When are we expecting news?

[Chie]

That is an entirely different conversation. If you don't want to fall for a mobile game's predatory tactics, then don't. Don't spend money on it. Be a F2P player. The conversation here is in regards to the game's success based on the game's functionality and premise as a video game. Nothing else.

Even so, I believe a video game - whether it's an indie, AAA or even a mobile one - should be given a chance before ultimately concluding that it'll flop. Regardless of whether you enjoy mobile games or not. Regardless of whether it's predatory or not. That isn't an issue for a responsible person.

It's not a different conversation, because it's not a video game, it's a content delivery system built on top of an algorithm specifically designed to hurt people who are vulnerable to addiction in the first place, and with visuals that superficially resemble the gameplay of KH3 specifically to get people to recognize it as "a video game".

I think what I've been saying is not sinking in to peoples minds at all. Algorithms in f2p games are specifically, deliberately designed to hijack the part of the brain that is vulnerable to addiction and train it to think a certain way. Yes, human beings have free will, but imagine saying this about any other thing that relies on exploiting addiction-vulnerable people in order to profit. Like, "guys, we HAVE to give cocaine a chance, and anyone who'd get addicted to it is just irresponsible anyway".

The fact that you're considering it on the same level as KH4 is proof that the propaganda is working. This should not be as normalized as it is.

 

[olu]

It's not a different conversation, because it's not a video game, it's a content delivery system built on top of an algorithm specifically designed to hurt people who are vulnerable to addiction in the first place, and with visuals that superficially resemble the gameplay of KH3 specifically to get people to recognize it as "a video game".

I think what I've been saying is not sinking in to peoples minds at all. Algorithms in f2p games are specifically, deliberately designed to hijack the part of the brain that is vulnerable to addiction and train it to think a certain way. Yes, human beings have free will, but imagine saying this about any other thing that relies on exploiting addiction-vulnerable people in order to profit. Like, "guys, we HAVE to give cocaine a chance, and anyone who'd get addicted to it is just irresponsible anyway".

The fact that you're considering it on the same level as KH4 is proof that the propaganda is working. This should not be as normalized as it is.

Wow. Okay.

Yes, while it's true that some mobile games use algorithms and psychological strategies that can exploit addiction-prone behavior, you're failing to differentiate between predatory practices and the medium as a whole. Mobile games are video games.

- Not all mobile games have exploitative/additive tendencies.
- Gaming in general is no longer limited to PCs or console.
- All platforms can have predatory practices. Micro-transactions, loot boxes, and similar mechanisms have also permeated console and PC gaming alike.

These algorithms are present in all aspects of gaming nowadays. Yes, there are valid concerns about the ethics of certain F2P models, these issues are not inherent to mobile gaming itself. Mobile games can be and should be considered video games, and the focus (or your primary concern here) should be on addressing harmful practices rather than dismissing the mobile game medium altogether.

It really just sounds like you just don't like mobile games and that's super okay! Plenty reason not to like them. But to say they're not games is just blatantly wrong. Break it down as much as you like - mobile games are games.

 

[BufferAqua]

Micro-transactions, loot boxes, and similar mechanisms have also permeated console and PC gaming alike.

*BIG COUGH* Overwatch

MMORPGs have also been famously exploitative for as long as I’ve played them. Definitely one of the worst offenders if you’re an MMORPG fan.

 

[Chie]

It really just sounds like you just don't like mobile games and that's super okay! Plenty reason not to like them. But to say they're not games is just blatantly wrong. Break it down as much as you like - mobile games are games.

I was about to write a post about "you know, you're right, I used mobile game as a linguistic shorthand for the kind of game I'm thinking of" - but, actually, no, in the post you're replying to I specifically called them f2p games and didn't use the word "mobile" once! Which makes it particularly bizarre to treat what I said as a difference in opinion or taste - this is simply not a topic I even mentioned! Why would you possibly reply to it to tell me I'm not being fair to mobile games?

