I was in Vegas when I was a kid and took a dollar and put it into a slot machine when my parents left me alone for a second. I won $20 and the casino wouldn't honor it because I was a child. But a child in today's world I could easily gamble money away on loot boxes.
@@levigoldson4242 Think your heavily over simplfying it. Those are real world transactions. You know what you get, you can feel and see it, and u can resell it later if u decide u dont want said thing. But with games like diablo immortal, opening lootboxes where u get shit 99% of the time what u cant do anything with that has no real value or whats so ever. If i open a pack of pokemon cards i know i can get shit or hit the jackpot. Its dishonest that things like trasding cards and gum machines get compared to lootboxes while they are not alike at all expect the randomness
@@levigoldson4242 Whether it's more or less "like casino gambling" is irrelevant. These companies literally hire psychologists to help them design systems to manipulate people into spending money by exploiting their base impulses. Aggressively. Another major difference is that you didn't have a toy machine for in your living room that you otherwise messed with for hours at a time. You didn't have the ease of access or the ridiculous amounts of exposure that comes from having a predatory shop in an online video game that people generally dedicate hours of their life to play. There is absolutely ZERO need for these kinds of systems outside of exploiting and taking advantage of people. Period. Why people defend the practice is a mystery for the ages, why in the hell would people opt for an experience that is intentionally made worse to extort you out of money, when the alternative is getting the entire, optimal experience, for a ridiculously lower price up front? I've said this before and I'll say it again. If movie directors and producers started charging different prices for different endings to a movie and the experience you got as a paying viewer was dictated by the price you paid to watch the movie, people would be fucking furious.
For me pay to win is hugely detrimental to video games, for example look at the stuff EA tried to pull with Battlefront 2. They made what could of been a great game, but then ruined it with pay to win mechanics and loot boxes. Then their more recent effort with bf2042, they wanted a bf game that they could monetize more, so it was designed to be a BR with specialists. They have pretty much destroyed the bf franchise now by trying to make into something it shouldn't of been all for profit. Imo when you design your games to make money or are adding features in just for the sole purpose of making money, it makes it worse or possibly ruins it in some worst case scenarios.
And that's where the hard part sort of lays and when we understand why companies do it. They are, at the end of the day, a business; the goal is to make money. However, it can go either way with what i'm about to say. Either you make a game and load it full of microtransactions and it does well, so that the developers don't even need to worry about the game itself. But on the other hand, Battlefront 2 is a fantastic example. When they took away that mechanic and made it purely cosmetic, then shifted focus onto the game and started adding all of this content, over time, it has very much become one of EA and DICE's most successful modern titles. This in turn meaning that they turned around and sold SO many more copies of the game. That's where the ultimate problem is. It's usually much easier and more cost effective to throw in in-game purchases rather than developing the game further. But on the other hand, it has been proven numerous times in recent history that good games sell very well.
I think you forgot the biggest issue with P2W games: Developers are gonna design games just to milk more money and this will lead to worse and worse game for the average consumer Eventually we gonna end up in an industry with tons of shit f2p games that cost nothing to develop just so they can milk a very very small % of the players
The fact that there is (almost) no regulation on P2W aspects in games for me is the biggest problem with P2W. I say almost no regulation as there are some countries that are slowly starting to put barriers in place for P2W. Diablo Immortal is not launched in Belgium and The Netherlands due to "current operating environment for games in those countries" so Blizzard got an answer on the question how far they can go. Not this far in these two countries. Belgium has very strict anti-gambling laws on lootboxes in games, preventing the use of these in many games, so I am not surprised Diablo Immortal couldn't be launched in Belgium. But lootboxes are not automatically forbidden in games in The Netherlands (lootboxes in FIFA games from EA Sports are allowed for example). Hopefully more countries will follow Belgium and The Netherlands.
Unironicly although Asmongold (currently doing so in Diablo Immortal to showcase its severity in real time) for example is whaling a lot in games, he does often say that people in general do a lot of things that can be considered stupid and detrimental to themselves, pay2win is one of those things. We cant depend on each other to hold the line on these things. The only way is for multiple countries around the world to collective ban/ or either heavily tax these companies that employ these tactics. Its the only way how companies will be forced to change their methods to still be able to profit of these games. Or stop making them because it aint as profitable anymore.
"The fact that there is (almost) no regulation on P2W aspects in games for me is the biggest problem with P2W." The biggest problem with p2w is the fact it exists.
I mean, they aren't really regulating it so much as they're outright banning it. Like Coe said though, the definition for what needs to be banned will constantly need to be updated as gaming companies find new ways to fleece their players. Forcing them to tell you what you're getting into like Coe suggested would be a good compromise, but I don't know how realistic that is in countries like America where lobbying exists. Publicly-traded companies like Activision Blizzard have every interest in paying legislators off so they can keep milking their playerbase and satisfying their investors without any pesky laws getting in the way.
I think you're missing the point. Belgium and Netherlands banned lootboxes or "mechanics that resemble gambling" in videogames. It has nothing to do with p2w. A game can be p2w without lootbox mechanics. If Diablo Immortal was selling power straight up without having to go through the gambling mechanics then it would be approved for launch in Belgium and the Netherlands.
Other side is that often the store side of games aren't opened up for reviewers ahead of launch. Effectively hiding the economy from reviewers before launch. They actively hide this stuff from people.
great point. i remember one of the sports games (cant remember) kept that stuff out at launch to get better review scores, then like a few months later they added all of in the game. they doing this on purpose because the greedy publishers KNOW they will get roasted so they try to hide it as much as possible.
