Maybe TOT decks should be offered for crowns.

Personofsecrets

Just a thought. As TOT isn't something universally enjoyed or played, it makes sense that the decks could be offered in the Crown Store rather than be a part of DLC expansions. In my case, I'd also rather get these from the Crown store by purchase or membership instead of hunting down fragments.

spartaxoxo

Hard pass. I don't want this game to become P2W, over monetized, less and less content and more and more crown store. It's bad enough with the companions. This is direct competition. No, thanks.

Tazzy

I play TOT (only against NPC`s) - but I would never ever pay for decks. Its not required to be owner of the deck, when the NPC selects one you don`t have, you still can play that game.

colossalvoids

As someone who does not enjoy tot nor plays it and have no use for fragments and other associated rewards from quests and so on it's a slippery slope. Despite me personally willing it to go away in some corner to never see it again, be it CS or else.

There's no need to encourage more purchases when the game is already overly monetized for not a free to play game which have constant hefty money worth expansions, subs etc. we should instead encourage them to funnel more resources into actual development and expanding their scale with things they could offer each release, as most of the money apparently going complete void or into other new title they're developing when looking at ESO recent years of offerings and how they boast a successful business.

BixenteN7Akantor

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Hard pass. I don't want this game to become P2W, over monetized, less and less content and more and more crown store. It's bad enough with the companions. This is direct competition. No, thanks.

I mean... Those decks are locked behind Chapters so they're already P2W. A fair solution would be to sell them in CS at largely reduced price (like 200-300 crowns each) to unlock the deck without upgrades.

colossalvoids

BixenteN7Akantor wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Hard pass. I don't want this game to become P2W, over monetized, less and less content and more and more crown store. It's bad enough with the companions. This is direct competition. No, thanks.

I mean... Those decks are locked behind Chapters so they're already P2W. A fair solution would be to sell them in CS at largely reduced price (like 200-300 crowns each) to unlock the deck without upgrades.

No one considering new content p2w just because it brings a new power spike, it's about things sold separately and not earned through the gameplay, new or old. I mean, it not even winning anything in this case but can set a precedent for the company to this next time if people are fine with more stuff they're charging for in addition to already rich monetisation.

Personofsecrets

I consider anything that someone buys which could hypothetically give them any advantage as a form of pay to win.

Generally speaking, I don't care about pay to win aspects of games. I still think that anti-pay to win aspects of communities are useful. That said, the conversation isn't had in the correct way. The "definition" that is used is bad. People make all kinds of special exceptions about what counts and what doesn't count as pay to win.

Those special exceptions hurt the conversation, in my opinion, because they let businesses weasel in pay to win aspects by just calling those aspects the exception word that turns off peoples thinking about the subject.

But again, despite being good consumers who give business a hard time, anti-pay to win people should understand that everyone needs to pay to win no matter what it is they are doing. There is no free to play, only relatively more or less free to play.

spartaxoxo

colossalvoids wrote: »

No one considering new content p2w just because it brings a new power spike, it's about things sold separately and not earned through the gameplay, new or old.

One more time for the people in the back!

colossalvoids wrote: »

I mean, it not even winning anything in this case but can set a precedent for the company to this next time if people are fine with more stuff they're charging for in addition to already rich monetisation.

In the case of decks, you would be winning something. Tales of Tribute has a ranked mode with leaderboards.

spartaxoxo

Personofsecrets wrote: »

But again, despite being good consumers who give business a hard time, anti-pay to win people should understand that everyone needs to pay to win no matter what it is they are doing. There is no free to play, only relatively more or less free to play.

That is precisely why the definition is NOT so broad as to label all monetization P2W.

DLC and big expansions with items unlocked through gameplay has generally never been regarded as P2W because that payment model requires developers to focus on good gameplay and the customer experience.

P2W isn't demonization of all forms of payment. It is a call out of a particular practice that led to predatory monetization models and games in the past. Those predatory games are what led to this definition and the term.

Personofsecrets

That is a flawed idea because of it's illogical requirements of special exceptions. "This way of paying for advancement is pay to win while all of these other ways aren't because of reasons that don't logically follow."

What developers need to do in order to justify their work has no relation to the general pay to win question. These are separate things.

I prefer the 100% consistent way of determining if any aspect of a game is pay to win.

To step away from abstractions, we can just look at the crafting bag. There are other pay to win aspects of the game, but that game piece is of particular interest because it was sold as being about paying for convenience. That's to say that the most common (wrong) idea of what pay to win is was undermined by a language game at the earlirst possible chance for such a thing to happen.

The crafting bag is just as abundant in the pay to win behavior that it creates as what gacha game create. Good thing that it's not "technically" pay to win!

spartaxoxo

There is nothing illogical about exceptions. It's a focus on what the customer should expect as a priority by understanding how businesses operate. It would be far more illogical to demand everything be free or to refuse to acknowledge that some practices are more predatory than others. Not all businesses practices are predatory. And a business cannot function without income.

