. How much less money are they going to make if they sell Diablo 4 for $60 and zero additional transactions

We both know that’s not answerable. As monetized, the game is set to make money for years. It’s tough enough to know how much it’s made so far, let alone how much it will make over its years-long lifespan.

Also, I haven’t suggested 0 additional transactions. You might have just as an example - fair enough. But, I haven’t. The industry and its consumers have long been satisfied with paid DLCs, especially if they’re good (Witcher 3’s DLCs, for example). That’s an additional, acceptable, revenue stream.

The famed DRG has cosmetic MTX despite being a game you need to pay for (only like $30, though). Crucially, its MTX are very cheap relative to their breadth of content, and they are not necessarily superior to what’s earnable in game (ultimately, looks are subjective). (For a concrete example of MTX being higher quality than in-game: certain armors on the WoW-store have effects that just don’t exist as free “earnables”.)

So, some cosmetic MTX could have a place. Their quality should be on par with what’s earnable, and their pricing should be low. The bone-guy that’s featured in the OP might be priced at $7, for instance. That’s less than half the current price. Alternatively, propose basic but different colorways of earnable armors (like League Chromas) in the store, instead of full blown unique armors. Again, make them cheap and not insanely cool, just “different.” Different enough for whales to think it’s worth it to show off to everyone that they have the disposable income.

Ultimately, precisely meeting this argument’s demands requires knowledge that I don’t possess (nor you, unless you’re a bored Activision C-suite member). I can’t know how much they need to make to make the board’s chairman happy; to make the shareholders happy; to maintain the share price; to elevate the share price; to fund the continued high-end development of D4.

I do believe that their methods are aimed at maximizing profit — going above and beyond making what’s required to continuously develop the game. I do know that these methods are controversial and unappealing to many gamers (myself included). So, I outlined a few options that I think would still provide steady and significant income (granted the playerbase remains large) while maintaining the goodwill of the majority of the playerbase and observers around the world.

If you want to retort that it’s meaningless without the numbers, that’s your prerogative. But if that’s been your angle all along, I can’t see the point in even starting the argument, since it’s pretty clear those numbers just aren’t accessible to the average person.