(Note: I did mention "mobile games" in previous posts, in relation to the mobile game industry. I.e. to find success as a mobile game that's what ML must compete with (and is doing so). Stuff like, say, Million Onion Hotel exists, but you've never heard of it.)

And this all seems besides the point when Missing Link, the thing we're actually talking about, is a f2p microtransaction abuse machine!

 

[olu]

I was about to write a post about "you know, you're right, I used mobile game as a linguistic shorthand for the kind of game I'm thinking of" - but, actually, no, in the post you're replying to I specifically called them f2p games and didn't use the word "mobile" once! Which makes it particularly bizarre to treat what I said as a difference in opinion or taste - this is simply not a topic I even mentioned! Why would you possibly reply to it to tell me I'm not being fair to mobile games?

(Note: I did mention "mobile games" in previous posts, in relation to the mobile game industry. I.e. to find success as a mobile game that's what ML must compete with (and is doing so). Stuff like, say, Million Onion Hotel exists, but you've never heard of it.)

Fair enough. However, the reason I addressed mobile games in my response is that the distinction between F2P games and mobile games often gets blurred in discussions like these. This conflation is common, and it can inadvertently lead to the perception that mobile games, as a whole, are synonymous with exploitative practices.

While your post specifically targeted F2P games, the broader conversation often includes mobile games when discussing predatory practices. This is why I brought up the defense of mobile games as a category - because, in many discussions, these terms are used interchangeably, and it's important to make sure we're not unintentionally dismissing an entire platform due to the negative aspects of one segment.

And even though you didn’t specifically mention mobile games in the post I replied to, the critique of F2P games often spills over into criticisms of mobile gaming as a whole. My response was intended to highlight that while F2P games can indeed be problematic, mobile games as a broader category encompass a wide range of experiences, many of which are not predatory.

Regarding ML and other similar F2P games, I completely agree with your concerns about predatory/microtransaction abuse. These practices are harmful to the gaming industry and to players. My intention wasn’t to divert the conversation from this critical issue but rather to ensure that in critiquing F2P models, we don't inadvertently cast a Heartless shadow over the entire mobile gaming platform.

And this all seems besides the point when Missing Link, the thing we're actually talking about, is a f2p microtransaction abuse machine!

Okay. It's still a video game. A mobile game, more specifically.

 

[Chie]

Regarding ML and other similar F2P games, I completely agree with your concerns about predatory/microtransaction abuse. These practices are harmful to the gaming industry and to players. My intention wasn’t to divert the conversation from this critical issue but rather to ensure that in critiquing F2P models, we don't inadvertently cast a Heartless shadow over the entire mobile gaming platform.

Are you sure you agree with me?? Because I was replying to you saying that "responsible" people can't be vulnerable to addiction, that if we don't like it we should just not get addicted ourselves, and that we have to give something a chance that is deliberately trying to hurt vulnerable people.

Which makes the whole "well, mobile games aren't all predatory, and that's what I'm arguing for here" feel kind of insincere. You were just defending the predatory ones as needing to be given a chance two posts ago.

 

[olu]

Are you sure you agree with me?? Because I was replying to you saying that "responsible" people can't be vulnerable to addiction, that if we don't like it we should just not get addicted ourselves, and that we have to give something a chance that is deliberately trying to hurt vulnerable people.

Which makes the whole "well, mobile games aren't all predatory, and that's what I'm arguing for here" feel kind of insincere. You were just defending the predatory ones as needing to be given a chance two posts ago.

Let me clarify my position.

I definitely agree that a lot of mobile games out there are games designed to exploit vulnerable individuals through predatory monetization practices are harmful and deserve strong criticism. No doubt about that. Neither do I believe that these practices should be excused or that "responsible" people are immune to addiction. No one is immune and addiction can affect anyone, regardless of their level of responsibility. I was merely dismissive when I said it wasn't an issue for "responsible people" and I shouldn't have been.