There is logic to "I want developers to focus on the gameplay aspect of the game because the emphasis is quality rather than individual items."

Subscription and DLC focus means that development makes it's money on providing quality gameplay first and foremost. Cash shop focused means that they focus on individual items and not as much on gameplay because it's not their money maker. That's why so many f2p games are less customer friendly than buy to play ones.

Nobody expects everything to be free. They just want game designer's main focus to be on making gameplay better because then we all win. Thus far, creating new games or expansions for existing games seems to be the monetization model that best accomplishes that.

spartaxoxo

Also I just saw this whole thing play out with OW2 all over again lol.

They were a buy to play game that sold lootboxes that had cosmetics only. All new heroes were free.

And then when they moved over to OW2, they decided to switch to a free to play game that sold heroes in the battle pass. And the quality cratered, the game became far more monetized, and player satisfaction hit an all time low. It must have impacted their bottom line because they walked back the decision to sell heroes and have had to walk back some of aggressive monetization decisions they had at launch. It went from a game that spawned a ton of copycats and genre shaking to the worst reviewed game.

Personofsecrets

The illogical thing, which I pointed out but will make more clear, is that ever new ways to be an exception will be invented out of thin air such that what design wants to do doesn't count as the false version of pay to win..

For example, what exactly is the issue with ToT decks in the Crown Store?

I can fabricate the reason that nobody is winning anything because everyone get's to play with a deck when it is selected for a game even if one of the participants didn't purchase the deck.

So what's the problem?

I can evoke the contrived idea that the Crown deck is balanced, so nobody is really winning anything if it is picked.

So what's the problem?

I can make up any idea that I want to trick those who believe in the meme of what pay to win is and what is their recourse? It's better to not have a fluid idea for this trigger phrase so that capital doesn't have the pretense of constantly shifting goal posts in their favor.

The comprehensive and correct view of what paying to win at something means anyone can just look at the above example, find how players with access to different decks are comparatively advantaged to players who didn't buy those decks and then properly apply the pay to win label to these happenings.

The other things being mentioned don't make sense to bring up. Paying to win is separate from developer priorities. Business monetization and the ability of players to protest such schemes is outside of the scope of what paying to win is.

The example of a game that is speculated to have gone down hill due to it's change in monetization also doesn't have to do with the topic. I played a game that is wildly successful and some guild members were spending hundreds of dollars a month on the game. So what? None of that matters toward the topic.

At this point, I'm done discussing what pay to win means.

spartaxoxo

Slippery slope is a fallacy.

Don't put power in the cash shop. Only in actual gameplay. That's pretty simple to adhere to and many games have. DLCS focus on gameplay, that's what it makes it meaningfully different.

Putting decks in the cash shop puts competitive power directly in the store. Those with their own access to decks are obviously going to better at playing with them than those who don't. It's a direct competitive advantage being purchased in the store. That's why I am very against this idea. You can argue that what is most profitable doesn't have an impact on developers motivations, but I don't agree. I think it does. So, I cannot agree that it's okay to put decks in the crown store.

colossalvoids

spartaxoxo wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

I mean, it not even winning anything in this case but can set a precedent for the company to this next time if people are fine with more stuff they're charging for in addition to already rich monetisation.

In the case of decks, you would be winning something. Tales of Tribute has a ranked mode with leaderboards.

Aren't decks shuffled between both parties?

spartaxoxo

colossalvoids wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

I mean, it not even winning anything in this case but can set a precedent for the company to this next time if people are fine with more stuff they're charging for in addition to already rich monetisation.

In the case of decks, you would be winning something. Tales of Tribute has a ranked mode with leaderboards.

Aren't decks shuffled between both parties?

They are but being able to actually play a deck confers some big advantages.

1) A deck you own is a deck you'll naturally have more practice with

2) The deck you choose when you are player 1/2 has a pretty big impact on your odds of success. So, being able to select a deck actually conveys a pretty big statistical advantage. Many players don't know this and just pick the same thing every time that they like. But more competitive players know which decks favor player 1 (for example) a lot and choose accordingly. If you don't have the ability to select them yourself, you can't use it that way, and are only able to play with it when a) someone randomly decides to play it or b) someone choose it specifically to put you at a disadvantage.

3) some decks are good counterplay to other decks. An opponent running a strategy is not as likely to pick the deck that may interfere with their own odds of success. And if you can't either, you're at a disadvantage.

