Op: you want an open and honest discussion yet set bounderies that only a handful of people can truly identify themselves with. That's not wanting an open and honest discussion. That's a narrow minded discussion.
First of like most of your peers you assume an item sold in Cash Shop A is seen as P2W, because it gives a clear advatantage, that a similar item in Cash Shop B is also P2W The thing is you then fail to view said item as it relates to the game. In one it might be an advantage while in the other it is not. Context is everything, without it all discussion is meaningless.
Furthermore the discussion really isn't that hard, but the wrong viewpoint is being used in my opinion. The current viewpoint most used is that another player has an advantage when using such an item. It's the whole grass is always greener thing that people are stuck in. The viewpoint should be: does him/her using such and such item detract from MY gaming experience.
Does it matter that another player got to the end of the road faster then you. At first glance you can say he has an advantage, but like people who have been powerleveled there is a good chance that he/she lacks knowledge about the class he is playing, because he skipped facets of the game that taught how to handle certain situations. Having to learn a class is a lot harder at the end then it is on the way.
Aside from that there is the question does it matter if a player is higher level then me however the way he got there. Be it playing more or using some other method. If it detracts from YOUR game experience, becuase he can steal resources or he can gank you or any other reason that ruins your experience, then it boosts are P2W in my book. If on the other hand it is meaningless if another player is higher level then it is not P2W. It's all about context.
Let's take an example from a Cash Shop that is not GW2 related. AoC sells lower rank PvP gear in their shop. Is that P2W? When 2 players both start PvPing at the same time one with bought armor and the other without then the player without will view it as P2W. If that same player who bought armor faces someone who has maxed PvP armor is it still P2W or is it a way to catch up on the gear grind. You will have arguments for both sides because it is personal. So again it boils down to: does such an item detract from my gaming experience.
How about this argument. I've only had experience with corrupt goverments so all goverments are corrupt from my perspective meaning your goverment is corrupt. From my point of view I'm correct because that is my experience, but I'm not looking at the context at all then. It might well be corrupt, but it might not be. Corrupt is subjective as well of course.
For the record I didn't vote because I don't share your extremely black and white without context viewpoints
What's highlight in the red and underlined, is the main reason why their cash shop is not P2W or pay to get an advatange.
We all know what the op is directing this thread at( the game) as well.
The end.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
No. I am not comfortable with purchasable advantages through a CashShop.
The reasons are numerous, but mainly because any game is a Controlled Environment based on calculated results by nature and therefore can be manipulated at will to yield any desired result in advantage of player X versus player Y.
Now you may say that this is no different than a newbie starting off today and trying to go against a veteran player that has been playing for a year. But it is not, because at one point the newbie will also graduate to veteranship and will be able to catch up to the veteran and the factors of the differences equalised as far as the calulated portion of the gameplay is concerned.
When you offer unequal advantages for real cash you are looking to make money as a business but at the same time you are introducing in to your game unequal elements, and a way for some players to cheat their way to them using their wallet.
It can even be argued that the practice is based on an unnethical principle, yet lets not go to that direction at this time.
Plain and simply from a pure gameplay perspective it renders that gameplay unequal between players and most players expect and want systemic equality or balance, so that then their own qualities as players make the difference faced with any given challenge within that game.
Cash shop advantages destroy the systemic equality of players and balance of gameplay. As simple as that.
Does that mean that Microstransactions as a Concept is a flawed one?
Not necessarilly, I beleive it all depends on its implementation. If the Microstransaction Plan is based on some sound principles that the Designer/Dev/Publisher set for their game, in a way as to never offer unequal advantages to players, and only offer, convenience and customisation (cosmetic items), then I think a microtransaction plan can work.
Will it offer the same income opportunities? In the short term no, but in the long term I think yes.
The truth is that many players, I would say most, play in a very coservative way when it comes to real cash, and the moment we know that there is no direct advantage to be had we will prefer the items available within the game and ignore the cash shop. But this up to a point, there comes a time when most players will also like to express own individuality within the virtual world and seek originality. It does take some time to reach that point however.
Yet, to this day I do not beleive that there has been any F2P game which actually was able to wait long enough for a game community to establish itself in a game, grow and prosper within what is offered by default by the game and reach the level of originality and luxury.
If we examine our History the same can be observed by any society upon this planet. The great empires of the ancient world did not start with prosperity, originality and Luxury they started very humbly, many as tribes no different than the next, achieved step by step greatness and once Combat Prowess, Conquest and Glory became things everyone had tasted, experienced and talked about then the next level became greatness via originality, this is when Fashion takes over, this is when Coliseums and Acropilises are built, great and lavishly decorated Palaces and Temples.
The same behavior I beleive works within a virtual world because the behavior is all too Human. Yet, no game has ever given the opportunity to its player base to mature to that level before showering the game with all kinds of Advantage and Unbalancing Offerings.
A B2P game (such as GW2), may actually be able to afford leting the game's population mature enough so that when that population reaches a certain level of it, such as most players having discovered the world and its secrets most players having fought countless battles and most players having experienced the greatest challenges and have had the rewards, then many of these players may seek to pass on to the next level pushed by their own individualism, and hunger for novelty as well as originality to spend a few bucks so that they can be a bit different than the next player besides them, customize their look according to their own world view of and experiences within the virtual world.
So, it depends in the end if a given company can afford to invest to the long term or is out for the short term income.
We shall see what comes, all i know is that I quit playing games that offer such Artificial Advantages for Cash the moment that my own efforts as a player are overtaken by these, it is the signal to me that the game is no longer Balanced or ofering equal opportunity for success to all its players.