Predatory F2P models often target these vulnerabilities, which is why they are so dangerous and looked down upon. My earlier mention of "personal responsibility" was not intended to downplay the seriousness of addiction but to highlight the importance of consumer awareness in navigating the exploitative practices within these mobile games. That said, I fully recognize that it's the responsibility of developers and regulators to protect players from these harmful tactics. Will the developers of Missing Link be doing that? Perhaps. Perhaps not. We do not know as of now.

Also, we need to consider the broader conversation often includes mobile games when discussing predatory practices. Again, this is why I brought up the defense of mobile games as a category because, in many discussions, these terms are used interchangeably, and it's important to make sure we're not unintentionally dismissing an entire platform due to the negative aspects of one segment - which is what you were doing.

We seem to both agree on the dangers of exploitative F2P games but my concern is ensuring that the criticism of these models doesn't unintentionally dismiss the broader range of mobile games that are not predatory. Many developers are creating mobile games with integrity, and those experiences deserve recognition, even as we hold others accountable for unethical practices.

Me saying "give ML a chance" was aimed to encourage y'all to try the game - as there is a possibility that it doesn't rely on predatory mechanics. Damo's video seems to suggest that it doesn't and can be played daily without needing to spend a dime - granted you're willing to go outside and take a walk. And I can hardly call encouraging someone to go outside as "predatory".

There are mobile games out there that offer fair monetization, meaningful gameplay, and respect for the player’s time and investment. And outside fair monetization, Missing Link seems to possess these attributes. How do I know? Watch Damo's video. In any case, these are the games that should be supported, while we push back against those that deliberately harm vulnerable individuals. We cannot be sure if Missing Link's will do this yet. But based off of how the game functions, I believe we should give it a chance in order to find out.

My points earlier were intended to differentiate between those harmful practices and the broader mobile gaming landscape, and I apologize if that wasn’t clear. I still stand by the fact that mobile games are games. Demonize them and call them money-sucking algorithm demons from the pits of hell - they're still games, simply by definition. End of.

 

[Chie]

Also, we need to consider the broader conversation often includes mobile games when discussing predatory practices. Again, this is why I brought up the defense of mobile games as a category because, in many discussions, these terms are used interchangeably, and it's important to make sure we're not unintentionally dismissing an entire platform due to the negative aspects of one segment - which is what you were doing.

But I literally did not do that! The post is at the top of this page!

 

[olu]

It's not a different conversation, because it's not a video game, it's a content delivery system built on top of an algorithm specifically designed to hurt people who are vulnerable to addiction in the first place, and with visuals that superficially resemble the gameplay of KH3 specifically to get people to recognize it as "a video game".

I think what I've been saying is not sinking in to peoples minds at all. Algorithms in f2p games are specifically, deliberately designed to hijack the part of the brain that is vulnerable to addiction and train it to think a certain way. Yes, human beings have free will, but imagine saying this about any other thing that relies on exploiting addiction-vulnerable people in order to profit. Like, "guys, we HAVE to give cocaine a chance, and anyone who'd get addicted to it is just irresponsible anyway".

The fact that you're considering it on the same level as KH4 is proof that the propaganda is working. This should not be as normalized as it is.

So what you're saying is that the response above is not coming from someone who doesn't see Missing Link as a mobile game - thereby categorizing all other mobile games as not games due to their F2P models?

And if so, then you're fine with considering it on the same level as KH4 seeing as they're both video games? Am I correct?

 

[Chie]

I'm not fine considering it on the same level as KH4 because one is content delivered on top of a carefully-fine-tuned microtransaction algorithm and the other is a holistic work designed by a team of developers.

This has nothing to do with what system they're on, that is something you are completely projecting onto the post and I'm not sure why because it seems completely irrelevant to the point I'm making, which I think I outlined very clearly and with deliberate word choice. This is a truly bizarre conversation.

 

[olu]

Dude.

Mobile games are games. KH4 is a game. Missing Link is a game. Both are games. Sorry if you don't like that premise.