WitchyKiki

Oof. You went and said this! lol

Personofsecrets

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

ESO_player123

Personofsecrets wrote: »

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

Why stop at ToT decks only? Let's dissect the content of chapters/DLCs into convenience pieces like this: a set from a trial - $5, full set of antiquity leads for a music box (12) - $3, a lead to a new OP mythic - $1. Exaggeration? Sure. But once something like this added to the Crown Store I do not see this trend stopping there.

Edit: and we already have companions in the store.

Personofsecrets

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

Why stop at ToT decks only? Let's dissect the content of chapters/DLCs into convenience pieces like this: a set from a trial - $5, full set of antiquity leads for a music box (12) - $3, a lead to a new OP mythic - $1. Exaggeration? Sure. But once something like this added to the Crown Store I do not see this trend stopping there.

Edit: and we already have companions in the store.

Yes, that all sounds good.

ESO_player123

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

Why stop at ToT decks only? Let's dissect the content of chapters/DLCs into convenience pieces like this: a set from a trial - $5, full set of antiquity leads for a music box (12) - $3, a lead to a new OP mythic - $1. Exaggeration? Sure. But once something like this added to the Crown Store I do not see this trend stopping there.

Edit: and we already have companions in the store.

Yes, that all sounds good.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the issue.

Kappachi

They already are offered for crowns. Buy the previous chapters/dlcs with crowns, then complete the missions. I would not want them offered other ways, rest of us already had to do all that questin.

Personofsecrets

Kappachi wrote: »

They already are offered for crowns. Buy the previous chapters/dlcs with crowns, then complete the missions. I would not want them offered other ways, rest of us already had to do all that questin.

Yes, my idea can just apply to new TOT decks.

Personofsecrets

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

Why stop at ToT decks only? Let's dissect the content of chapters/DLCs into convenience pieces like this: a set from a trial - $5, full set of antiquity leads for a music box (12) - $3, a lead to a new OP mythic - $1. Exaggeration? Sure. But once something like this added to the Crown Store I do not see this trend stopping there.

Edit: and we already have companions in the store.

Yes, that all sounds good.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the issue.

What was the slippery slope that brought Companion to the Crown Store?

ESO_player123

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

Why stop at ToT decks only? Let's dissect the content of chapters/DLCs into convenience pieces like this: a set from a trial - $5, full set of antiquity leads for a music box (12) - $3, a lead to a new OP mythic - $1. Exaggeration? Sure. But once something like this added to the Crown Store I do not see this trend stopping there.

Edit: and we already have companions in the store.

Yes, that all sounds good.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the issue.

What was the slippery slope that brought Companion to the Crown Store?

I just mentioned that one regular part of a chapter was taken out and put in the crown store. Though personally I'm not really concerned about companions. We have plenty of others, and all of them are more or less the same in terms of giving any advantage in the game. That would not be the case with ToT decks or sets from dungeons/trials. BUT once they start pulling out features from chapters/DLC to the cash shop for convenience sake it will be progressively worse (because there will be people with enough RL money to gobble them up).

Personofsecrets

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

Why stop at ToT decks only? Let's dissect the content of chapters/DLCs into convenience pieces like this: a set from a trial - $5, full set of antiquity leads for a music box (12) - $3, a lead to a new OP mythic - $1. Exaggeration? Sure. But once something like this added to the Crown Store I do not see this trend stopping there.

Edit: and we already have companions in the store.

Yes, that all sounds good.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the issue.

What was the slippery slope that brought Companion to the Crown Store?

I just mentioned that one regular part of a chapter was taken out and put in the crown store. Though personally I'm not really concerned about companions. We have plenty of others, and all of them are more or less the same in terms of giving any advantage in the game. That would not be the case with ToT decks or sets from dungeons/trials. BUT once they start pulling out features from chapters/DLC to the cash shop for convenience sake it will be progressively worse (because there will be people with enough RL money to gobble them up).

There is some irony in what you write. This is me pointing it out, please imagine in a nice way.

Not being concerned about the companions could be the slippery slope.

Writing off the special perks of each companion and considering them to be about the same is the slippery slope.

By your own standard, things are prepared to be more and more heavily monetized right now.

And your point regarding TOT has had a counter idea earlier in the thread. Everyone get's to play with TOT decks during a match whether they have unlocked them or not. So why be that concerned about TOT decks too? Why not just say that it's all more or less of the same for the TOT decks too?

I can understand not wanting more aggressive monetization, but trying to differentiate between what paid for advantages do and don't count when it comes to indicators of future aggressive monetization doesn't really make sense.

Also, slippery slopes can happen, but they don't necessarily have to happen. The designers have not monetized, for example, the login rewards. There is yet to be monetization info regarding Golden Pursuits as well. That's to say that design can be generous at times. Maybe some TOT decks would cost money and then, a season later, maybe there would be free decks. Who knows?

