The moment when you try to use real-life logic for a game is the moment you’ve failed to disassociate a game from real life.
Game concepts do not need to be hindered by realistic concepts.
It’s completely possible for a game to hand out items and players can still feel as if their particular item is special. The problem is with how Tree of Savior does it.
Everything in this game is a silver sink. Enhancement is tied to potential and in order to get a weapon into higher enhancement levels you need luck, potential and silver.
Potential is practically unnecessary since failing to enhance means using more silver just to get back to a previous enhance stage anyways. If there was no potential, the difference between one player getting a +15 item and another would be how much silver they spent, and it would still hold significance because of how important silver is in the game (attributes, repairs, resources, etc).
Potential just limits the lifetime of an item so it doesn’t exist forever, but its problematic when people are willing to spend silver on their items as opposed to other things like attributes just to upgrade. Potential limits their ability to continue upgrading, and if they expend most of their silver only to reach a low upgrade level with no possibility of going further, they feel robbed… and rightfully so.
If potential was not tied to enhancement and only to trading, I could accept it. It would mean that the item can only be traded a limited number of times before it is locked to someone. It would still serve the purpose of effectively removing the item from circulation without actually having to destroy the item.
Potential, in its current implementation, just feels like an unnecessary constraint. Why punish players even further from trying to enhance when its more than enough to require more silver for upgrade chances?