I Actually have been around games long enough to agree with you Cohh it's getting to the point we need to regulate games with a rating hit for additional transactions because it's like entry level gambling addictions
I'm quite uncompromising when it comes to p2w. It's completely antithetical to gaming in its entirety. A giant cancer upon the industry. It would be better if it was rooted out. I would include things that others wouldn't. My definition is all in game benefits. In general not cosmetic but even some of them can be, because they are easier or worse to spot them or abilities. I also think just cosmetic can be predatory, just not nearly to the same extend as p2w and loot boxes.
Thats not happening tho so why not a more realistic solution? Proper labeling so people like you who say they dont want any form of p2w can just stay away from the game. Buts thats not what u rly want is it? You dont want others to enjoy the games either cuz then you experience fomo.
@@BogzySama Did I stutter? What did you think I meant with rooted out? Of course that's not what I want. Let me be very clear, so you don't have to wonder. I would legislate p2w and loot boxes practices out of games. Regulate it. Though not straight cosmetics. Do you enjoy the games or the practices themselves? Enjoying the games is fine, but if you enjoy these practices I consider you an addict or insane. Like you have Stockholm syndrome or something. You don't have to keep eating shit, smile and ask for more... How is it not realistic? This was the norm 14 years ago and games were plenty profitable. Countries are actively looking into this because of how bad this is. All big market countries should. Only then is this cancer gone. Some loot boxes are already banned in the Netherlands and Belgium. You can still play CS:GO itself but the loot boxes themselves are disabled. This can be done. Just labelling is not going to do anything. Neither is staying away. A minority of players, the whales and people sucked in, are making it more profitable for publishers, while the majority of players suffers for it. It's not actually going to solve any problems. It directly affects players in the same game who don't spend. It directly affects games and entire franchises who didn't have this before. And indirectly the entire gaming sphere because it's normalizing insanely predatory practices, lowering the basic standard for all games. It's getting worse. Staying away is one thing. This came to me, to franchises I enjoyed. To MMO's I played. Gran Turismo 7 a game that already costs 70 dollars, had reviewers play their game and then patched microtransactions in their game after reviews were in. From gold farmers being banned in WOW because it was a detriment to the game, to Blizzard now having a shop buying gold for real money on top of their subscription. While players were leaving the game, they were making more money. People were not happy with the way things were done and instead of addressing actual problems they can just do this. To cover for the problems. Games are made with this in mind. Make them more grindy on purpose so they can sell boosters in the shop. Lower drop rates so you're more inclined to buy gear with better stats. These practices can only make games worse. Plenty of these games can survive fine on their own or with just cosmetic skins straight up. The ones who can't probably shouldn't and again are covering for problems. Just make a better game that people have an interest in playing and can compete with others. I'm personally not that affected by fear of missing out. I've lowered my exceptions for the industry significantly and I'm extremely stingy with money. But this is a psychological trick to manipulate people out of their money. That is a bad thing. I'm not just talking children here. These are problems adults have. Loot boxes in games is gambling brought directly into the household. It's has ruined people financially. TLDR I want government legislation. Thinking this toxic shit is fun and want to keep it is ruining it for everybody else, despite what you think, not the other way around.
I absolutely agree with everything you said Cohh! P2W is a horrible business model and horrible to be pushing it to younger and younger children. It is grooming of a child IMO.
That's not what he said, that's what you choose to interpret from what he said, but I do agree that P2W is horribly pushed down our throats, with some few and far between exceptions
Always appreciate your perspective Cohh. I'm right there with you man. My son spends so much of his allowance, birthday and holiday money etc. on games like 2K and Fortnite... it's absolutely ridiculous! Love your content. Thanks man.
It goes even deeper than this Cohh, what about when devs send their game out for reviews, wait for all the positive review scores and then add all the micro transactions afterwards! We need regulation fast
In the UK Gambling legislation not yet implememted i think but they are looking into it. Loot boxes come under this. In game spending for games not restricted to adults will also come under the spotlight in any new legislation. In many games users can buy 'loot boxes' without knowing what is inside them, this in effect is gambling according to several parliamentary reviews on the subject. Games will therefore need to either stop undisclosed purchases or will require age verification to do so along with appropriate gambling warnings. This is also something that will likely be mirrored by the EU as a whole.
hope that more countries will make a law like the one in the Netherlands and make it broader and better so that new Pay2Win games must indicate exactly what they have in ther game or they are not allowed to release the game in that country. to protect people from gambling addiction in games. and that they know exactly what's in it and can make their own choice
I'm Dutch. And my views on it are rather libertarian. I don't, under any circumstance, need my government to decide for me what I can and cannot do. I don't need my government to ban certain games because they contain P2W/lootboxes for me, despite my disdain for P2W and microtransactions.
@@huntakilla1234 no no i dont want the government to ban all games. I only want the need to say what is in ther game on real life money after you buy the game so you can make your own pick do i want to invest time in it or not. And if game makers dont say what in it. yea then ban them its only fair to say what is in the game or not.
