Pay2Win: The Tricks Exposed

About

Pay2Win: The Tricks Exposed is a single player casual role playing game. It was developed by Best Gaem Studio and was released on December 15, 2015. It received neutral reviews from players.

"Pay2Win: The Tricks Exposed" is a simulator that puts you in a fantasy world to experience the Pay2Win business model firsthand. By making numerous purchases, you'll uncover the secrets behind the system, with all virtual cash provided for free. The game aims to make players think about the value of their spending, as the accumulated cash amount is displayed throughout the game. This game is recommended for those interested in the Pay2Win debate and its impact on the gaming industry.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player

Skip User Reviews

56%

Audience ScoreBased on 80 reviews

humor12 positive mentions

gameplay4 negative mentions

The game effectively highlights the manipulative tactics used in pay-to-win games, providing valuable insights into the gaming industry's monetization strategies.
Despite its flaws, the game has a unique charm and can be surprisingly addictive, making it an interesting experience for those familiar with MMOs.
It serves as a humorous and exaggerated critique of the frustrations players face in free-to-play games, making it a thought-provoking experience.

The gameplay is excessively tedious, requiring repetitive clicking and dragging, which can lead to frustration and boredom.
Many players found the user interface poorly designed, making interactions cumbersome and detracting from the overall experience.
The game often feels more like a chore than a fun experience, with exaggerated mechanics that can make it difficult to engage with the intended message.

story
27 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
11%
78%
11%
The game's story is perceived as a satirical commentary on the pay-to-win mechanics prevalent in many MMOs, with quests that often feel tedious and overly reliant on real money transactions. While some players appreciate the humor and cleverness behind the narrative, many find the quests frustratingly long and repetitive, leading to a sense of disillusionment rather than enjoyment. Overall, the story attempts to critique the genre but often falls flat due to its execution and the burdensome nature of its gameplay mechanics.
- “A cool idea and story, with a good lesson - feels like something a teacher would assign as a click-along homework assignment.”
- “Even though NPCs clearly say that their quests are BS, you still can get that sense of accomplishment while doing them and feel your place in the game world.”
- “This game is okay; the idea of the game being funny and ingenious, and the gameplay and quests are rather comedic.”
- “Hearing the moral of the story is not worth the time.”
- “Your 'reward' for completing quests is a brief explanation of one concept or trick employed by those shady developers to extract a gazillion dollars from you.”
- “The absolute shittiest game I've ever played... sadly that's exactly what the creator was going for in a quest to show just how crap generic MMOs are.”
gameplay
17 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
18%
58%
24%
The gameplay is often described as tedious and lacking in quality, with many players noting that it serves more as a simulation of pay-to-win mechanics rather than providing an engaging experience. While the concept of exploring free-to-play mechanics is appreciated, the execution falls short, leading to a boring experience that some find insightful but ultimately frustrating. Overall, the game prioritizes its educational aspect over enjoyable gameplay, making it a mixed experience for players.
- “The game is from 2015, so it's going to feel outdated; there's not a single mention of the controversial loot box mechanics found in free-to-play and premium games alike.”
- “The idea of showing off the ongoing scam tactics in MMOs with gameplay is great.”
- “What I had to say about that in the feedback thread was the following: 'The mechanics for upgrading items remind me of actually doing that in a real MMO, where I had enough upgrade gems to almost certainly get my items to +10, but didn't want to sit there clicking the button for literally two hours per item until it succeeded enough times in a row.'”
- “The idea is actually really good, explanations are well done, but execution and gameplay are poor.”
- “The whole 'pay to win' mechanic is supposed to get rid of the tedium of leveling and doing all this early-game stuff, and this game doesn't provide that.”
- “The gameplay is boring, but that's the point.”
grinding
13 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The grinding aspect of the game is widely criticized for being excessively tedious and poorly designed, with players expressing frustration over clunky interfaces and the overwhelming time investment required for tasks like upgrading equipment and farming resources. Many reviewers feel that the experience is more laborious than enjoyable, often leading to boredom and a desire to seek shortcuts through microtransactions, which are also seen as frustratingly tedious. Overall, the grinding mechanics detract significantly from the game's enjoyment, making it feel like a chore rather than a rewarding experience.
- “So in my opinion, you are better off watching a video about the psychology of pay-to-win than wasting time and nerves playing this; after around 20 minutes, it becomes so tedious that most will likely miss the 'message' of lectures 4-6.”
- “The biggest flaw and reason why this game has some meta-level of irony is that you still have to do something tedious without the ability to 'buy the time'.”
- “I felt a sense of boredom grinding dungeons and relief when I was told I could just get the fancy legendary sword from a loot box.”
humor
12 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is described as hit-or-miss, with some players finding it hilarious and on point, particularly in its critique of pay-to-win mechanics. However, many reviewers feel that the humor is overshadowed by frustrating gameplay and tedious interactions, leading to a mixed reception where moments of wit are often buried under annoyance. Overall, while there are glimpses of comedic potential, the execution leaves much to be desired, making it more of a commentary on gaming practices than a consistently funny experience.
- “Hilarious and pretty much on point.”
- “It's fine to make a game that mocks cash-grab concepts or pretty much anything as long as it brings something that can actually be considered funny.”
- “I did grin at the humor of much of the text and the sort of semi-intentional poor craftsmanship of the game.”
monetization
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
75%
The monetization strategy in the game is heavily criticized for its overt focus on maximizing profits through microtransactions, including battle passes and other features typical of free-to-play and MMO models. Reviewers feel that while the game attempts to expose pay-to-win elements, it fails to recognize that game quality significantly influences player engagement with these monetization tactics.
- “All of this should be available from the very beginning of the game if the idea is to maximize monetization.”
- “Basically, it shows the monetization behind the majority of free-to-play/MMO projects, how it works and why, in a very simple manner.”
- “And all of this should be available from the very beginning of the game if the idea is to 'maximize monetization.'”
- “Delivering its message with the heaviest hands possible, this attempt to reveal the pay-to-win secrets misses the mark by ignoring that the quality of a game impacts player engagement with microtransactions.”
music
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
75%
The music in the game has received mixed reviews, with some players appreciating the nice soundtrack while others find it repetitive and tiresome, contributing to an overall perception of lacking quality in various game aspects.
- “The music was driving me crazy.”
- “The overall quality of the game is very lacking (music, graphics, level design, gameplay).”
- “Got some okay soundtrack but gets tiresome.”
graphics
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
100%
The graphics of the game are generally considered simple and adequate, though they do suffer from some bugs. While not the primary focus of the game, which emphasizes its thematic lessons over visual quality, the graphics are deemed decent enough to support the overall experience.
- “The overall quality of the game is very lacking, particularly in graphics.”
- “The focus is clearly not on the best graphics or mechanics in the world; the graphics are decent but not impressive.”
- “While the game does a decent job at graphics, they are not the main focus and could use significant improvement.”
replayability
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game is generally considered to have low replayability, with users expressing that it lacks elements that encourage multiple playthroughs.
- “The game is really not replayable.”
- “There is little incentive to play through the game again.”
- “Once you've completed it, there's not much left to explore.”
stability
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game demonstrates strong stability, successfully avoiding the common glitches found in many low-budget titles on Steam.
- “The game crashes frequently, making it nearly unplayable at times.”
- “I experienced multiple bugs that disrupted my gameplay experience.”
- “The stability issues are frustrating, as I often find myself having to restart the game.”
optimization
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The optimization of the game has been criticized, with some users suggesting that the experience is more enjoyable in retrospect than during actual gameplay, indicating potential performance issues or lack of engagement.