Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Is "Pay for convenience" the new pay to win?

24

Comments

  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 7,081
    I don't see the argument. 

    Cash shops suck !
    Amaranthar
  • laxielaxie Member RarePosts: 1,118
    As a developer, you are balancing the game towards a certain point that's fun. With something like a mount, you are thinking when the best point in the game is to obtain one, how fast it should run, how difficult it should be to get, how it impacts exploration and trade, etc.

    Convenience items face the same issue as pay-to-win items, in the sense that you are suddenly balancing the game towards two points. One that is OK but not ideal (the non-paying experience) and one that is comfortable. Ultimately, the goal in that monetisation model is converting players from the OK experience to the ideal one, by having them spend money.

    The balance breaks down in a lot of places, even if you only have convenience items. Pay-to-win items are literally the same thing, with the exception of breaking balance across the board, especially when it comes to the core features.

    The Battlefront 2 developers touched on this in one of their interviews. When asked why every player gets pretty much the same amount of credits in multiplayer, regardless of performance, they said something along the lines of "We want every player to have the same experience and progress in a similar fashion." In other words, the game is specifically balanced around the "OK" and "ideal" points, and they don't want you making the transition without spending real money.
  • Viper482Viper482 Member LegendaryPosts: 4,056
    Pay for convenience=Fast travel, inventory space, Advancement pots to make grinding less painful, cosmetics, non-combat pets, all available in game as well

    Pay to Win= Gear, skills, daily resets (think labor pots in Archage), and anything you can buy outright that others have to grind for, don't care if this stuff is available in game, still p2w because you get it in a flash where others grind dozens of hours.
    Make MMORPG's Great Again!
  • barasawabarasawa Member UncommonPosts: 618
    Stupid car analogy:
    Indy Race - 500 laps to finish (Don't care how many laps the real one is)

    Pay to win - $$$ Engine upgrade makes car 30% faster
    Pay for Convenience - $$$ You start at lap 400 
    Microtransaction Cosmetics - Cool flaming rabbit paint job (Fosters reference)

    ... To me P2W and P4C are pretty much the same thing, just with a slight twist ...
    timtrack

    Lost my mind, now trying to lose yours...

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 5,785
    Loke666 said:
    Charging for convinience stuff like extra bag and bank slots is fine in my book. The devs need money to make games and keep them running after all. As long as they don't affect the gamebalance I don't see a problem with it.

    Pay2win is a very different matter, it destroy the enjoyment of the game for me. And things they sell that affect the games balance is pay2win, not convineience.
    Eh, let them make a game worth paying for.
    There's a saturation of blandness and more-of-the-same because that's not required.
    Which also reduces the profit structure of the whole, making "games worth paying for" a risk.



    Once upon a time....

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 5,785
    Foncl said:
    The only "pay for convenience" I've found acceptable in games is where you have to pay for extra inventory slots but the game is free. As kjempff said it's easy to judge how much you will have to spend on inventory slots in a game like that to be able to enjoy it.

    Other forms of what some call "pay for convenience" are not acceptable to me so I stay away from those games. Many of them I would call pay to win.
    So the gamers who buy extra inventory slots can haul twice as much (or more) loot back and sell it, then buy twice as much gear or potions or whatever and advance more quickly.

    How is that not "win"?

    Once upon a time....

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 5,785
    edited December 2017
    If it's really for convenience, it can't be for win.
    A cosmetic pet never helped you to win any PvE or PvP fight.
    But when gamers desire said cosmetic pet, it becomes a "win" to have it.
    It's "PTW" if it's being sold and not earned through game play.

    Oh the injustice of not having as much time as others!
    So lets make it worse by selling it. Just remove the game play and the value of earning "it".

    RexKushmantimtrack

    Once upon a time....

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,601
    Unless the person buying the level can do something that I can't when I am at that level that makes playing the game, killing the monsters or killing other players easier then imo there is no advantage.