I can't stand p2w on the basis that that kind of crap eventually leads to design being altered specifically around the "option" to buy the convenience There's been so many games and companies that pretend they don't intentionally create obnoxious systems just to sell you the fix
They can spend as much money as they want if it dosnt effect me. But guess what, multiplayer games effect me and my fun. If someone outgears me and is more powerful than me in a fight because they spent hundreds more, then I dont care about their fun anymore since they care just as much for mine. The Cash Krakens keeping this type of practice alive are the true cause of it.
i understand cohh on this topic pretty well. i used to play this game online called "total domination" it was fun it was free, i liked my clan on there felt like family, didn't really need to pay to win. but the reason i stopped play was what we call CC-players (credit card players) they paid to win cause they didn't want to grind like some ppl. if you grind and used the info all the players had gathered it was fun and you'd get just as much if not more then if you paid, but like i said cc-players that basiclly pay2win turned the community toxic and the fact the admins do nothing to help... well i think everyone gets the idea. thank you cohh for talking about an important subject
Tbh if you watch this video you're already way more invested than 90% of the general audience this stuff is targeted at. Nothing will change if the general audience doesn't shift against P2W.
@@colecates5554 That's exactly my point. By watching this video and getting informed we know how P2W this and many other "games" are. Without an ESRB type of label this info will likely never reach the core audience that just sits around browsing the AppStore.
It should be noted that, some games, such as Warframe and World Tanks/Warships, exist because of that system. They're games that are completely free....but since they ARE free, they have to make money some other way, such as Gold ammo, or speeding up XP, getting that 'Frame done in a quicker time, etc etc. This, of course, straddles the line but there is a distinct sense of "pay to win" all the same.
The bad things from p2w are when they incorporate gambling type mechanics with their pay options to prey on people who have problems with gambling. Also, it's pretty often that they hide the percentage chances that you will get the thing you want from the gamble and players often don't understand how low the chances are until after spending money.
You will never see competitive/fair p2w games. Why? Because it isn't about your skill, time or effort put in, just who spends more. If money gives you an advantage over other players, you will forever be at a disadvantage until you get the same as them. Games need balance, p2w is not balanced.
I have a P2W game I enjoy. There isn't a lot of barriers between paid and unpaid game play, just some extra resources, but the main reason I got it was just to skip like 5 seconds of animation and dialog to turn in a quest. You can do like 10 quests at a time and each one has the same animation, you pay a little money, and and it auto-completes them all at once. It isn't a huge game changer, just saves a minute of time, so I would give it like a 2 on the scale, which I think is fine.
4:09 really speaking to the common folk here Coh. As for the rest of us who dont have a company to sell and have to live by a budget, The problem i have with micro transactions is that the game will 99% of the time be tailored to, in some way shape or form, incentive purchasing those micro transactions. So when games have a section tailored for those with large disposal money, the rest of us have to work through the system that's been designed and if we're LUCKY then the experience wont be grindy, repetitive and ask us to wait 3+ days (warframe) for something. As for your ratings system, I too would like something as you've suggested so that my friends and I never touch a game where our real world financial situations can divide us in our experience in some way. but whenever you apply a price in ANYTHING, games or life. Those "with" will prosper and progress and those "without" will in some fashion be penalized for their circumstance. And it sucks that we're having to have this discussion in an art form that should be specifically tailored to where the entire experience is enjoyable. not just those that can afford it. and inb4 the "just win, just be rich, just work more, just be better just get lucky, just don't complain, just don't play, just dont comment here, just blah blah blah" troll comments. yes yes your very smart people :)
@@levigoldson4242 Hi Levi, what you've said is true for some games/players. However, going to my point above about how the design of the game will be in some way compromised to incentivise making a purchase. Unlike games from yonder years, they had to ensure everything was up to a standard, the pacing of the game, and cosmetics as intensives for completing the game under certain conditions but to name a couple. Now with Micro-transactions, the developers will intentionally create pacing issues and disproportionately difficult areas/enemies in order to incentivise purchasing upgrades/time saves etc etc. EA even patented a system which would shift difficulty so players would go against stronger players with the likely hood of losing just to promote, and again, encourage players buying the weapons they were just beaten with. Google "EA Dynamic difficulty patent" if you want to read. And while i know people will look and say "hey its EA what'dya expect mate lol" My point still stands that the design of what would be a complete, fun and equal experience, now has been tainted to provide the "option" to make purchases for peoples "convenience". Despite creating the inconveniences intentionally to begin with. bottom line is - Introduce money beyond the initial purchasing price for games and the game/experience WILL be compromised for it. and it doesn't have to be this way :( and allowing some versions of P2W is just putting MTX on a slope just for the standards to decline further down on for example the newest diablo as mentioned in the video. you just cant trust companies to keep themselves in check and self regulate.
What an intelligent , well explained and thoughtful opinion. The world is complex, most of people likes to shortcut it to black and white. Shades are always closer to the truth. Thanks Cohh! keep it up , you are excellent
An app store like google play has a 48 hour limit on refunds. Beyond that limit there are no refunds. A lot of games now scale their monetization up over a period of time to get around the 48 hour refund window so that people can't get their money back. In the first 2 days it might be minimal. Day 3 they add a little bit more. By day 14 they're going full throttle with a money leaderboard. The amount that you spend slowly continues to go up as well and by day 14 you want out because the monetization keeps scaling up but you might have spent a couple of grand :p. It's a trick that has been employed for the last couple of years and it speaks home to the point of deceptive practices; hiding the monetization of a game. Showing customers as absolutely little as possible to try and get them to spend as much as possible. This is coupled with constant fomo tactics to try and force them to spend or quit. You can be certain that if a game employs a fomo tactic that it is hiding monetization down the road that is going to come and bite you. They want to force you to spend or quit so that you have no time to evaluate the game. The fomo purchases always start small. $1.00. $3.00. $5.00. They continue to scale it up : ). New users are always going to be blindsided by these tactics. The moment you see fomo gtfo. If you spent any money and fomo pops up 20 minutes later, refund everything you can immediately and uninstall. Fomo is a massive red flag. You've all been warned :).
