A broad P2W definition in law would paint premium stash tabs P2W

"

Destructodave a écrit :

But you are right. Most games nowadays release and generally hide various things behind paywalls to increase profits. It has became more and more acceptable over time. Some of the stuff that game companies do nowadays would not be anywhere near acceptable years ago. Times have changed, and this is just the gaming climate we live in now.

I do think more and more games have reached "P2W" status. I will say this. It doesnt bother me with F2p games. They have to monetize somehow. When it bothers me, is when you spend 60 bucks on a game and then have the same kind of microtransactions a F2p would have. Now that gaming practice, pisses me off. But a F2p game monetizing their game doesn't. You can choose to deal with it, partake in it, or just dont play it. I like PoE, I really dont care if stash pages are a form of P2W. Just by typical definition, they are an advantage/QoL/gameplay function hidden behind a paywall.

I mostly agree here, and how games monetize is the real elephant in the room. On one hand you have to feel for developers and studios. Games have been fixed priced at 49-59 for far too long industry standard wise. It's not realistic or sustainable.

Costs have gone up over the last 25+ years and AAA games especially have become large investments. In order to re-coup dlc, mtx, and the like have become a necessity. This has also caused major studios to partner with publishers to handle costs outside development, like marketing, customer service, and logistics. This has really turned the game industry, in a negative way, imo. EA, Activi$ion, Tencent, among others really leave something to be desired from a customer standpoint.

Tbh games should really retail for $99.99 or so, and that could help stem the tide of some of the more grimy parts of the gaming industry. I just dont know if that price point can survive in the marketplace. Either way something has to give, or we will see less desirable monetization, and live service games being released in various stages of "completion" in an escalating fashion.

"

DarthSki44 a écrit :

Well I suppose we will have to agree to disagree here.

I dont see how p2W in solo or single player exists, except to impact yourself, which again how can anyone else win or experience advantage, in that setting?

You can have your opinion. I just think its illogical. I mean by that measure Skyrim (or any other game) mods are p2w. It's just an awful measure, when there are real predatory, unethically monetized games out there. I'm not dying on the hill for single player games. If it's not obvious why that logic is flawed, you will never see it.

It's not worth the energy to debate further. We won't have common ground on this.

What the hell?

Comparing a single player offline game with a multiplayer game which is designed strictly around engaging with other players online.

I guess it's one of these brainlet "define your own reality" arguments.
You know, no game is actually pay to win because every game is single player if you think about it!

"

awright a écrit :

its like comparing brushing someones arm to rape, loot boxes are weighted gambling, out and out, aimed at kids, no different to lottery scratch cards, you get stash tabs for free, granted 4 is incredibly tight now with all the bloat since release, but they arent an actual requirement to play the game, and neither are mtx's, its convenience is all it is.

Premium tabs arent a requirement to get listed on the trade sites, you can manually make a forum post if you really wish to not spend a penny on the game.

Gambling is illegal in my state. Have to cross state lines, or go to an indian reservation to gamble in North Carolina.

It is only a matter of time before these things get regulated, and a whole agency dedicated to it. Why? Because there's a lot of money in it, and that is the only reason they need.

"

Kiss_Me_Quick a écrit :

What the hell?

Comparing a single player offline game with a multiplayer game which is designed strictly around engaging with other players online.

I guess it's one of these brainlet "define your own reality" arguments.
You know, no game is actually pay to win because every game is single player if you think about it!

Read through the posts and you will see we actually agree here.

P2W in single or solo play is impossible imo. Whale was saying that it was.

This was kind of a side argument. Everyone knows PoE is online multiplayer, albeit nearly 100% PvE.

"

DarthSki44 a écrit :

"

Kiss_Me_Quick a écrit :

What the hell?

Comparing a single player offline game with a multiplayer game which is designed strictly around engaging with other players online.

I guess it's one of these brainlet "define your own reality" arguments.
You know, no game is actually pay to win because every game is single player if you think about it!

Read through the posts and you will see we actually agree here.

P2W in single or solo play is impossible imo. Whale was saying that it was.

This was kind of a side argument. Everyone knows PoE is online multiplayer, albeit nearly 100% PvE.

