Shifting to Pay-To-Win

Mburn7
Mburn7 Posts: 3,427 Chairperson of the Boards
in MtGPQ General Discussion
Lately I've been seeing a lot of forum time devoted to discussing adding more real-money paid options in game.
People are asking for everything from cash-for-rares to more currency bundles to an outright VIP monthly subscription.

My question is:  Why?  When did pay-to-win become a desirable feature in a game?  I have long said the best feature of MTGPQ is its lack of real purchasing advantage, all money does is give you access to things faster.  You can't buy a guaranteed mythic, just more chances to get the one you want.  Drop rates are equally horrible for everyone.  Events play the same for everyone.

Traditionally I see backlash AGAINST adding more microtransactions to a game, not support for it.
Am I way off base on this?  Where is this coming from?  I say keep your money and just enjoy the game.
«1

Comments

  • Krishna
    Krishna Posts: 205 Tile Toppler
    As far as I can tell, all the money made by this game comes only from in-app purchases since there are no ads or videos to watch. That being said, I understand the emphasis on creating more options and different pay scales for people to spend money in-game. I feel fortunate that Ive already been playing for a while and have a decent card collection. Every now and again i'll spend a little but I never feel that I have to. but for new players that dont want to spend money, its got to be really difficult. I've faced off against whales and can usually hold my own so again I dont mind so much, and know that its keeping this game afloat.

    like you said, the p2p option just gets cards and PWs to players faster. hopefully there does not come a time where paying players get advantages that free players will never get. 
  • DumasAG
    DumasAG Posts: 719 Critical Contributor
    I understand the argument here, but I think the recent calls for things, particularly the subscription, is more a case of realism than a desire to increase P2P functions of the game. A trend first noticed was a decrease in rewards, and increase in the amount of new cards coming out, and a (slight) increase in cost of newest packs. Most people have felt a little strapped for resources.

    Rather than fight against the tide to demand things return to the way they were, much less become more F2P, I think people are saying, "IF we have to pay some amount to keep the game moving forward, how about we pay in these ways and stop the choke on resources?" 

    As an added benefit, if the crowd hovering between P2P and F2P pony up a little extra money, in theory that would allow for the game to become friendlier to F2P (and tangentially, I would certainly spend MORE if I was forced to spend LESS). That's perfect-world thinking, of course. In all likelihood, austerity will only ever continue no matter who starts paying more.
  • andrewvanmarle
    andrewvanmarle Posts: 978 Critical Contributor
    There is a difference between pay to win and pay to advance (a bit quicker)

    now buying specific mythics is kinda pay to win, but to be honest I'm'too tempted to resist.

    the subscription idea is a good one i think: you 'd get stuff quicker and maybe more, but it's'still the same game for everyone.

    and I think that having a regular base of income is good for the health of the game and will make the marketing houds of d3go look at other stuff than trying to squeeze another penny from us.
  • Quantius
    Quantius Posts: 228 Tile Toppler
    Having grown up with TCG's, there's always been an expectation of paying to play — which can be exacerbated into P2W when certain things are either impossible or take prohibitively long to realistically acquire to keep up with paying players. I think MTGPQ dances on that edge for sure, and if they actually rotates sets as fast a paper magic does, then with it's current drop rates it would absolutely become P2W as there would be no way to keep up.

    That said, I am a paying player, I like to support products that I enjoy, but I always worry about F2P games because it can be tempting to chase that fast whale money instead of fostering a long term community and making the game accessible for new people to come in. Eventually, the fast money dries up as whales move on, and the response is to make things increasingly expensive/harder to get which just pushes people away.
  • Indymon
    Indymon Posts: 35 Just Dropped In
    “Keep your money and enjoy the game.” = No game to play. 

    The game is created and supported by a business that needs money to do so (and to make a profit, without which there is no incentive to support the game to begin with). The game must have monetary components or it won’t exist. Period. Full stop. Recent discussions have been focused on providing feedback about what monetary options would work out best for the player base. That’s a wonderful way to frame that discussion (rather than rote complaints). Many companies pay significant money to have that sort of civil information provided. 

