Installera Steam
logga in
|
språk
简体中文 (förenklad kinesiska)
繁體中文 (traditionell kinesiska)
日本語 (japanska)
한국어 (koreanska)
ไทย (thailändska)
Български (bulgariska)
Čeština (tjeckiska)
Dansk (danska)
Deutsch (tyska)
English (engelska)
Español - España (Spanska - Spanien)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanska - Latinamerika)
Ελληνικά (grekiska)
Français (franska)
Italiano (italienska)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesiska)
Magyar (ungerska)
Nederlands (nederländska)
Norsk (norska)
Polski (polska)
Português (Portugisiska – Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugisiska - Brasilien)
Română (rumänska)
Русский (ryska)
Suomi (finska)
Türkçe (turkiska)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamesiska)
Українська (Ukrainska)
Rapportera problem med översättningen
Diskussionsregler och -riktlinjer
Anmäl detta inlägg
This is a pime example.
Not really just a difference in currency. One user pays with their time, the other pays with their money. If You have loads of free time but little money..then you'll spend your time. If your free time is scarce but you have some good income well it makes more sense to spend money instead of your valuable and limited time doesn't it?
A player can spend months of question...or pay for a pack of xp boosters or a straight up levelup.
A player can grind for hours and weeks to get an item, or they can just buy it from a cash shop or AH.
A player can grind for gold, or justy buy gold with real money.
There is a line but for many its more less that the game has crossed the line and more that they feel they're missing out because they're not paying.
And something that feels like P2W might in fact not be, when viewed from a neutral external point,. I draw the line at games Selling power directly.
Examples I can give are Loadout. Old game all bout shooting guns and customizing guns. Through gameplay you could unlock a max of 3 weapon slots. If you however paid the premium currency, you could unlock further slots, up to 6 I believe.
Now while you could earn the premium currency the rate of earning was so abysmally slow that it made no sense. we're talking like 100 blutes for winning a match and these things had 10K plus price tags. Having the extra weapon slots meant you had that much more firepower bot for general and specific cricumstances.
Another was Might QUest for EPic Loot.You spent premium currency to buyaccess to new heros and traps for your castle. The fact that as time went on they progressively nerffed things to the point where you pretty much needed the premium stuff.
Here's the thing these games had in come...they both failed. Both have long since closed down their servers and even before that the games were dead.
No obne wanted to play them. This is what happens in games that have a genuine P2W vibe.
People stop playing..which ruins the system since it just leaves the whales to compete with each other and being a whale among whale is no different than being a minnow among minnows.
This creates a brief arms race as the whales fight to noit become the proverbial minnows but eventually people get spent out and stop playing.
Who are we to decide that? Since when have we ever decided how much goods will be in the shops. If you like the price buy it. If you don't, don't. Simple as that.
The whole problem here and why you claim pay2win games are not successful is because you deny people’s stance on the matter when it comes to the matter of time spent.
Don’t take it the wrong way but the industry has not fooled me in this regard during the last 20 years and it certainly isn’t going to be a steam user using the same arguments that is going to change this.
P2W games can only work if they provide enough incentive for both the paying and non-paying folks to win. If Paying meant winning automatically against non-paying then non-payers would eventually stop playing. We see that happen time and time again. This leaves just the whales. WHich kinda ruins the point of being a whale.
Hence what is sold is either convenience.. like the convenience of having a better chance at a rare item, or the convenience of having faster xp gain.
They're usually carefull enough with that.
And yes i do consider time and money to be interchangeable currency. If your job pays you $8 an hour your time is cheap and you likely can spend hours more freely than money. If your job pays you $600 an hour but leaves you with less free time, well then you have plenty of money but not the time to grind or achievemastery. SHould then be locked out of the game for that?
Games with Genuine P2W cannot sustain themselves for very long, we see that over and over again. The games that opersist are the ones that have found a balance between incentivising players to pay, and incentivising non-paying players to keep playing,
As a gamer myself. I quickly peace out of any game that gives even the faintest whiff of bad balancing .
Research why. The reason is because the intent is to make it pay-to-win for as much people as possible without alienating them.
When you try so hard to make your base think they need to pay to win enough for making them pay to win speaks for itself.
I’m not gonna lie. My native language is French and I lack the English vocabulary to go in-depth. Best, I can do is to suggest focusing on gamer psychology and how it is used by the industry.
Be careful about the sources as well. A lot will speak about the gist of it but will restrict the details to try and get around NDAs. You really need to look hard and ideally know some insiders yourself to really get the whole picture.
A lot of people buying it are doing so for an advantage. An advantage that helps you to win. I won’t mind a reasonable set back. But at some point it goes way beyond something reasonable. When it start impacting my experience because I can’t possibly spend 300 hours playing a single game instead of potentially spending a LOT of money then not calling it “Pay-to-Win” is kind of insane.