I bought ESO on sale on Steam. Started farming and soon my bags got full so I went online to see where I could craft or buy a reagent bag. I found out the ONLY way I could get a reagent bag was by purchasing a monthly sub of 12€. So I logged off and uninstalled the game.
i dont think pay to win should exist within gaming. having a box price or subscription, sure. even an expensive game, fine. but pay2win just promotes gambling. gambling isnt meant for people under the age of 18 in many countries, and i think it normalizes it. id like to see it totally removed from the gaming industries. i agree with a lot of what you have said except for one bit, i dont agree with your statement about pay2win being ok as long as you understand the big picture, respectfully. i would prefer a game where those top tier gears or materials are earned by playing. isnt that the point of gaming? to actually game.
yeah everytime i hear Cohh talk about pay2win i feel like he wants to endorce it without completly admiting to wanting to do it and then trying to justify it the main issue with the pay2win is that most people that are considered whales cant control themselves they spend both the money they have and the money they dont have, and sometimes you just need to protect people from themselves
@@pedromoreira6218 I feel like he doesn't want to endorse it, more he doesn't want to tell people what to do. I agree that some things need to be put in place to save people from themselves, a lot of people don't realise they have a gambling issue until the damage is done.
Cohh I like you and your opinion on the ratings, however I don't think that is anywhere near enough. I think the ratings should exist and also if there is ANY form of gambling/P2W the game should have the exact same regulations as casinos, online or brick and mortar whichever is stricter as these games are no different to a slot machine flashy lights and sounds attract kids the same way. If you want to sell gambling as fun for kids then you should be held to the same standards as everyone else...
Glad you changed your mind Cohh. I must admit that I did find your previous take on it INCREDIBLY naive and ultimately harmful to gaming; exacerbated by the fact that you are seen as a legitimate/principaled voice within the community. PvE is, at its heart, competative. You just need to look at speed runners and world first kills in MMOs. In Diablo Immortal we now know that publishers are prepared to gate PvE content behind pay walls (with Legendary Crests). Lost Ark had a less egregious version of this with the gating of Argus - only ultimately allowing those that paid to access the content upon release. I disagree completely about P2W occasionally being good. It sets the tone for the industry. If one company gets away with P2W activities, others will copy. Heck, its one of the reasons why this slippery slope has progressed as far as it has; for example, we now fully accept that all mobile games are going to be P2W. Why? Because that has been established over time and never nipped in the bud. Either way, I will look forward to your next video, in a couple of months time, that explains that P2W will never be acceptable.
I think the idea of informing people with some sort of rating is a great idea. Also, just banning lootbox/gambling systems in the US seems logical. They introduce young kids to gambling that could easily cause their parents harm by draining their bank accounts or running up credit card debt without their knowledge. It can also create future gambling addicts.
My usual rule of thumb used to be to condemn those who P2W in pvp but ignore it in pve. After all, pve is a form of solitare. But even in these solo pve games I can hear the advice my father gave me almost 60 years ago when I discovered gambling at the age of 8. "Never trust a man who cheats at solitare." I hope they remove all P2W aspects in gaming as a man who cheats at solitare will also (and mayhap even more quickly) cheat in competition. Problem is, though, how much can we trust these soulless corporations when they claim to be completely fair and above board. Always enjoyed your video's; now I enjoy them more. Good vid
So all the people who used cheat codes to have fun in single player games back in the day are bad people who cheat in competition? That's some garbage and narrow minded advice. I suggest more critical thinking than that. Bending the rules to have a little more fun when you are the only one playing and it affecting no one else is just fine. It speaks nothing to who you would be in a competitive setting.
@@orbbb24 You're putting words in my mouth. I never said that "all people who used cheat codes in single player games back in the day are bad people who cheat in competition". The "cheat codes" you were referring to were usually supplied by the dev's and were intended to provide extra experiences for individual gamers at a time when almost all games were physical and couldn't be modified over the net. And I never said all gamers who used such things were bad people. I said that the line between cheating at solitare and the line between cheating in competition is much thinner than the line if you never cheat in solitare. Take care
Agree on Cohh's perspective where P2W isn't really bad, it's very situational. I've played dozens of games and some of them were heavily P2W elements, but it's always up to the players' choice to decide either they are going to stay or just quit for good sake. Now I know at certain point P2W styles would definitely become toxic and drive out good gaming ideas and companies, but I think the main problem is that P2W not being properly regulated, even when there is literally no limit or cap that could stop players from overspending. To think about spending $10000 over one character is crazy enough for common people, but probably not as crazy as it seems to millionaires. I've seen people around me paying hundreds of thousands on their game without affecting their life, but sadly I've also seen people pouring in their life savings into game that eventually caused them went near-broke, Unregulated P2W games are no difference than gambling slots.
I agree for sure. A rating system would be good. Mobile games, on for example the Apple App Store, already show a "contains in-app purchases" warning but not to what degree. Genshin Impact was fun for a while for me but when it became apparent that I had to keep buying Battle Passes to keep up and seeing others literally dropping $100s if not $1000s to have the newest character fully max geared, I walked away. It's down to personal choice of course, just like gambling. In my case, I spent close to a decade with some serious debt, so I learnt the hard way of how to control my spending. P2W games can only exacerbate addiction, as you said give the dopamine hit.
