Pay to edit your character. This game is $70.(hexbear.net)

posted 11 months ago

Yuritopiaposadism [none/use name]@hexbear.net

games@hexbear.net

94 commentshide report

Sort:

Hot Top Controversial New Old

You are viewing a single thread.

View all comments View context

[ - ]

CarmineCatboy2 [he/him]@hexbear.net

7 points

11 months ago

You mentioned that it’s not a big deal to have pay-2-win in a single player game.

You misunderstand.

This isn’t your average pay2win situation where you can _totally earn your way to the important stuff. This is as if the Publisher told the Development team to put the cheapest healing potions from the first shop in the village ALSO for sale on the RMT shop. It’s in bad taste, it’s exploitative, but it’s also hilariously irrational all things considered.

The reason why this became a PR loss is because they also removed the Start New Game button after your begin the game. So that lead to a belief that you gotta buy Art of Metamorphosis for 1,99. All in all it leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouths in the pettiest, least lucrative way possible.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net

5 points

11 months ago

No, I understand just fine. Your reply confirms what I know. It’s pay-2-win stuff. What you are saying is the usual pay-2-win scenario. Convenience items, usually trivial ones, and other currencies that are harder to obtain to get advantages in the cash shop. All earnable, albeit some rarer ones more slowly, in-game. It’s your average mobile game microtransaction slop.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

CarmineCatboy2 [he/him]@hexbear.net

4 points

11 months ago

What you are saying is the usual pay-2-win scenario.

Not at all. The usual pay2win scenario involves two things. First you actually get something. Second, that something takes a wild amount of time to acquire through normal means. When I said ‘what if the first, shittiest health potion was also on a cash shop for some reason’ I was not exaggerating in any way.

Cash shops have been normalized in an infinite number of ways. There are entire games built around selling cosmetic skins or characters. Capcom has consistently chosen the worst of all worlds with every single one of their games, selling nigh useless things that (rightfully) draw people’s ire.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net

4 points

11 months ago

I reject your second criteria outright. It is ridiculous. If you can pay to get something that gives you an advantage it is pay-2-win. Even if that thing is attainable fairly easily in the game. In the case of this game, there are items, that are rare that are sold. So even by your own criteria this is pay-2-win. By mine, it is pay-2-win. It is pay-2-win.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

worlds_okayest_mech_pilot [he/him]@hexbear.net

2 points

11 months ago

I think this definition is different from the usual definition of pay-2-win. The way I’ve always seen it described, “pay-2-win” refers to a micro/macro transaction that more or less renders the general content meaningless. So in an 80-hour long game, it would give you the items and gear that would allow you to skip the first 75 hours of it. Persona 5 is a decent example, allowing you to summon level 80+ personas from the very start of the game (well, as soon as you unlock above-level fusions).

The microtransactions in Dragon’s Dogma 2 give you an advantage, certainly, and are a scummy practice by out of touch Capcom executives. But in my experience, your definition of pay-2-win is not the common one. That’s why people here agree with your points but are confused about your conclusion

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net

1 point

11 months ago

The way you’ve just described pay-2-win is literally the first time I’ve ever heard it described as such in 40 years of my life.

Either way, this a big movement of the goalposts. You are narrowly defining the term in such a way that so few games would qualify. Hell, Genshin Impact wouldn’t even qualify by your definition (but is still pay-2-win by my definition). Sure you can spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on new characters and weapons but you’d still need to DO the content. The only thing that would count is things like level skips you can buy in WoW, and yet the pushback from WoW players is that this is not pay-2-win because just getting to the endgame isn’t “winning”. So, I reject your definition as being a commonly accepted one because in the MMO community (a community of MILLIONS of players) it is a constant struggle in these discussions due to people literally rejecting that definition.

If I’m being honest, and I don’t mean this in an insulting way at all, I do not believe you’ve really considered this issue deeply before in the past. I think your definition and defense of the game is very “vibes”-based. And, look, that’s okay. Most people aren’t borderline obsessive over stuff like this and just live their lives, which is fine and normal. But coming to the defense of a game because you have some outlandish definition of a term that I think most people are somewhat settled on is a bold move.

I think ultimately there are two commonly accepted ways people see as pay-2 win:

Cash shop that gives you any advantage in the game at all. (Most who accept this are still fine with cosmetic-only cash shop items.) This is my stance, of course.

Cash shop items that gives you a competitive advantage that you otherwise could not easily obtain through gameplay (or is completely locked behind the cash shop entirely).

I have assumed this entire time you were of the latter crew. I did not expect to see a definition of pay-2-win that not only have I never heard of but seems so outside the normal discourse I’ve never even considered it before right this moment.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

worlds_okayest_mech_pilot [he/him]@hexbear.net

2 points

11 months ago

If I’m being honest, and I don’t mean this in an insulting way at all, I do not believe you’ve really considered this issue deeply before in the past. I think your definition and defense of the game is very “vibes”-based. And, look, that’s okay. Most people aren’t borderline obsessive over stuff like this and just live their lives, which is fine and normal. But coming to the defense of a game because you have some outlandish definition of a term that I think most people are somewhat settled on is a bold move.

Okay, I’m really not a fan of your tone, nor your insinuation that I am “borderline obsessive” about the game in a way that is not “fine or normal”. I respect your experience and what you have previously seen of pay-2-win discourse. I admit it was wrong of me to use the term “usual definition”. It was not my intention to imply that my experience is the objectively correct one, nor to demean any different takes on the issue. I merely intended to offer the perspective I have personally seen online about pay-2-win mechanics, even if it was a perspective you have not seen before. The internet is full of gaming discourse, and it is only natural that many definitions and descriptions exist.

That being said, I certainly do not deserve the way you have worded your reply to me. I would have loved to discuss the matter further if you had simply rejected my definition and offered more of your own perspective. Your comment comes across as needlessly hostile, describing my honest perspective as some sort of freakish screed by an overly-obsessive gamer.

Like, “literally the first time I’ve ever heard it described as such in 40 years of my life”? “Most people aren’t borderline obsessive over stuff like this”? “…you have some outlandish definition”? “…I think most people are somewhat settled on is a bold move”? “not only have I never heard of but seems so outside the normal discourse I’ve never even considered it”?

Where do you get off typing in such an inordinate, degrading tone to a comrade on this website? Over a simple video game discussion? Type like this all you want to Reddit libs, but I certainly don’t appreciate it here. The degree that you have gone to in order to thoroughly trash my perspective in the span of a single reply is beyond the pale. If you wanted to reply, you should have stuck with your first paragraph, which is much more reasonable, and has the MMO perspective that I personally did not consider. If my original comment came across as smug or rude, I promise you it was unintended, and would have expressed myself more clearly if you had said so. But I will certainly not discuss this with you now.

Next time, if you feel the need to type: “I don’t mean this in an insulting way at all”, think about rewriting your comment.

permalink

report

parent

Show more comments