“Online games will now be banned from giving players rewards if they log in every day, if they spend on the game for the first time or if they spend several times on the game consecutively. All are common incentive mechanisms in online games.”

  • flamingmongoose
    101·
    11 months ago

    Actually good regulations targeting the most manipulative of game designs.

  • Altima NEO@lemmy.zipEnglish
    56·
    11 months ago

    Man do I hate daily log in rewards. I wonder if this will affect tencents games that are released in the west?

    • walter_wiggles@lemmy.nz
      23·
      11 months ago

      China wants to remove the adverse affects of gambling/addiction from it’s populace, not the world. This is just another facet like their social media restrictions.

    • kick_out_the_jams@kbin.social
      9·
      11 months ago

      a word for such things is ‘dark patterns’
      it’s not designed to be liked but to keep the player returning habitually and upping so called “retention.”

    • Fizz@lemmy.nz
      9·
      11 months ago

      Yea they will have more shit to compensate for the losses in the Chinese market.

  • sculd@beehaw.org
    54·
    11 months ago

    Banning login bonus is such a good idea. When I am busy I simply don’t have time or remember to login once per day and then I miss out on some items.

    • johntash@eviltoast.orgEnglish
      23·
      11 months ago

      I’m alright with the games that give you daily rewards but they don’t have to be consecutive days. It still benefits people who log in everyday, but you at least aren’t entirely missing out

    • weew@lemmy.ca
      1·
      11 months ago

      or they get around it by not making it a “login” bonus but “do this really quick and easy daily quest” bonus.

  • Kwakigra@beehaw.org
    23·
    11 months ago

    Remember kids, almost all freemium games make their money through manipulating your animal impulses to make you spend money on essentially nothing which you wouldn’t rationally want to spend. Disarming this particular skinner box seems like a positive direction.

  • Erdrick@beehaw.org
    22·
    11 months ago

    When I saw the title, I was concerned.
    Upon reading the article, I was really happy to see this.
    Now that I actually think about it though, I DO play a gacha game and it would simply be impossible to exist if not for the gacha business style it utilizes. I’m very happy that so many people sink real money into it, as I simply am unable to do so myself.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      15·
      11 months ago

      I’m very happy that so many people sink real money into it, as I simply am unable to do so myself.

      I get what you’re saying, but it does also create incentives to develop for whales.

      Like, okay. Take Fallout 76. They – unlike with previous games in the series – do not have large, commercial DLC packages that come out. Rather, they have small, free, seasonal releases of content. Howard has committed Bethesda not to doing any commercial DLC for the game.

      I was happy with that “large commercial DLC” model, and purchased them. But, okay, as it stands, I get a game that someone else is mostly paying for, right?

      They sell a “premium” subscription for $12/mo, which provides some relatively-minor benefits.

      And they sell various cosmetic items that people can place in their camp that one could hypothetically spend a pretty much unlimited amount on.

      My problem is that financially, this constrains them to have basically no incentive to do anything other than develop new cosmetic items and sell to people who really want to buy them. And in the past, Bethesda has made some excellent large, commercial expansions for games in the series, like Far Harbor for Fallout 4.

      This isn’t to argue in favor of or against the law in China, but to point out that the “someone else will pay for the game” model has some problems with it – if you aren’t paying anything, and someone else’s wallet is covering all the costs, it means that the game developer is entirely-incentivized to do development to appeal to whoever is paying for the thing, not you.

      • Jrockwar@feddit.uk
        4·
        11 months ago

        This doesn’t necessarily apply to multiplayer games though: the free-to-play part of the playerbase is there to pad the numbers and ensure queues are short (if it’s a match based game), cities are lively (if it’s a MMORPG), etc.

        If the developer can’t appeal to those too, then you’re left with a ghost town of a game that can’t appeal to the whales either.

      • Pigeon@beehaw.org
        1·
        11 months ago

        Also, the “whales” are by and large not unharmed rich people - it’s mostly poor people who are at risk for gambling addiction, such as many with adhd, depression, etc. The people who are targeted successfully by this model usually suffer for it.