Pay to Win? Please tread carefully, this game can be amazing

I was the first one to speak up against that display and I still think it's a bad idea as it takes most of the fun of getting loot unless you're a club member.

(Heh, the first time I saw your avatar here I was confused for a moment... 'Did I open Dredmor forums instead of Card Hunter?' )

 

I know, I did that when I saw the Galactic Hitchhiker avatar. It's kind of fun, actually.

 

BTW: It's lively now, sure. But, as stated in the rules, please do NOT bump your own threads.

 

While I play PS2 and enjoy it and personally do not believe its pay2win, people argue both sides regarding that game. LoL is the same as PS2 in my eyes but is generally regarded as not pay2win. So where each game falls on the p2w scale is an individual opinion. Would it help if the subscription bonus would show a small *closed* chest which you cant open without sub? Less in-your-face then seeing the actual item but also less enticing to sub (btw I dont mind the item, I dont even look at it anymore).

Edit: on the price - it's way too high, wouldnt even cross my mind for a second at that price. More reasonably you should price the sub at around or under $5. On the other hand it might be worth $10 once you have released and have tons of custom content, and practically doubling it then wouldnt go over well either. Quite a dilemma.

 

Since this topic is so highly discussed, I suppose another opinion couldn't hurt.

In every game since the dawn of mankind, I've picked up every single subscriber model program that has ever been offered at one point or another. I make a decision depending on what sort of boost they're going to give and stick with it for a variable amount of time.

Card Hunter's Club membership is a nice bonus that as soon as I read the details I picked up immediately. I did so because I value my free time very highly, and any time I spend playing a game I want to be earning the maximum potential return on investment (in this case, time spent relaxing).

getting a 33% and 25% bonus after every single battle is enough of a boost for me to want to spend a small amount ($5-10 at most) on a game that I plan on spending many hours a week playing. I think at some point, this boost is going to go to the wayside after I've earned "enough" items that I feel I can play with builds freely.

I don't consider this pay-2-win, as I'm still applying time to the game. Since in previous examples, some one who has the time to spend 5+ hours grinding away each day is going to have significantly more gear (and experience) with the game, I'd like to still think I'm able to compete with him on a mental level...but how do I bridge the Gear gap? Do I deserve to stand a chance vs him?

While in my example I could throw down some money and buy chests, that feels very pay to win. As you're buying power (albiet in a randomized fashion) on demand.

At least with the club membership you have to apply time in-game to work for it, even if the road to equality is paved with gear quantity imbalance.

 

Sadly this game is a bit Pay-2-Win. Hopefully the in your face "Hey look what you can get if you spend money!" will be reduced in time because it only serves as salt in the wounds.

This is a really good game, but I fear it's going to be burdened by the Pay-2-Win scheme unless something is changed.

 

Would you like to elaborate?

How it is more p2w than say League of Legends or World of Tanks? (two most succesfull f2p games in pc atm afaik)

Most succesfull f2p games have some ways to reward or speed up paying customer. Pay 2 win only steps up when non-paying customers simply don't have any way of getting same stuff as paying ones.

Then again I hear that Clash of Clans is really succesfull, and has nothing to do with fairness and basicly who pays most wins. Plenty of examples on PC also.

 

I very much share with you the preference of the Card Hunter Club option over the Buy Chest option, especially the 150-pizza guaranteed epic chests somehow feels wrong, like gambling. But then perception plays a big role here, because in reality the Card Hunter Club also involves you paying real money for random items. Which option is better pretty much depends on how many battles you play in a month, because for the price of one month subscription you could have gotten 10 items, 4 of which epic or better, level 1 to 18. For pure number of items the Card Hunter Club appears to be always better, who doesn't play 10 battles in a month? But after you finished the treasure hunt maps and quests, it would take a lot of battles before the Club earns you more than 4 epics.

 

Well it's simple really. World of Tanks for example is more of a pay-2-advance kind of system. I believe at one point they did have some better ammo you could purchase only for real money, but if I recall correctly they did away with that. Regardless you can purchase experience and better tanks, but you are still lined up with people with the same type of tanks. There's no real advantage.

I don't play league of legends, I play DoTa where there is no pay system outside of maybe cosmetic items? So I can't really comment on that.

With Cardhunter it's pay to win because you can still be the same level as someone else, but have better equipment because you either purchased the gold to obtain it from a shop, or you purchased chests which are guaranteed to give you a certain item based on rarity. Sure you don't pick what that item is, but it's still going to be something more quality than the guy who hasn't paid a thing. Take the example of World of Tanks. Your paying to advance further into the game, but your Super Tank Killer 3000 is still going up against other Super Tank Killer 3000's. In Cardhunter, you can be the same level as the other guy but have better gear.

 

Unless there is gear which strictly isn't available to free players(AFAIK, there isn't...correct me if I'm wrong), Card Hunter isn't P2W. I do think the exhaustion system is a bit extreme, though. I find that more annoying than people being able to buy chests and club memberships.

 

In theory Cardhunter system will work very similar to World of Tanks. In practice level is determined by (equipped) items and skill. So you will occasionally face opponents with better cards but lower skill. Which could even be considered to be the better option. It also isn't strictly tier based, so effect is harder to spot. (Might be bit weak comparison. LoL would actually be closer comparison, with runes and all)

Ofc if top ranking is what you're after, it will be p2w for very long time after the launch. Potentially forever if there isn't ranking decay or removal of inactive people.

 

I see CH the same way you see World of Tanks then. Sure you can get the good tank or items, but in CH after a game or two your ranking will jump up with other people who have similar experience/card balance so you're being matched up against people who are a real challenge to you. As you say, There's no real advantage.

