BTD6 is not P2W. Almost 800 hours in-game, only spenting 50 Cent on game during the random sale.

[JimboYCS]

You are honestly crazy at this point, If you think BTD6 is P2W. You don't need powers, insta monkeys or double cash mode, you can finish any level by your brain IQ. I have crazy amount of dollars, insta monkeys and powers by just playing game. I have unlocked every monkey knowledge, Heroes and Skins by just playing the game.

You only buy in-game stuff to support the devs and make your game little ez. I should probably buy something, considiring how much I have played and enjoyed this game, but I always forgot and spent money on something else.

BTD6 is better than Dota 2, when comes to how much you can unlock with the grind*. I have seen and played a lot of games, where you need fat wallet to enjoy game fully. BTD6 is basically free game with full support, better than most P2W/P2P MMOs.

Yes, some others Ninja Kiwis games are different than BTD6, but that doesn't matter. This game is awesome. Tommorow I should have my sallary, so I'm promising myself to buy something in-game to support this amazing game.

BTD6 is not P2W. The End of the Story.

* The Game is in the perfect state. If you consider BTD6 P2W: you are troll or either sorry to say a honestly dumb player. I wouldn't be suprise If some of these people came from Twitch, because BTD6 kinda get popular there... And as per usual, some of Twitch Streamers and their communities are kinda cringe in their behiavour. I remember once watching some guy with 10k viewers, crying over and screaming in agony.

If you are random guy reading this post, that never played BTD6: This is one of the best TD I have ever played. *

* H0LABANANA, K Y S, Evilsod and Hiroko are trolls. *

* - edited part

[A Ballad from Nocturne]

Big Dicc Marty a écrit :

A Ballad from Nocturne a écrit :

Mhm, and what is the consequence when you do not buy it? And compared to whom do you have a disadvantage for not buying it, and how does that effect your success at the game?

in FC5 the difference is negliigable, but in FCND the difference between starting kit, and top tier is staggering vast, not to mention being able to boost damage on said weapons. You don't need it. You can unlock the top teir gun in not too much time, but unlocking them at the start makes the rest of the game an utter non trivial stroll, not that Far Cry games are hard mind you, but it allows you to ignore a great deal of content as you don't need it to porgress, seeing as you've jumped to the top of the ladder.

As for the other user, P2W in competitive multiplayer is greedy, and a serious issue.
That same tactic is still P2W even in the context of single player, it's no more greedy than in a multiplayer game, however the practical implications are not the same for P2W SP vs P2W MP.

It doesn't change what it is however.

Paying real money in-game for in-game advantages compared to not buying them, even if they can be gained for free, even if it doesn't take 70 hours of grinding to equal 1 dollar of currency, it's still P2W, or P2PF.

It's the practical implications that matter more. For BTD6 it's mostly a non-issue, the game isn't balanced around the existence of paid items.

Let me say I am happy you are making a point and we are exchanging arguments here and not insults. If I come across as rude at some point please tell me, I am most probably not doing it intentionally.

I have to stick with what I said though: The term "Pay 2 Win" should be used for multiplayer games that actually rip off people because they literally kinda force you into doing it to have a chance AND (very important in my opinion) because the term has to be reversible -> you have to _loose_ due to not paying. And that is not what happens when you don't by the stuff in Far Cry. That said I do totally agree that it is incredibly ♥♥♥♥♥♥ demeanor by the company (not necessarily the Developers for they don't have a say in these matters potentially) and it makes me annoyed. Then, again, if people wish to literally pay additional money to get stuff that they can get anyway - and that makes the game less exciting - I guess it still is kinda also their decision. I would look for free ways to make the game easier.

In my opinion being precise and not using terms for very different issues is needed because else stuff gets mixed together and that is often enough used against the consumers by the exact companies that try to milk us gamers even beyond just getting us to buy their games. Therefore I want to mention that even mobile games are not "pay 2 win" if they go ahead and urge you to buy some sort of ressource that allows to play more like once or twice a day. That is "pay to play", which is about as bad, but also it's own thing.