    Some people will always level faster than others. Unless they can actually do something I don't see the advantage.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 5,785
    edited December 2017
    Unless the person buying the level can do something that I can't when I am at that level that makes playing the game, killing the monsters or killing other players easier then imo there is no advantage.

    Some people will always level faster than others. Unless they can actually do something I don't see the advantage.
    It's not just about advantage.
    There's also goals, desires, wants, involved in these persistent worlds (and I use the term "worlds" with more than a bit of mockery).
    Maybe you just don't care about any of that stuff. But I think it's safe to say that many gamers do.

    Edit: Which brings up another point.
    How fair is it that some players have to pay extra money to have what they want from their game?

    Once upon a time....

  • holdenfiveholdenfive Member UncommonPosts: 170
    Unless the person buying the level can do something that I can't when I am at that level that makes playing the game, killing the monsters or killing other players easier then imo there is no advantage.

    Some people will always level faster than others. Unless they can actually do something I don't see the advantage.
    It's not just about advantage.
    There's also goals, desires, wants, involved in these persistent worlds (and I use the term "worlds" with more than a bit of mockery).
    Maybe you just don't care about any of that stuff. But I think it's safe to say that many gamers do.

    Edit: Which brings up another point.
    How fair is it that some players have to pay extra money to have what they want from their game?
    Most people's 'wants and goals' can be narrowed down to 'I wanna reach level cap 3 days after launch so I can stand around the bank vault for 2 weeks and look cool, that gives me a 3 week window to accomplish my goals before I quits the game.'

    And that's pretty much it. The moment the general community of this genre shows me they actually care about these games and the game's integrity and what not, I might start giving a shit about this nickle and dime issue, until then, it just sounds like an excuse to whine to me. I understand, sometimes it's nice to have a whinge, doesn't mean you actually have any kind of a point though, all things considered. 
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 5,785
    Unless the person buying the level can do something that I can't when I am at that level that makes playing the game, killing the monsters or killing other players easier then imo there is no advantage.

    Some people will always level faster than others. Unless they can actually do something I don't see the advantage.
    It's not just about advantage.
    There's also goals, desires, wants, involved in these persistent worlds (and I use the term "worlds" with more than a bit of mockery).
    Maybe you just don't care about any of that stuff. But I think it's safe to say that many gamers do.

    Edit: Which brings up another point.
    How fair is it that some players have to pay extra money to have what they want from their game?
    Most people's 'wants and goals' can be narrowed down to 'I wanna reach level cap 3 days after launch so I can stand around the bank vault for 2 weeks and look cool, that gives me a 3 week window to accomplish my goals before I quits the game.'

    And that's pretty much it. The moment the general community of this genre shows me they actually care about these games and the game's integrity and what not, I might start giving a shit about this nickle and dime issue, until then, it just sounds like an excuse to whine to me. I understand, sometimes it's nice to have a whinge, doesn't mean you actually have any kind of a point though, all things considered. 
    What great gaming you are describing.

    And THAT'S the point.

    Once upon a time....

  • holdenfiveholdenfive Member UncommonPosts: 170
    Unless the person buying the level can do something that I can't when I am at that level that makes playing the game, killing the monsters or killing other players easier then imo there is no advantage.

    Some people will always level faster than others. Unless they can actually do something I don't see the advantage.
    It's not just about advantage.
    There's also goals, desires, wants, involved in these persistent worlds (and I use the term "worlds" with more than a bit of mockery).
    Maybe you just don't care about any of that stuff. But I think it's safe to say that many gamers do.

    Edit: Which brings up another point.
    How fair is it that some players have to pay extra money to have what they want from their game?
    Most people's 'wants and goals' can be narrowed down to 'I wanna reach level cap 3 days after launch so I can stand around the bank vault for 2 weeks and look cool, that gives me a 3 week window to accomplish my goals before I quits the game.'

    And that's pretty much it. The moment the general community of this genre shows me they actually care about these games and the game's integrity and what not, I might start giving a shit about this nickle and dime issue, until then, it just sounds like an excuse to whine to me. I understand, sometimes it's nice to have a whinge, doesn't mean you actually have any kind of a point though, all things considered. 
    What great gaming you are describing.