    There has been some great feedback given lately (thinking of @bken1234 in particular but others as well). I hope the business side listens so we can have this game for a long time. 
  • Mainloop25
    Mainloop25 Posts: 1,959 Chairperson of the Boards
    If $10/month got you something like, say 200 crystals, 150 jewels, and a random new rare a month, I don't see that breaking the game or pushing it into P2W. I can see a bunch of people going for it, I might even go for that. 
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    Mainloop25 said:
    If $10/month got you something like, say 200 crystals, 150 jewels, and a random new rare a month, I don't see that breaking the game or pushing it into P2W. I can see a bunch of people going for it, I might even go for that. 
    in our current mtgpq environment, that amount of additional currency would give the monthly subscribers a significant edge on f2p and selective purchase players.  That divide would only increase in the following months.

    Monthly costs are the reason I never played World of Warcraft and similar MMOs.  I'll spend money when I want to spend money, not out of an obligation to remain competitive.
  • James13
    James13 Posts: 665 Critical Contributor
    I don't like the subscription idea.  Small transactions for optional content I could be on board with.  Foils or alternate art seem like low hanging fruit.
  • bk1234
    bk1234 Posts: 2,924 Chairperson of the Boards
    The day ads are introduced is the day I will leave this game -- I have no problem paying microtransactions or a subscription to prevent that. 

    I don't feel this makes me supportive of P2W, rather it makes me an investor in one of my main sources of entertainment. 

    I pay for Spotify to get extra benefits and be ad-free, no reason why I wouldn't do the same here. 
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    bken1234 said:
    The day ads are introduced is the day I will leave this game -- I have no problem paying microtransactions or a subscription to prevent that. 

    I don't feel this makes me supportive of P2W, rather it makes me an investor in one of my main sources of entertainment. 

    I pay for Spotify to get extra benefits and be ad-free, no reason why I wouldn't do the same here. 
    what if the ads were optional and came with bonuses if you watched them?  (say an extra 15 crystals).

    One of the games I play, after every match you get your earned rewards or you can get 2x the rewards if you watch a 10 second ad.  To me, the perks of the generous additional reward outweigh the short time I have to watch an ad.

    But yeah, mandatory ads would ruin this game
  • Mainloop25
    Mainloop25 Posts: 1,959 Chairperson of the Boards
    FindingHeart8 said:
    Mainloop25 said:
    If $10/month got you something like, say 200 crystals, 150 jewels, and a random new rare a month, I don't see that breaking the game or pushing it into P2W. I can see a bunch of people going for it, I might even go for that. 
    in our current mtgpq environment, that amount of additional currency would give the monthly subscribers a significant edge on f2p and selective purchase players.  That divide would only increase in the following months.

    Monthly costs are the reason I never played World of Warcraft and similar MMOs.  I'll spend money when I want to spend money, not out of an obligation to remain competitive.

    Ok? As it should? What's the difference between doing that and just buying those things on your own once a month? The only difference is giving the devs a more stable source of revenue. 
  • span_argoman
    span_argoman Posts: 751 Critical Contributor
    edited April 2018
    As a mostly F2P player who enjoyed the game for a long period being purely F2P, I'm not too keen on the proposed subscription idea for selfish reasons. 

    For those who are saying that getting stuff a bit faster than others doesn't hurt anyone, consider that some people have voiced concerns over newer players never being able to catch up to the elite players because elite players are earning rewards faster than anyone else.

    A Platinum player this week earns 315 Crystals playing all events except TotP. Being in a top 25 coalition would add 50 Crystals (16%) to that, and being top 50 in individual ranking for RtO would add 100 Crystals (32%) to that. These are the gaps people are talking about that newer players will have trouble closing with a lesser card collection. Elite players earn more resources regularly and hence will continue to have a better collection than newer players.

    The only difference for this discussion is to swap elite for paying and newer for non-paying. Are we okay with paying players having a better edge over non-paying players than they have now? I say better cause there are already means to spend money in the game to improve one's competitive edge, so to get people to spend more the new options have to be better. Paying to earn X% more Crystals from events as some people have proposed is exactly one of those options.