P2W definition is simple does it affect your in game power if you buy it with money ? If yes then its p2w if not then its not p2w. Cosmetics that dont affect your in game power are not p2w. Its not about PVP or PVE or paying for conveniece or paying to progress and changing the definition and its not a broad term because of this companies keep pushing it and people slowly accept it more. Edit: P2W is bad lol, i agree your money do whatever you want with it, but the problem for me is the fact that P2W exists in game, and yes i do understand company needs to make money but at some point it is too much. People also go into semantics and P2W definitions and justifications for it when it should just be simple and not allowed Netherlands and Belgium are on the right track if more countries do the same and have legislations against it gaming will only be better. And diablo immortal is not p2w it went further beyond lol to a higher plane of existence.
"Cosmetics that dont affect your in game power are not p2w." Is it really that simple? Cosmetics, even without stats, can change visibility of your character (I remember in Rainbow Six Siege one character has a skin that makes her gadget much more visible, thus easier for enemy to spot it) or confuse your opponent (who will, for a brief moment, not know who is fighting against).
@@TheARESxGOD I think this is an unexplored topic. People expect that cosmetics are just cosmetics but i bet that in PvP they often have great impact on performance of other players. The effect may be close to zero but still, it is not good to assume there is absolutely none, claiming cosmetics are never a pay2win thing.
@@TheARESxGOD Thats the thing. Pay to win is pay to win... there is no debate over paying for things that boost your performance. It is clear and transparent. But considering cosmetics, most players are like "nah, you will just look differently, thats all", completely ignoring that some skin may have different visibility or other less obvious impact on opponents performance.
7:30 NOPE. People or governments sometimes must tell you what you can do and what you can't do. If drugs make you happy, it's good? No. Misleading children, without their understanding of it (gambling)? No. We have rules and as long as you don't break them it's ok to have fun.
people have their own free will. don't buy games if you are worried about whether or not you trust yourself to not spend money. I play p2w games all the time but my rank settles among the other f2p and that's fine. trying to be the best player in a p2w games is a waste of money but to some it isn't.
The companies obfuscate and cloud the real intentions of their pay to win mechanics, not because Rich people are their target audience but its primarily children who are the target audience for most mobile gaming. There are so few game companies now that just make a good game and release it with a few expansions later down the line. Now almost everything in games is monetized and it kills what makes games special to begin with, most of it is just soulless cash grabs.
thank you for your thoughtful and well-spoken opinion Cohh. I shall consider your arguments to further expand my own opinions on the subject. thank again for all you do, stay awesome.
Contains (any sort of ) real money gambling = Mature rating. In Game chat without Blocking function? = Mature rating. Cohh without Beanie? = Mature rating 😆
Folks with no thoughts on the consequences of dropping crazy amounts of bucks is the problem. It spirals and sucks more people in, also justifies what the gaming company put up for a cash shop model Players with gambling addictions are the big losers Good to see 2 countries in the EU did ban the game right away. Hopefully more will follow!
For me, pay to win has always been something that allows you to get something that you couldn't get from just playing the game. It doesn't matter if it's a time gated currency, cosmetic, or gear. If paying lets you somehow circumvent that limitation, then that's pay to win.
@@Ichigo2k9 I gave up on Diablo Immortal the moment I hit the level 30 wall and didn't want to grind to hit level 35 just to continue the main story. I might as well just go back to the vastly superior Diablo 3.
I feel like if you can't convince a person for buy what you are selling without obfuscation it through different layers of currency, gambling or as away to be better then other non-paying players. thenthere is certainly some maliciousness going on. Cause I am sometimes curious if a person got a list of what they got for their money along with a price tag of what they payed. Would they still make the purchase, if not is it a scam? No probably not, but you can't deny that it is disingenuous and anticonsumer. And then there should probably be some kind of regulation or restriction for how deceptive you can be.
I really hate the overall sentiment of 'microtransactions are fine, if it's only cosmetic'. Something like visual gear progression in an ARPG, for example, are important aspects of a game too. Take PoE, if you want a badass looking char, you better pay for it... I'd rather buy a game full price and have a full experience from start to finish, visuals included.
I have no issue with a game, especially a free2play one having a system like buy gems to get X cosmetic or buy gems to get a premium track on a season pass. I mainly take issue when it's pay to advance or pay for power. I like content warnings but find the Rating system very arbitrary.
I just paid 300 to skydive it was incredible, it was an experience no video game could ever give you, and yet some of these games have $1000s of microtransactions as if they could truly give you an experience
I think 300 bucks is an obscene amount of money for 10 minutes of fun. I can buy 5 triple A games, or 10-20 indie games for that, with potentially thousands of hours of fun. See what I did there? My opinion holds zero value on how you choose to spend your money. Nor does your experience invalidate my opinion.
