[yshalabi]

I am a bit concerned with the direction of in-game purchases. Games are being designed to push users to spend money. Whats the difference between this and gambling in casinos? Are users aware that algorithms are being gamed to maximize profits? Is this ethical? I think we really need some oversight here. I think an entire generation is being exposed to gambling and exploitation -- and I am not sure if its healthy.

[lmm]

> Games are being designed to push users to spend money.

Every business is designed to push their clients to spend money. Some are better at it than others.

> Whats the difference between this and gambling in casinos?

There's no possibility of winning, so no way to delude yourself that the money you spend is an "investment", or to try to make back your losses. And we haven't (yet) seen anything like the scale of social problems caused by casino gambling.

> Are users aware that algorithms are being gamed to maximize profits?

Maybe. But honestly what's the difference between an algorithm and a human salesman? (e.g. I've heard it alleged that Dumas and Dickens deliberately stretched and optimized their serialized stories, to maximize their profits) Does it matter?

[jamra]

An algorithm can make the game harder after it confirms you are willing to buy items. It's getting to the point where games are short circuiting your ability to reason.

[coldpie]

I never thought about it that way. Interesting insight. One aspect is that users don't receive a cash payout. They pay money in, but never receive money in return, like you would expect from true gambling. This falls apart when you allow trading within a game though, as you can exchange real money for a virtual trade. Then it does involve a payout.

[spathi_fwiffo]

Interesting point - I would originally agree with the other posters that said Gaming is different because there is no chance of making back your money, but you are correct, in a lot of games with markets and currencies, there is a way to make money from your time spent gaming.

I guess this would only be an issue if the purchase-element manifested directly in a way to make money? For example with Team Fortress 2; you can buy keys to unlock the item crates (which deliver a player a single new random item) - but you can't buy the item crates themselves - and you can't buy an item to make the crate's randomness any more favorable.

[Retra]

An unregulated casino would never give payouts either. (But they would generate as much false hope as they can afford.)

It's a promise of happiness in exchange for addictive behavior.

[jsprogrammer]

>An unregulated casino would never give payouts either.

An unregulated casino would not see many patrons then.

[Retra]

Why is that? You don't think an unregulated casino could stage wins to make it look like it was giving payouts? Or just make up stories?

[jsprogrammer]

Do you have an unlimited number of stooges? Such a facade can only be kept up for so long.

[spathi_fwiffo]

casinos didn't birth into existence fully regulated. their illegality and regulation came about because they were fleecing their many patrons.

[jsprogrammer]

And not all casinos never paid out.

[at-fates-hands]

This sounds like the same thing credit card companies who target young teenagers and college kids to get them hooked into impulse spending and rack up large sums of debt.

[forgetsusername]

I think you have your causation all messed up. We're immersed in a culture of "keeping up with the Jones'" impulse spending. Credit cards are a just tool to fulfill that desire.

Really, what do credit card companies do besides set up a booth on campus, saying, "Want a card?", and kids line up around the block?

[phatfish]

In my eyes the type of "games" Zynga create are no different from sites like madbid.com. Except the hook is needing to have a better looking/more successful farm than your friends, rather than an iPhone for £1.50

[blumkvist]

Uuuh... and what about CPGs? Chocolate bars are designed to push consumers to spend more money. Whats the difference between this and shooting cocaine in your veins?

[forgetsusername]

>"I think we really need some oversight here."

Yeah, let's get the government involved, because they don't have better things to do than make sure people aren't spending too much on their fake farms.

>and I am not sure if its healthy.

I'll bet you have a few habits or activities that people aren't sure "are healthy".

[yshalabi]

Where did I say government? If I am not mistaken, the organizations that oversee the casinos are private sector. If they are needed here then I see no reason why it cant be setup the same.

As for your other comment... jeez. Why so passive-aggressive? You are certainly right -- we all have habits that someone would consider unhealthy. But is my taste for sweets as destructive as this? I dont know, seems like they are both serious. It might even be that the addictiveness and lack of end-game of these games make them more dangerous.

Anyways, my main concern is that these games are being played by kids. I think everyone agrees that kids are still developing. What is the impact of these kinds of games on them? Do you know for sure that its harmless?

Not meaning to insult you or anyone, but dismissing these questions without a good reason is just plain ignorance and probably irresponsible. I am not equipped to answer these questions. Which is why this post and my original one are filled with questions.

[bmelton]

> If I am not mistaken, the organizations that oversee the casinos are private sector.

You are mistaken, at least in America. Except for those Native American run, casinos in America are regulated by some form of a gaming control board.

To my knowledge, this is true of pretty much anywhere that has gambling as an industry, though I wouldn't be shocked to find out that Monte Carlo or somewhere were wholly unregulated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaming_control_board

[forgetsusername]

>"Why so passive-aggressive?"

I consider "people are doing things I don't approve of. We should regulate that behavior" to be passive aggressive.

>"But is my taste for sweets as destructive as this?"

I'm pretty sure obesity kills more people than social games.

>"my main concern is that these games are being played by kids."

The vast majority of these games are played by adults.

>"Do you know for sure that its harmless?"

I don't care if it's "harmless". It isn't my duty, or yours, to ensure that everything everyone else does is "harmless".

[tsieling]

Would it bother you if casino methods were being applied to kids games?

[themartorana]

They are. See: Disney, et al.

Please stop invoking "won't someone please think of the children!!"

[forgetsusername]

Well, as a parent I'd do the responsible thing and ensure that the games I purchase for my children to play (because, you know, they don't have iTunes or Facebook accounts, or credit cards) don't employ those methods.

This is really a non-issue.