Pay to Win - Any end in sight?

Soldato
Joined
20 Aug 2004
Posts
3,115
Location
Bournemouth
This is a discussion about the wonderful world of Pay to Win games, as they are commonly known. For those who arent familiar with them, its games that you either buy first or get for free, and with putting down some more money get access to all the best stuff straight away.
Now personally I can see why companies do this as they can keep releasing new content and get people to pay for them over and over again. But god does it annoy me.
I personally havent felt a rant necessary since yesterday as games like World of Tanks, the new online C&C, Tribes Ascend, and other such pay to win games are fun for a short while then you realise a few people who only want to play for a couple of hours will put down a load of money to be able to easily massacre all those people who prefer to work hard for their unlocks. But these games are easily avoided.
But what happened lately I hear you ask? Battlefield 3 followed suit! I mean what the hell possessed them to do this?! Put down a few quid and you have all the best perks, all the weapon unlocks etc. So now level one people can take on the best of the rest. This has completely destroyed the game in my eyes and I cant understand why its happened. People are happy to pay for their new mappacks as they come out, with new vehicles / weapons / unlockabes but they still saw the need to do this?! In my opinion its completely stupid and annoys a lot of people. Well me.
Anyone else wondering if this madness will ever end?
Next RTS game will probably have you playing with one unit and paying to unlock others!
 
i cant see why you have unlocks in the first place.

just make all the weapons available from the start and properly balanced.
 
The idea that you should get better weapons that someone just because you play a game more is stupid anyway, so it's the ranking system that's at fault here, not being able to pay for it.
 
id say pay to win is more world of tanks, paying to get weapons etc that are UNOBTAINABLE by unlocking/playing the game.

early unlocks are nothing to complain about.
 
Tribes Ascend and World of Tanks/Warplanes are free games so they're bound to have micro transactions just so they can bring in some dough and some of the easier to get starter guns are so OP in Tribes it doesn't matter.

I don't get why people dislike the new BF3 unlock payments. If you haven't unlocked everything by now and play it quite frequently you need to give up. It's good for people just getting the game as its been in the sale a lot recently and don't want to feel that everyone whose played it for 6 months have a big advantage.

The new C&C is a pile of crap.


No serious game has micro transactions that mean anything. Sure you can get instant 80s in WoW now but that games steadily becoming the biggest joke out there.
 
No serious game has micro transactions that mean anything. Sure you can get instant 80s in WoW now but that games steadily becoming the biggest joke out there.

see that's the problem what were serius games are slowly changing to be full of this crap, people are just upset that series they loved in the past are being ruined, and that potential great ideas are also being ruined.
 
I hate the whole unlocks and perks that have plagued modern games.

Nothing wrong with unlocks/perks in games if they're done correctly. It gives people a reason to play which is fun especially when playing in public servers where a lot of people are just retarded beyond measure.

see that's the problem what were serius games are slowly changing to be full of this crap, people are just upset that series they loved in the past are being ruined, and that potential great ideas are also being ruined.

The next proper C&C is already being worked on iirc and I'm hoping that it's going to be decent but I aint going to hold my breath because ever since Generals they've been utter horrid.
 
BF3 is not 'pay to win'.

If anything, it is crap gamers that will feel the need to pay for perks as they get pwned daily, but the irony is that they will still get pwned daily even with the perks.

It is just a form of milking money from crap BF gamers.
 
My opinion is that while it's not that much of an issue right now, developers/publishers? are pushing the way to making people think this is normal, until you see it in every game with bonuses that indeed are pay2win, or better yet Pay to benefit over others in the short term or pay to skip earning via gameplay.

I will say I'm not up to date on this whole BF3 Paid Unlocks but from what I read you can get -everything- and that means everything, while now it may not be so much of an issue, if games have this from release or something close to it, then it's bye bye to games of old.

You've seen how slowly they introduced microtransactions, people were up in arms at the though of the idea to begin with, slowly it's been modified and now you can get in game advantages whilst still minor, who's to say it won't stop and go even futher? You are damned naive if you think devs/pubs aren't just in it for the money and to milk every possibility, not all of them but the majority of the big hitters don't care about you as an individual. I totally expect to see microtransactions, which by the by aren't micro anymore; turn into something we all are used to, expect and for some reason are happy throwing money at like it's the right thing.