Shit, my bad! I read only half of your post somewhy! Deepest of apologies! I agree that SSF can't be P2W( unless it has some racing Shagnaningnans).

"

DarthSki44 a écrit :

I mostly agree here, and how games monetize is the real elephant in the room. On one hand you have to feel for developers and studios. Games have been fixed priced at 49-59 for far too long industry standard wise. It's not realistic or sustainable.

Costs have gone up over the last 25+ years and AAA games especially have become large investments. In order to re-coup dlc, mtx, and the like have become a necessity. This has also caused major studios to partner with publishers to handle costs outside development, like marketing, customer service, and logistics. This has really turned the game industry, in a negative way, imo. EA, Activi$ion, Tencent, among others really leave something to be desired from a customer standpoint.

Tbh games should really retail for $99.99 or so, and that could help stem the tide of some of the more grimy parts of the gaming industry. I just dont know if that price point can survive in the marketplace. Either way something has to give, or we will see less desirable monetization, and live service games being released in various stages of "completion" in an escalating fashion.

More realistically, a broader spectrum of prices needs to be tolerable in the marketplace. Giant AAA hootinanies that take ten years to develop and cost untold bananatillions of dollars could go for a hundred or even a hundred-twenty (provideed the quality's there to back it up) while the indie scene working with a lot fewer resources making smaller (but often no less awesome) games can range from the regular sixty on down to five or less, depending on.

This gradient already exists to a degree in Steam, to the benefit of everybody. No other entertainment/creative industry I know of has absolutely standardized pricing like this, it's weird and unnatural and not really helpful.

To be fair, the EAs and Actifuzzions and Tencents and such are already there, already huge, and will never stop trying to push the industry into low-effort, high-dollar "active service" models because those companies are evil and exist purely to suck money out of wallets with as little benefit to the consumer as possible. Spectrum pricing your game to what you think it's worth won't get rid of evil bloodsucking publishers...but honestly, the way the AAA industry's going as of late just might. Watch it happen in ten years, I'm telling ya. They can't keep inflating the bubble like this and expecting increasingly malicious MTX systems to make up the difference.

Not that boy-who-cried-wolf "Stash tabs are PEE TWO DUBBLEYOO!!!" threads help. If you can't identify actual predatory MTX/monetization patterns when you see them, you're of no use to this debate. Honestly, the absolutely egregious prices Grinding Gear charges for its cosmetics (FIFTY FUCKING DOLLARS for one armor set? Really?) are far more consumer-unfriendly than premium stash tabs. But people are too hung up over their idiotically broad definitions of PEE TWO DUBBLEYOO to understand that, so here we are sixteen pages later with people still saying that not only is Grinding Gear evil incarnate for selling stash tabs, but so is anyone who's ever bought a stash tab.

Ugh

"

DarthSki44 a écrit :

P2W in single or solo play is impossible imo. Whale was saying that it was.

Wat. That whole side argument was you claiming that P2W is impossible in POE because it's a PvE environment. That's like saying that blizzard could sell gear for real money in WOW, as long as it's raiding gear and not pvp gear. That would not be P2W? My comparison may have been on thin ice but way closer to reality than the claim it originated from.

"

1453R a écrit :

PEE TWO

Sorry, I can't bring myself to read that nonsense.

What? You don't like being called on how whiny and ridiculous all the PEE TWO DUBBLEYOO arguments you keep throwing out are?

Tough cookies. Unless, of course, you're saying I can ignore you freely because you keep throwing out all that white-knighting junk.

"

LowBudget780 a écrit :

"

Rexeos a écrit :

I have played with and without tabs.


PoE is p2w.

Paid premium stash tabs will definitely give you an in-game advantage over someone using forum posts and that clunky procurement app to do trades. Anyone who says otherwise is delusional.

Actually I still used Acquisition even when I had premium tabs. Way easier to use do batch pricing and search (you can search account wide instead of just a single tab).

I dont trade anymore stopped in Gen 3 but I'm sure its still same.

"

LowBudget780 a écrit :

Like instead of just looking at a calendar to figure out the date, you pull out a starchart and spend 3 hours staring into the sky instead.

Calendars are P2W!! Boycott!!