    This also means that paying elite players would be earning more resources than any other group in the game. While one cannot fault these players who put in both the effort and the money (though also having the good fortune of being able to build a strong enough collection earlier than others), it just means there will be a greater disparity within the community.

    Some people are adamant that disparities don't matter in game communities. I think as an analogy to a new player joining the game and wanting to be competitive, less people are gonna be interested in a marathon than involves running up a mountain than one running on hilly terrain. Sure the view will be great from the mountain top, but only if you can get there. And a game community is always better off if it's able to constantly attract new players and grow.

    I feel obliged to put a disclaimer saying that I am not like some crusader against disparity within games. There has to be disparities to incentivise certain behaviours. Incentivising playing the game is understandable (Progression rewards), incentivising being passionate about the game is understandable (Competition & Coalition rewards), and incentivising paying for the game is understandable (in-game items in exchange for money).

    But as with many other things, I believe there has to be a degree of moderation to the disparity as it will affect the experience of the various groups within the game, whether some people want to believe it or not. I can't say (and never will be able to unless I become omniscient) what degree of disparity is ideal, but I think it is a point of consideration that people dismissing its significance might want to think more about.

    That said, I do understand that the game has to make money to keep running. If these options do come around, hopefully they do help make sufficient money for the developers. Because I'm fairly sure there will be F2P players who will stop playing the game when they realise that they are disadvantaged on building their collection on two fronts. Better options for paying players will always have their pros and cons.


    DumasAG said:
    I understand the argument here, but I think the recent calls for things, particularly the subscription, is more a case of realism than a desire to increase P2P functions of the game. A trend first noticed was a decrease in rewards, and increase in the amount of new cards coming out, and a (slight) increase in cost of newest packs. Most people have felt a little strapped for resources.

    Rather than fight against the tide to demand things return to the way they were, much less become more F2P, I think people are saying, "IF we have to pay some amount to keep the game moving forward, how about we pay in these ways and stop the choke on resources?" 

    As an added benefit, if the crowd hovering between P2P and F2P pony up a little extra money, in theory that would allow for the game to become friendlier to F2P (and tangentially, I would certainly spend MORE if I was forced to spend LESS). That's perfect-world thinking, of course. In all likelihood, austerity will only ever continue no matter who starts paying more.
    Erm, there was no decrease in resources. The crunch comes from having all the new planeswalkers being available for purchase in rapid succession. It's 2,895 Crystals for H1, H2, J3, Angrath and Vraska over 1.5 months.
  • Bil
    Bil Posts: 831 Critical Contributor
       I do not like the idea of the VIP stuff ...  Its more likely to create frustration among players than anything else. Non VIP will claim against pay to win and VIP are likely to pay 10 bucks and get nothing from them (i already hate getting dupes ... But if i just payed 10 bucks for them it makes it worse IMO)
      Another way to bring regular incomes to the game would be to apply more decent prices for bundles or crystals. Paying 40 bucks for a card that will remain 6 months in standard is quite expensive.
       I occasionally invest in mythic bundles but i always have the feeling that I'm paying too much for a single card and a bunch of currencies ... Which i accept in the end because its a way to support a game i enjoy playing.
      As far as i'm concerned i'm likely to invest when a deal looks good ... But deals (almost) never look good in this game ...

      Allow players to pay for targeted cards, offer orb bundles that include discounts on booster crafting, offer real money packs with higher droprates, apply decent prices ... there are plenty of things that would look appealing for players that are willing to pay for the game but do not want to get ripped of.

