Design Risk Score
Verified data79/100
5 mechanics flagged
Why this score
- Pay-to-Win+25
Paying grants a direct gameplay or competitive advantage.
Why this counts
Pay-to-win mechanics undermine competitive integrity and create a two-tier player base divided by spending capacity rather than skill. Research on fairness perception shows they significantly reduce long-term engagement.
- Consumer-protection consensus: paid competitive advantage is the most-cited monetisation harm
- Fairness-perception research on paid advantage in multiplayer games
- Gacha System+25
Randomised paid pulls for characters/gear that affect power.
Why this counts
Gacha mechanics share structural features with slot machines: variable-ratio reinforcement schedules, which behavioral psychology identifies as the most powerful driver of repeated behavior. Multiple national gambling regulators have investigated or restricted these mechanics.
- Belgium Gaming Commission — paid random-item mechanics ruled gambling (2018)
- Zendle & Cairns, PLOS ONE — loot boxes linked to problem gambling (2018)
- Microtransactions+12
In-game purchases sells items that affect gameplay or progression.
- FOMO Events+12
Time-limited content tied to purchasable items.
Why this counts
Przybylski et al. (2013) formalized the Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) construct. Games exploit this by attaching scarcity signals to social currency items, creating anxiety that is only relievable through immediate purchase.
- Przybylski et al., Computers in Human Behavior — FoMO construct (2013)
- Scarcity principle (Cialdini) applied to limited-time store offers
- Daily Login Bonus+5
Rewards are granted for logging in each day.
Why this counts
Daily login systems apply operant conditioning (fixed-interval reinforcement) to create habitual game opening behavior. They are designed to disrupt the natural decision of whether to play and replace it with obligation.
- Operant conditioning / fixed-interval reinforcement (Skinner, behavioural psychology)
- Habit-formation research on daily-reward streak mechanics
Points reflect severity, not just presence — cosmetic-only purchases score far lower than pay-for-power. Total: 79/100. How scoring works →
Joy Index
51/100
Good
Community score: 51/100
Joy reflects genuine enjoyment after accounting for design risk.
Verdict
Reconsider
Worth reconsidering
This game's design leans heavily on maximizing spending over enjoyment. If you play, set firm limits and stay aware of the pressure tactics at work.
- Consider evidence-based alternatives
- If you play, set a hard budget and strict time limits
- Be aware of sunk-cost pressure tactics
Want a reading tuned to what youcare about? Connect your Steam library — your “For you” score stays entirely in your browser.
Score your library →Where to buy
Prefer something else?
Similar games that respect your time and wallet more.
More like this
Similar games, with how each one scores.
Mods
Upload a mod →Detected Design Patterns
Rewards are granted for logging in every day — a fixed return schedule set by the game.
Content is available only during a limited window, then rotates out.
Paid draws with randomised outcomes — what you receive is determined by chance.
Purchases grant progression or competitive advantage over non-paying players.
Why this score
Verified data- Pay-to-Win+25
Paying grants a direct gameplay or competitive advantage.
Why this counts
Pay-to-win mechanics undermine competitive integrity and create a two-tier player base divided by spending capacity rather than skill. Research on fairness perception shows they significantly reduce long-term engagement.
- Consumer-protection consensus: paid competitive advantage is the most-cited monetisation harm
- Fairness-perception research on paid advantage in multiplayer games
- Gacha System+25
Randomised paid pulls for characters/gear that affect power.
Why this counts
Gacha mechanics share structural features with slot machines: variable-ratio reinforcement schedules, which behavioral psychology identifies as the most powerful driver of repeated behavior. Multiple national gambling regulators have investigated or restricted these mechanics.
- Belgium Gaming Commission — paid random-item mechanics ruled gambling (2018)
- Zendle & Cairns, PLOS ONE — loot boxes linked to problem gambling (2018)
- Microtransactions+12
In-game purchases sells items that affect gameplay or progression.
- FOMO Events+12
Time-limited content tied to purchasable items.
Why this counts
Przybylski et al. (2013) formalized the Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) construct. Games exploit this by attaching scarcity signals to social currency items, creating anxiety that is only relievable through immediate purchase.
- Przybylski et al., Computers in Human Behavior — FoMO construct (2013)
- Scarcity principle (Cialdini) applied to limited-time store offers
- Daily Login Bonus+5
Rewards are granted for logging in each day.
Why this counts
Daily login systems apply operant conditioning (fixed-interval reinforcement) to create habitual game opening behavior. They are designed to disrupt the natural decision of whether to play and replace it with obligation.
- Operant conditioning / fixed-interval reinforcement (Skinner, behavioural psychology)
- Habit-formation research on daily-reward streak mechanics
Points reflect severity, not just presence — cosmetic-only purchases score far lower than pay-for-power. Total: 79/100. How scoring works →
Time Respect
Verified data- Daily Login Bonus-20
Rewards tuned to pull you back every day regardless of genuine desire to play.
- Limited-Time Events-20
Time-limited content pressures you to play now instead of when you actually want to.
Embed this score
Drop this in a forum post, wiki, or README — the badge always reflects the current score.