There is a difference between taking advantage of the fact people of course don't want to loose all the time and taking advantage of people being impatient.

[H0LABANANA]

I mean, realistically, both definitions make sense since you can't prove the "real" definition of pay-to-win to all the people who ever used the word. I think it makes more sense for the definition where the advantage doesn't matter for single player since you're not affecting anyone else, but sure. Just believe what you believe.

[A Ballad from Nocturne]

H0LABANANA a écrit :

I mean, realistically, both definitions make sense since you can't prove the "real" definition of pay-to-win to all the people who ever used the word. I think it makes more sense for the definition where the advantage doesn't matter for single player since you're not affecting anyone else, but sure. Just believe what you believe.

Well maybe true, but, again, i want to point out that "Pay 2 Win" kinda requires to have a "don't pay & loose" condition.

[H0LABANANA]

A Ballad from Nocturne a écrit :

H0LABANANA a écrit :

I mean, realistically, both definitions make sense since you can't prove the "real" definition of pay-to-win to all the people who ever used the word. I think it makes more sense for the definition where the advantage doesn't matter for single player since you're not affecting anyone else, but sure. Just believe what you believe.

Well maybe true, but, again, i want to point out that "Pay 2 Win" kinda requires to have a "don't pay & loose" condition.

Not really, Pay 2 Win means you can pay and win. That doesn't mean that if you don't pay then you lose.

[Evilsod]

H0LABANANA a écrit :

A Ballad from Nocturne a écrit :

Well maybe true, but, again, i want to point out that "Pay 2 Win" kinda requires to have a "don't pay & loose" condition.

Not really, Pay 2 Win means you can pay and win. That doesn't mean that if you don't pay then you lose.

No, he already clarified that. The implication is that someone else must lose.
Which is why it goes straight back to singleplayer is irrelevant. "Winning" is typically related to competition of some kind.
You don't say you won Skyrim, you say you beat Skyrim.

Nobody else loses because you chose to throw money at a SP game.

Well, unless you're going to argue that technically we all lose because you're encouraging ♥♥♥♥♥♥ developers/publishers.

[H0LABANANA]

Evilsod a écrit :

H0LABANANA a écrit :

Not really, Pay 2 Win means you can pay and win. That doesn't mean that if you don't pay then you lose.

No, he already clarified that. The implication is that someone else must lose.
Which is why it goes straight back to singleplayer is irrelevant. "Winning" is typically related to competition of some kind.
You don't say you won Skyrim, you say you beat Skyrim.

Nobody else loses because you chose to throw money at a SP game.

Well, unless you're going to argue that technically we all lose because you're encouraging ♥♥♥♥♥♥ developers/publishers.

Actual, life is pay to win. Without money, we won't survive, therefore, we lose. You know what that means...

[A Ballad from Nocturne]

H0LABANANA a écrit :

A Ballad from Nocturne a écrit :

Well maybe true, but, again, i want to point out that "Pay 2 Win" kinda requires to have a "don't pay & loose" condition.

Not really, Pay 2 Win means you can pay and win. That doesn't mean that if you don't pay then you lose.

But you don't win anything, you just succeed at a game where there is no competition. You literally pay for making the game shorter. That isn't winning. Some people would even argue that you actually reduce the amount of enjoyment you'll get out of it.
It is not "pay to win" just because you spend additional money and get something out of it.

Edit: And it literally is not what you write, you yourself say "you can pay & win" but "Pay 2 Win" only really is a thing if a. you win against competition in the first place and b. you actually HAVE to pay to have the best chances of winning. But that is literally not how Singleplayer works.

[Evilsod]

H0LABANANA a écrit :

Evilsod a écrit :

No, he already clarified that. The implication is that someone else must lose.
Which is why it goes straight back to singleplayer is irrelevant. "Winning" is typically related to competition of some kind.
You don't say you won Skyrim, you say you beat Skyrim.

