Pity systems must be explained before purchase

What it is

A pity system is a loot box's floor rule: after a set number of pulls without a high-rarity result, the next pull is guaranteed to deliver one. Pity fundamentally changes a gacha's mathematical structure—turning pure randomness into capped randomness, so the player's worst case shifts from "never get it" to "at most N pulls." Because the rule's existence, trigger condition, and current count all directly shape purchase decisions, pre-purchase disclosure is not an added courtesy but a necessary part of decision information: the player who does not know the pity exists faces a different risk structure from the one who does.

Why it happens

Pity information shapes decisions through three paths. Risk ceiling: knowing "guaranteed within 90 pulls" converts a probability problem into a budget problem (set aside resources for 90 pulls), sharply reducing uncertainty anxiety. Count visibility: the current pity count (67 pulled) is the strongest continue-or-stop signal—as the count nears the floor, each pull's marginal value rises (closer to guaranteed delivery), and after a reset it returns to base probability. Rule complexity: soft pity (rising rates), hard pity (count reset rules), and off-banner pity (a high rarity that is not the rate-up) combine into behaviour more complex than the disclosure text conveys in some games—that shows the disclosure duty is not "paste the rules" but "make the rules understandable."

Where it stops holding

A common concern is whether pity information encourages spending: knowing "10 pulls from pity" may push a player to top up and finish it. The effect exists, but the difference from hiding pity is the difference between informed decisions and manipulated ones—the object of protection should be decision quality, not total spending. Pity design spans a wide ethical spectrum: no pity (pure random, uncapped risk), high thresholds (150+ pulls, a ceiling that barely functions), and low inheritable thresholds (an explicit ceiling whose count carries across banners) are clearly different protection levels. Non-inherited counts (every new banner starts from zero) are the most contested design—player frustration over "80 pulls with no result, and the next banner starts me from zero" concentrates there, and some regulators have begun requiring inheritance disclosure.

Applying it

• Show pity state persistently in the gacha screen: current count, pulls remaining to the floor, and what the guaranteed result delivers—all visible before purchasing any pull pack.
• Present the rules structurally (trigger conditions, count inheritance, reset timing as separate items), with explicit callouts at key changes (whether a new banner resets the count).
• Verification: test player understanding of the pity rules—ask players "what happens if you pull 20 more times?" A comprehension rate below threshold means the presentation needs simplification or stronger callouts.

Related

• Same group: W10.02.1 Loot boxes share gambling's core psychological mechanism · W10.02.2 Probability disclosure needs per-rarity specifics, not vague ranges · W10.02.4 Visual and audio amplification inflates box-opening excitement and impulse
• Nearby: W10.02 Loot boxes and probability disclosure · C3.09 Decision-making and loss aversion · O1.01 Trust and transparency
• Search terms: pity system · guaranteed pull · soft pity · gacha disclosure