转盘赢钱_赢钱比其他更平等-CSDN博客

转盘赢钱

It’s only fitting that the Empire embodies the final form of the pay-to-win formula: a collective that finds victory not through skill, dedication, or wit — but in buying bigger guns than the other guy. Yet there’s something far more nefarious about pay-to-win than simply leveraging cash to get one up on the Rebellion — and it speaks to something far more personal, far more intimate than topping a leaderboard.

我 T的理所当然，帝国体现了付费以诚取胜公式的最终形式：集体，用于查找胜利不是通过技能，爱岗敬业，或机智-但比其他人更大的购买枪支。 然而，赢取奖金要比单纯地利用现金筹集更多资金来造反叛还更邪恶-它所代表的意义远不止是排行榜，更是个人化，亲密得多。

Online games can be the great equaliser — they have the unrivaled ability to suspend the standards applied to our underwhelming corporal selves, if only fleetingly. It’s not difficult to see why someone might spend lots of time away from themselves — to become someone else, do something else, be somewhere else.

在线游戏可以成为绝佳的平衡器-在线游戏具有无与伦比的能力，即使只是短暂地，也可以中止适用于我们压倒性的身体自我的标准。不难看出为什么有人会花很多时间远离自己-成为别人，做其他事情，去其他地方。

Companionship, entertainment, challenge — each one is escapism in different forms. That escapism doesn’t just include my experience, it includes myself. Height, weight, hairline — everything is subject to change in the virtual worlds we choose to engage with. The bump on my nose, that fading top mop, and those few extra pounds are negated in online games.

陪伴，娱乐，挑战-每个人都是各种形式的逃避现实。逃避现实不仅包括我的经历，还包括我自己。身高，体重，发际线-在我们选择与之互动的虚拟世界中，一切都会发生变化。我鼻子上的颠簸，那只褪色的拖把和那几磅多余的东西在网络游戏中被否定了。

We’re all equalised, then. At least to a certain extent.

那我们都平等了。至少在一定程度上。

We aren’t in other ways, though. Digital worlds and connected communities introduce new standards — of knowledge, of skill, of behaviour — but at least we can choose to engage with these communities, to choose which standards we apply to ourselves.

但是，我们没有其他方式。数字世界和互联社区引入了新的标准-知识，技能，行为-但我们至少可以选择与这些社区互动，以选择适用于自己的标准。

We can do the same in real-life too, of course. We can decide to engage in hobbies and groups and professions, but that doesn’t save us from the judgement of others as we walk down the street, or drive that car many would consider state of the art — had you bought it fifteen years ago. If you don’t feel good about yourself, then, you need only choose an online community where those feelings not need apply. It’s those feelings, as dark and tragic as they can perhaps become, that are primed for exploitation in loot boxes and microtransactions.

当然，我们也可以在现实生活中做同样的事情。我们可以决定从事业余爱好，团体和专业，但这并不能使我们在街上行走时免于别人的判断，也不能开着很多人会认为是最先进的汽车—如果您是十五年前购买的。如果您对自己不满意，则只需要选择一个不需要这些感觉的在线社区。正是这些感觉，可能变成了黑暗和悲惨，准备用于战利品箱和微交易中。

Pay-to-win microtransactions: real-world money for in-game advantages. It’s here that the ‘equalising effect’ begins to wither under the might of excessive corporate want. Now, real-world standards and limitations are introduced into our make-believe reality and identities. Those thousands of hours spent developing that sick three-sixty no-scope are suddenly undermined by that guy who spent actual cash on that big-ass bazooka. That standard you opted for — to be judged by your ability to shoot things in the face — is now replaced by your ability to pay for in-game gear.

付费制胜的微交易：获得游戏内优势的现实世界货币。在这里，“均衡效应”在企业过度需求的影响下开始消退。现在，将现实世界的标准和限制引入了我们的虚构现实和身份中。那家伙花了数千小时来开发那只三十六岁的无镜望远镜，却突然被那个花了大笔火箭筒花钱的家伙破坏了。您所选择的标准-由您拍摄面部事物的能力来判断-现在已由您支付游戏装备费用的能力所取代。

In other words: by how much you earn.