Yes, one is grander than the other. A blind person could see that. But they're both games. Period. The argument in question here is whether you see mobile games/Missing Link as a video game. Don't forget that.

Give Missing Link a go when it comes out (which I'm sure you most definitely will regardless of your thoughts on mobile games) and uninstall it if you don't like it.

And that is my final say on this conversation and topic until more Missing Link news drops.

Enjoy the rest of your day.

EDIT:

I'm not fine considering it on the same level as KH4 because one is content delivered on top of a carefully-fine-tuned microtransaction algorithm and the other is a holistic work designed by a team of developers.

This is really funny because it implies you don't believe mobile games are also developed by a dedicated group of people. It not being holistic doesn't invalidate its status as a video game, I'm afraid. Point is kinda invalidated with the existence of DLC anyway.

"Super Mario 64 isn't a game! It's just a bunch of computer code that the user can interact with by controlling the player character and jumping on the Goombas!"

 

[Squood!]

....we really need some news at this point oh my madoka

 

[olu]

....we really need some news at this point oh my madoka

nothing passes the time like a meaningless back and forth, eh?

we're practically in 2025 already!

 

[Squood!]

...huh. That was just weird. I didn't even type that at all. I wasn't even in the browser

 

[Liodin]

People are free to criticize ML if they want, just as people are free to defend it. It’s not the type of game everyone wants to support for a myriad of reasons, and I believe that’s fair.

Totally agree.

I didn't say you can't criticize ML. As far as I'm concerned, criticize all you want as long as you do it with respect. I don't mind if you don't play the game. If you hate gachas, phone games or whatever, I get it. All of that I understand and can even agree in lot of the points, because if it wasn't KH I wouldn't play ML.

What I complain about is the persecution of some people here. Of the need to respond to any message from someone who comes to the forum to share their excitement with other fans, with messages that do not contribute anything because these people do nothing but repeat the same opinion over and over again, and the only thing that causes is that these people stop coming to the forum because they feel rejected and tired of the same narrative.

For every positive message, come 4 that only bring bad vibes to let you know how wrong you are and that the situation we are in is the worst ever. No value. They just want you to know how pissed off they are.

Even some hypocrites here that criticized Nomura's appearance in that Rebirth video, that the other day in Reynatis Nomura's interview he said he knew there were people that were criticizing him about that, and those same people here were surprised that there were people that said that.

---

The conversation that is being generated now is what I would like to see more often.

I agree about everything said about F2P/gacha, but ML is still a video game.

Because if we extrapolate what you say to other areas, we could not watch anything on Netflix, Youtube, TikTok, etc because they use algorithms to make us watch things we like. Or Amazon for you to buy things that you might like.

Nor could we buy products that are packaged in a certain way, that are positioned in strategic places in the store, that use advertising that is tailored and distributed in such a way to best connect with their potential consumers. Because everyone is trying to manipulate you to get your money.

All the time.

We live in capitalism and nothing is altruistic.

 

[Chie]

Dude.

Mobile games are games. [...]

The argument in question here is whether you see mobile games/Missing Link as a video game. Don't forget that.

[...]

This is really funny because it implies you don't believe mobile games are also developed by a dedicated group of people.

I. Did. Not. Say. Anything. About. Mobile. Games. You did. You even quoted my post where I didn't say anything about them and told me it was about mobile games. This is an argument you are having with yourself with an imaginary position you invented. I can't help you with that! I even listed an example of a mobile game I consider a game (Million Onion Hotel)! I could list more!

It is so weird to see someone bring up an unrelated topic and then tell me "the argument in question" is the thing they made up!

 

[BufferAqua]

I agree about everything said about F2P/gacha, but ML is still a video game.

Because if we extrapolate what you say to other areas, we could not watch anything on Netflix, Youtube, TikTok, etc because they use algorithms to make us watch things we like. Or Amazon for you to buy things that you might like.

