[elfcard]

I'd much rather people pay for stability. Tricking people to pay for 64 bytes of code and a new color pallet for a diamond encrusted pixel sword in order to offer stability was a mistake. Education needed to happen, this shit is hard, and it's a lot of work. When I go to a store, I don't see a sign "Pizza is free" only to walk over and find that if I want to put toppings on the pizza, well those cost $0.99 per single slice of pepperoni on the pizza. In order to get a full pizza experience, including peppers, cheese, and sauce, I'm not paying $30 for the free pizza. It's dishonest, and we're the ones allowing it to happen.

[nl]

I'm not sure I understand you.

Firstly, Pay-to-play (which I think you are talking about?) isn't the same as an app store for mods. I'm not sure if you play Minecraft, but there is a very diverse range of mods available, of differing qualities and all hosted on malware infested download sites. That's a real problem that deserves to be looked at.

I'd never advocate that core features of Minecraft be made pay-to-play. Instead, I'm advocating exactly the same model as we see in Android or iOS: the core system is free, and there is a simple way to get extra features onto it. Some of those maybe free, and some may not.

Secondly, the number of bytes doesn't determine the value of anything.

Thirdly, "It's dishonest, and we're the ones allowing it to happen" - who, specifically is the "we" you speak of here? I'm not doing anything to allow it to happen. (I'm not specifically doing anything to stop it, either: I'm simply not involved. I'm genuinely curious who you are talking about).

[elfcard]

Sell me a service, or a product, not a gimmick. That's what I'm saying. Im talking about IAP.

The value is in scarcity, but it's artificially scarce. It's contrived.

Seriously? On a forum dedicated to startups and development, many who like me do app and game development or lead app and game development teams; you can't figure out who I'm talking to? Seriously?

[nl]

The value is in scarcity, but it's artificially scarce. It's contrived.

Couldn't this statement apply to gaming as a whole, too?

Is it that being stopped half way through a game and forced to pay for some gizmo to keep playing is worse than having to pay up front for the whole game? Financially there may be no difference at all, right?

(Not a gamer here)

Seriously? On a forum dedicated to startups and development, many who like me do app and game development or lead app and game development teams; you can't figure out who I'm talking to? Seriously?

HN is hardly a game focused forum. The vast majority of people on here don't have anything to do with games.

It was difficult to tell if your "We" meant "game developers" in general or was somehow more specific to Minecraft mod developers (which is what I didn't understand).

[chc]

What does "pay for stability" mean? Is this actually an actionable business plan?