If you look at what you'd get for spending £8.99 (example) a month and what you get for spending £8.99 on ingame currency/game points a month , it's hard to see which ends up being a better deal.
It also removes the time investment in some cases, or simply cheapens what was my experience over 120/140 hours to a few minutes for example.

Don't some F2P Games now charge absurd amount now? Tribes Ascend, a competitive game where you had all weapons, all classes, everything unlocked so that people who wanted to play a role didn't have to grind it out?
I haven't played it for a long time but I didn't like it because of that, I couldn't just go play heavy defense or turret farmer, I don't know if it's changed but it was all unlocks then.
Next I read it's like $49.99 to get the biggest in game gold package which won't even net you everything? That should be the price of the WHOLE game but you have to spend more. Correct me if I'm wrong but I simply don't like where it's all going to head. Money money money for everything.



Nothing wrong with unlocks/perks in games if they're done correctly. It gives people a reason to play which is fun especially when playing in public servers where a lot of people are just retarded beyond measure.

If it wasn't enough that playing the game should be the reason you play, people now need unlocks and perks? Something I've noticed in the newer generation of gamers really find attracting and I just see it as useless fluff that's distracting from the main purpose, to play a competitive online game where everyone is equal the moment you hit play.

But, don't mistake in thinking I hate them, I play lots of games where you "level up/improve your character" but usually, there are mechanics in place to keep you fighting and battling level equivelent content/players, within reason.

BF3 is not 'pay to win'.

If anything, it is crap gamers that will feel the need to pay for perks as they get pwned daily, but the irony is that they will still get pwned daily even with the perks.

It is just a form of milking money from crap BF gamers.

Short sighted opinion ahoy! Do you really believe that?
What about the good players who've just bought it, are they crap for wanting to buy it?

I wouldn't say I'm crap but just because (I won't, ever) I want to buy it it automatically profiles me as a bad player.
 
Last edited:
If they had tf2's system i wouldn't be bothered as everything in that can be found just buy playing the game and it is all very balanced. However i agree some games like the new blacklight have a stupid pay2win system.
 
I'm really enjoying Tribes Ascend, I don't think it's pay to win as if you suck you suck, okay you might have a bit more armour or quicker health regen but if you can aim for toffee you ain't gonna get very far.

I bought the cheap gold pack so that I get bonus xp in each match, was only 10 bucks and I'm playing this game lots and have paid nothing... I'll probably pick up another gold pack in the future as I'm showing my support for a game I want to be successful as I miss Tribes 2 so much but moreover I don't have the time to grind out the XP. For people who have commitments, work etc. being able to unlock a few bits and pieces that I want to play with for a few quid works for me.
 
I'm really enjoying Tribes Ascend, I don't think it's pay to win as if you suck you suck, okay you might have a bit more armour or quicker health regen but if you can aim for toffee you ain't gonna get very far.

Does that mean if you are a good player it's an advantage multiplied?
I think that's what you said, pretty much?

You cannot use bad players as excuse for it being not advantageous, also, if there isn't an advantage what exactly are you spending money on? Nothing?
 
To be fair it is just mirroring society in general - people pay money to gain an advantage, whether that be racing teams investing in technology, Jane buying the best football boots for lil' Johnny, Chantelle getting her nails/hair/tan etc done before going out on the pull etc. Of course, if you've got rubbish engineers, little talent for football or are a minger, it does not guarentee you success, just as the best gamers will rise to the top irrespective of whether they've bought perks etc.

As a rule I don't like unlocks in multiplayer but then I don't play much multiplayer (other than Quakeworld) and indeed I ignoring achievements in SP games as well.
 
Does that mean if you are a good player it's an advantage multiplied?
I think that's what you said, pretty much?

You cannot use bad players as excuse for it being not advantageous, also, if there isn't an advantage what exactly are you spending money on? Nothing?

I'm spending the money on reducing the grind, the actual advantages are quite small (extra grenade, or +4 ammo to the technician clip for example) but there are some classes or alt. weapons which are only available by unlocking with XP or gold which I don't think is a problem as they are available to all.

I'm in my 30s, am married, work full time and am studying for a degree so don't have much free time to game these days, I've bought couple of bits I wanted to play with but it hasn't made me the best player on the server just because of that, I'm usually mid-table-ish, sometimes high up but it depends on the team more than anything and having a good balance of players but I don't really care about being top of the leaderboard, it's about the fun of playing not just winning.

