I think it's an improvement though. You never part with your money unless you know exactly what you'll get.
It's basically individualised offers in the form of boxes.
this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
193 points (98.0% liked)
PC Gaming
12342 readers
200 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Who is buying these skins. I feel like such an alien sometimes. I just can't understand wanting to spend any money at all on a cosmetic skin
Game developers hire economists and psychologists to run experiments on the precise ways they need to design their games to make people feel like they need skins and other cosmetics and spend money on them. The games are designed to nudge people into associating having good skins with being good at the game and having the default skins with being bad at the game, and to make people want the new skins and feel bad for not having them. Furthermore, they don't really make money on the average person who either doesn't spend money on loot crates or maybe spends a bit of money every now and then- the real money makers are a tiny percentage of players who have some bizarre compulsion to spend absurd amounts of money on this stuff. These are known as "whales" and a lot of them have legitimate psychological issues that cause them to be like this or they're like Saudi nobility who just have absurd amounts of money and don't give a shit about blowing it on fake video game stuff.
To put it into perspective the player model shown when high level players play while have flashier animations which not only look cool but make the player look extremely nimble, it's hard to explain but you just look way better with skins on to a point where players do make weird associations like "karambit is an awp skin"
the reason why in the aforementioned association is because after firing the awp (bolt action sniper) players will draw their knife instead of waiting for the bolt to be reset.
the draw is animated and on the karambit, the draw is exceptionally flashy, since this is frequently done as a legitimate technique (you move faster with knife drawn in cs) then people see the flashy karambit animation very frequently
Its a free to play game. You put 1000s of hours in why not spend some.money to customise your gun. Money isnt that tight for some people.
Yeah, I bought a few season passes when I was into DOTA. The main gain from those is cosmetics and some ladder ranking, but realistically it was that I'd played the game a ton for free and felt that paying a bit to engage wasn't a big deal.
Everyday the thrill of the game wore off for me, but honestly given hours played versus money spent it was probably one of the cheapest investments in entertainment I made.
I guess. I'd rather not throw away my money, even if it's not tight. I wouldn't feel joy about a custom skin. Every time I saw it I would be reminded that I'd wasted money.
But that's me, not everyone.
I'll spend like $30 on the weekend getting alcohol and take aways. These add no value to my life beyond the short time I spend consuming them. Spending $20 for a skin that I think looks cool for a gun I really like and often use is an easy choice in a game I got for free.
Its hard to explain for someone that doesnt play but its more than just a skin on a gun when you play competitive games you're expressing your skill as a player in front of an audience of people. Its a way for players to make the gun feel more like their own instead of just having everything look exactly the same. People are playing $80 to play a 1 time play AAA game so for f2p games with infinitely replayability spending some money on a skin isnt a big deal you're just paying devs for the game you love.
when you play competitive games you’re expressing your skill as a player in front of an audience of people.
The first part of your post makes sense, even if I don't agree with it. But this part stands out- buying a skin isn't a skill question. It's just a wallet question.
Some games have stuff you can only earn via achievements or whatever. I could see being proud of, like, a skin you only get if you get 100 perfect whatevers in a row. But, like, just buying it? But I guess the audience has enough people who are impressed by that sort of thing.
spending some money on a skin isnt a big deal you’re just paying devs for the game you love.
Also not to be a negative nerd, but unless the company is very tiny the developers aren't getting much, maybe zero, of that money. Developers get a salary. Stock options, maybe. It's not like a tip jar. Profits typically go to the owners under capitalism, not the labor. "Buy skins to support the developers" might be indirectly true, in a limited sense, but it mostly feels like capitalist propaganda.
Im not saying buying a skin is skill expression. When a player is playing they are preforming in front of an audience, everything is part of how they express themselves. From how they move to how they shoot to the skins on their gun its all player expression. Not everything has to be an achievement to be proud of some stuff you just like because it makes YOUR character look the way you like. I dont know how to convey this idea properly.
If its a f2p game where cosmetics cost nothing people still choose cosmetics over the default character. This is because your ingame character kind of represents you when you play online.
For your second part about spending money on games I feel like you are being intentionally obtuse. I dont only care about money going to devs. The game isnt made by just devs. I want it to go to the entire company that produced the game I'm playing. If investors get paid thats good I'm glad they are getting a return on investing in the creation of a game I like. If the game made no money there wouldnt be people getting hired to work on it. A f2p game is exactly like a tip jar no one has to buy anything and if no one buys anything the game shutsdown.
