Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"pay-to-win"

Yah, good luck with that. Anyone who has played competitively knows you will absolutely get stomped by a higher skill opponent even if your deck is more powerful on paper unless the discrepancy is ludicrous. Garfield made his game too well to fall to such trite criticisms...he outdid himself, its immune to his own potshots, lol



Yeah, there's basically a floor of how much you have to spend to get a competitive deck, but beyond that spending more doesn't help.


That floor is pretty dang high though. It both has one of the highest costs of entry for pretty much any game (to be fair, it does change with format, but it's basically a choice between paying a lot upfront or effectively a subscription), and the advantage you have scales quite substantially with the amount that you spend (though not quite as much as some mobile games). 'pay-to-win' is a valid criticism, even if skill still matters to some extent.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: