Fabricant451

Video Games: The General Discussion & Community Thread Number Two

Real text on a positive rated Lost Ark Review on reddit. (All about it not being pay to win.)

"To determine if Lost Ark is a Pay to Win game, you first need to know what Pay to Win is.

Pay to Win literally means you have to spend money to win.

If you spend money and lose, it is not Pay to Win."

What a bunch of absolute horseshit.

If I keep looking at people defending this game I might hate this game with a fiery passion. (Note, I didn't even actively look for this. It was just in my feed.)

@Fabricant451 Is this one right too? <.<

Because my real question/point, is you're making two separate arguments. 1. It has no bad practices. 2. Others games with bad practices are worse. (You do understand why one doesn't fit the other, yes?)

@SleepingSilence

Pay to Win literally just means you can pay money to get an unfair advantage over other players, be that in buying better gear, buying 5 star characters in whatever gacha bullshit people play, etc. If you can definitively buy your way to being better than someone on an otherwise level playing field, that's pay to win. World of Warcraft selling exclusive mounts for real money isn't pay to win but if it suddenly sold legendary gear that gave you an advantage in pvp and/or pve content that other players couldn't get, that's pay to win. A game lessening the grind doesn't make it pay to win. If Lost Ark started selling gear that was above BiS that utterly ruined game balance, then yeah it'd be pay to win.

My argument isn't that Lost Ark has no bad practices and you'll not find me making that argument. My argument is that it's not, by definition, pay to win unless you change the definition of 'pay to win' to 'paying real money for anything in the game that is beneficial in any way'. Which is a slippery slope to outright saying 'all microtransactions are pay to win' instead of simply 'microtransactions are fucking bad' which is inarguable.

Lost Ark can have bad monetization and other games can have worse monetization without Lost Ark being pay to win. That's not contradictory. What Lost Ark is doing is what SWTOR does and other free to play MMO games do: incentivize players to essentially pay a monthly sub or equivalent. Is SWTOR pay to win if subscribed or preferred players get a mount at level 10 instead of level 25 or have access to more content or customization options? Is Lost Ark pay to win because you can purchase a recurring fee that makes teleports free and slight boost to exp? Because by that logic, FF14 is pay to win because you can buy a level skip to the current expansion and so is WoW because of character tokens. Even ESO does it and that's a buy to play game.

Lost Ark is actively being censored in the US, and they darkened many of the Asian characters skin for the US 'Muh Diversity' crowd.

@SleepingSilence

Is this really the hill you want to die on, my guy

Video Games: The General Discussion & Community Thread Number Two

Seems a bit contradicting in those statements. In what they're implying. But most bad monetization practices aren't so zealously defended. Like I'm seeing online. Not from you specifically mind.

@SleepingSilence

I don't think that's contradicting. Lost Ark not being pay to win doesn't contradict that there are games with worse monetization than it. SWTOR, for example, a game I genuinely enjoy literally locks you out of having multiple action bars and being able to move above a light jog unless you give them money to do so.

I mean even the people I've seen defending the game, casually talk about how it'll die down in hype and go away in a month. And for a f*cking MMO. That's NOT AT ALL a good thing. This isn't a flavor of the month indie title. A good MMO, will not die in a month.

Most MMOs have their most populous period at launch and then again at expansion releases. I don't think it'll die but I also doubt it'll go the way of New World.

Tell me that doesn't look like a mobile game RPG screen

I've looked up and seen one of the "cinematic dungeons" and they look nice enough.

I mean I don't play many mobile games but that looks like a typical MMO character menu to me

[/quote]

Video Games: The General Discussion & Community Thread Number Two

If Lost Ark didn't exist. I wouldn't have seen a random unfollowed user on twitter say, "Guys, some play to win games are good. And some not pay to win games are bad. Guys. Guys."

