> [...] "free" games and its design has long been associated with forcing emotional, heat-of-the-moment-spurred buys from consumers
Why is this a bad thing? You decided to download and to play the game. You put yourself under the "game" rules. You are an adult, not a child.
>Even worse is when they later convince themselves that the money was well spent (say, for an extra life in Candy Crush).
This is a highly subjective claim to make it pass as an argument. I may personally agree that every money spent on games is money not well spent but that is just my opinion.
Users are not babies. As long as no gun is pointing at them (i.e. the game gives you any content for free but also offers you more if you pay ), every purchase they do is legitimate.
Maybe I'm losing the point of this whole debate, I don't understand what you think users need protection against.
Why is this a bad thing? You decided to download and to play the game. You put yourself under the "game" rules. You are an adult, not a child.
>Even worse is when they later convince themselves that the money was well spent (say, for an extra life in Candy Crush).
This is a highly subjective claim to make it pass as an argument. I may personally agree that every money spent on games is money not well spent but that is just my opinion.
Users are not babies. As long as no gun is pointing at them (i.e. the game gives you any content for free but also offers you more if you pay ), every purchase they do is legitimate.
Maybe I'm losing the point of this whole debate, I don't understand what you think users need protection against.