The title of this post makes it clear: if some video game monetization strategies are deemed “acceptable” it certainly means that some others… aren’t!
Following various controversies and during these times of exploration, the video game industry seems in dire need of some guidance and clear lines not to cross when developing and implementing its monetization strategies. Therefore, it would be interesting to try to define what is and what constitutes “acceptable monetization” in video games.
This post delves deeper into the dark side of monetization, and tries to underline a few limits that should not be crossed by game publishers who aim at building long-lasting, trustful relationships with players.
In the last two or three years, Ubisoft has considerably transformed and improved its company image and is slowly regaining trust from players. This likely comes following the end of 2014, where the company was making the headlines for having had one of its worst years in terms of PR and corporate image. Some critics even went so far as to placing them on the same level as Electronic Arts, which has been infamous for deceiving fans and creating public outrage throughout its existence, in addition to being voted “Worst company in America” several consecutive years in the past.
But when I look at Ubisoft today, it all feels like a long time ago. They seem committed to being better and are taking significant actions to regain their fans’ trust. So how are they doing it exactly?