@SleepingSilence

Lost Ark isn't pay to win. It's 'pay to convenience'. You can't just buy the best gear and pay to beat the raids, but you can buy stuff to remove teleport cost or various other quality of life shit that one could argue shouldn't be behind pay wall. But a free to play game is going to try and make money somehow, that's just the nature of the beast.

Also that twitter person is right.

With the entire comment section grilling him for the fact he used to go after bad monetization practices, and also knew exactly what game he was defending. (And I use paid hacks semi-ironically. Youtubers gotta eat too. But it's only because the game has spent "Raid:Shadow Legends" money on advertising itself/paying people daily to play & stream it.

If someone wants to go after bad monetization practices there are dozens of worse examples than Lost Ark. Also, games having streamers do advertisements is not new nor is it always someone faking it. Sometimes, yeah, it's clear that the person is just throwing away morals to make a buck which hey that's the hustle in this world, but sometimes someone can genuinely enjoy a game and also do an ad for it.

I think it's just because I heard some fuck with a thick accent, pretend to be excited when he could jump in an MMO. And it made me lose my mind.

Maybe it was done for laughs. Or maybe he's not an MMO player. You also can't even jump in Lost Ark outside of scripted 'press G to jump' sections. You can dodge roll though which is something a bit more unique to the MMO space.

I've loved to hear examples of ARPG'S it's better than in comparison.

Victor Vran, Titan Quest, Last Epoch, Wolcen: Lords of Mayhem, I think it's better than Torchlight, MU Legend.

I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that Lost Ark, when the hype dies, can sit comfortably among the Diablos and PoEs of the world.

Because you can't have sex with characters in those games but you can in Lost Ark.

But I suppose everyone said the same thing about Tera too. About how great the combat system is. And eh? I suppose it's probably more fun to play, then it is to watch.

TERA was a breath of fresh air in the genre at the time because of its combat but because that's where the focus was you then had to contend with a fetch quest boring ass MMO where the fun stuff wasn't killing mobs but killing BAMs and dungeons but then that game had a myriad of other problems least of all doubling down on giving all the cool shit to the little girl loli race.

TERA could've been cool, man. Now I'm sad.

But the kind of zealous online defense and equal parts hatred that I'm seeing from the community about this dated MMORPG. I think I'll stick with the cash grab I'm already fooling myself into playing. Thanks.

Again, not a cash grab but also it's more of an ARPG with a chat room than a full on MMORPG. I'm not defending the game because, again, I don't think it's the kind of game for me (I like my games to at least pretend to have a story) but I can absolutely understand why there are people genuinely having fun with and enjoying it. Hell, I know someone who wasn't gonna play it and now almost has a max level character with plans to make more and they haven't spent a dime other than the head start.

Video Games: The General Discussion & Community Thread Number Two

If Horizon Forbidden West sucks I'm gonna bash my head against a wall and never play video games ever again

Toontown | The Guild's #1 Stop for Cartoon Discussion

If Flee or Mitchells vs the Machines doesn't win the Best Animated Feature at the Oscars then I will continue to mock them and call them out of touch while also caring way too much about pointless award shows.

I just think it would be nice if something other than a Disney movie won because in the past ten years only 2 animated movies won that weren't Disney and like sorry, Brave, but ParaNorman was better and also fuck you Big Hero 6, Princess Kaguya ruled.

What I'm saying is I've never forgiven them for giving it to the rat chef movie over Persepolis

Video Games: The General Discussion & Community Thread Number Two

I think your problem is sourcing opinions from people you deem to be paid hacks and not streamers or people you trust or like trying the game that is free out for yourself since the only thing wasted then is time. But as someone who has played a lot of MMOs, Lost Ark is better than New World because New World is on fire so much you can survive a winter with it as your primary heating source. And saying it doesn't look better than mobile games is a bit disingenuous.

I don't even like the game because its story is super shit and I disagree with gender locked classes but even I can't deny that the actual use of skills and moment to moment fighting of enemies is solid enough to be better than garden variety ARPGs. It doesn't have the polish of a AAA budget or even a AA Diablo knockoff but it's a good enough veg out game that'll absolutely die down in a month as is the way.

