Should ads be disabled for paying users to avoid “selling them off” through ad networks?
In many ad-driven or hybrid monetization projects, there’s an option to remove ads. Sometimes it’s tied to a subscription for a limited period, sometimes ads disappear temporarily after a purchase, and in some cases, they can be turned off permanently.
Ad monetization is, in a sense, a gradual way of “selling” a user. From a paying player, though, developers want recurring purchases, not just a few cents from an ad impression. Especially considering the high cost of acquiring that user in the first place. That’s why offering ad removal often feels like a logical and profitable move.
But is it really that simple?
The same player is already bombarded with ads in other apps and social networks, so removing ads in one game doesn’t shield them from the noise.
Advertisers actually pay well for impressions shown to paying users — so by disabling ads, developers are deliberately cutting off part of their revenue.
And the very fact of making a purchase already creates a “commitment anchor”: psychologically, it’s harder for a player to abandon a project they’ve spent money on.
So what does ad removal for paying users really represent: a retention tool, or just a QoL feature that makes the experience smoother by reducing distractions and letting players claim rewards from placements without interruptions?