Because kids aren't utilitarian. They want shiny things impulsively now in whatever niche game they are playing at the moment. Or want to keep up with their friends who got cool stuff to keep status. Doesn't matter to them that they'll switch games in a week and lose everything.
To add to this, for them money is like ice cream, comes from parents rarely and gives them temporary pleasure. That's why I think it is good to pay your kids for chores or good grades so that they start learning financial responsibility early. Sure they'll blow their money on useless stuff at first but then they'll have none for some other thing they wish they had money for and will learn to choose more wisely in the future
I concur with this. Our kid can earn robux doing chores, and she only earns them once in a while.
It often leads her to a period of deliberation, where at first she's like 'I so much need this, I must do whatever chores it will take!'. Then gradually as the minutes go by, she gets doubts, and at some point flips into "No. Way. THAT is NOT worth THAT MUCH WORK!"
Whenever this happens, I get sort of proud or satisfied.
A lot of times it doesn't happen, she does the chore and gets the reward.
But other times, especially for costly idiosyncratic choices, she comes to her senses.
The insane spending sprees/binges shrink a lot, when they are expressed in "how much vacuuming and floor washing am I willing to endure?"
My dad let me gamble my allowance against himself in poker. Lost it all, obviously. Was quite heartbroken he wouldn't give it back, but I sure learned a lesson :)
> That's why I think it is good to pay your kids for chores or good grades so that they start learning financial responsibility early.
Have you ever read "Punished by Rewards" by Alfie Kohn? He states that rewarding for the things you mentioned inhibits the desired behavior in the long run.
Haven't read it but I remember reading about a study where they would watch some kids play with toys, record which were their favorite ones and then in another play session give them sweets for playing with their favorite toys after which those toys would no longer be their favorite.
However even though most people don't enjoy their work we must learn to get past that in order to achieve our goals, might as well learn this early imo.
Personally I hated most of school, pretty much every subject that wasn't math or programming. Rewards did motivate me to learn those things I didn't like.
So maybe only reward them for doing stuff they already don't like doing but would be good for them. If you see your kid doing well in math but poorly in history only reward them for history.
Doesn't inhibit them but makes the activity not pleasant because your mind is attaching the work itself to external motivation. You don't do it because you want to (for the pleasure of it), but for a paycheck and humans don't enjoy activities like that if they're not starving.
Honestly, I don't think there are very many people who wash dishes for pleasure. If you have a kid who loves cleaning for fun, by all means, don't pay them to do it.
It's not kids or Roblox specifically, it's gamers and platforms/games with "micro-transactions" etc.
When I was younger and still played online games regularly, I was initially stoked about cosmetic micro-transactions in (competitive) online games. Not because I wanted to buy them, but because these would fund the continuous development of my favorite games without affecting their integrity (no "pay to win" mechanisms).
Later I found this was a Faustian bargain. It turned these games and communities around them into something that I don't want to participate in.
These days I don't mind as much. Because among the sea of predatory, tacky or otherwise low quality crap there are way too many high quality, original and interesting games (typically made by small teams) that I will ever be able to play.
I don't know anything about Roblox specifically. On one hand the comment above is tragic, but on the other hand my understanding is that motivates kids to play around with Lua. If that's the case, then I'm all for it, because for me and many others that kind of thing is how we found our way into our profession as developers.
I think you're right on with the micro-transactions, Roblox is particularly bad for it. One of the games on there my boy likes is Rainbow Friends, its some sort of tame horror survival genre which he loves exploring around and playing as the different characters. If I could just buy that game as a 'full unlock' or something I probably would, instead it's $$$ "micro" transactions for every little thing and it really isn't a habit I want to get the kids into.
This is why I don't stress too much about validating game state in server scripts. It lets the kids cheat clientside if they can figure out how to rewrite and load the Lua scripts.
Some time ago I read an article explaining that initially games used to sell upgrades which were making the player stronger in multi-player games. The net result was that the games were loosing players because that mechanic was seen as unfair (pay to win).
So they switched to aesthetics enhancements only and that resulted the correct strategy to have in game sales and not loosing players.
Unfortunately cannot remember further details to prove this memory, sorry.
Meanwhile, Chinese and Korean kids widely DEMAND pay to win, and see people who complain about Pay2Win as "Losers in life", because, to them, it's just two valid paths, and if someone pays to win at a game, then it's just a mark of status. Btw, did you also know that parents in central china have protested over the right to cheat?
Tons of really great stuff in eastern work culture that I miss now back in europe. But that "results-first and call it a systematic right" thing never sat well with me.
Thank you for bringing a different worldview to the discussion. I realize that my comment was Euro (or West) centric, but that wasn't intentional. I appreciate your perspective, as it adds valuable context and enriches the conversation. It's interesting to see how cultural differences shape attitudes toward gaming, and your insights have certainly given me something to think about. Thank you for that.
If that's what the other guy was referencing, then it's a misleading characterization of the situation. The original comment was:
>Meanwhile, Chinese and Korean kids widely DEMAND pay to win, and see people who complain about Pay2Win as "Losers in life", because, to them, it's just two valid paths, and if someone pays to win at a game, then it's just a mark of status. Btw, did you also know that parents in central china have protested over the right to cheat?
The article says:
>In response, angry parents and students championed their right to cheat. Not cheating, they said, would put them at a disadvantage in a country where student cheating has become standard practice. “We want fairness. There is no fairness if you do not let us cheat,” they chanted.
The comment is claiming cheating is "a mark of status" and "just two valid paths", whereas in the qz article parents wanted to cheat because not cheating would put them at a disadvantage. Those aren't really comparable, because in the latter case they're presumably not supporting cheating in and of itself, only because they don't want to be put at a disadvantage. A parallel would be how in the US, democrats are against voter ID laws, because it would disadvantage minority voters. They don't (presumably) want election fraud (although republicans do think so), they just don't want a regime where their side is disadvantaged.
Ok, I was just providing a link for you. If you wanted to discuss whether cheating is good in this specific scenario, you should have put that as your comment to the parent.
And if you read my last comment more carefully, I wasn't faulting you, only the original characterization.
>If you wanted to discuss whether cheating is good in this specific scenario, you should have put that as your comment to the parent.
I think it's fair game to call the claim misleading, even if the parents are technically protesting for the right to cheat, for the reasons outlined in my previous comment. Again, going back to the example of democrats being against voter ID law, it would be misleading to characterize that as "democrats protesting for the right to commit vote fraud", even though they're technically supporting making election fraud easier.
It's not only kids that buy these.
I know a lot of 40+ year old men that buy skins and useless junk in video games all the time.
They spend a ton of money on cosmetic junk in short lived video games.
It's puzzling to me, but i see it all the time.
I'm a 40+ year old man who buys cosmetics for CS2 (which has a resale market). If you are going to spend 200+ hours doing something you might as well have a nice environment to do it in.
There's a reason everyone isn't driving a Honda Civic.
Yeah, I'll admit I have and Probbaly will "whale" in my share of mobile games. Though "whaling" amounts can vary vastly on the perception (I'm not throwing down $1000 every time a new character releases. But I do spend triple digits a month).
Key is proper financial management. If I make $10000 post tax (which isnt an impressive figure for a community like this), put 15% in savings, 30% in rent/utilities, and 5% into food, I still have $5000 left. Spending $500 on games won't really phase me.
I 100% agree this isn't something kids would do and balance, though. And I recognize others have addictions and much worse financial planning.
