have opinions that do not correspond to the usual gamer. The study further found that the players of the game do not prefer a pay to win mechanics, but they prefer cosmetics.

Zendle, D., McCall, C., Barnett, H., & Cairns, P. (2018). Paying for loot boxes is linked to problem gambling, regardless of specific features like cash-out and pay-to-win: A preregistered investigation.

The article investigated features of different loot boxes to determine whether such features establish the link among problematic gambling and loot boxes spending. The research employed an extensive preregistered correlational analysis (n=1200) in the study. The problem faced by most competitors is resolving whether various kinds of loot boxes bring more inherent harm, and how to regulate them accordingly. The study also specified loot boxes' differences by highlighting how their unique features vary. For instance, cashouts, pay to win, paid or unpaid openings, and in-game currency. The study noted that the pay to win mechanism adopted by popular games such as Fire Emblem Heroes and Hearthstone offers gamers a competitive advantage when playing the game. As such, the article concludes that loot boxes feature such as pay to win weakly increases the links among expenditure on loot box and gambling addiction and problems. Therefore, the main report concluded that despite the absence or presence of distinct characteristics of loot boxes, if game developers market them to gamers for money, then the purchase of loot boxes is connected to gaming problems.

Hamari, J., Alha, K., Jarvela, S., Kivikangas, J. M., Koivisto, J., & Paavilainen, J. (2017). Why do players buy in-game content? An empirical study on concrete purchase motivations. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 538-546. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.045

The article used a questionnaire by developing a set of questions corresponding to the factors that compel individuals to buy in-free-to-play games. Besides, the researchers reviewed existing studies by gathering data through an online survey by researching social media and website pages of three significant Finnish games-related publications for 17 days. During the study period, 1159 responses were collected with the omission of 70 because prior, they had not participated in free-to-play games. The study objective was to analyze in-game content buying reasons through a bottom-up perspective that is conversant with the available data instead of a top-down confirmatory view. The findings of the study indicated that purchasing reasons diverged into six dimensions. For instance, players buy in-game content to gain a competitive advantage over their rivals. Besides, in-game content is obtained to enhance unobstructed play by unlocking content to enhance continuous play, avoid repetitions, and protect achievements. Other reasons are economic rationale, social interaction, and indulging children. The results of the research, therefore, showed that the need for unobstructed play, unlocking content, and social content are associated with how much players spend. The article concluded that game designers implement artificial limitations, obstacles, and social interactions lure players influences the margin of spending among different players.

Brooks, G. A., & Clark, L. (2019). Associations between loot box use, problematic gaming and gambling, and gambling-related cognitions. Addictive Behaviors, 96, 26-34. doi:10. 20191016/j.addbeh..04.009

This study aimed to explore the link between gambling problems, loot box use, and gambling, between various groups of video games. The articles researched between different study groups, for instance, Study 1 had 144 adults (21 years and above), while study 2 had 113 students (19 years and above). All participants had played video games and were well-versed about loot boxes before the research. Participants then were asked to complete an online survey, an internet gambling disorder scale, and a domain-specific-risk-taking financial subscale and questionnaires about false beliefs about gambling. The study found that most players in study 1 (88.9%) and in study 2 (94.8%) had opened the loot box. About a half in both study groups had spent money on the loot box. A majority of players in both groups believed that loot box purchase is an addictive form of gambling. The outcomes of the research showed that there are false beliefs that gambling could be a risk factor for risky loot box use among video gamers. Besides, the results suggested that uncertain loot box use results from risky behavior tendencies and false beliefs about gambling. The article, therefore, concluded that games with market places often lead to gambling addiction and behaviors by shifting gamers' use of loot boxes from wanting items from the loot boxes for personal use towards the desire to make money.

Zendle, D., & Cairns, P. (2019). Loot boxes are again linked to problem gambling: Results of a replication study: PloS one, 14(3), e0213194.

The research was administered on players aged 18 years and above using an online survey method. The objective was to establish how the amount players spends on loot boxes influences their addiction to gamble. Besides, the researchers also conducted a large-scale survey on a sample size of 1172 game players to find the relationship between spending and game addiction. The research was blinded to prevent participants from identifying the study objectives, thus helping to eliminate chances influencing the outcome of the study. The research also used the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI), which had nine questions prying gamblers how often they were involved in gambling-related behaviors. The results of the study indicated that purchasing loot boxes results in gambling addiction. Besides, the documents evidence that loot boxes are a platform for gamers in developing gambling problems. The article concludes loot boxes heightens gambling addiction, and that people with difficulties in gambling are likely to pay more on loot boxes.

Tomic, N. (2017). Effects of microtransactions on video games industry. Megatrend Revija, 14(3), 239-257. doi:10.5937/megrev1703239t

The paper investigated the effects of microtransactions on gaming industries. The results were obtained by examining the relevance of microtransactions as an electronic payment method created by game developers and their objective in the process of remodeling the gaming industry. The article incorporated an extensive review of the existing literature in...