 

Cardhunters system is nothing like World of Tanks, I'm....not really sure how you guys think that it is.

World of Tanks has you placed against people with the same kind of firepower.

Cardhunter has you placed against people with the same ranking or level, but firepower can be slanted to one side or the other. Player A can have access to more rares or Epic items as a result of spending more money. That's a fact, there's no opinion about it. You spend money, you get Rare and Epic gear faster.

It's....really simple I'm baffled that people argue it's somehow similar.

Regarding the access to gear, sure everyone has the ability to have the same items. But what this system brings in is the ability to access those Rare or Epic items quicker if you spend more money. Simply put....Pay-2-Win.

I should also add a solution to the problem rather than just state facts. I believe the best way to fix the system is to first remove the "Here's what you could have got if you were spending money!" I mean, sure the gear might not be the best, but it's really pushing the whole pay system.

Second thing would be to change up the chest system of spending money to get more loot. Maybe just get rid of it all together? Because that's the biggest problem with the Pay-2-Win scheme.

I understand developers want to make money. Why not work more towards cosmetic items or more content that doesn't give an unfair advantage to other players? Or perhaps just charge a one time fee for the game? I'd gladly spend 40 bucks or more for a quality built game. Heck I'd even throw in extra for some bonus content or DLC.

 

thought I was clear. Sorry I'll try again.

Totally a fact, you're right. Not a question at all.

The "Firepower" in Card Hunter is a combination of skilled play and card availability. Being able to purchase additional cards gives you a wider array of options and does give you the slanted firepower situation at your current ranking. This slanted firepower WILL matter for a few ranked games where your better cards should grant you a victory (unless you make mistakes or fail tactically) at which point your ranking should rise. Once you have risen to the higher rankings, the players you encounter will have a more equivalent chance of beating you. Once the ranking system has figured out where you should be within the ranking, you go back to winning roughly the same ratio of games as before you had the better cards.

There is no real advantage here, you've just purchased a bigger tank and are playing with people who also have bigger tanks, or are able to seriously compete against larger tanks with their smaller tanks.

Hopefully that's more clear.

 

I just joined the beta today, and the game is a blast - just the right amount of challenge IMO if you like a tough game as I do. I got as far as beating the demon portal.

Anyway, my comment here is that I like the Adventurer's Club incentive and its visibility. It seems to be a multiplier to the profits of time spent rather than a game changer, which for me makes it feel fair as regards free play. I don't find it discouraging at all, though I suspect I would not pay for it. I like the idea someone suggested of giving a free trial of the club for a few days.

That said, it is a difficult issue designing a CCG to both collect money and keep the players who don't want to pay micro-payments. I think a lot of players of this kind of game would prefer an up-front purchase similar to original Guild Wars. Perhaps it could be combined with a *small* annual sub to pay for the servers. But that's not the model you're going for, and hopefully what you're doing will work well for you. I'm not convinced cosmetic items are a real alternative for this sort of game.

 

It is bit iffy comparison in some parts. But idea is the same.

Take for example T9 tank that needs ~150k XP to get all the parts. Now paying costomer in WoT can either get modules instantly via free exp or has to play 33% less matches to get them (very rough estimation would be 20 hours without premium and 13 with). And that's just one tank.

Implement similar time differences into Cardhunter and you might come to consider that "faster" part not so significant.

Oh, and like said earlier in this thread, people have very different notions what is p2w and what isn't. 25%-50% boost to loot most certainly isn't in my books. Cash chest could potentially be, although if price is high enough it isn't that big deal. And will in theory even out over time.

 

It may be pay-to-get-items-quicker, but not P2W. P2W, to me, means that paying players have an unfair advantage over free players by having access to items, or whatever, that free players don't have access to, thus, allowing them to win more easily against said free players. In Card Hunter, a free player can get every piece of gear that a paying player can get, it just takes more time. Isn't that the only realistic way to do it? There has to be some incentive for people to wanna spend money, and in Card Hunter, one of those incentives is having the possibility, not even guarantee, that they'll get the epic/rare gear they want faster than they would from not paying.

I do agree with you about cosmetic items, though. The more cosmetic items, the better. If enough money can be made from cosmetics, then maybe they could remove the option to buy chests, like you said. I don't worry too much about people being able to buy chests, but I'd rather them be buying cosmetics instead.

The exhaustion system is what annoys me a bit. Replaying modules is a great way for free, and paying, members to get more gear. Obviously, if they're too lenient, then people wouldn't have as much incentive to pay, but I feel like it should be changed some. Either allow players to pay gold for more plays, or increase the plays from 1 a days to 2-3.

 

Sometimes it is the best. I've opened about 150 chests total (SP and MP), and twice I've seen legendary items in the club reward box. I'm not sure how often epics showed up there, but the chests themselves only gave me 3 epics (and no legendaries, of course).

Yeah, those epic chests are a much bigger issue than club rewards.

 

But why are they? Should I have a million dollars to spend and get all the items I could want. Let's assume I was able to get exactly the items I want. Now what? Now I'm playing with people who also have nearly all (if not all) the items they would want. I win the same amount of games I did before I had the additional cards, just at a higher power level.

How do I gain advantage in this?
How do you lose out because of this?
How does this change if I'm going up against someone who hasn't spent a dime but has been playing every day for the last year?
How do you even know who purchased items (other than cosmetic)?

I totally understand the impression that real money = bad and something that you can't or aren't willing to partake in. How are you negatively affected by other people spending money on it?