![midas.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/knightestategame/EoCaNJRRYTcw2VRcW3MAEV4k62sjxgF3XJkBoSNwAnbAYMkYHtKtdsm3jYLsJQwNN9m.png)

I can't think of many phrases that carry more baggage in modern gaming than “pay-to-win.”
It has quickly become a symbol of everything players dislike, especially in mobile gaming, and rightfully so. Because the truth of the matter is that free games aren’t really free. Players know it. Developers know it. But too often, no one says it out loud. Even free apps like Facebook are notorious for data collection, so there's always a catch whenever a piece of software is classified as "free".

Since I began working on Knight Estate, I’ve always thought a lot about how to balance fairness with the fact that the game has to be monetized somehow. And here’s the insight that I realized most developers miss: Players aren’t against spending money. What they hate is being outclassed, outpaced, or outright cheated just because they didn’t.

One of the things I strongly believe as a game developer is that we should always call out the dynamic between us and the players; let's stop pretending that there's no sort of "trade" going on.
Way too many free-to-play game developers act like they’re generously offering a gift, then silently introduce paywalls, grind traps, or predatory time limits to frustrate players into spending money. That’s not only lazy design, it’s dishonest, and frankly, a little shameful.

I think it’s more honorable to say, right up front, “Hey, I worked hard on this game. It’s free to start, but at some point, you might expect to pay. Or, if you’re up for the grind, you can do it.”
That level of transparency earns trust and respect from the players.

I don't think there's anybody who spends months or years building a game just to act like a financial return does not matter. If you’ve done the work, it’s fair to expect a return.
What feels worse to players than being asked for money is being manipulated into spending it.

**The Unspoken Contract Between The Players And The Game Developer**
The moment a player downloads your "free-to-play" game, they’re entering a silent agreement:
“If I enjoy this game, I might support it. But you need to respect my time.”
That’s it. Simple.

“Pay-to-win” breaks that agreement, not because money is involved, but because it creates a gap that effort alone can’t fill.
It’s not just that money gives you something; it gives you access. It gives power, and often at the expense of those who can’t or won’t pay. I’m looking at you, Genshin Impact and Diablo Immortal.

**The Better Model**
In my opinion, here's what good monetization looks like:

Cosmetic Monetization – Character skins, emotes, flair, things that only change how you look, not how you play.

Accelerators – Let players pay to save time, which would have been spent doing repetitive actions, instead of skipping content. Free players should reach the same goals through effort. Resource boosts are fine, but only if they encourage experimentation, not serve as keys to the next level.

Flavor Content – Optional characters, DLCs, or experiences that add some depth to the narrative.

Exhibitional Power – A paid character might offer a unique playstyle, but shouldn’t be a direct upgrade over free ones.

The goal is simple:
Reward paying players. Don’t punish the ones who don’t.

**The Elephant in the Room: Whales**
Yes, “whales”, the small percentage of players who fund most mobile games and seem like mythical beings, exist.
But chasing whales while alienating everyone else is short-sighted and the start of a smooth race to the bottom.

A sustainable game economy comes from a large, engaged player base, frequent low-pressure transactions, and most importantly, a player community that feels valued, not exploited.

In the end, it’s about trust.
Be honest about monetization. It’s not shameful.

In my previous post, I said, “It’s when games make us feel something that we keep coming back.”
Let that feeling be a good one. Even an emotional low fueled by the game’s story is better than pay-to-win frustration.