To be fair- while grinding could be called a skill, it’s really usually less about skill than time and luck. Padding games just so you can charge to play the game the way it is designed to be fun isn’t right, and games that offer really unfair advantages or premium only items that simply can’t be had by skill or luck is kinda messed up. But I used to be totally against games with pay content. Then I got older and had stuff to do and suddenly 200 hours to give a game wasn’t a few weeks but years of free time. Suddenly I’d be mid quest and come back so long after that o didn’t remember the controls or what I was even doing or why. I’d sell items that were my mains because I’d forget I got a new thing or why I kept something. And then when someone said: “psst- hey! Wanna go do some low level quest for your next 7 days of game time just for gold, or want to pay me $5 in 30 seconds and actually play the games story for an hour, or play for half and go cuddle” I said- where do I sign?
Then it sounds like you're playing the wrong kinda of games. You should never reach a point in ANY game where the design of the game suggests you put in more money than what it's already worth.
By default though, wouldn’t that value be relative? Someone out there might think horse armor is worth the cash, someone else might not see a problem with paying $20 in content for a game they paid $40 used or on sale for- since new it’s $60 anyway. If you have 800 hours into elder scrolls for $50-60, that’s a great value, but what if you decide that 800 hours of play is worth more than $60? What if to you that 800 hours is worth $200? Value is relative isn’t it?
One person will buy a Ferrari for $100k and consider it a great deal, another would never spend that much but might buy one for $30k, and a third can’t afford the $30k even if there was a Ferrari F50 for that cheap. But if you enjoy the game, and you don’t feel like you spent more than you’re happy with, how can it be the wrong kind of game for you, and how could you ever pay more than it is worth if you decide what you pay?
You're right in saying that monetary value to enjoyment value is very subjective. What I meant to say is that game designers shouldn't rely on players willing (or gullible enough) to keep repeatedly paying more money into a game. I feel that they should go the route of designing a game that keeps you coming back to it, and thus to any future products said company might make.
One person will buy a Ferrari for $100k and consider it a great deal, another would never spend that much but might buy one for $30k, and a third can’t afford the $30k even if there was a Ferrari F50 for that cheap. But if you enjoy the game, and you don’t feel like you spent more than you’re happy with, how can it be the wrong kind of game for you, and how could you ever pay more than it is worth if you decide what you pay?