ESO_player123

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

Why stop at ToT decks only? Let's dissect the content of chapters/DLCs into convenience pieces like this: a set from a trial - $5, full set of antiquity leads for a music box (12) - $3, a lead to a new OP mythic - $1. Exaggeration? Sure. But once something like this added to the Crown Store I do not see this trend stopping there.

Edit: and we already have companions in the store.

Yes, that all sounds good.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the issue.

What was the slippery slope that brought Companion to the Crown Store?

I just mentioned that one regular part of a chapter was taken out and put in the crown store. Though personally I'm not really concerned about companions. We have plenty of others, and all of them are more or less the same in terms of giving any advantage in the game. That would not be the case with ToT decks or sets from dungeons/trials. BUT once they start pulling out features from chapters/DLC to the cash shop for convenience sake it will be progressively worse (because there will be people with enough RL money to gobble them up).

There is some irony in what you write. This is me pointing it out, please imagine in a nice way.

Not being concerned about the companions could be the slippery slope.

Writing off the special perks of each companion and considering them to be about the same is the slippery slope.

By your own standard, things are prepared to be more and more heavily monetized right now.

And your point regarding TOT has had a counter idea earlier in the thread. Everyone get's to play with TOT decks during a match whether they have unlocked them or not. So why be that concerned about TOT decks too? Why not just say that it's all more or less of the same for the TOT decks too?

I can understand not wanting more aggressive monetization, but trying to differentiate between what paid for advantages do and don't count when it comes to indicators of future aggressive monetization doesn't really make sense.

Also, slippery slopes can happen, but they don't necessarily have to happen. The designers have not monetized, for example, the login rewards. There is yet to be monetization info regarding Golden Pursuits as well. That's to say that design can be generous at times. Maybe some TOT decks would cost money and then, a season later, maybe there would be free decks. Who knows?

@spartaxoxo already pointed out in post #16 why owning a particular ToT deck gives an advantage, and I agree with the points made.
Regarding companions: I PERSONALLY am not that concerned about companions in crown store (even though I unlock and use all of their perks). It does not mean that others feel the same (and it was definitely not well received here on the forums).

Companion's advantages cannot be compared to those provided by sets or ToT decks because the latter is used in leaderboard content.

Edit: for the record, I'm not on any leaderboards, so my concerns are not for my placements here.

WitchyKiki

Personofsecrets wrote: »

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

Imagine thinking that the natural progression of an MMO which always comes in the forms of DLC is 'pay to win'. These people have never played true P2W games.

Even still, a deck on the crown store is still NOT P2W. If the other player picks it, you can also use it... I still would hate to see TOT decks stuffed into the crown store, its not P2W but its micro-transactions that are being hyper monetized.

spartaxoxo

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

WitchyKiki wrote: »

Oof. You went and said this! lol

I have a *** job and put together what is probably a $30,000 Magic the Gathering deck over the last 6 to 7 years.

Especially for game pieces that don't cost that much, let's say a $10 to $20 Crown Store deck, people have to realize that people aren't paying to win. They are paying for their love of the game.

Imagine thinking that the natural progression of an MMO which always comes in the forms of DLC is 'pay to win'. These people have never played true P2W games.

Even still, a deck on the crown store is still NOT P2W. If the other player picks it, you can also use it... I still would hate to see TOT decks stuffed into the crown store, its not P2W but its micro-transactions that are being hyper monetized.

If you're paying for a significant competitive advantage in the cash shop it's P2W. Other people being decide how you use might be able to use a deck is not the same thing as being able to select it yourself, and there are significant competitive advantages to being able to select it yourself.

Jaimeh

spartaxoxo wrote: »

There is nothing illogical about exceptions. It's a focus on what the customer should expect as a priority by understanding how businesses operate. It would be far more illogical to demand everything be free or to refuse to acknowledge that some practices are more predatory than others. Not all businesses practices are predatory. And a business cannot function without income.

There is logic to "I want developers to focus on the gameplay aspect of the game because the emphasis is quality rather than individual items."

Subscription and DLC focus means that development makes it's money on providing quality gameplay first and foremost. Cash shop focused means that they focus on individual items and not as much on gameplay because it's not their money maker. That's why so many f2p games are less customer friendly than buy to play ones.

Nobody expects everything to be free. They just want game designer's main focus to be on making gameplay better because then we all win. Thus far, creating new games or expansions for existing games seems to be the monetization model that best accomplishes that.

This ^ If an advantage for winning something is not available for free in the game, and it can only be obtained from the store, that's the definition of PTW. People can be pedantic all they want about convenience things, but nothing right now is PTW in the game, and I hope it stays that way. As for items from DLCs and so on, that's new content, and of course it will be monetized. If you want to have a current and updated build you need access to them, but that doesn't mean you can't still 'win' with less updated stuff.

Personofsecrets

That isn't necessarily true for a hypothetical deck that doesn't exist yet. Pure speculation.