If you aren't interested in paying that's fine and if you play with all the other stuff for long enough you'll be able to have the same experience, in Tribes the only gold only items are skins which will cost real money but is entirely aesthetic so not really a necessity for most people.

I do see and agree with a number of the points made previously about balance and fair play and not every company is going to get this stuff right but the market is changing and Free to Play seems to be becoming a successful model for many developers.

LOTRO saw a massive increase in players and revenue in going down that route and if you're a fan of the games that have that model you must want the company to be successful so they keep producing content for years to come.

If you could find an open branch of GAME on the highstreet and wanted to buy a top 360 of PS3 game you are looking at 40 to 45 quid for something like COD and then the map packs and all that jazz so it quickly gets very expensive, plus the 40 a year for gold membership on the 360. So if I sink £30 into Tribes Ascend what's the problem? I would have bought the game for that anyway and this way I can try it out with no fee or commitment and just enjoy myself.
 
Regarding Tribes Ascend being pay to win, I don't see the problem with the model or any micro-transaction model for that matter.

I'm sure the majority of people who have played the game and enjoyed it have purchased stuff anyway, It's the polite thing to do, it's how the model is supposed to work.

Even with the cheapest gold pack, that's more than enough to unlock the class of your choice with all the unlocks for it, plus more to spare.

Overall, if your not willing to support the developers, and won't pay for whatever reason, I guess it can be frustrating having to spend hours gathering the XP to unlock a single weapon.

But looking from HiRez's point of view, this model was the way to go. These type of shooters are much in demand by a hardcore few, yet the more casual FPS players tend to not like the steep learning curve and sheer amount of skill, coordination that goes into it.

A retail £20/30 simply wouldn't work for this game. It wouldn't sell as it's not targeted at a wide enough audience.
 
Regarding Tribes Ascend being pay to win, I don't see the problem with the model or any micro-transaction model for that matter.

I'm sure the majority of people who have played the game and enjoyed it have purchased stuff anyway, It's the polite thing to do, it's how the model is supposed to work.

Even with the cheapest gold pack, that's more than enough to unlock the class of your choice with all the unlocks for it, plus more to spare.

Overall, if your not willing to support the developers, and won't pay for whatever reason, I guess it can be frustrating having to spend hours gathering the XP to unlock a single weapon.

But looking from HiRez's point of view, this model was the way to go. These type of shooters are much in demand by a hardcore few, yet the more casual FPS players tend to not like the steep learning curve and sheer amount of skill, coordination that goes into it.

A retail £20/30 simply wouldn't work for this game. It wouldn't sell as it's not targeted at a wide enough audience.

This tbh.

You can't have the Free to Play model with out any way to for the developer claim back the expense of creating the game.
 
The BF2 unlock system was really addictive and it could take you a while to reach a rank and feel like you achieved something. Now it's just like oh, I ranked up 5 times today...cool.
 
It's hard to argue for either side right now, I'm sure the future will bring more fodder for both sides.

As a long time gamer who's dipped his foot in so many games/genres I do see benefits and negatives. For one, I can play/try a game almost at a whole for free, so I don't have to spend £25-35 on something I might play for a month then get bored of (BF3).

I can't help but feel this is simply a foot-in to something worse.

Even with the cheapest gold pack, that's more than enough to unlock the class of your choice with all the unlocks for it, plus more to spare.

The class of your choice? Instead of Tribes 1/2/V where, you know, have everything up front. (Although yes, you had to pay for the game to play at all)
How much does it cost to be able to play anything you want? Like the old games.
 
Last edited:
The class of your choice? Instead of Tribes 1/2/V where, you know, have everything up front. (Although yes, you had to pay for the game to play at all)
How much does it cost to be able to play anything you want? Like the old games.

'Everything you want' varies from person to person. Personally for me, £20 + a few hours of play did it. I got what I wanted with gold, I've not spent my XP as much, meaning I have 150,000 stacked up to buy whatever takes my fancy.

The main point I'm trying to get across is, if Tribes Ascend had a £20 or 30 price tag it would fail. So from the developers point of view they had no choice but to go free to play.

Tribes is too under the radar to sell well, it's learning curve is too steep, the skill ceiling too high, the community perhaps a little too elitist and most of all totally different to these modern day FPS titles such as COD and BF (which everyone seems to play and love).
 
Back
Top Bottom