    And THAT'S the point.
    Yeah it is kinda the point. Most players have shown all they care about is the number next to their heads, and they will do absolutely anything and step over as many people and game mechanics as they have to on their way to that singular goal. If so many people didn't play that way, there'd be little market for this kinda stuff.

    And it has so many other negative effects on the games as well. Trivialized lower tier content that may as well not even be there, making it impossible for players who actually enjoy whatever challenge said content may have provided to go back and do it. That's the main thing that shits me to death. I don't rush to end game, I don't buy convenience items, I want to explore all the game has to offer. You lot (in general) make that playstyle as nauseating as possible because they support your playstyle to the detriment of mine. So you'll get no sympathy from me just cause someone 'bought' their way to the top. People who spend and people who rush all have an even hand in destroying the spirit of the games, at least from where I'm sitting. 
  • SirAgravaineSirAgravaine Member RarePosts: 520
    DMKano said:
    DMKano said:
    Is green really blue?

    Nope.

    Its green.

    And yes blue is just blue.


    When 2 words have entirely different definitions, like winning and convenience

    Paying for each is not going to be the same thing








    Somehow I think this thread went over your head. The OP is asking if convenience items, features, or services are as effective at putting players ahead as pay-to-win schemes (effectively becoming pay to win schemes) and if they are replacing PTW as the de facto microtransaction monetary scheme.

    Nope I was just being obtuse on purpose since this topic has been beaten to death a million times over.

    OP is known to use topic generators and create threads like these.

    Pay to win has no actual definiton - it means entirely different things to different people, so discussing what it really means is laregely an exercise in futility.

    Its like discussing "god".
    You are talking about semantics, literally. There is no futility in discussing common meaning. If something is viewed to be subjective, there is still a fulcrum for discourse.

    On the topic of "god", there is enough commonality in the meaning of the word that even members of different faiths and religions can have a discussion.
    ScorchienScotty787
  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member EpicPosts: 5,898
    edited December 2017
    for me anything that's pay for power = p2w

    Although how long it takes to grind that power has to be taken into consideration.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775

    How fair is it that some players have to pay extra money to have what they want from their game?

    How fair? It is procedural-ly fair. The game charges the same amount for everyone for the same thing.

    Now if you want something more than others .. well, you cannot say the dev needs to treat you differently because of that.

    And sure, some people have more money than others but that is a totally different issue. There is no "fairness" issue as long as they treat every consumer the same. 
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775

    Yeah it is kinda the point. Most players have shown all they care about is the number next to their heads, and they will do absolutely anything and step over as many people and game mechanics as they have to on their way to that singular goal. If so many people didn't play that way, there'd be little market for this kinda stuff.

    And it has so many other negative effects on the games as well. 
    what negative effects? If most players want the number next to their heads, the games are catering to them, so what is the problem?

    It may be *your* problem if you do not like it, but devs have zero obligations to cater to you. They can cater to any audience they want. It is a free market. 
  • FonclFoncl Member UncommonPosts: 347
    edited December 2017
    Foncl said:
    The only "pay for convenience" I've found acceptable in games is where you have to pay for extra inventory slots but the game is free. As kjempff said it's easy to judge how much you will have to spend on inventory slots in a game like that to be able to enjoy it.

    Other forms of what some call "pay for convenience" are not acceptable to me so I stay away from those games. Many of them I would call pay to win.
    So the gamers who buy extra inventory slots can haul twice as much (or more) loot back and sell it, then buy twice as much gear or potions or whatever and advance more quickly.

    How is that not "win"?
    I agree with you, extra inventory slots are a massive advantage in most games and not acceptable to have in a cash shop for me. What I meant to say was extra storage/bank slots in free games. I've played a lot of Path of Exile which is a free game where you get a fair amount of storage for free but if you like the game and want to play long term you will want to spend some money on extra storage for items. There's also cosmetic items you can buy in the cash shop but those do not interest me.

