Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

craigwritescode.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 349 posts

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#291

Post by josho »

kmeisthax wrote: post #283
dleslie wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, but it's a social experience. The primary capital isn't one's competitive standing, it's the uniqueness of your gear. Fortnite's store UI is designed around limited time access panic sales.

Indeed. In fact, we've even spotted kids using "default" as a slur - which is exactly what you design for if you're building a microtransaction slurry game.

My daughter recently encountered this in Roblox. Her friends gave her a hard time for her default skin. The peer pressure to spend money is real.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#292

Post by josho »

naravara wrote: post #241
dleslie wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thankfully, PC Gaming strangely hasn't been dominated by this phenomenon, despite EA's, Activision's, and Epic's best efforts. Fortnite is addiction-tuned F2P casinowear, and it's done gangbusters, but the industry hasn't managed to copy that formula with great success.

The reward loop works much better when it can be in your pocket and be accessed during moments of boredom/idleness. The lack of friction before getting pulled in is at least as much of a causative factor as the three issues the article highlights. Every little bit of friction diminishes its effectiveness. One thing that's ironic with a lot of mainstream AAA gaming though, is that even though they aren't copying the r…

I’ve read that the reason is to extend playtime for as long as possible to limit resale market.

Maybe with the advent of digital purchase (and the death of selling your used copy) we’ll see a return to designing games for fun.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#293

Post by munk-a »

watwut wrote: post #250
dleslie wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thankfully, PC Gaming strangely hasn't been dominated by this phenomenon, despite EA's, Activision's, and Epic's best efforts. Fortnite is addiction-tuned F2P casinowear, and it's done gangbusters, but the industry hasn't managed to copy that formula with great success.

Pretty much all people I ever heard about or new who has issue with gaming were addicted to something like lol, wow or pubg. The people who play whole night and that are irritable and underperforming during day, who made gaming their whole life, are not playing causual games. They are playing console and pc games.

Those folks are paying their time into the game sure - but casual games in IAPs can drain bank accounts surprisingly fast from folks that'd normally consider themselves above microtransactions. There is a lot of very sneaky psychological tricks that go into trying to get folks to spend an insane amount of money - I'd compare that to something like CS:GO which is trying to get everyone to spend a little bit of money but is less oriented to harness big spenders outside of the marketplace which isn't all that promoted in game.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#294

Post by smegger001 »

andomar wrote: post #257
mod wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. Yes, they would. The lottery is about giving up something of little value ($1 or $2) for some entertainment and the chance at a truly life-changing situation. I doubt anyone is unaware there's almost no chance they win, and that they're losing on every dollar they spend. Interestingly, the lottery is occasionally +EV to play. I ot…

> The lottery is about giving up something of little value ($1 or $2) for some entertainment and the chance at a truly life-changing situation Wish that were true. Organizers usually take 90% of the money. Just a tiny percentage is paid out. Like Voltaire said: "Lotteries are a tax on stupidity"

Except that wasn't Voltaire it was the economist Sir William Petty. In fact Voltaire made his fortune on the lottery. He found a exploit in the rules of the particular implementation of the lottery allowing him to guarantee a win and high pay out.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/05/how-voiltair...

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#295

Post by munk-a »

mod wrote: post #129
TeMPOraL wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also pretty useless. Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. If you have a list of 20 items with non-uniform chances, can you tell how long you need to play before it's likely you'll get an item you want? You and me can, by doing little math in head; most people can't (and it's another question whether one has the willpower to do such math and follow it through whil…

> Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. Yes, they would. The lottery is about giving up something of little value ($1 or $2) for some entertainment and the chance at a truly life-changing situation. I doubt anyone is unaware there's almost no chance they win, and that they're losing on every dollar they spend. Interestingly, the lottery is occasionally +EV to play. I ot…

> Yes, they would. The lottery is about giving up something of little value ($1 or $2) for some entertainment and the chance at a truly life-changing situation.

It is expected that that one or two dollars is more likely to result in a life changing situation if saved and properly invested - this is difficult in the modern world since a lot of large institutions are out to short-change the little guys but it still remains true.

I can easily see the value proposition of regular casino gambling - you're slowly losing money for the experience - but for the lottery your money is being transformed into a ticket that is, essentially, worthless.

I am strongly morally opposed to the lottery as a form of government income supplement since spending on lotteries tends to be weighted toward lower income and is extracting revenue from those less able to bear it. Lotteries are an extremely regressive tax.

