Social ethics in MMOs?

[Azeroh]

ayo wtf wdym man i like winning @ah, nothin' better than beatin' up on fools like glance, 'yo! Madge

Madge! .. Gladge

SEvvene hunDred and SevenT Seven trEEEdECilion, seeeven hUUNdred and sEvEnty sEvEn duOdECIllion
SCHIZO
FeelsStrongMan

 

[Krater]

I have a level like 40 "smurf" account. Even in norms its very common to see diamond/master/pred sky dive trails. Half the time the champion squad has a masters. It's no secret that the matchmaking is broken in that regard. You got two options... either bitch about that being the problem. Or give your nuts a tug and start taking those fights. You're only going to get better if you constantly verse players who are better than you. Learn from your mistakes, etc.

Unless you've been intentionally sabotaging your stats your smurf account is dead by 40. I used to make a couple new smurf accounts almost every time I played with my brother and usually by around level 10 they are toast and are just matching you based on whatever metrics they use. I've probably made over 100 different apex smurf accounts, it's really the only decent way to play with a friend that has a much different skill level than you. It actually feels more like a random game mode than the normal "random" game mode because there are so many other smurf accounts of various skill levels.

 

[Ivo]

being able to win by paying devalidates x game systems that you use in order to win and also devalidates your skill in game that you would use to win. it turns the game into an arms race of whales, playerbase starts leaving when they cant compete with whales, new players come into game and leave because of whales, this spirals until game dies.

fair = game is balanced, everybody has a (close to) equal chance of winning x game
p2w gives you advantage, causing the game to not be balanced and lowering the chances of your opponents of winning while rising your chances of winning
making it unfair

p2w that isn't unfair isn't p2w, its cosmetics. p2w = pay to win, if you aren't increasing your chances of winning it isn't pay 2 win

That's not a bad thing though. It's just the nature of the game. Many new games implore the same principles where you either spend a lot or don't get to compete and it's perfectly fine imo. As long as these practices are consistent throughout the lifespan of the game, it shouldn't be a problem. The game is just another type of hobby when you think about it. Just like how some people spend tons of cash on bikes, cameras, weapons, etc., others prefer to spend it in a game. Now if a non p2w game like wow went full p2w that would be a problem of course, but I don't see that happening.

 

[Azeroh]

That's not a bad thing though. It's just the nature of the game. Many new games implore the same principles where you either spend a lot or don't get to compete and it's perfectly fine imo. As long as these practices are consistent throughout the lifespan of the game, it shouldn't be a problem. The game is just another type of hobby when you think about it. Just like how some people spend tons of cash on bikes, cameras, weapons, etc., others prefer to spend it in a game. Now if a non p2w game like wow went full p2w that would be a problem of course, but I don't see that happening.

could you send me a successful NA p2w game where the p2w isn’t a problem/good for the game?

Just because you think it’s fine, doesn’t mean it is. The arms race kills your game. Insert every game that died to p2w here.

Why is p2w fine as long as it’s p2w from the start?

 

[Ivo]

could you send me a successful NA p2w game where the p2w isn’t a problem/good for the game?

Just because you think it’s fine, doesn’t mean it is. The arms race kills your game. Insert every game that died to p2w here.

Why is p2w fine as long as it’s p2w from the start?

Because that's the nature of the game in question. Why do you ask specifically for an NA game? A big number of asian games are using the p2w model and they're successful as their playerbase have fun playing the game. The fact that people prefer to spend money in a gacha game rather than do weekly content in wow proves it. Just different types of players, that's all. If you don't like the p2w model, don't play a p2w game. It's like being short and complaining that other basketball players are tall.

 

[Azeroh]

Because that's the nature of the game in question. Why do you ask specifically for an NA game? A big number of asian games are using the p2w model and they're successful as their playerbase have fun playing the game. The fact that people prefer to spend money in a gacha game rather than do weekly content in wow proves it. Just different types of players, that's all. If you don't like the p2w model, don't play a p2w game. It's like being short and complaining that other basketball players are tall.

cool, doesn’t have to be NA, give me any game that is p2w where the p2w part is good? just because a game is successful despite p2w doesn’t mean the p2w part is good btw, I’m expecting more than that.

“The fact that people prefer to spend money in a gamba game rather than do weekly content in wow proves it“

just because the players want something doesn’t mean they should have it/it would be good to have it. people are dumb. if all you did was give people what you wanted, your game would be shit. the “people” you are talking about who enjoy p2w are called whales. sure, the whales are having fun, but at the expense of the rest of the playerbase. this isn’t good for any game.

it’s very easy to imagine a scenario where people want things that benefit themselves, completely ignorant as to how it would negatively affect the playerbase, thus causing the game to get worse and continue getting worse as then those negatively affected leave/do the same thing, and the cycle continues.