@@huntakilla1234 the experience of video games is definitely great and I have thousands of dollars and thousands of hours in video games been playing for over 20 years I mainly tried to compare skydiving to this because the experience of that was so intense and Serene that there was nothing else like it and $300 was expensive but also pretty cheap in the scheme of things especially when you compare it to thousands of dollars worth of microtransactions. I paid $60 for elden ring that was an amazing experience I love that game. But these companies think they can give you an experience that's so unique and so great it's worth literally your whole wallet and that was mainly my point I guess, sorry if it seemed like I was attacking gamers cause I'm just bad with words I didn't mean to I am a gamer myself
@@davidgomes4408 I also have a fear of heights even after doing it lol and no video games are a real experience and there are a lot of fun but if they think paying 300 dollars in a game could bring you the joy of either going skydiving or just buying 5, 60 dollar games, then that company is corrupt. Sorry I'm not too good with words I didn't mean to say gamers can't have an experience because I wouldn't trade my gaming experience for literally anything in this world other than family, I guess I meant to say unique experience more so than experience in general, and the only unique experience we get from all these hundreds of dollars in microtransactions is a mugging lol
There is no reality in which P2W systems do not reliably compromise game design. The best example of this is Middle-earth: Shadow of War, a single-player game with in-game microtransactions. Play that game for a few hours and there is no way to escape the realization that developers deliberately turned the gameplay loop into a total slog in order to "encourage" players to purchase faster progress. Of course the devs swore up and down that this was not the case, but it turns out you can't trust people who have both every motivation to lie to you and complete plausible deniability. After all, you can't prove that they set experience rates laughably low just to trigger MTX purchases from impatient gamers with more money than sense (or their mom's credit card info), right? And if you think the devs also ruined the game in the process, well that's just your subjective opinion, dude. As Cohh correctly points out, there is no regulation or oversight of this space. But even if there were, how would we ever hold developers accountable for the behavior I've described above? How would you ever prove the intent behind design decisions that are clearly driven by monetization? The only way to be sure is for none of those monetization schemes to exist in the first place. You can only trust the good intentions of a game designer when you know that they have no incentive to nickel and dime you into oblivion. MTXs represent a conflict of interests that rational consumers simply cannot ignore. You are paying someone to provide you with a certain product while they are simultaneously maintaining the ability to purposefully undermine the quality of said product at any time. It's a frankly ludicrous arrangement that no one should abide.
This is an incredibly well articulated and thought-out response. If I could hit the "Thumbs-up" button, one-hundred more times I would. I, for the life of me, cannot understand why people have such a difficult time understanding this concept. If this same methodology (I'm referring to the conflict of interest) were applied to any real-world, hands-on transaction, most people would walk away without a second thought. The disconnect that seems to take place simply because of the medium that facilitates the transaction is inexplicable. As someone who has played games for over 20 years (Literally played my first game on a Commodore 64 computer and an Atari 2700) and watched this industry evolve from it's very infancy to the current state, I honestly cannot even begin to put into words, both how terrible is feels to see and how surprising it is that people allow it. "What you allow, will persist." People not only accept it as a reality and continue to engage with it but they defend it too. Why would anyone in their right mind OPT to receive an intentionally produced inferior product designed purely to provide an inferior experience, when they could pay a reasonable sum upfront and receive an optimal product where nothing is withheld? It's insane.
- Cosmetics - 100% fine with - Expansions - 100% fine with - Being able to buy materials that a non paying player can grind in a REASONABLE time - sure w/e i wont buy them but if someone else wants to thats fine I can still grind them (Warframe is a perfect example of this). The moment though Power and items that are non cosmetic become locked behind a paywall thats also not just a full expansion, thats where i dip out. or if the materials are SOOOO HARD and RARE to grind that you could spend like a year and not get 1 but if you drop $50 you get like 10 im also out.
It needs a new term that better fits where we are today. The monetization models that I believe are hurting games are this: If the development of the game is at all based around the monetization system then it's wrong. What I mean by that is we have the problem where extra grind is introduced so that it pushes you towards buying shortcuts or ways to lessen the grind. It's made extra grindy just to get money. I have no problem with monetization models that are cosmetic. I also have no problem with games that allow you to get "paid" stuff through just playing the game or a system where you can buy special currency and sell it to other players for in game currency. That is a system everyone can participate in.
While I don't think cosmetics are pay to win, I still think they are predatory monetization, especially in games where you regularly see deals upwards of 60 dollars for a godamn skin sometimes more.
Agree with the 50 or so comments I read. Except on lost ark. I have about 700 hours in lost. And yes I have put around 75 dollars into it to speed up my progression but what I like about lost ark is I didn't have to. I just didn't want to wait and I have the money to do it. My rule of thumb on a game regardless of if it's free to play or a pay game is a dollar and hour. So if I pay 60 dollars for a game I expect to get 60 hours of content of it, which let's be frank is not always the case. The fact that I have 700 hours of lost ark and have spent 75 dollars I am very happy with that. I am 43 and in a much different part of my life than say a 16 yr old or 20 something but it's just how I base my gaming. That said I never will spend any money on randomized loot boxes.
Thanks for the more nuanced take on p2w. That said imo p2w cheapens the experience for others. It ruins the integrity of the game. Especially when said game is designed for payers moreso than base players.
I agree with the Cohhs point of view, I may tolerate a bit more than him when it comes to games, but certain systems rustle even my jimmies. I don't know how good of a suggestion this is, but I was wondering, if we want to see these kinds of rating systems (the 1-5 Cohh was talking about), then maybe Cohh could include these kinds of ratings in his game reviews? I understand and know that Cohh doesn't play lvl 4-5 games and that this is not needed, just because Cohh doesn't tend to play these kinds of games. But just as a topic opener when it comes to rating certain games? Or bring it up on Dropped Frames and have JP or Zeke maybe take up on this. Would also love to see a comprehensive list of things that make a game 1-5, so just like 1's have only cosmetics.
I think the real name for what's being done these days is "Pay To Fun". It's not just pay to win, or pay to accomplish... games are literally being designed thee days where they plan ahead and ensure their game systems are easily made more "grindy" or tedious than they were originally intended to be, so there's more incentive to the player to buy their way past the "boring" parts. So, as a game developer in 2022, you will probably come up with a new game idea, flesh it out, and you and your team will then balance it, and get it to where it's really fun to play.... and then you'll find every way possible to slow things down, make things annoying, and cut the content up into small pieces, so it can be monetized. Only the players who spend ALL the money will get to pay that fun game your team spent years making, everyone else will have to suffer through all the added BS.