I don’t care if we stretch the limits to absolutely no bounds. When you’ll realise grinding for 1400h or paying 200$ is kind of an impossible choice for anyone with an actual life… maybe then, and only then, you will realise that it pretty much is, for all intent and purpose, pay to win.
Edit: Whoopsy, sorry! I just read it again and it kinda sounds like I’m saying you have no life. Not what I intended to say. I just wanted you to picture the average guy this game is “supposed” to be aimed at. I can only speak for myself so that is what I am gonna do.
I’m 33. I sleep, eat, drink, work, take care of my family and friends, etc… I’m not special. This is the bog standard life of people of my age. I don’t know where you could find the time to grind that insanity within a reasonable timeframe but I certainly couldn’t.
The 200$ is an impossible choice because it is the only practical choice. This is the illusion of a choice. You get passed a lemon which you take gladly because they purposely made the alternative worse in every single way.
"Okay, maybe it is, but just how much is it? and what is winning anyway?"
"I uninstalled it as soon as I heard about all the P2W elements."
That was a riveting character arc!
So basically both sides are having fun. Thats the sign of things being done right and all you have left are salty freeloaders whining that once again they are limited by their lack of money. That once again people who have what they don't have, can get stuff they don't but want to have.
If the devs over balance one way or another then the system breaks. There's no press towards paying, or rthere's no fun to be had as a freeloader. At which point one or the other will leave which will ironically lead the other side to leave as well.
We see this all the time.
'Think' is the operative word and every business operates by making people think they need to spend money with them. Welcome to capitalism.
You could just say human psychology and yeah. But here's the thing. Most people have the self-awareness to know when they're being lead by the nose.
By the time most of us are 13 we learn not to take every advert we see with a tablespoon of salt.
Not really. You can just look at the game itself. Is the grind you have to put in as a free loader worth it to compete with the whales? If no, move to a different and more satisfying game, if yes, continue. Very few people will keep doing things they don't consider fun in their free time.
And the nature of the advantage is important. In some cases It might just level the playing field between the people spending time as their currency as opposed to money.
Agreed but remember reasonable to YOU, is unreasonable to someone else. Many people consider paying $40 for a single game reasonable. I consider that unacceptable. See how that works?
That's the crux of the matter. What YOU see as P2W may not be what someone else sees as P2W.
But the fact you can make up the difference by spending time in stead of money pretty handily proves that it's not P2W, its just spending a different currency . Time vs Money.
And if the game makes those 300 hours fun and enjoyable, well then what do you really lose?
at which point some people will spend the time because they're enhjoying the game and thats the cheaper currency for them, some people will spend the $200 because enjoying the game and thats the cheaper currency for them. I mean if you work the kind of job that lets you ear 3x that in the time someone else takes for their lunch, it's not a big deal. Or the third option. YOu uninstal the game and move on to somethinfg that you actually enjoy,
I've encountered plenty games with unsatisfactory game play and power imbalances. And you know what I did...I stopped playing them. As do millions of people every day.
A game can be aimed at two different groups at the same time you know?
Then you play another game that does not require $200 for you to have a fun engaging experience. You act as if you NEED to play the game. You don't there are any number of other games you can play.
If you reach that point of thought then clearly the game did something wrong or is not for you. If the game manageds to find h its equillibrium then they're basically serving their target market well. If it doesn't it will fail.
Let the market decide.
A game's power balancing can be unliked without the game being P2W.
Once you reach the point or discover a detail that makes the game unpalettable to you. you can very well just uninstall. Be more confusing if they kept playing beyond that m8.
Well and Good. Other people have different mind sets. Neither side is wrong or right. Both sides are free to vote with their wallets.
Oh no! No change at all! Hahahaha.
And equating P2W design to bad balancing is a ludicrous thing to suggest.
In any case this thread has provided a shining example of my former point.
Not even the people in this thread can agree on what makes a game P2W. And OP suggests games to be tagged by steam with such a tag.
How we don't go from here to 'This game is missing the/badly tagged with the P2W tag because potato'?
You can still win against someone who bought Ultra Instinct Goku on Dragon Ball FighterZ. The advantage in these situations is typically so trivial that you can't even prove that this kind of unbalance, or any one of the same nature, is by design.
In contrast. The only way you can win against a Diablo Immortal P2W player is if he AFKs.
As you like to so often say... Apples and oranges, except this time it's actually appropriate to say that.
So? There's a group of people in every thread here who can't agree to stuff that's blatantly obvious to the rest of the internet. Case and point: Diablo Immortal is not pay to win when everyone else knows it is the very definition of a pay to win game.
Previous hits include: Using SAM is not cheating, every Steam Award has an ambiguous meaning, there's no difference between lootboxes and Borderlands loot chests. and a 5 Star ranking system is too hard to grasp.
You can't use these opinions to gauge anything.
I would agree that some games can be debated over whether or not they are P2W, but there are also games were it's so blatantly obvious to everyone that they are P2W that's remarkably foolish to argue otherwise,