Ronald Parker
2025-01-31
Exploring Immersion Metrics in AR-Driven Mobile Game Experiences
Thanks to Ronald Parker for contributing the article "Exploring Immersion Metrics in AR-Driven Mobile Game Experiences".
This research investigates the ethical and psychological implications of microtransaction systems in mobile games, particularly in free-to-play models. The study examines how microtransactions, which allow players to purchase in-game items, cosmetics, or advantages, influence player behavior, spending habits, and overall satisfaction. Drawing on ethical theory and psychological models of consumer decision-making, the paper explores how microtransactions contribute to the phenomenon of “pay-to-win,” exploitation of vulnerable players, and player frustration. The research also evaluates the psychological impact of loot boxes, virtual currency, and in-app purchases, offering recommendations for ethical monetization practices that prioritize player well-being without compromising developer profitability.
This study investigates the environmental impact of mobile game development, focusing on energy consumption, resource usage, and sustainability practices within the mobile gaming industry. The research examines the ecological footprint of mobile games, including the energy demands of game servers, device usage, and the carbon footprint of game downloads and updates. Drawing on sustainability studies and environmental science, the paper evaluates the role of game developers in mitigating environmental harm through energy-efficient coding, sustainable development practices, and eco-friendly server infrastructure. The research also explores the potential for mobile games to raise environmental awareness among players and promote sustainable behaviors through in-game content and narratives.
This research investigates the ethical, psychological, and economic impacts of virtual item purchases in free-to-play mobile games. The study explores how microtransactions and virtual goods, such as skins, power-ups, and loot boxes, influence player behavior, spending habits, and overall satisfaction. Drawing on consumer behavior theory, economic models, and psychological studies of behavior change, the paper examines the role of virtual goods in creating addictive spending patterns, particularly among vulnerable populations such as minors or players with compulsive tendencies. The research also discusses the ethical implications of monetizing gameplay through virtual goods and provides recommendations for developers to create fairer and more transparent in-game purchase systems.
This paper provides a comparative analysis of the various monetization strategies employed in mobile games, focusing on in-app purchases (IAP) and advertising revenue models. The research investigates the economic impact of these models on both developers and players, examining their effectiveness in generating sustainable revenue while maintaining player satisfaction. Drawing on marketing theory, behavioral economics, and user experience research, the study evaluates the trade-offs between IAPs, ad placements, and player retention. The paper also explores the ethical concerns surrounding monetization practices, particularly regarding player exploitation, pay-to-win mechanics, and the impact on children and vulnerable audiences.
This paper explores the application of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning algorithms in predicting player behavior and personalizing mobile game experiences. The research investigates how AI techniques such as collaborative filtering, reinforcement learning, and predictive analytics can be used to adapt game difficulty, narrative progression, and in-game rewards based on individual player preferences and past behavior. By drawing on concepts from behavioral science and AI, the study evaluates the effectiveness of AI-powered personalization in enhancing player engagement, retention, and monetization. The paper also considers the ethical challenges of AI-driven personalization, including the potential for manipulation and algorithmic bias.
Link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link
External link