Nire Bryce

has something changed (like all the gambling addictions they've fostered I suppose) or is the research still that smaller microtransaction costs net you more overall money over the life of an online game, but all games management mostly just ignores it?

thinking about how the game industry is sort of disincentivized to learn any business lessons that aren't "game sell good because superstitious reasons" and "game sell bad because superstitious reasons"

having accidentally taken advantage of the increasing suburbanization of the world and a decline of public space and physical third spaces from 2000-present in the US, they have a captive audience in gamers who are partially there for a complex mix of social pressure and network effect.

who will buy any game made under any working conditions as long as you manage to get brand loyalty with the part of the social group that is at most 10% of it but has the most free time to play and evangelize

and you'll pretty much always have those things if you aim at 16-21 year old

so the core audience is people who probably haven't done any creative work or had to pay their own rent, who will always buy your game even if it's bad, and they'll complain and then come right back

idk how to change that, but basically the metrics are worse than meaningless and it's entirely possible neither group realizes they're holding each other back by not demanding something sustainable

see also "15 hours? for a 60$ video game???" being a common comment on games with a 3 person team