1x1x1 maybe?

@Tlstiffl I did. Both ideas are up my alley but then I'm a sucker for a good triangle or whatever it may be

1x1x1 maybe?

Hello this interests me muchly

Toontown | The Guild's #1 Stop for Cartoon Discussion

So back to your points. Can you think of a kids show where 'obvious gags for the young crowd' doesn't apply? Or can you think of a season one of a kids show that does its worldbuilding/lore better than Avatar? Please don't say Steven Universe or Adventure Time, I beg you.

@SleepingSilence

Off the top of my head? No, because most cartoons aren't really serialized the way Avatar is, or I assume it becomes such. Also because I'm not super familiar with a lot of cartoons. I haven't seen Adventure Time and Steven Universe is a bad example anyway because its first season is like 50 episodes and only like 10 of them have any sort of lasting lore relevance. Gravity Falls maybe? But I say that having not seen Gravity Falls.

Most cartoons, and correct me if I'm wrong as this is absolutely not my area of expertise, tend to be more episodic in nature culminating in arcs near mid or season finales. But just because ATLA does its lore better than its peers doesn't mean I have to give it a pass for what I feel are its narrative shortcomings.

I don't expect a character like Aang to understand the moral complexities of war profiteering, but I would absolutely expect a character like Katara or Zuko to

Toontown | The Guild's #1 Stop for Cartoon Discussion

Have you finished it?

@Exit

I finished season 1, but it took me a bit because I was put off by the first couple of episodes and their wild tonal shifts. I didn't find myself compelled to watch beyond that despite everyone telling me that it gets 'even better'. That may be but I have the same response to that as I do when someone tells me "Yeah no this game gets good after 20 hours"

I tried getting into Avatar but ultimately I didn't really vibe with the writing. I love the aesthetic of the show, though. Elemental benders in an Asian setting is certainly cool.

@Peppercorn

My problem was its writing, largely. Like I know with cartoons people like to use the whole 'it's good...for a kids show!' but I've always been of the mind that something is good or bad regardless of audience in mind (with exceptions, I'm not about to be like "No, Little Einstein's is brilliant!') and Avatar's writing (at least in the first season, which is all I have context for) wasn't 'good for a kids show' or even 'good in general'. It was full of tonal shifts and obvious gags for the young crowd, but its lore was interesting enough. But lore and story aren't the same thing and if someone says otherwise ask them to explain the lore of Lord of the Rings and buzz them if they start talking about Frodo and Sam's wild adventure.

All everyone ever talked about was stuff that doesn't happen in the first season because the first season spends half its time doing episodic lore exploration (which were the episodes I liked) and then the other half being episodic adventures. But while watching the first season I kept being told the same thing, how good it gets, how Zuko has a redemption arc, how such and such and so and so and this and that and it's like yeah, that all sounds cool, but the first season felt trapped by its need to appeal to the younger Nickelodeon crowd.

I also suspect that many ATLA fans were young when it was airing and I was 16 and at the age where I was too cool and mature and old for dumb cartoons which is probably why my NickToon/TeenNick nostalgia consists of the Rugrats/Doug/Clarissa Explains It All/Rocko era through to just about As Told By Ginger 2004-ish or so. Except for CatDog. That was a mistake. And Rocket Power.

But yeah, I'm sure ATLA is fine but I gave it more than a fair shake (I feel) and just...didn't vibe with it.

For some reason, I remember you talking about the Legend of Korra. Did you happen to watch that show first? Or am I confusing you with somebody else?

@SleepingSilence

Nah, I never saw Korra. My experience with Korra was playing the real bad action game of it then hearing she and another girl held hands. I have been told I might like Korra because of my specific interests in shows where women get to punch people real good but those same people also told me I'd like Avatar the Last Airbender so I can't trust 'em