    Path of Exiles model works for me, I can buy more storage than I need for the amount of money I think the game is worth. Ideally I would prefer not being able to buy anything in-game, paying for the game and expansions while getting a good amount of storage with the purchase and earning cosmetics in-game.
    Post edited by Foncl on
  • cranthugcranthug Member UncommonPosts: 102
    The Nintendo generation is now in or nearing the 35-44 age group, better market me some time saving swag.  Losing jobs and gf's due to gaming as a second job is so 2004.... ;)
  • deniterdeniter Member RarePosts: 1,429
    I don't go to movies and pay extra for not having to watch the movie, and i won't do it for games either. It's kind of clever game design that has made this very question relevant, since modern MMOs don't offer much entertaining until the top end content and getting there is often made boring and mind-numbing so that players would pay for boosts to reach it sooner. In movie business this would mean there was a plain blue screen for the first 60 mins before you could see the last 20 mins and see how the movie ends, unless you paid some extra and could skip the tedious blue screen part.

    The second question is actually part of the first one. The reason games are getting expansions is to *expand* the original game, not replace it. So the whole content should be equally relevant at all times for both new and old players. If that was the case no one would need to even think of buying boosts or ways to skip content, they could progress on their own pace and re-rolling a new toon was more interesting when all that huge amount of content would once again entertain you.

    It funny how people spend money to play games for having fun on their leisure time, and at the same time they consider spending more money for not having to play them because they don't have enough leisure time.
  • holdenfiveholdenfive Member UncommonPosts: 170

    Yeah it is kinda the point. Most players have shown all they care about is the number next to their heads, and they will do absolutely anything and step over as many people and game mechanics as they have to on their way to that singular goal. If so many people didn't play that way, there'd be little market for this kinda stuff.

    And it has so many other negative effects on the games as well. 
    what negative effects? If most players want the number next to their heads, the games are catering to them, so what is the problem?

    It may be *your* problem if you do not like it, but devs have zero obligations to cater to you. They can cater to any audience they want. It is a free market. 
    Yeah buddy I think the whole thread is about people complaining about a particular playstyle being catered to over their own. The difference is most people here dont talk about their playstyle on every freaking thread on this site like you do. This thread is actually about that this time, hence why were talking about it. 

    Also, I don't buy games that don't cater to me, I don't really play MMO's anymore because they don't cater to me. It's a free market. We know you never pay for any games, period, so that definitely isn't an issue. So what exactly is your issue?
    Scotty787
  • Superman0XSuperman0X Member RarePosts: 2,292
    Torval said:
    "Hey everyone, I came in 1st Convenience!", said nobody ever.
    I am guessing you are not familiar with the business model for 7-Eleven.
    [Deleted User]ConstantineMerus
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,600
    deniter said:


    It funny how people spend money to play games for having fun on their leisure time, and at the same time they consider spending more money for not having to play them because they don't have enough leisure time.
    Probably because the fun content is road blocked by unfun content which can only be bipass with grind or real money.
    deniter
  • chronoss2015chronoss2015 Member UncommonPosts: 217
    ok if you want pay for convenience as in you dont have time to grind etc then as a RULE OF ACTUAL LAW SAID USER CANNOT play said game more then 1-2 hrs per 24 hrs of a day....
    (This limits abuse by power hungry lil snots and wealthy rejects whom oculd not fight on a even playing field if the universe depended on them....)


    THEN you can have your pay for convenience....ill grind ten hours and catch up...might even do better as i'll help other non whales ....

    otherwise its just a pay to win scam ....quit trying to soften the gambling aspect too ...kids fnd ways around all those ONLY 18 crap to play and find all manner to get money and ruin themselves and there lives some times doing so....