Diablo Immortal is an abusive, psycologically damaging and unscrupulous game. It has been finely engineered to pull you in without you even knowing it. Just a little swipe to begin with wont hurt. And then they got you. There are multiple mechanics happening at once that arent even necessarily connected to the game, they are connected to your senses. Games that launched unfinished, or were ultimately disappointing (like no mans sky and cyberpunk) were simply rushed products. THEY HAVE NOTHING ON DIABLO IMMORTAL. This isn't even a game, its a piece of software specifically designed to take your money. I cant tell you not to play it or what you should do with your money. I can only say BE CAFEFUL guys.
The ESRB does have a rating for the loot boxes these days, and it is a required aspect. It isn't the 1-5 (which I do think is interesting and valid) but it is something. And ROBLOX is such an odd place. SO SO SO MANY different companies and individuals all geared toward kids and the Robux push/pull is excessive. I also wonder if learning the lessons younger will make kids more resistant to it.
I'm not sure where this "learning" stopped then. Because, growing up I learned that gambling is a vice, a scourge on humanity and that there were clear reasons it was restricted to casinos. It's clear regulating authorities have fallen asleep over the past two decades and just let this all fall apart. Digital Sports Gambling, Videogames with loot boxes. All of it should have remained banned.
i play games to escape real life, getting reminded that im off less fortune then people with alot of money is awfull, no matter what i do in games like that i cant get on same level, just like real life. we need it to be capped, so everyone not paying can get to the same level, with time or skill. imho, gamling laws should be affect 3-4-5. wish everyone would follow belgium and netherlands.
Really great video. I agree on pretty much everything but I think it's just a good take - no matter how you feel about P2W, regulations would make it better for everyone and even shed more light on it - right now it's hard to objectively tell how much P2W is in a game without spending hundreds of hours on it (as some P2W mechanics are locked deep into the endgame). I used to believe P2W only mattered when it comes to actual PvP but Lost Ark managed to change my mind - it's a great example of predatory PvE P2W. I wish this stuff never made it this deep into gaming but greed corrupts everything. The only way to truly fight P2W is voting with our time and money but regulations and laws (banning games that don't follow the regulations or try to hide P2W mechanics) can definitely help.
I said it myself, I've been playing mobile p2w games, but now with my own account, I bought them with lvl 1 with premium items, not hacked, but, loged in since the game out and accumulate any item it gets until someone buys it, even cheaper, hell, you can even buy a genshin account with a top tier character for 5 dollars because it's a rerolled account, which is the best market for mobile games, right now, this is the best outcome for a f2p to at least get something without the fact of RNG.
Was an interesting take. I personally don't feel ptw should be illegal but should absolutely not be available to minors. I do believe gambling and lootboxes are a separate and much more dangerous issue. It should definitely automatically make a game mature rated like a few of the European countries laws have made. I think it should really be completely illegal to have them since it encourages very dangerous addictions. I mean i live in a state that gambling is completely illegal but can log into just about any online game and gamble thousands of dollar on lootboxes. Gambling is regulated for reasons, and it should be regulated in the digital space too. Unfortunately our lawmakers are all older and mostly technologically illiterate. Even if they weren't the games companies who make money from this have more money than god and could lobby against consumer laws easily. Our country is run by the greed of companies and the greed of politicians... so don't see it getting addressed here in the USA ever sadly.
I feel anxious... when I think about where Gaming will go. I mean surely there will be Games at any point in Time that won't have microtransactions and p2w stuff... but surely there will be more and more. And the big sad part about it is, that those Games that get heavy loaded with microtransaction and p2w stuff could be really good Games... if they didn't had those things. Like for example, Genshin Impact, if it was a B2P games and that's it and then you maybe buy expansions as DLC which are B2P, fine. Could be really cool. Instead you have Character and Weapon you have to buy, which you also can get by just playing but there are so many and new stuff is coming so often that as a F2P player you won't be able to get everything in Time, it will take you forever, because the drop rates are horrendous. Plus that you have the Resin stuff that Limits things you can to or you just Swipe some more to be able to do more. And I feel like that really takes away from it. Otherwise I think Genshin could've been a really good game. And then they just pump out more and more Games like that, that all work the same way and that just for the sole reason of "money". And the more Time goes on the more they will find new ways, which ultimately will make things worse. And like I said... that makes me anxious for the future of Gaming.
P2W needs to be regulated as gambling with adult-only access, with total transparency on the mechanics. The psychological tricks as shown in that 2016 gaming business conference video, as well as any related mechanisms, need to be put in black and white in these games' publicity and as separate end user agreements.
I agree but IMO cohh grants a pass to the games that very much do the same except they were testing water back in 2013 like warframe, and it's something western developers learned efficiently from eastern game devs, make it grindy make it endless and people will pay to get ahead, always, "oh you dont want to spend 300h numblessly farming droning level of instances then just buy the starter kit for 70 euros, after that you can also pay a monthly sub to receive these extra benefits, and all these cosmetics are on the shop, to help finance us you see a humble indie dev team". The gaming economic sector has developed and the cycle is to create products and develop a good reputation and then use that reputation to bleed clients dry for the investors and shareholders, the only ones interests any company is ever looking out for, so it's serve the client till they trust then use them till they dont, rinse and repeat with new product
also the problem is a lot of games you need to reach the endgame to discover that those pay to win stuff you will mostly have to buy it to make the game enjoyable and that sucks, if could be a way of us to know it before that would be nice
I remember when I was younger I would pay a monthly sub Just so I could Play World Of warcraft, a game you technically couldn't even "win". Millions of people never thought of the fact we were buying $50 + games then paying every month to keep playing it and thats without the expansions. Blizzard never changes lmao
I feel Warframe is the best example currently in gaming in how to do "Pay to Win" in a healthy way. But lets be honest here, if that game had no grind to it at all, every time they drop a new content update, players would finish it in 2-5 hours, obtain everything, max everything out, log off, and go play another game that has things to do until the next Warframe update in 2 months.