    100 players inverting 20 bucks on a bundle brings more money to the game than 20 "hardcore players" inverting 40 bucks for it ...
  • Sirchombli
    Sirchombli Posts: 322 Mover and Shaker
    span_argoman said:
    Erm, there was no decrease in resources. The crunch comes from having all the new planeswalkers being available for purchase in rapid succession. It's 2,895 Crystals for H1, H2, J3, Angrath and Vraska over 1.5 months.
    Erm... Are you still getting rares from new events ? How about 160 jewels with an exclusive bundle? Didn't think so. As another mostly f2p, long time player, we're fine. I can play competitively without a single new card . I'm still getting cards at a far slower rate than usual .Plus, I didn't get a chance to save for rix because it came out the day after the last xln bundle left the vault . The only thing that has remained constant in the current environment is that there are always events that have entry fees and there aren't any rewards that involve the new set . i don't know what you call that, but I call that a decrease in resources. It's not even a push to spend more money. I've locked up my wallet because of it and it's going to take something spectacular to change that. 
  • Laeuftbeidir
    Laeuftbeidir Posts: 1,841 Chairperson of the Boards
    I really, really don't like subscriptions. A few bugs here and there wouldn't hurt me - but for me, personally, the day I consider subscribing to any game, is the day I leave it for good.

    As alternative, I like what they did when booster crafting was introduced :a slight, but mentionable discount for crafting (10%), as a bonus to every purchase. Combined with smaller sales like the last origins one, I would be tempted, without the feeling the game would enforce me to pay.
  • Aeroplane
    Aeroplane Posts: 314 Mover and Shaker
    I'm surprised they don't sell pink stones straight up. Once you have filled your set with all the commons to rares there isn't much incentive to splurge on premium boosters to go for the elusive masterpieces and mythics. They could  even have an option of when you attain all commons to rares pinkies become available for purchase. It could be a win win.
  • Gunmix25
    Gunmix25 Posts: 1,442 Chairperson of the Boards
    Aeroplane said:
    I'm surprised they don't sell pink stones straight up. Once you have filled your set with all the commons to rares there isn't much incentive to splurge on premium boosters to go for the elusive masterpieces and mythics. They could  even have an option of when you attain all commons to rares pinkies become available for purchase. It could be a win win.
    A very 1 sided win win. Pinks should never be for sale outright. In a 1 time bundles in small amounts sure, but never outright. 
  • bk1234
    bk1234 Posts: 2,924 Chairperson of the Boards
    Bil said:
       
       I occasionally invest in mythic bundles but i always have the feeling that I'm paying too much for a single card and a bunch of currencies ... Which i accept in the end because its a way to support a game i enjoy playing.


    This is an interesting point. I feel mythics are overpriced as well. I thought the $19.99 deal for the Dryad was really good and appropriately priced. I think paying more for PW is appropriate as well. I am happy to see a shift on other things and hope it is indicative of what we will see in the future. 
  • Bil
    Bil Posts: 831 Critical Contributor
    edited April 2018
       That was a seducing deal indeed. If i were interested in the cards i would have bought it without any doubt. 
       If the exclusives were offered in bundles like this one i'm pretty sure they could sell a lot of them. I would have bought most of them.
  • span_argoman
    span_argoman Posts: 751 Critical Contributor
    Sirchombli said:
    Erm... Are you still getting rares from new events ? How about 160 jewels with an exclusive bundle? Didn't think so. As another mostly f2p, long time player, we're fine. I can play competitively without a single new card . I'm still getting cards at a far slower rate than usual .Plus, I didn't get a chance to save for rix because it came out the day after the last xln bundle left the vault . The only thing that has remained constant in the current environment is that there are always events that have entry fees and there aren't any rewards that involve the new set . i don't know what you call that, but I call that a decrease in resources. It's not even a push to spend more money. I've locked up my wallet because of it and it's going to take something spectacular to change that. 
    I must admit I did not notice that exclusive bundles now pack less Jewels since I don't spend often enough on the game to notice what goes into a paid bundle and what doesn't.

    I have indeed noticed that we are no longer getting guaranteed Rares. I have also noticed that we are getting a lot more booster packs from rewards than before. So how does that balance out? Depends on how lucky one is I guess.

    And yeah BoFT being the only event awarding RIX packs as it is the only RIX event is a bother. One no longer can bank on participation in events helping them to fill out their collection in the latest set.

Categories