People who never used fpsbanana or joined a server with a bunch of skins.
I blame league of legends and then dota. Those things pushed matchmaking into cs and then gamer empowerment into obscurity. Even Microsoft's version of Minecraft that they rewrote you have to pay real money for in order to save more worlds. There is a direct correlation between laziness and stupidity, and paying more.
I've spent like 5-10 dollars on csgo skins. Haven't gambled but just spent money directly towards the marketplace to choose the shitty skins I like. Some designs are just really appealing to me
100%.
Make a fun game. If there are skins, include a handful of good ones with the game and call it a day. I'm there to have fun playing a game, not to try on outfits.
Maybe I'm old.
Before this shit existed (like back when the hottest shit was Quake), I thought it might be cool to get a professionally made skin everyone in the game could see for like $0.25-$0.50. A dollar, at most.
The first iteration of a system that could have potentially made that a reality, the things you'd actually wanna buy were $25-50. Like who the fuck workshopped these ridiculous prices?
load more comments
(1 replies)
I wouldn’t spend money on skins in most games but Counter Strike is different. You can buy a skin, use it for years, and then sell it for more than you paid. In fact, skins are actually a very good investment that have historically had less volatility and better returns than stock indexes like the S&P 500.
Sure, people will always care for skins and beanie babies. Everyone knows that.
load more comments
(9 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Predatory as hell. Almost impressive how Valve manages to simultaneously be one of the best and one of the worst companies in gaming.
It's completely optional. They are about as predatory as gucci bags or other designer shit some people pay way too much for (IMO). You don't need any of it to be competitive or to continue enjoying the game.
I just personally don't have a problem with things that exploit people's vanity.
Best or worst, aim for No. 1!
Let the live service cattle subsidize the best platform for buying non-slop games. Easy math.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Don't hate me for asking a question. I don't endorse loot boxes and do think they suck. But help me understand:
Isn't this better than loot boxes?
You get to see what you're paying for before you pay. You pay more for rarer items that clearly have very high monetary value and you're allowed to sell on items for real money of you want.
Valve also still sticks with a cosmetics only model and no gameplay affecting transactions. Selling cosmetics only is probably the best way to monetise.
and you're allowed to sell on items for real money of you want.
Just to be real: You can sell them for Steam Wallet funds, which is not "real money" since it can only be used on Steam.
You can sell them on hundreds of third-party marketplaces that let you withdraw to your bank account or crypto wallet.
You can do that, but you're not allowed to do that.
Valve may not endorse it, but they certainly allow it. In fact, there are many skins that cannot be traded on Steam’s official marketplace, but only on third-party sites due to their high value.
They tolerate it as long as they don't do stupid actions that will alert Valve's lawyers.
Thier monetization benefits from it, as people are more willing to spend more on lootboxes if they have the possibility of a payout of real money. They'll only put lawyers on it just enough to convince regulators they're not a casino 😂
You get to see what you're paying for before you pay.
Yes, for the first box. The box after is not shown. So its basically just „hey, if I open this Box, it could very well be that the next box will be a legendary knife”
So you are just betting for what comes after that
I think it has an option to decline it too, so you don't have to purchase to move on. I could be wrong about this, but I think this is what I heard.
If I understood it correctly, you open a new box when you buy an item, but if you don't buy it then you need to wait until the following week to open another box again.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Leave it to Valve to find the most predatory monetization possible.
I think nintendo is so much worse tbh. Mario kart for example they shove the dlc in to kids faces the whole time. Nonono, you can't play these tracks, but you van look at them. Here are all the characters. No not this one, you need your parents magic numbers.
Cases are silly and bad, but at least it's adults who should know better.
Nintendo has a ton of things we can criticize but at the very least the process with them has usually been simple purchases. You pay for what you want to buy and that's what you get.
load more comments
(10 replies)
For FTP games that I am really enjoying, I will buy stuff sometimes to support the game.
Oh so it’s loot boxes mixed with a limited time store multiplied by FOMO. Very cool.
Not!
Also: “At what point do they become macro transactions?” IMO at $2. That’s the micro/macro cutoff for me.
I think being able to see the item and having the option to purchase is much better than opening a random box that you have no idea what you'll get.
view more: next ›