16 hours ago, theFlu said:Right, this seems to a habit of ours; I write a terse version of an idea of mine and spend the next two pages expanding upon it. Was it a reply, not really; that implies it was directed to you. But, in-so-far as it was a reply: I agreed on "not thinking there's actual planned obsolescence going on here", and "mildly disagreed" with your "the only reasons are sales and micro-transactions*" pointing out that other things, such as (development) resource allocation within the company/between products can lead to undercooked features - in favor of the future product. That may have the same effect as planned obsolescence would, but would be more "benign" in nature. Hence, "mild" disagreement.
If that's still too convoluted, then .. don't worry, the point is pointless anyway. Not spending another two-pager on this
* abbreviated, as people can read your post
Well, I was listing reasons why a game company would actually manipulate a game to be less fun for long time-players (which by the way fits squarly unter unethical behaviour) as the OP was asking exactly about this (if I am not misreading). Now when you list reasons for something else happening which may in some instances look similar and tell me you disagree with me however mildly, consider me confused. 😉