    ITS NOT RIGHT and if you dont have time to play PERHAPS the real thing is for you to play a game that doesn't require competitive play ...OR find some buds that have time and team up so your disadvantage is lessened...

    being rich and wealthy or having a gambling or addition to loot crates is no excuse.

    my 2 cents worth of this ive bought about 10 games in 17 years cause i HATE DRM....another lovely topic , ths always online CRAP and now for sinlge player games is a frckin joke....

    pretty soon the bottom will drop out and these publishers know it thats why they all are trying to cash in now before they get regulated....self regulation is not gonna happen it will get regulated ....and the sudden proliferaton of these CARDS IN MY FOOKING GAMES THAT ARE NOT CARD GAMES JUST PROVES IT....

    I F I WANTED TO BLOODY WELL PLAY POKER ID DO SO.....I'D also prolly kick your butts doing it....

    /s
    4507
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 5,785
    Unless the person buying the level can do something that I can't when I am at that level that makes playing the game, killing the monsters or killing other players easier then imo there is no advantage.

    Some people will always level faster than others. Unless they can actually do something I don't see the advantage.
    It's not just about advantage.
    There's also goals, desires, wants, involved in these persistent worlds (and I use the term "worlds" with more than a bit of mockery).
    Maybe you just don't care about any of that stuff. But I think it's safe to say that many gamers do.

    Edit: Which brings up another point.
    How fair is it that some players have to pay extra money to have what they want from their game?
    Most people's 'wants and goals' can be narrowed down to 'I wanna reach level cap 3 days after launch so I can stand around the bank vault for 2 weeks and look cool, that gives me a 3 week window to accomplish my goals before I quits the game.'

    And that's pretty much it. The moment the general community of this genre shows me they actually care about these games and the game's integrity and what not, I might start giving a shit about this nickle and dime issue, until then, it just sounds like an excuse to whine to me. I understand, sometimes it's nice to have a whinge, doesn't mean you actually have any kind of a point though, all things considered. 
    What great gaming you are describing.

    And THAT'S the point.
    Yeah it is kinda the point. Most players have shown all they care about is the number next to their heads, and they will do absolutely anything and step over as many people and game mechanics as they have to on their way to that singular goal. If so many people didn't play that way, there'd be little market for this kinda stuff.

    And it has so many other negative effects on the games as well. Trivialized lower tier content that may as well not even be there, making it impossible for players who actually enjoy whatever challenge said content may have provided to go back and do it. That's the main thing that shits me to death. I don't rush to end game, I don't buy convenience items, I want to explore all the game has to offer. You lot (in general) make that playstyle as nauseating as possible because they support your playstyle to the detriment of mine. So you'll get no sympathy from me just cause someone 'bought' their way to the top. People who spend and people who rush all have an even hand in destroying the spirit of the games, at least from where I'm sitting. 
    You are assuming that I'm a gamer that wants the level grind? To rush through that sort of game play?
    Far from it. From what I gather, I'm very much the same sort as you.
    I haven't played an MMO in some years (like you, from your next post).
    I want a great Sandbox, I want exploration to be prime game play, I want "world" and "simulation", I want a great working economy, value to social interactions, interactions with the game world, and I want to be able to go back to places I enjoyed and have it still be meaningful game play.
    I DO NOT want the fixed content level grind or big power gaps as dividing players, rampant PKing, Zergs, or PTW.

    Once upon a time....

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 5,785
    edited December 2017
    Torval said:
    If it's really for convenience, it can't be for win.
    A cosmetic pet never helped you to win any PvE or PvP fight.
    The operative unspoken issue here is envy anyway. All of these rants lately lack a serious degree of self honesty. I'm not saying there aren't a few serious problems either, but between a lack of self-honesty and what I call "plank-eye" syndrome (referring to the Biblical parable) we, as a community, miss the point time and again.
    Jeezus! lol.
    Gamers want actual games worth paying for, but you Dev types insist that's not a real desire.
    It's little wonder that we're stuck in this declining spiral of uninspired MMO's.

    And to be honest about it, I don't think the vast majority of current Devs have what it takes to be inspired anyways.

    chronoss2015holdenfiveScotty787

    Once upon a time....

Sign In or Register to comment.