“If you don’t like p2w games, don’t play p2w games. It’s like being short and complaining that other basketball players are tall”

true, I don’t play p2w games. And? ???????????????
saying game system is bad = complaining that people are tall, true and based

 

[Selaya]

world of warcraft
(wait you said successful gam- nvm then )

 

[Ivo]

The point I'm trying to make is that you can't complain about a game in which the primary metric for competitive success is the money you spend. That's simply the nature of the game. Nobody said that a game has to be fair for everyone. Different people, different games to please them, that's all.

I don't understand why you think that having the option to obtain competitive advantage by spending money is bad for a game. People who don't have the time to grind, prefer playing such games. The p2w model is just the opposite of the grind model that existed in most old games(Diablo 2 for example). Imagine a guy who lives in his mom's basement, playing the game for 12 hours a day. How is that more fair than the guy who has a full-time job and family spending the money he earned working 8 hours a day for advantage in the same game? He clearly can't afford grinding for 12 hours a day. Wow handled this in a nice way since neither p2w nor grinding are an option due to the in game store being largely cosmetic and endgame content being timegated.

That being said, hating on p2w games that people have fun playing is weird. Especially when you don't even play such games. Starting a game that is obviously p2w and expecting to do well as f2p is plain stupid. There's no need for complaining. You either put in the time and effort required to be competitive or spend the money, depending on the game system.

I've had my fair share of p2w games mostly on mobile and it's perfectly normal when everyone knows what the game is all about. You can pay your way up to the end game and compete with other players who did the same. In games like wow, you have to play for gear and all the stuff needed for endgame. It's not a better or worse thing, rather a matter of preference.

So again, hating on p2w games is unreasonable. Unless you mean f2p games that turn into p2w games over time. Then I agree, it's a bad move by the devs that negatively affect the playerbase.

That's all I can say on this.

 

[Azeroh]

The point I'm trying to make is that you can't complain about a game in which the primary metric for competitive success is the money you spend. That's simply the nature of the game. Nobody said that a game has to be fair for everyone. Different people, different games to please them, that's all.

I don't understand why you think that having the option to obtain competitive advantage by spending money is bad for a game. People who don't have the time to grind, prefer playing such games. The p2w model is just the opposite of the grind model that existed in most old games(Diablo 2 for example). Imagine a guy who lives in his mom's basement, playing the game for 12 hours a day. How is that more fair than the guy who has a full-time job and family spending the money he earned working 8 hours a day for advantage in the same game? He clearly can't afford grinding for 12 hours a day. Wow handled this in a nice way since neither p2w nor grinding are an option due to the in game store being largely cosmetic and endgame content being timegated.

That being said, hating on p2w games that people have fun playing is weird. Especially when you don't even play such games. Starting a game that is obviously p2w and expecting to do well as f2p is plain stupid. There's no need for complaining. You either put in the time and effort required to be competitive or spend the money, depending on the game system.

I've had my fair share of p2w games mostly on mobile and it's perfectly normal when everyone knows what the game is all about. You can pay your way up to the end game and compete with other players who did the same. In games like wow, you have to play for gear and all the stuff needed for endgame. It's not a better or worse thing, rather a matter of preference.

So again, hating on p2w games is unreasonable. Unless you mean f2p games that turn into p2w games over time. Then I agree, it's a bad move by the devs that negatively affect the playerbase.

That's all I can say on this.

so you can’t give me any examples at all? thanks for proving my point. I’ll reiterate this because you forgot

p2w is bad for games because it devalidates x game systems and devalidates your skill. it turns games into an arms race that kills the game inevitably if not fixed.

you are strawmanning, I never said any game HAS to do anything. I’m just saying that p2w is bad, you can’t argue against that therefore you’re strawmanning my argument. Obviously, you can make any game in any way you’d like, this doesn’t change my opinion that p2w is bad for games.

“You can’t complain, it’s the nature of the game”

then the nature of the game is bad.

“I don’t understand why you think that having the option to obtain competitive advantage by spending money is a bad thing”

I explained why, you are just ignoring it for the sake of your argument.

“People who don’t have time to grind prefer p2w”

I really don’t care. Also, depends on the game. Some games are just competitive and don’t require grinding in order to compete fairly in the game (cs as an example), how would you justify p2w in those games then?

“The p2w is just the opposite of the grind model”

cool, still bad

“Imagine a guy in his moms basement, playing 12 hours a day. How is that more fair than the guy who has a full time job?”

It isn’t fair. How does this justify p2w? I never claimed that x systems are fair, I just said p2w isn’t.

This argument also falls flat on this face when you try to apply it to other games where you don’t need to grind for gear and such, games where you just play the game.

“That being said, hating on p2w games that people have fun playing is weird. Especially when you don't even play such games. Starting a game that is obviously p2w and expecting to do well as f2p is plain stupid. There's no need for complaining. You either put in the time and effort required to be competitive or spend the money, depending on the game system.”