Excuse me if I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying, but how is compulsively consuming social media or buying stuff from the store the same thing as getting addicted to near-gambling type of ways to get stuff through gacha? I’m not trying to argue, just understand.

Well, for store stuff I can get that, because compulsive spending from shopping is a real addiction that must be treated as much as anything else, but consuming social media is more… manageable I’d say? However, as a Gen Z, I do see how it negatively affects the youth. Older generations, too.

I guess I’m just confused by the equivalency here, would you mind explaining it further?

 

[Darkspawn]

Look, I'll drop it now since I'm not really going anywhere exciting with this, but what I'm driving at is that Disney is perfectly happy to release a pixel RPG in which different Disney properties interact with each other where the character goes through different worlds, and Disney is doing it exclusively on their own without KH being in any way involved. And it's not even the first or second time they've done this.

Maybe Fortnite gets a Sora skin. But I just don't see Disney as the company pushing for that idea. Collabs happen, you're absolutely correct, but they're usually led by SE. FFBE (although the snow globe units were ridiculous), MK, etc. But those collabs have taken place in SE products. The huge exception being Smash, of course. But adding Sora to Smash seems to have been a herculean task that Sakurai fought and bled for.

Sora in Fortnite would require Disney to work with Epic on it. Maybe it happens? But man, the company that has like one KH pin at their parks doesn't strike me as the company that's going to do this any time soon. The one factor is that, as olu says, KH consistently makes money, even if it seems neither Disney or SE seem to value it at the profits it makes every time a game comes out.

Eh, I dunno. Something could be announced tomorrow and I'd look like an idiot. This is just my read on it.

I feel like Sora is automatically doomed when it comes to uber-cool collabs because of Disney. Even if Sora wasn't owned by Disney and the rights to the character belonged to Nomura/SE, they'd still have to go out of their way to eliminate every and all Disney references in such a collab - like how they removed all traces of Disney characters in Sora's inclusion for Smash. If I remember correctly, we didn't even get a Donald Duck, Goofy or Mickey Mouse Spirit. Only reference to Disney is the Lucky Emblem present as the Kingdom Key's keychain.

Disney and SE would have to be all aboard for a legitimate collaboration to occur. And that really sucks cuz that hardly happens.

The thing with the potential Fortnite collab is that all three companies involved already work together. Disney owns a portion of Epic. Disney obviously works with SE on KH. And Square Enix works with Epic on developing almost all of their flagship titles including KH4. FFVIIR, and DQXII. Therefore, a collab between all three would be a no-brainer.

And remember this is the only the beginning of the Disney’s collaboration with Epic. Their plan is to create this whole metaverse thing that will likely having content tying into anything and everything Disney-related. It’s only a matter of time before KH is brought into that in some capacity.

 

[Dandelion]

This whole "Sora can't do anything because Disney" argument is bunk. Most of us old-timers told y'all for years that Sora wasn't in Smash because of one man: Nomura. And lo and behold, Tetsu-san told everyone that himself when the boy finally made it to Smash.

Tetsuya Nomura has a tighter leash on Sora than Disney ever did or will.

 

[Chie]

Because if we extrapolate what you say to other areas, we could not watch anything on Netflix, Youtube, TikTok, etc because they use algorithms to make us watch things we like.

This is such a weird thing to say because nowhere has anyone said "playing missing link is evil". Nobody's telling you what you can or can't do. I've played games with microtransactions because I'm an adult, I personally believe I can handle it, and I could, although I don't think they should be in the game.

I'm not sure how many times I can emphasize how gacha/etc.'s entire business model relies on hurting people to exist. In most cases the games would not be profitable if they didn't encourage addictive personalities. There are many other aspects of modern capitalism that are also harmful and should be gone (including a lot of algorithm manipulation stuff, yeah), but video games can and do exist outside of it. Even a game made under heavy capitalism, like, say, Kingdom Hearts, can function outside of that context in a possible future, because it can be read as a text (in the non-literal sense). Gacha/most f2p, on the other hand, could not and would not exist without doing what it's doing.