[jb_briant]

First, I use Cambridge definition, which makes the usage of monetization correct. "to make money from something"

Second, not all IAP are abusive, I didn't said nor meant that.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/monetize

[nottorp]

I don't know about that. As an old school gamer, I notice that the second IAPs show up the design of the game changes to accomodate them, and that is always hostile to the player's time if not wallet.

I don't have any recent examples because I'm simply avoiding anything with IAPs but look at Guild Wars 2 and Path of Exile.

Even if you sell "extra content" (not game expansions) as IAPs you end up with 20 extra leaders at $5 each for Civilization, or whatever Paradox is adding to all their games.

[yurishimo]

This is true to a certain extent but like anything, the industry also has differing opinions on it. Indie developers in the "idle" gaming space have been slowly abandoning the idea of locking progression behind IAP which has been nice to see. These "games" are very unique though in that part of the entire appeal is that you don't need to do much. Rushing through an idle game as fast as possible kind of defeats the purpose. Sure, the devs will gladly sell you some in-game currency so you can unlock everything in a week instead of 4 months, but those players are the minority.

My "favorite" way to interact with a mobile game developer is an IAP that replaces optional ads. If your game has forced ads, I will not play it. I also will not play games with "optional" ads that aren't really optional in practice. For the few developers who respect my time, I'm content to throw them $5 or whatever to disable the ads when I interact with an optional part of the game, or as a thank you for not over monetizing their game when I reach the end.