Pay to win isn't complicated if you can pay for advantage it's pay to win and it's bad for gaming, cosmetics should be a low price too, cosmetics can be key to enjoying some games
No, it was understandably complicated for a few years, back when the term was gaining a lot of steam on the internet. There were a lot of people that still referred to "Pay to Win" as the old definition, where it was a term to explain games that gave you EXCLUSIVE power advantages for money, that couldn't be earned any other way. Games like Crossfire, the original Combat Arms, the early days of World of tanks, or some Korean MMO's with power buffing potions. Oh and if you want to see one of the worst forms of "Pay to Win," and one of the games that helped play a role in the origins of the "Pay to Win" term, go do some research of Crossfire. BTW the most popular FPS in the World believe it or not...yeah it's not CoD or CSGO. These are like 10+ year old games, so the term "Pay to Win" was created back in this time for specifically this type of monetization. So when games like Warframe and Lost Ark released many years down the road where the new predatory method was, "now everything is earnable for free players BUT we will EXTREMELY inconvenience free players." Those games didn't technically fall into the original "Pay to Win" definition that many of us were familiar with. So that's why there was a lot of debate (and still remains a little) on people saying "Lost Ark isn't pay to win, Warframe isn't pay to win." Because for the most part, those are just people that have a firm definition that they've held for years, and anything that's outside of that definition is not P2W or were called a separate term, Pay to Progress. So it's understandable for many people. Even Cohh stated it in this video. Developers are always finding new ways to monetize their games, and because the fact that predatory practices are evolving, people are slowly realizing they have to give up their firm definitions of the past and evolve their definition as well.
ESRB rating - nobody looks at it, nobody enforces it. nice idea for consumers, truly, but that fell of the wagon the moment online purchases/app stores/ingame stores took over in gaming. we rely heavily on (independent) reviewers, and people stop pre.ordering games. Vote with your wallet.
The action of paying to win may or may not be bad. But creating the opportunity for customers to pay to win is wrong. There is no reason why accelerated gaming options couldn't be implemented free in many circumstances (ie. difficulty) if the games were good enough to buy originally. Pay to win systems shift the focus of development from being solely about building a quality product to optimizing targeted discomfort in order to maximize transactions. There are less-bad implementations, but they are still contributing to the problem. Also, cosmetics shouldn't be included in Pay to win, because a cosmetic should not help you "win."
Eh, still don't think Lost Ark is a 3...and much of it is already known from the KR server 🤔 Also gotta give LA some credit to not block *any* content behind a paywall...
I got blocked on LinkedIN for telling someone high up at Amazon Games that his idea of "P2W in Diablo Immortal being blown out of proportions" is completely tone-deaf and he can't just throw such criticism away like that.
I think another element of this is education. Children need to be explicitly taught, by parents and schools alike, to be aware and educated about these attempts. In countries where better consumer education is common, I think this sort of exploitation becomes much less likely.
If companies want to be able to have certain pay to win mechanics then the user of the account needs to be the legal owner of that account and be able to transfer that account to others and accept monetary compensation for said account. As it stands we can pay for a product that lets us play on an account that we do not own and then continue on to gamble money for an in game item that is not guaranteed all while not being able to get anything back for our investments. I personally do not play any pay to win games past cosmetic skins and pay to progress faster through grinding (not pay for a level boost). It is such a shame that the games industry has turn into what it is today. Games are designed around make money out of you while you play the game instead of trying to sell more of their game because it is a unique experience from a polished product. I would rather spend 120 dollars on a retail game than have all my future games be designed around these predatory pay to win mechanics that make having fun in the game only possible by spending much more on it that its worth given its gameplay experience being diminished by said mechanics.
I wouldn't consider Lost Ark as a 3 out of 5, rather a 2 out of 5, being path of exile a 1 out of 5 or even a 0 since paying will not give you any advantage whatsoever in character progression in POE.
P2W does not have a YES/NO answer, it's a scale. P2W gives gameplay advantages, and every person has different views on when those advantages cross their line of P2W. IIRC DOTA has no P2W elements. League on the other hand can be considered P2W if you consider your size of available champion pool as an advantage and yet the game is viewed as a relatively fair game by most players. The size of the advantage, the area it affects, the amount you can pay, the limit (if there is one) you can pay until you don't have an advantage compare to other spenders, they all affect where the game belongs in that scale.
7:23 That be LIRIK then KEKW, He dropped $130 day one! Love the dude but if people like Cohh took a larger standing as well as those who are meant to protect and regulate us from these blood sucking vultures, these companies would soon have to abandon it and give us more acceptable forms of monetization like DLC packs with extra content. CD Projekt Red, Techland, Naughty Dog have all done great dlc packs with usually hours of extra content to play through, that is acceptable and welcome. Blizzard and Microsoft XBox need regulating asap and I worry as this is allowed to continue, whatever Sony PlayStation has planned for their jump into games as a service 🤕