Keep strawmanning me, ah, please, it feels so good, do it, HARDER, DEEPER, AAAGH!!

I didn’t say I expected to do as well as whales in p2w games as a f2p. Nothing you said here proves my point wrong.

“I've had my fair share of p2w games mostly on mobile and it's perfectly normal when everyone knows what the game is all about. You can pay your way up to the end game and compete with other players who did the same. In games like wow, you have to play for gear and all the stuff needed for endgame. It's not a better or worse thing, rather a matter of preference.”

If you enjoy the system is subjective, sure, but if it’s bad/bad for the game is a bit more objective. If a system causes people to leave and new people to stop joining, it would be a bad system, no?

“So again, hating on p2w games is unreasonable. Unless you mean f2p games that turn into p2w games over time. Then I agree, it's a bad move by the devs that negatively affect the playerbase.

That's all I can say on this.”

I’m about to climax, ah, oh my god, ah fuck, keep going, ah, YESS!!

I’m not hating on p2w games, I’m just saying that p2w is bad. Once again, send me any good game that has p2w which is good for the game?

 

[Sarmlery]

Unless you've been intentionally sabotaging your stats your smurf account is dead by 40. I used to make a couple new smurf accounts almost every time I played with my brother and usually by around level 10 they are toast and are just matching you based on whatever metrics they use. I've probably made over 100 different apex smurf accounts, it's really the only decent way to play with a friend that has a much different skill level than you. It actually feels more like a random game mode than the normal "random" game mode because there are so many other smurf accounts of various skill levels.

Don't have to sabotage the acc. Just not play on it for a whole season and have the rank reset. I'm curious as to why you have over 100 accounts though.

 

[Krater]

Don't have to sabotage the acc. Just not play on it for a whole season and have the rank reset. I'm curious as to why you have over 100 accounts though.

Well it's probably been about a year since I played, so I'm not certain things are still the same, but when I was playing there was a very obvious difference as a brand new account, it would place you into the lowest bracket, you wouldn't see any pred trails, and aside from other smurfs the skill level was obviously lower. The system seems to give you a few introductory games to get enough stats for it to calculate your matchmaking, this was usually around level 10 or so, but I think it's probably based on a certain number of games or time played. After these introductory games I would suddenly see pred trails everywhere...I'm sure this wasn't helped by doing relatively well against the low bracket players and my stats being very good because of it.

As to why I made 100 accounts it's because I would play with my brother once or twice a week, and a 2-3 hour play session would be enough to eat up all the introductory games and put the account into full skill-based matchmaking mode. You can see from the FAQ here - https://www.ea.com/games/apex-legends/news/matchmaking-2023 that when you are matching as a party they just use the highest rated player to match from, they don't even average the group out or anything. My brother isn't as skilled as I am, and has a much lower tolerance for getting destroyed by a pred team than I do, so matching on our normal accounts made for a very unpleasant experience for him.

I'll have to revisit some of the old accounts again, but I never noticed any matchmaking reset after a season change for the random matches. I don't really played ranked much because I don't find the timid play style of everyone afraid to loose ranking as enjoyable.

I still stand by my opinion that SBMM in random game modes is a bad design. No incentive to get better if you are near the top of one of the lower end skill brackets. The entire purpose of a ranked system is to have a seperate game mode of similar skilled players. In essence Apex just has 2 ranked modes right now.

You can see from the matchmaking FAQ that they basically divide the playerbase into 4 or 5 groups, this is especially problematic if you are in the bottom of the top group. There is a huge skill difference between an 80th percentile player and a 99th percentile player. Most of these people that are actually pretty good at the game could never attain the type of skill that the predators have even if they had the time to devote to it. So instead of being rewarded for putting in some effort and being better than 80% of the playerbase you get punished by being fed to preds all day... meanwhile the guy sitting in the 19th percentile who never makes an effort to improve has as better k:d and more wins.

SBMM is better for EA and their profits, it isn't better for the players.

 

[Krater]

Why would p2w be bad anyway? Makes no sense to me

They are bad because they result in an inferior product that is usually designed to frustrate you into spending large sums of money. Often they can prey on gambling addictions and use unclear pricing in ways that just ooze sleaziness. This is especially common in the mobile games marketed to younger and more gullible people. Even the "pay for convenience" type games just result in an inferior product with artificial roadblocks built into the game to frustrate you into spending money. They have entire departments of people using game psychology to manipulate players without their knowledge. I don't see how being manipulated without your knowledge could be considered good.

There are thousands of games you can buy right now for a set price and just enjoy. I believe that is the better model for consumers, and the world would be a better place without p2w and freemium games.

I don't see a huge problem with cosmetics if they don't impact the actual game, but I still don't love it since the system often preys on vulnerable people that end up spending many times more than just buying a comparable game. I suppose those whales fund the game for the rest of us, I just hope they are people who can afford it and not some kid with no financial literacy.