Greetings. It's been a while since I've posted about #splinterlands and since there's a bit of a controversy or two going on right now, I figured I would write a little bit on one of the points I have recently in the discord server and elsewhere.
One of the most controversial subjects is the issue of SPS staking. I had been away from the game and the discord for a while so I hadn't really heard of it before. I first learned of this when 
I don't have too much of a problem with this concept, but I was a little taken back by the numbers. They seemed a little high to me. I know that things may all shake out during implementation, but I saw it as yet another decision in a trend of decisions that to me seem to have a chilling effect on potential new players.
People take offense when I say this, but Splinterlands is a pay-to-win game. I estimate that if you look at two teams in a match, the factors that decide the winning team break down to about 80% the value of the hands played, 15% strategy and 5% Random Number Generations (RNG). Changes like staking requirements and card level reward limits make the game pay-to-earn as well.
Both of these things together, create a one-two punch that in my opinion seriously hinders new player acquisition. A lot of folks don't believe me when I tell them this. I can't count how many times I have been told "Build your deck" when questioning the logic of these decisions. I made the statement in Discord the other day that I don't think this is the persuasive argument we think it is.
To demonstrate the problem to those who may not understand, I came up with an anaolgy. The comparison of Splinterlands to a poker game isn't perfect, but I think I can use it to make my point.
Imagine that a friend of yours recently told you about this new casino in town that has a new type of poker game. You are told that it is a new and unique way to play the game. Your friend says that you would be great at it becasue you are really good at strategy. You are excited and decide to check it out one day.
Upon arriving, you learn that to enter the Casino in order to play the game, you have to pay a $10 fee which gets you a player's card. You walk in and see lots of exciting games going on. You sit down at one table and start to play. You play a few hands and soon realize that it's a lot harder than you thought it would be. The players all seem to be super experienced. They also bet a lot more than you can afford. You end up folding most hands because you're matched against players who are betting hundreds of dollars when you are betting with ones. They are essentially paying to win the game.
By some stroke of luck, you draw a a really good hand and win your first game. You are confused when the dealer pulls the pot off of the table. He explains that you can't take any winnings unless you buy or rent your own cards. Oh, you didn't know that. So you embark on a mission to figure out how to do that. Some other players get you started. You get some basic cards (whatever that means) and head back to the table. You start to win more often. You're getting the hang of it. You're still often outmatched, but you learn that you can sneak in wins here and there with good strategy. You climb in status and next thing you know you're back in the mix again with some high rollers.
The pot is huge. You know it's going to be tough to win, but if you play your cards right, you might be able to do it. Lucky you, you draw a royla flush. The other players try to raise the stakes, but you hold firm and refuse to bite on their bluffs. SO you win. You go to take the winnings but see the dealer take half of the winnings and give you the other half. "WTF?", you exclaim. The dealer tells you that even though you won, your cards are not strong enough to take the full amount of your earnings. You start to complain.
The other players hear you and tell you, "Build your deck". You tell them that you can't afford it. They tell you "Sure you can. Just borrow some money from us. We'll charge you interest, but your winnings will more than cover it. By renting stronger cards, not only will you win much much more, but you'll earn more when you win too! that's what makes this game great! That's how it was designed!" You take a step back and look at the opportunity before you.
You came here because you wanted to play a fun and engaging game. You wanted to test your mettle. It turns out that strategy matters little here. What matters is how much you're willing to spend. That is the single greatest factor for winning games. Strategy matters very little. You understand that you can earn money here, but it isn't what you thought it was and it feels kind of scammy. You decide not to come back. Whenever it comes up in conversation, you tell people that it's basically a scam. The game part is rigged, but you can make money off of it if you put in the effort.
So what are your thoughts? I know the metaphor isn't a perfect one, but I felt it was a good way to get my point across. I believe that if we don't make changes to the way the game is played, mainly on the pay-to-win front, we'll never realize the full potential of splinterlands. It will continue to be a niche game made mainly for investors and not people who waant to play the game for fun and engagement.
Please let me know your thought below. Do you agree with me? Why or why not? Do you think it's fair to call Splinterlands a pay-to-win game? Is is pay-to-earn? Sound off below.
Posted using Splintertalk