I made a rather lengthy rebuttal to this in another thread, I'll edit if I can find it. The casino argument might make sense if I could drop some money into a slot machine and play as much as I want. There is a major difference between paying every single time you play and paying once to play as much as you want. Addiction is a much needed component of a game, otherwise games become disposable. Edit: [quote][quote]Danny has a problem with Destiny. He doesn't think it's a bad game, but its development surfaces some troubling ethical questions about the role of game design in keeping players addicted. Especially when expensive DLC is involved.[/quote] Good points on behavioral game design, but I don't agree with the overall sentiment against it. He talks about "removing content" which is an unfounded argument that needs to stop being pushed around, it's asinine to believe that because Bungie had already created some content that it should be given to you, that's not how business works. That's like going to a fast food restaurant, seeing some food sitting under the warming lamp and expecting them to give you that food along with your order, because it's made already. It's like going to work on payday and only getting half of your paycheck, because you already did that work two weeks ago and your boss doesn't feel like paying you for it now. It's a terrible argument and it needs to go away. Games should be addictive, that's the point, I want something that keeps me coming back, not something I play for a couple of days then collects dust on my shelf for eternity. Speaking of games that collect dust, expensive DLC? As apposed to purchasing a new game, at full price, and playing it a fraction of the amount of time put into Destiny? Destiny is a cost effective game, it provides the addiction and enjoyment, things that a game SHOULD have, at a very reasonable cost IMO. He makes a point about games being "worth it" if it culminates in an ending. He's promoting disposable games, which I believe is way more unethical than tapping into behavioral science. If you're happy purchasing new games all the time and trading them in or selling them because they aren't worth playing anymore than I guess that's where our views differ, because I'm not okay with that. The guy said it himself, Destiny does not have a sub, meaning that the cost of support and infrastructure has to be obtained through game and DLC purchases, meaning that DLC at regular intervals is NEEDED to support the cost of hosting your game environment, fixing bugs, and implementing features. Perhaps you're against Bungie/Activision making money off of their games, that their games should be sold at a price that is just enough to cover their costs and put food on their tables, that this very successful commodity that they are providing shouldn't grant them financial gains. In a perfect world everyone would work for free and share their products openly, but this isn't utopia, this is reality, and if you create a successful product you should be rewarded for it. tl;dr - Addictive games > disposable games. P.S. - When I say "you" I mean the people that are against behavioral game design or companies profiting off of their products.[/quote]