I guess I wasn't clear as to your original argument, but my point still stands. An evil system that preys on people with no self-control is evil. And a just system that doesn't let people hurt themselves is not evil. It's extremely limiting and wasteful to assume that because something is called "free to play" that it is necessarily abusive. You've pointed out a very specific scenario (consumable items in a competitive game that unbalances the playing field) where things tend to get out of hand. Fine, then don't add a system like that in to your next game! Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

@Tim: Puzzle Pirates seems to come up again and again as a game that did it best, first. Thanks for the info!

@Wojciech: I have caught this trend on iPhones as well. It is quite interesting. I suspect that tradition is a huge part of it. As mentioned in the article, games teach value systems. For a less experienced gamer (i.e. first-time social gamer or mobile gamer), the first system they come across that they have a chance to really learn would, I think, tend to ingrain a pattern that they look for in future games.

The medium could also have a fairly significant impact, as I think about it. It seems that part of the nature of mobile games is a heavy consideration of time usage. (e.g. I'll play this game for 3 minutes before the bus comes.) So facets of a game which also activate the timeline-organizing part of the brain would stand out for a player. This is just a rash assumption of course. Interesting point, in any case!

@Nels: Yes, that was a good post. (Just read it now.) He makes a very good point about the alignment of play and financial issues. However, based on our discussion, I would say that only some facets of the experience fit his 'pay to skip the boring' model. Vanity items, or content packs, or subscriptions -- none of these require the free portion of the game to be boring in order to succeed. But the financial/play alignment is a good rubric for determining if the system one designs will trend towards evil or not!

Your point about the purse strings is valid also, and something I maybe should have included in the writeup. There is always a danger in financially-led design decisions, and I can see that the danger is amplified in situations where these two goals are opposed.

@Lando: It sounds like DDO has made a pretty strong effort to not be evil. It sounds like they have some objectives (multiple access methods, non-gamebeaking upgrades, etc) and have tried to properly utilize the tools before them. Thanks for the post!

@Great Dane: As I am not a WoW player I wasn't fully aware of the specifics of Character Buying. I knew it was frowned upon but just made some guesses as to why. Thanks for this detail!

Some of this premium content - certain puzzles, for example - are available for free on certain days of the week, so that non-paying players can preview it before spending money on the badge.

That is not a fair analogy. Both in a theatre and with a DVD you are charged a single price to get the full experience. In neither case is somebody standing at the door asking if you would like to purchase gems that can be used to change how the movie ends for everybody.

Again, purchasing content is a great way to legitimately monetize your hard work. However, giving people the opportunity to purchase gold/gems/whatever to make the game easier (especially in MMORPG type games where people compete with one another) preys on those who lack the self-control that the rest of us enjoy, which is why the 2%-3% of the players who buy these consumables can finance the game for the rest of us; they are grossly and pathetically overpaying.

By creating their own point system and using that for purchases, they are able to reward free to play members that play the game and thus as mentioned provide content for VIP members. It keeps a lot of people in the game or able to rejoin the game in the future and most of the entertainment of the game is of course talking and working with others.

It's cheaper in the long run, say over the course of a year, if players were to actually just purchase the packs rather than continuing to pay via subscription, ie VIP, but VIP works for a number of people either because they don't want to spend all that money at one time, not sure if they can play much month to month or if they are like me, I pay to help build content and because I am receiving value each month.

Buying packs works for many people. I can think of a variety of reasons ranging from wanting to "own" content so that they don't have to worry about making another bill payment every month, year, etc. For people that have off time that waxes and wanes they can purchase content when they are ready and don't have to "worry" about getting their money's worth each month they play. It seems to work out quite well for military personal that have to spend time abroad without a decent internet connection as they buy the content they want when they are available and on deployment they don't have to worry about keeping up a subscription or losing their characters/equipment/etc. Not to mention that if you play for over a year or so, it's cheaper just to purchase the packs.

Free to play attraction is pretty simple, it's FREE!!!! The thing that is unique about DDO though is that while you might not get access to all the premium packs that are available at your level, currently characters in the game(toons) are limited to level 20, there are always free to play quests that are within level range in order to advance your character. It might be a little boring at times, but eventually, you can get to level 20. Furthermore, if you farm favor on multiple toons on any of the servers, that favor generates TPs that are collected in your main account. Once you have enough favor you can purchase any of the premium packs and thus all game content is available for the free to play character provided you want to spend the time doing it that way. It might not be the easiest way, but for those that are cash strapped or those that refuse to pay money for an online game it's a viable option.