That all said I think the EV of a lottery ticket is probably quite a bit higher than Starbucks and those sell gangbusters. A lot of our society is oriented toward exploiting addiction.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#296

Post by pseudalopex »

ryandrake wrote: post #219
AngrySkillzz wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The medium is the message. We've been talking about this for decades - the structure of the thing you are interacting with determines how you interact with it. Substantive debate is difficult in 140 characters, so substantive debate does not often happen on Twitter. Infinite scroll and auto-play video eliminates the "decision points" where people would otherwise reconsider if they want to continue, so people spend mo…

Also, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. You judge a system by its outcome, not by the intentions of the people who built it.

"The purpose of a system is what it does."

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#297

Post by luplex »

dillondoyle wrote: post #213
luplex wrote: post #41

I did an internship with a very profitable Swedish mobile game before the pandemic, and it was really interesting to see the doublethink: everyone knew we were making a drug, but people avoided speaking of it in that way. It was always "our most engaged players readily spend on in-game items", and never "the most addicted users spend money so they can continue playing" It was a great workplace, but I don't think it w…

Yesterday I saw on Cardi B's stories she did a paid post promotion for a game that is literally a slot machine.. It's designed with childlike graphics and her followers are very young. It's marked as teen in google store. God even the first review shows how blatant this is: "I'm really not big on games but this game is the truth. I cant stop playing it. I go to sleep to it. Wake to it. My day is filled with ways of f…

Why does this type of ad work? Do people want to be addicted to something so badly? Don't they have something better to do?

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#298

Post by luplex »

Spivak wrote: post #136
ethbr0 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

F2P-with-purchases games should (a) require disclaimers, (b) be illegal and stiffly penalized for allowing minors to play, & (c) have their algorithms open to a gaming regulator (in the same way Las Vegas does).

Eh I don't really think "think of the children" is the right narrative here. These games, while especially bad for children, aren't much better for adults. Absolutely require 18+ to play and require them be labeled as gambling but I don't think that's enough. If we're counting on adults "knowing better" which makes it okay to play these games while the industry profits on precisely those adults that don't then there'…

In fact, we never marketed to children. Adults are much more profitable, because they can actually pay up.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#299

Post by luplex »

bromuro wrote: post #142
luplex wrote: post #41

I did an internship with a very profitable Swedish mobile game before the pandemic, and it was really interesting to see the doublethink: everyone knew we were making a drug, but people avoided speaking of it in that way. It was always "our most engaged players readily spend on in-game items", and never "the most addicted users spend money so they can continue playing" It was a great workplace, but I don't think it w…

Gaming today is not that different than gambling. I started playing some games on iOS recently, I got addicted too and spent way too much money I should have. Meanwhile ads displayed in the app offer me “real money” and “millions each month” playing cards or by “putting my finance at risk” or playing similar addictive games. (Yes, I paid for the game but there are ads for extra scores)

Except that with gambling, you get a rush and a chance of profit. In games, it's only a sad and short-lived rush.

Re: “User Engagement” Is Code for “Addiction”

#300

Post by hakfoo »

lmm wrote: post #290
kryogen1c wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> F2P-with-purchases this misses the core issue. a game like path of exile is completely playable for free - and they release new content quarterly and yearly (again, for free). a game like Raid Shadow Legends is not - you very rapidly hit a paywall and it would take years of free play to acquire power equivalent to spending $100. the exploitative nature is pay to win, where youre simply playing a different game unle…

There's nothing wrong with an honest pay-to-win game. The dangerous part is the randomness.

While I agree with your sentiment, I have to wonder if it would be possible to make a non-random pay-to-win game be compelling both from a financial and gameplay standpoint.

Say you can buy max-level weapons/characters/whatever for a defined price. The meta rapidly breaks down to "this is the highest yield of power per dollar" and "the optimal build costs exactly USD 1143.76."

It's not compelling for new players to say "I know that I'm going to eventually spend eleven hundred bucks if I love this game." You can't dangle the chance of getting a super-powered item on that first 99 cent lootbox to get someone on the IAP treadmill. I'd expect the game design itself would have to feature hard breakpoints to trigger a purchase/hundred hour grind moment.

And then, how do you convince the whales to pony up 5 and 6 figures once they possess an optimal build? Fashion and equivalent power churn only goes so far.

Post reply on HN