Are Smite’s Prices Really ‘Equal Purchasing Power’? Fans Weigh In!

by

Smite, the action-packed third-person MOBA, has players buzzing with concerns about the pricing of skins in the game. A recent discussion took place in the community, particularly around the issue of whether the prices of these skins truly reflect their purchasing power compared to what players experienced back in the original Smite. Fans of the game are essentially raising a red flag about pricing discrepancies, fueled by nostalgia and a strong attachment to their in-game investments. Given the recent transition to Smite 2, this debate is heated and features a mix of frustration, confusion, and a sprinkle of humor, as players express their feelings about perceived price hikes and the developer’s handling of legacy gems.

Summary

  • Players are questioning whether skin prices in Smite 2 are truly equal in purchasing power to those in the original game.
  • There’s frustration around the perceived greed of the developers, particularly regarding legacy gems and their conversion to new gem prices.
  • While some players defend Hi-Rez’s decisions, many feel that communication about pricing changes has been lacking.
  • Community members express a desire for greater transparency from developers and fairer pricing structures reflecting the game’s long history.

The Great Price Debate

The initial post by user Jay_Chungus has ignited a firestorm of comments regarding the fairness of skin prices in Smite 2, especially concerning classic skins. In their view, the prices should reflect their original cost in Smite 1, and this argument seems to resonate with many players. One commenter, Draco9990, clarified the skin pricing history, stating that while the skin was initially priced at 500 gems during an event, it now stands at 1200 gems, which converts to 2400 diamonds in the new game. Players feel misled as many had been anticipating better deals or at least some continuity from the previous version. This discord represents a broader sentiment among players who feel the nostalgia factor should play a role in how skins are priced now, leading to criticisms of the pricing model being out of touch with the community’s expectations.

Legacy Gems: The Frustration Grows

Traditionally, players have amassed a significant stash of legacy gems from their adventures in Smite 1, which are now controversially being deemed as having less purchasing power in Smite 2. Fan favorite MoonlessNightss voiced their outrage, pointing out that these legacy gems feel as if they have been devalued significantly. They remarked, “legacy gems have 5 times less purchasing power according to this,” implying that players are practically compelled to spend more real money or grind harder for gems than ever before. The creators seem to have turned a beloved feature into a source of frustration. Fans are basically left scratching their heads, trying to understand why the gems they’ve built over years don’t hold the value they once did. User Thanol put it rather bluntly, expressing feeling cheated about promised returns on skins and mentioning how his ability to obtain classic skins seemed to dwindle. The feeling of losing an investment has made many loyal players wary of the company’s monetization strategies.

Defending the Developers or Defending Your Wallet?

<pAs with any community discussion, there are those who defend Hi-Rez amid the critiques. Some commenters, like Zelr0n, noted that players might need to understand the larger financial dynamics affecting game development. The player expressed that the legacy gem issue is compounded by long-term players having accumulated vast resources, making any attempt to keep the game lucrative challenging for the developers. It’s a classic case of having your cake and eating it too. While it’s nice to think that long-time fans should be rewarded for their commitment, the reality is that balance is needed to keep a free-to-play game thriving. This defense, however, doesn’t sit well with all. Brymward took a more combative stance, suggesting that the devs are not transparent and often ignore community feedback until there is a massive uproar. This sentiment is echoed in various other comments, indicating a significant divide in the community regarding loyalty and skepticism towards company motives.

The Chest Conspiracy?

<pInterestingly, some players are theorizing that the price strategy might create a push towards chests instead. A comment by ImJokersDC hints that the developers prefer players to buy skins from chests, because while they are random, they typically come at a cheaper price point compared to purchasing outright. If you think about it, it makes sense in a business perspective – encourage spending through randomness to keep players engaged rather than just selling at fixed prices. However, this creates a potential pitfall for players who want specific skins and aren’t into gambling. This adds another layer of tension to the pricing debate. The community clearly has mixed feelings about any subconscious nudges that lead them into a more lottery-style spending, as many simply want the skins they already fell in love with.

As the discussions continue to morph and evolve, it’s clear that Smite players are deeply invested not just in their game characters but in the value of the items they purchase. The situation is reminiscent of a classic tale of love, loss, and a bit of sweet nostalgia as fans grapple with the changing landscape of Smite 2. From skin pricing to legacy gems, the sentiment is a wild mix of hilarity, nostalgia, and frustration, with many players hoping that the developers will hear their concerns and adjust prices accordingly. Whether fair or not, one thing is apparent: this issue is more than just skin deep; it’s about the bonds between players and the game they’ve come to cherish.

Read More

2025-03-16 12:15