Which brings us to other things TP can purchase. One of the most important aspect to the game in my mind is that power levels of items in the game have not seen a lot of inflation over the 5 years the game has been run. Although the level is slowly getting higher, there are not really uber items that must be purchased with TPs. In actuality, though there are basic equipment items available in the Turbine Strore, they are basically what any level 6 player would pick up within 30-40 hours of play and the TPs for purchase are actually far more expensive that playing a game that you enjoy anyway will eventually pull. There are things like custom dies for equipment to change their color and things like alignment changes and other stuff that are "neat" but for all practical purposes surpurulous to the game. There are bonus items that can be put on ships to give better buffs, but with continued game play even f2p players will eventually get to be a high enough guild level that they will be able to buy these items with in game cash, ie gold, silver, and platinum coins rather than having to spend TPs to get them.

One more thing about packs, while the VIP players generate a steady income each month, the people that buy packs provide incentive for the company itself to continuously develop new content so that as each new pack is created they get an influx of income for generating that pack.

To summarize:
Providing multiple methods of payment, either through subscriptions, one time purchases or time investment the number of players in the game at any time day or night is maintained so that people can group together and overcome challenges and socialize along the way. More players means more entertainment which draws more players.

All game content is available via each of the different payment plans so people don't leave like they do in many games when the f2p players realize they can never be as uber as the p2p players.

Continued storage of characters even if subscriptions lapse is another key element to allow people to return to the game weeks, months or even years after they stop playing.

Incentive for the company to continue expanding the content in the game benefits players that want to see more content added and the company itself.

No sales of uber items goes back to the fact that f2p players are on an even standing with p2p players.

Level limits that are possible for everyone to reach so that the game isn't a continuous skinner box requiring you to continue to constantly play daily, weekly, monthly just to keep up with everyone else in the game. Eve online for all it's good points fails that one drastically as players need to maintain their accounts and keep training at all times if they are going to maintain where they started at and there being no hope of catching up to the leaders in the game.

Overall, I've been playing DDO for about 2 years now and I still find it enjoyable. I've taken breaks from the game here and there, but because I'm not facing a penalty for leaving and coming back, it makes it a very easy game to return to.

I'm sure I've missed a lot of things about the system and suggest you take a look yourself, but in my opinion DDO has done micro-payments correctly.

There's another interesting point in there about League of Legends. Lots of folks like LoL and how Riot has managed to keep the business from mucking with the gameplay, and I agree with them, but Jaime's right in that almost all the design decisions about LoL were made by DotA. (Ditto w/ TF2 and, well, TFC and many others) The microtransaction-based games that have evolved from the ground up (Zynga's stuff, etc.) as compared to those based on existing formulas tends heavily toward being abusive. That's a bit chilling for me.

And while it's easy to say "It doesn't have to be that way," swimming against the current of supposed best practices and common wisdom ain't easy. Especially when someone external is holding the purse strings and looking at how Zynga does it and wants to know why that ought not just be imitated.

TL;DR - I hope D3's auction house and other ancillary transaction schemes prove fruitful, because I'm deeply skeptical of the industry at large finding ways to have microtransactions that are entwined with gameplay not drift toward abusive.

However: All we do in most of our activities in life is 'gain assets', at the end of the day. If a person has an enjoyable farmville experience to the same degree that you have an enjoyable LoL experience, who are we to slander their chosen entertainment?

@A. Lockhart: Yes, of everything in the list, microsubscriptions are the most intriguing to me. I guess I see Retail > Microtransactions, Subscriptions > Microsubscriptions. It's like a quadrant of the possibility space that is unexplored!

@Ubisububi: I don't see how the distinction between consumables and content has anything to do with the kind of player that is purchasing them. Every time you pay to go to the theatre instead of buying a DVD, you are choosing a 'consumable experience' that 'simply makes the sound and picture bigger'.

I don't for one second defend those who abuse their players. I'm saying that the choice to abuse a player or not is not related to the kind of transaction system a game contains. Because you are exactly right: We have responsibility, and we must use our systems responsibly. That is all there is to it.