Pascal's Wager isn't an argument for why God exists and is really real.
Pascal's Wager is, in fact, 100% disconnected from the question of whether God exists and is really real. Pascal's Wager offers no evidence for God's existence - not even the shaky "evidence" of the appearance of design or the supposed fine-tuning of the universe or the feelings in your heart.
It offers no logical argument for why God must exist or probably exists - not even the paper-thin "logic" of the First Cause argument. It does not offer one scrap of a positive reason for thinking that God is real.
Pascal's Wager is misdirection. Distraction. It's a way of drawing attention away from how crummy the arguments for God actually are. It's an evasion: a slippery, dodgy, wanna-be clever trick to avoid the actual argument. It's a way of making the debater feel wily and ingenious, while ignoring the actual question on the table.
It isn't an argument. It's an excuse for why you don't have an argument. And it's a completely pathetic excuse.
If you're relying on Pascal's Wager for your faith, you might as well believe in unicorns or elves, Zoroaster or Zeus, the invisible dragon in Carl Sagan's garage or the Flying Spaghetti Monster who brought the world into being through his blessed noodley appendage. Pascal's Wager is every bit as good an argument for these beliefs as it is for any religion that people currently believe in. If you had a better argument for God, you'd be making it.
You'd be offering some good evidence for why God exists; some logical explanation for why God has to exist. You wouldn't be resorting to this lazy, slippery, bet-hedging, shot-full-of-holes excuse for why you don't have to actually think about the question. Pascal's Wager isn't an argument. It's an admission that you've got nothing
Pascal's Wager is an idea proposed to challenge atheists' views on the existence of God. So examine all four possibilities proposed by the wager from a non-religious standpoint to understand why atheistic people like myself aren't caused to believe in God by it. 1) God exists and you believe in him: good for you. 2) God exists and you don't believe in him: you go to hell...I speak for myself here but i also think i speak for a large portion of atheists: spending an eternity in heaven kissing some arrogant God's ass is not what i picture to be "perfect happiness." 3) God doesn't exist and you believe in him: Congratulations! You've just wasted the only life you'll ever get believing in some fairy tale and accomplished nothing. 4) God doesn't exist and you don't believe in him: good for you. The idea of wasting the only life you have is far more terrifying than burning in hell with a bunch of other smart people who also don't believe., and plus there is no pure, objective proof for God's existence.
Essentially, it's a decision made under duress - the duress of "what if I'm wrong?" I suppose the stakes are high, but what an unsatisfying way to decide the most important question of all. We also have to question, is such a decision in keeping with what it's claimed our motives are meant to be - in other words, is it even valid?
The biggest problem with Pascal's Wager is that it assumes that the belief in God is enough for salvation, but the problem with this is most denominations of Christianity and Islam are very specific about the need to follow their particular denomination in their particular way. So you could choose to believe in God, but if you choose the wrong one - and given how many denominations there are, you probably will - you'll still not be saved. The other problem is, Pascal's wager, put simply, says you have nothing to lose by believing in god, but you might have a lot to lose by not. This assumes there are no drawbacks to believing in God. One drawback, especially with things like Pentecostalism, is that they take the emphasis off of life and basically say we're all going to be saved, implicitly meaning this world means less. Frankly, I think any belief system that takes the emphasis off of life and experience is evil. Religious divisions have also led to huge conflicts in which masses of people have been slaughtered. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, paganism, and even Buddhism all have bloody histories.