The Solution to Monetization in Gaming – And Why it Will Never Work

OPINION – The cycle of resentment towards monetization in video games is as predictable as it is futile. While the solution is simple and elegant it will never work. We have heard the same tired old argument for many years already – if players stopped making in-game purchases, the industry would be forced to pivot.

And yes, that is the solution. If we all agreed to stop opening our wallets after we buy a game or download it for free, cosmetic bundles would lose their luster, battle passes would crumble, and loot boxes disguised as game mechanics would wither away.

Still, this solution will never work. No matter how loudly the gaming community protests monetization, there will always be people out there willing to feed the beast.

The Beast Will Survive Because It’s Constantly Fed

Please understand that the monetization model in modern gaming is not fueled by the many. It is sustained by a fraction of people who spend disproportionately. Often referred to as “whales” in industry jargon, these are the spenders who can prop up entire revenue streams. They don’t just buy the occasional skin or battle pass. They buy everything, which creates a lopsided ecosystem.

As of February this year, GTA5 had reportedly generated over $8 billion in revenue, making it the biggest single earner in all of entertainment to date. While the company behind it, Rockstar Games, and its parent company Take-Two Interactive, will never disclose exactly how much of that revenue is from in-game purchases, it’s been conservatively estimated to be between $2.5 billion and $3 billion.

This is just one example of dozens of games that rake in hundreds of millions each and every year. And as previously mentioned, in this lopsided ecosystem, it wouldn’t matter if 90% of players boycott in-game purchases, that remaining 10% still generates enough profit to keep the beast alive.

Many of us Remember How it All Started

We all know that it started on April 3, 2006 when Bethesda released a small downloadable package for Xbox and PC players who enjoyed playing Oblivion. This DLC was sold for $2.50 and $1.99 respectively and contained nothing more than a horse armor cosmetic.

At least this is the starting point of in-game monetization in the West. In Japan, in-game monetization practices via micro-transactions had been tried successfully already back in the 1990s on arcade games like Double Dragon III.

Even though players complained, that particular DLC would become one of the best sellers, eclipsing sales of entire expansion packs. Bethesda Game Studios laughed all the way to the bank because they provided the entire gaming industry with data that proved that those speaking up against this type of business model are in a minority.

Modern Video Games Are Designed to Exploit Those Who Can’t Resist

While gaming is part of the entertainment industry, the only thing big corporate execs like to entertain are reward cycles fine-tuned to hook players into spending. Creating an artificial need of urgency with frequent cycles in in-game stores or battle passes that will let players “skip ahead” aren’t new.

Companies like Activision Blizzard, EA, and Tencent employ behavioral psychologists and data scientists to optimize spending patterns. The aim is not to sell a game. The aim is to establish a pattern and sell a habit.

The monetization pipeline counts on players with disposable income who come up with internalized excuses like wanting their character in the game to look cool. I will readily admit that I fall into this category, even though I know all about the psychology behind it.

Yes, I am a fan of Berserker. Yes, my favorite game is Diablo IV. What can I say? I spent $50 for the Berserker cosmetics for my barb and the Skull Knight for my Necro. Was it because I wanted them to look cool? No! I did it because they look f**ing badass! At least I’m not a hypocrite.

Complain All You Want From Behind Your Ads

There is a peculiar contradiction in the way many YouTubers criticize monetization in gaming. On one hand, they take a firm stand against microtransactions, battle passes, and premium cosmetics, calling them manipulative and predatory. On the other hand, their own videos are often packed with ads and sponsored segments that viewers must sit through or skip.

The issue isn’t that creators rely on advertising. Most viewers understand that making videos takes time, and income from ads or sponsors helps creators keep going. But it becomes hypocritical when the same creators denounce game studios for doing what they themselves do – offer content for free while monetizing the attention of their audience.

I’m not a big fan of excessive corporate greed and I’m not defending companies that make billions of dollars on in-game purchases. But you can’t have your cake and eat it too. Condemning monetization when it comes from a billion-dollar publisher from behind a wall of ads is doing the very thing you’re speaking up against. The only difference is the scale, not the structure.

Many Have Tried – None Succeeded

There have been numerous calls for in-game purchase boycotts over the years. Gamers have protested monetization on Reddit, YouTube, and Twitter. Hashtags trend for a few days. Forums fill with frustration. Then it all fizzles out. Meanwhile, the sales charts never blink.

Why? Because boycotts always fail to scale to critical mass. One region may protest, but another shrugs. One community may organize, while the rest just want to play. And publishers know this. They weather the storm and wait for it to pass. The next content drop always pulls people back in.

This is why live service games double down on monetization even after backlash. Diablo Immortal survived controversy. Helldivers 2 recovered from its PSN account requirement debacle. The monetization model persists because it remains profitable, no matter what.

The Only Fix is The One We Can’t Pull Off

If players actually stopped spending, the system would indeed collapse. Publishers would be forced to rethink. Developers could return to making games that stand on their own, like back in the day of cartridges. Monetization would take a back seat to gameplay.

But that is not going to happen. Not now. Not ever. Because even in the face of overwhelming opposition, someone always buys the skin. And as long as that someone exists, the industry has no reason to change.

Monetization is not a problem with no solution. It is a solution we are collectively too fractured to enforce.