Forum Discussion
@jaydabbler I'm not talking about the cards.
I'm talking about the fact that the game gives you a card is not random, but with certain coefficients. If you pay the money then you get the right cards. The game puts you in the category of people who pay. In this category people become more "lucky" and get the right card at the right moment. This is done in many games, to encourage those who pay.
@Goo0di wrote:
@jaydabbler I'm not talking about the cards.
I'm talking about the fact that the game gives you a card is not random, but with certain coefficients. If you pay the money then you get the right cards. The game puts you in the category of people who pay. In this category people become more "lucky" and get the right card at the right moment. This is done in many games, to encourage those who pay.
This seems pretty out there!
Here's the thing, in this day and age of the internet and the hive mind, where people can easily put together data and calculate rates and probabilities, a company would be quite stupid to try something like that without being transparent about it. There are various reasons:
- That kind of thing (giving better luck based results to those who pay money) because people are quite against that. The norm is that people who pay will have access to more chances, but the chances are equal for everyone.
- If they did make internal changes to the coefficients for the RNG used for people who pay, then it would make absolutely no sense NOT to market it. Why give those who are paying more without telling them, they already paid anyway, and they aren't going to realize that they are getting more because there is no information indicating so. What is the point then? It would just mean that people who are already keen to pay would need to pay LESS!
- If they are doing it and are hiding it, and people discover it, that would be terrible marketing for a company, completely not worth the total lack of extra revenue that doesn't actually exist if they do implement something like that.
Given this, there is no reason to do it. You can call PopCap greedy if you are inclined to do so, but if they were, then this idea would not be in their best interest.
You say that this is done in many games. I can imagine some small and ignorant indy developer who actually thinks that this helps implementing this in their small mobile game but even then, is there proof of this? Which are these games that do this? Or is this just a bunch of people who don't understand probabilities and think that companies are both stupid and incredibly greedy making the same assumptions for all these other games?
About Plants vs. Zombies™ Franchise Discussion
Recent Discussions
- 17 minutes ago
- 12 hours ago
- 14 hours ago
- 22 hours ago