Got ya

It's a match made in heaven, or maybe the other place.

In Taiwan, the mobile game "Arena of Valor" has teamed up with KFC for an unusual cross-promotional event. With the purchase of a specific meal combo, KFC customers have the chance at receiving a code that unlocks Colonel Sanders as one of the game's playable characters.

That's right, the gacha game model of paying for random loot has escaped its virtual confines and made its way to the real world.

Though, to be fair, fast food has long been a pioneer of the loot box system. After all, a Happy Meal is basically a loot box with chicken nuggets. Nevertheless, you can bet that this promotional event will see a surge of Taiwanese players flocking to KFC until they walk away with their newly unlocked video game character.

Gacha games are weird.

In spite of spending a greater than average amount of time playing video games, I rarely pay much attention to mobile offerings because the worlds of traditional video games and mobile games are very different.

In a traditional game, you buy the game, play it to completion, and then either play it again or move on to the next.

In the world of mobile games though, this is rarely the case. Most mobile games, by design, cannot be "beaten." They remain in a constant state of development, continually releasing increasingly difficult content while trying to sell you the tools needed to clear it.

Let's be clear. Gacha games, named after Japanese vending machines but appropriately similar to the English phrase "Got ya!" are predatory to their customers, exploitive of people prone to gambling addiction, and detrimental to the gaming industry as a whole.

Which is why I only play a couple of them.

Specifically, "Final Fantasy: Record Keeper" and a new mobile game called "Arknights." The former plays to my love of the Final Fantasy franchise and the latter is a tower defense game, which I am eternally a sucker for.

In general, I have a couple rules about gacha games. Don't pay more than the game is worth and don't reward bad behavior. I've been playing "Final Fantasy: Record Keeper" for several years now. From where I stand, the game has earned the occasional dollar I toss at it. I rarely get anything worthwhile for my dollar. Rather, I just consider it a tip for continuing to support a game that is otherwise pretty easy to play for free.

Which is not to say that the game is devoid of exploitive practices. Every week there's a new drawing encouraging players to spend $30 for the chance at new items to make their team stronger. It's absurdly overpriced and I won't support that kind of practice.

"Arknights" hasn't been around long enough for me to determine how fair or unfair its monetization practices are. So far I've been able to progress at a satisfactory rate without spending anything. If that continues, I may not mind tossing the occasional dollar its way. It's important though to always keep these things in perspective.

A traditional video game may cost anywhere between $50-90, but you'll be getting a complete gaming experience. Spending the same amount of money for the chance at an incremental upgrade in a game you play on the toilet is way out of line when it comes to the value proposition.

The recent release of "Arknights" is well timed. I really only have enough attention span in my life to keep track of two gacha games at a time and recent developments have caused me to abandon my previous secondary title, Nintendo's "Fire Emblem Heroes."

While Nintendo has long been a holdout when it comes to exploitive video game trends, even they cannot escape the siren's call of the mobile market.

Nintendo entered the mobile market a few years ago with two titles of opposing monetization philosophies, "Super Mario Run" and "Fire Emblem Heroes." "Super Mario Run" was a Mario themed auto-runner with a traditional sales model. You buy the game up front and play it to completion.

"Fire Emblem Heroes" meanwhile adopted the gacha model. The main draw of the game is building an army of characters from across the Fire Emblem franchise, most of which can only be obtained by spending an in-game currency on a random draw. While the game itself is free and offers players enough in-game currency to build a respectable force without opening up their wallet, maximizing your potential is essentially impossible without spending money.

The difference between monetization models was immediately apparent. In spite of having fewer users, "Fire Emblem Heroes" crushed "Super Mario Run" in revenues. When comparing them, the president of Nintendo said they still preferred the traditional monetization model. However, their subsequent releases tell a different story. "Animal Crossing: Pocket Camp," "Dragalia Lost," "Dr. Mario World," and "Mario Kart Tour" have all since released on mobile devices each with a monetization model more aggressive than the last.

"Mario Kart Tours" in particular has drawn criticism for its "Gold Pass," which charges players $5 per month for access to special loot and an exclusive racing mode. Paying $60 per year just for a baseline experience, on top of constantly pressuring players into making smaller one-time impulse purchases, is pretty egregious. Yet, Nintendo has not only not backed away from this model. They've doubled down.

To celebrate the game's third year anniversary, "Fire Emblem Heroes" announced a similar subscription scheme. At $10 per month, the game's new "Feh Pass" offers not only exclusive cosmetic skins and bonus missions, but also long desired quality of life improvements. It's not hard to imagine that Nintendo will continue to focus their attention on the players willing to spend $120 per year on the game to the detriment of those that don't.

This was a deal-breaker for me. However, since I've barely invested any money into the game since it launched, it was relatively easy to walk away. I've had my fun and gotten my money's worth out of it.

For others though, the sunk cost fallacy is going to hit them hard. If you're a player that's already invested hundreds of dollars into the game your choices are to either walk away from that investment, continue playing the game while constantly being pressured to "upgrade" to the subscription, or resign yourself to paying the monthly fee.

It's a trap. "Fire Emblem Heroes" has moved on to the stage in its development where it's more focused on retaining its current paying players rather than attracting new.

Mobile games are often cheaply made, repetitive, and relatively shallow experiences. They also make tens of billions of dollars every year. If you're playing one, pay careful attention at what you're getting before opening your wallet.

Travis Fischer is a news writer for Mid-America Publishing and tries to avoid getting got