3 ms·

> The thing is - is it necessary to have the best gear to enjoy the game? Technically no but Diablo and ARPGs in general are all about items and for a very lar

by nickjj 4y ago

> The thing is - is it necessary to have the best gear to enjoy the game? Technically no but Diablo and ARPGs in general are all about items and for a very large class of players who enjoy this genre it's all about min / maxing your character, or at the very least getting improved items / skills / kill speed as you progress. Tying items into a cash shop in the way it's been done here feels really dirty, like it's going against the entire ethos of the genre. This is partly why Path of Exile has been wildly successful for almost 10 years (it's another ARPG). Their cash shop is focused on cosmetics and quality of life improvements. You can't just buy items or things that make your character more powerful. The only reason I bring up PoE is to demonstrate it's possible to create a long running profitable ARPG with cosmetic cash shop items in a free to play game. I do know things like stash tabs are borderline and debatably a kind of essential item but I'm ok with that, you can get very far without thinking about them and you purchase them once and you're good to go for years. It was also like $15 from what I remember, it's been a bunch of years since I played so I forgot. I do know I spent around $40-50 total on that game on various quality of life things and it felt like money well spent. I was happy to support GGG. In fact, I ran into a billing situation once and they gave me free coins to compensate a customer support pain point (which I didn't ask for) but I didn't want their work to go unpaid so I ended up purchasing more to match what they gave me. Not nickel and diming your customers and not preying on weakness goes a long ways for building up a loyal fanbase. I haven't played PoE in years but I feel like they won me over as a customer for life. I didn't think it was possible to ruin the Diablo franchise more than the original release of Diablo III but I think Diablo Immortal may have won in that department.

lcw 4y ago
This take seems off to me specifically in you last paragraph. Whether it is MTX in the form of cosmetics or p2w mechanics both are predatory to people with addictions to games and kids. I feel like people are upset about p2w mechanics in the game but at the same time say "I'm fine with cosmetic mtx" which makes the whole argument read to me as you are upset that people want to use money to win and that means they shouldn't so you will virtue signal like I care about people spending $10k. If you as an individual don't like p2w that's fine. I get that, but let's stop acting like we care about the virtues of it when kids are spending $1k on worthless Marvel skins in Fortnite or Roblox and there is little uproar about it... We just don't like going into a game where a rich person can beat us, which is understandably frustrating. The other virtue outrageous is just disingenuous imho.
- badkitty 4y ago
- pdimitar 4y ago
  Your take is even more off since you didn't see the blindingly obvious difference: having a choice in your game progression. - Cosmetics are a choice. They don't affect your progress in any way. - Bought character power is not a choice. You can happily play X amount of hours but at one point you'll hit a brick wall you can't overcome without money. And no don't tell me that "eventually you will", because elementary psychology says people get discouraged and quit if their effort isn't rewarded until a certain time threshold. That time is much less than what a F2P will allow you. I don't know if you deliberately missed the point or you can't see something that's easy to notice.
  - lcw 4y ago
    What point are you making? I'm making a point that you can spend $100k on cosmetics in Roblox or Fortnite, and people do spend thousands of dollars over time almost unknowingly. I assume you would think this is bad right? If manipulative psychology is the issue at hand than quantitatively speaking if you spend 10k on cosmetics or 10k on p2w through manipulative psychology what is the ethical difference? If you think I'm arguing for a side you are mistaken. I just don't think people actually care about people who are victims of this. They just don't like p2w games, and that's fine. I'm just calling a spade a spade. Also I feel like you are going down a rabbit hole of being gated on a game from being top 10 on a leaderboard, because the story mode and making it to level 60 seem completely accessible with no money. This is kind of a crazy path to walk down especially for PC gamers, who seem to be the most outraged, where affluence is definitely an advantage even if the game isn't the one making the money off it. For instance, the difference between a refresh rate of 250hz vs 60hz on a competitive FPS game. Try and tell me there isn't an advantage between a $800 gaming rig vs a $10k gaming rig...
    - pdimitar 4y ago
      > I assume you would think this is bad right? Of course I agree with that. I was under the impression that we're not discussing whether addiction is bad -- it's widely known that it is. I was arguing that "Minecraft and Roblox and millions of other games feed off the weak minds of virtual cosmetic addicts" does not at all make the pay-to-win model of other games okay. Because it did seem like you went off on a whataboutism road. That the world is screwed up doesn't mean we have to give up. We can try and improve little corners of it.

by nickjj 4y ago

lcw 4y ago

This take seems off to me specifically in you last paragraph. Whether it is MTX in the form of cosmetics or p2w mechanics both are predatory to people with addictions to games and kids. I feel like people are upset about p2w mechanics in the game but at the same time say "I'm fine with cosmetic mtx" which makes the whole argument read to me as you are upset that people want to use money to win and that means they shouldn't so you will virtue signal like I care about people spending $10k. If you as an individual don't like p2w that's fine. I get that, but let's stop acting like we care about the virtues of it when kids are spending $1k on worthless Marvel skins in Fortnite or Roblox and there is little uproar about it... We just don't like going into a game where a rich person can beat us, which is understandably frustrating. The other virtue outrageous is just disingenuous imho.

badkitty 4y ago
pdimitar 4y ago
Your take is even more off since you didn't see the blindingly obvious difference: having a choice in your game progression. - Cosmetics are a choice. They don't affect your progress in any way. - Bought character power is not a choice. You can happily play X amount of hours but at one point you'll hit a brick wall you can't overcome without money. And no don't tell me that "eventually you will", because elementary psychology says people get discouraged and quit if their effort isn't rewarded until a certain time threshold. That time is much less than what a F2P will allow you. I don't know if you deliberately missed the point or you can't see something that's easy to notice.
- lcw 4y ago
  What point are you making? I'm making a point that you can spend $100k on cosmetics in Roblox or Fortnite, and people do spend thousands of dollars over time almost unknowingly. I assume you would think this is bad right? If manipulative psychology is the issue at hand than quantitatively speaking if you spend 10k on cosmetics or 10k on p2w through manipulative psychology what is the ethical difference? If you think I'm arguing for a side you are mistaken. I just don't think people actually care about people who are victims of this. They just don't like p2w games, and that's fine. I'm just calling a spade a spade. Also I feel like you are going down a rabbit hole of being gated on a game from being top 10 on a leaderboard, because the story mode and making it to level 60 seem completely accessible with no money. This is kind of a crazy path to walk down especially for PC gamers, who seem to be the most outraged, where affluence is definitely an advantage even if the game isn't the one making the money off it. For instance, the difference between a refresh rate of 250hz vs 60hz on a competitive FPS game. Try and tell me there isn't an advantage between a $800 gaming rig vs a $10k gaming rig...
  - pdimitar 4y ago
    > I assume you would think this is bad right? Of course I agree with that. I was under the impression that we're not discussing whether addiction is bad -- it's widely known that it is. I was arguing that "Minecraft and Roblox and millions of other games feed off the weak minds of virtual cosmetic addicts" does not at all make the pay-to-win model of other games okay. Because it did seem like you went off on a whataboutism road. That the world is screwed up doesn't mean we have to give up. We can try and improve little corners of it.