Quote (MaryJuana @ Aug 19 2022 03:11am)
My granddad usually only reads clickbait titles and then goes ahead and tells everyone the new „facts“ he just read about
You remind me of him
Anyway on to the topic, Blizzard proved how bad they can manage a fair game when it comes to mobile (which is more or less the standard nowadays with a few exceptions), but its still Blizzard and not EA when it comes to the successor of their major series - i dont think they dare to make it p2w and the notes prove that apparently. Altho you tried to mislead with this post
The game can either be:
1) Pay to win
2) Be smart to win
3) Be skilled to win
4) Hack to win
In Diablo 2 we often saw partnerships between 1) and 3) because, although someone won't just admit one is smarter than they are, they do appreciate manual skill like f4tality's and they often encourage it by gearing them at their own expense.
The partnerships between 2) and 4) are the most notorious because if you're smart you don't pay, and you also realize that no matter how skilled a player is, unless they have an unfair advantage they cannot consistently win, with only a defeat being very embarrassing.
No partnership can exist between 3) and 4) because 3) will not accept 4).
Partnerships between 1) and 4) were rare but yet existed.
The point is:
If the game doesn't let you do none of the 4, it's unplayable and it's not a game. There would also be no reason for people to party or play socially because they would have nothing valuable to share.