换句话说：你赚多少钱。

Microtransactions fundamentally break the barrier between fantasy and reality. For some, this won’t matter so much. But for people who’s real-world presence is restricted — be it by health issues or social anxiety — it’s not difficult to see how such an invasion might be devastating.

微交易从根本上打破了幻想与现实之间的障碍。对于某些人来说，这无关紧要。但是，对于现实世界中存在的人们(无论是由于健康问题还是社交焦虑症)而言，他们的生活受到了限制，不难看出这种入侵可能具有毁灭性。

That doesn’t mean microtransactions are a psychological nuke, of course. More that they degrade our digital escape routes on a really, really bad day — or at a time when we might need to get through a difficult period in our lives.

当然，这并不意味着微交易是一种心理障碍。在一个非常非常糟糕的日子里，或者在我们可能需要度过生活中艰难时期的时候，它们会破坏我们的数字逃生路线。

This is why the practice seems so pernicious, and why pay-to-win feels so profoundly unfair. It fundamentally corrupts video games.

这就是为什么这种做法看起来如此有害的原因，以及为什么“以赢取钱”感觉如此不公平的原因 。它从根本上破坏了视频游戏。

In this context, it’s easy to see why even cosmetic microtransactions — ‘the good ones’ — present a problem: they lock-off part of what people use to define their new online identities behind a real-world limitation. It brings this identity crashing back to reality once more — the exact opposite of what you and the developers presumably want to achieve.

在这种情况下，不难理解，为什么甚至化妆品微交易(“好的交易”)也存在问题：它们在现实世界的限制之下，将人们用来定义新的在线身份的部分内容锁定了下来。它使身份再次崩溃，这与您和开发人员可能想要实现的完全相反。

And there’s countless reasons why we might want to adopt a digital persona. Illnesses, both mental and physical, can limit our time with people in the real world — with nothing said of geographical location, isolation or garden-variety loneliness. That’s not to say video games should be or are a cure for these things, but to say they can help make the intolerable briefly tolerable.

我们可能想采用数字角色的原因有无数个。无论是精神上还是身体上的疾病，都可能限制我们在现实世界中与人相处的时间，而对地理位置，孤立性或花园品种的孤独感却一无所知。这并不是说视频游戏应该或可以治愈这些问题，而是说它们可以帮助使这种无法忍受的短暂容忍。

But you can’t digitally re-define yourself if that definition is locked by money you might not have.

但是，如果该定义被您可能没有的钱所锁定，则您无法以数字方式重新定义自己。

Even cosmetic microtransactions strip meaning from online communities. That thing you’re wearing used to mean you beat the unbeatable. Now it means you got lucky on a random roll purchased with real-world cash. Even if it can be earned, your achievement is undermined by the very suspicion you might’ve paid for it.

甚至化妆品微交易也剥夺了在线社区的意义。 你穿的那东西曾经意味着你击败了无与伦比的人。现在，这意味着您可以用真实的现金购买随机卷，从而感到幸运。即使可以赚钱，您的成就也会因您可能为此付出的怀疑而受到损害。

Video games will never equalise everyone, but they allow those who feel they need that environment — which is likely most of us at some point in our lives — to choose the standards they want to gun for in a swift and immediate way.

电子游戏永远不会使所有人平等 ，但视频游戏可以使那些认为自己需要这种环境的人(在我们生命中的某个时刻可能是我们大多数人)选择他们想要Swift而Swift地寻求的标准。

And I’m not advocating for abandoning reality, either. I’m saying that reality has plenty corporate excess — and it’s difficult to see why the digital worlds we choose to inhabit should suffer from it, too.

我也不主张放弃现实。我的意思是，现实对企业来说有很多多余的东西，很难理解为什么我们选择居住的数字世界也应该遭受它的困扰。