Pay-to-Win Video Games: The Pros & Cons - Essay Sample

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. 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 seeks to examine 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.

References

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

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

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.