Nobody else loses because you chose to throw money at a SP game.

Well, unless you're going to argue that technically we all lose because you're encouraging ♥♥♥♥♥♥ developers/publishers.

Actual, life is pay to win. Without money, we won't survive, therefore, we lose. You know what that means...

I was waiting for someone to bring that up ^^
Let's face it, if life had a developer, this place would be getting 1 star reviews.

[Ninja Zyborg]

Evilsod a écrit :

Big Dicc Marty a écrit :

If you solve a problem in game by spending real money, beyond the retail price, you have paid to win, paid to progress, etc.

Do you have actual examples of this in the context of a singleplayer game?

One that isn't a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ mobile cash grab, at least?

I'd like to point out that mobile cash grabs are, by definition, pay to win.

[imag2OOO]

u can litteraly just pay to win every map { except chimp mode} by either cash drops or just strait up instant monkeys

[A Ballad from Nocturne]

imag2OOO a écrit :

u can litteraly just pay to win every map { except chimp mode} by either cash drops or just strait up instant monkeys

There is no competition, Pay 2 Win is not when you pay to skip a map in singleplayer. (Edit: and Co-Op as well ofc. You don't win a map, you succeed at beating it.)

[Evilsod]

Ninja Zyborg a écrit :

Evilsod a écrit :

Do you have actual examples of this in the context of a singleplayer game?

One that isn't a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ mobile cash grab, at least?

I'd like to point out that mobile cash grabs are, by definition, pay to win.

Erm... no, they are not pay to win by definition.
A cash grab is not necessarily pay to win, just like how a pay to win game isn't necessarily a cash grab.

[Garou]

Ninja Zyborg a écrit :

I think the real problem with these discussions is nobody is agreeing on what "pay to win" even means.

If it means "you can pay more money to beat the game easier", then yes. BTD6 is pay to win.

If it means "you have to pay money in order to beat the game in a reasonable amount of time with reasonable effort", then no. BTD6 is not pay to win.

I'm personally part of the second group, where pay to win requires excessive difficulty as well as the option to pay more money, but other people might disagree.

yeah i like that reasoning for a game is pay 2 win if you realy feel the need to cash in some money like Black Dessert for example where you realy need 2 buy some pets and some premium to get trough the first week until you get all the free ♥♥♥♥

[Senki]

Everyone is making up their own definitions on what p2w is and there's no official definition online either. Whoever thinks that their definition is the only correct one is just wrong because there's no correct definition in the first place.

I don't even know why people care about this term so much, it doesn't define what a game is or how good it is.

Bloons has microtransactions and their devs are obviously greedy but the game itself is good and the grind isn't that horrible.

All this obsession over the pay to win term is dumb af. It was literally invented by some random players that probably played a ♥♥♥♥ MMO or another cash grab game made to exploit the playerbase for money and now people are trying to make a definition for it that they can apply to every game. It's like arguing what the definition of pee pee poo poo is.

TLDR: stop arguing about what p2w means no one is right and u're all dumb

[Big [REDACTED] Marty]

Games like candy crush where the "difficulty" rises so steep that it becomes practically impossible to progress. The levels are beyond unfair, and when you run out of "lives" you must wait an entire day to keep playing. Or pay some money to not have to do those things.

BT6 does this too in a way. Instead of levels being unfair, they become more and more unfair the higher your wave count gets in freeplay.

At which point, in order to progress, you will eventually need to spend money, as the game will eventually become impossible to beat without the aid of paid items.

Of course this is hardly an actual issue in BTD6, as there is no real reason to get to round 405 other than the bragging rights, or maybe there is some actual reason...

Games like Warframe are pretty bad with forcing the player to wait for hours, days, and I think possibly even an entire week to unlock a new weapon/frame/etc with the option to skip the wait.