For all your pretty words of maximum inspiration, if you are THAT concerned about someone paying a few bucks to level slighly faster than you then you're nothing but a petty malcontent.
Also
games don't follow the same path to greatness that empires do
Fashion was not the cause of the Acropolis or the Colliseums
GW2 is being built with a cash shop in mind, so there is no magical level of "originality and luxury" to obtain before switching over.
There is not magical level of "originality and luxury" period. Seriously... WTF?
You overestimate the market for pretty things. I don't think a single game has ever been able to sustain this business model.
I don't think it's fair that those without jobs have more time than me to play an mmo, it puts me at a disadvantage and means I can never catch them up.
So until mmos cap time spent in the game = better gear than I say P2W FTW
I don't think it's fair that those without jobs have more time than me to play an mmo, it puts me at a disadvantage and means I can never catch them up.
So until mmos cap time spent in the game = better gear than I say P2W FTW
Quit your job. Problem solved. Instantly. Now tell me how I can instantly get a job as good as people who pay 200$ a week in a cash shop. I have a job, its just not that good. Games were supposed to be free from class stratification. But of course money is power and only people with money count.
I don't think it's fair that those without jobs have more time than me to play an mmo, it puts me at a disadvantage and means I can never catch them up.
So until mmos cap time spent in the game = better gear than I say P2W FTW
Quit your job. Problem solved. Instantly. Now tell me how I can instantly get a job as good as people who pay 200$ a week in a cash shop. I have a job, its just not that good. Games were supposed to be free from class stratification. But of course money is power and only people with money count.
There are a few games like this, but the vast majority of western mmorpgs the opposite is true.
Time is power and only people with time count.
Obviously there needs to be a balance between the two.
If the point of life is to be selfless and altruistic, why would I ever pay for an advantage?
because the point of video games is NOT to be selfless and altruistic. It is to have fun.
But whenever a community of people get together, on videogames or otherwise, the basic ethical principals will still apply. For example, it might be fun to be a ninja looter, but it's the opposite of altruism and everyone will hate you. OR it might be fun to be a Player Killer against the noobs, but again it's the opposite of altruism and people will try to get you to stop.
Or it might be fun to buy out the cash shop and be #1, but you'll have once again done the opposite of altruism. By taking advantages unrelated to the game, such as personal IRL wealth, and applied it to the game, you have shown that you will spend money to be #1... It's not the same as say, buying an expensive car, or subscribing to a health club. It's spending money to literally beat other people at a game. It would be like using real life money to buy more Monopoly Money, or using real life money to buy more soldiers in Risk, etc. etc.
And that's why I won't ever pay for an advantage on a game!
So? People ninja loot all the time. Everyone needs on LFR in WOW. That is why Blizz is changing the loot rules. Whatever you think the ethical principles are, they don't matter at all. People do whatever they want.
And how can people to try to get anyone to stop ninja looting? It is obviously not working, whatever they try.
You have no real argument of why atruism is important, only that you like it. What if I don't? There is really nothing you can do about it. In fact, from my observations in MMOs, it is the norm to be selfish.
Plus, in the case of P2W, it is only fair that those who pay to subsidize your game got some advantages out of it.
based purely on your options the asnwer is no, nothing should ever be sold in a cash shop that is exclusive to the shop and not avaliable in game, and no items should be sold in your fictional shop that are more powerful in anyway shape or form than what can be got in the game its self.
i do not have a problem with a cash shop that sells "fluff" items, armour skins etc or items of a same level in power that i can get from questing/dungeon runs/raid etc, XP boosts and the like, if player X goes and buys a high end item i just got from a dungeon boss or raid and its cost them £10,$10 or whatever then what do i care, a fool and his money are easily parted and all that.
I don't think it's fair that those without jobs have more time than me to play an mmo, it puts me at a disadvantage and means I can never catch them up.
So until mmos cap time spent in the game = better gear than I say P2W FTW
Quit your job. Problem solved. Instantly. Now tell me how I can instantly get a job as good as people who pay 200$ a week in a cash shop. I have a job, its just not that good. Games were supposed to be free from class stratification. But of course money is power and only people with money count.
There are a few games like this, but the vast majority of western mmorpgs the opposite is true.
Time is power and only people with time count.
Obviously there needs to be a balance between the two.
Time is much more easily obtained than money. And furthermore you cannot save up time. No matter how much time you spend doing nothing you don't build up a giant pile of time that you or your family can utilize. Further time cannot be dumped all at once as money can. You can spend 8 hours only in 8 hours. You can spend $80 in a second.
If you are so rich that you can blow hundreds of dollars on a video game, get a reduction in hours or something.
The point of video games is that my time should be just as valuable as your time. In the real world not everyone's time is equal.
Its ironic that the majority of people arguing for cash shops are ostensibly the people complaining that games should be based on player skill. Explain how some kid with a trust fund starts at 2x-10x as good at gaining exp and killing monsters as me.
For some yes. You are being obtuse to think that people can give up responsibilities to obtain time as they see fit. They are called responsibilities for a reason.
Originally posted by Cuathon
Further time cannot be dumped all at once as money can. You can spend 8 hours only in 8 hours. You can spend $80 in a second.
This is a valid point. I acknowledge it. It's not overpowering, but time as a resource is naturally more limited than money.
Originally posted by Cuathon
The point of video games is that my time should be just as valuable as your time. In the real world not everyone's time is equal.
What? That has nothing to do with being "the point of video games." Actually, the opposite is My point. In video games not everyone's time is equal, because to those with massive amounts of time, time is cheap. To those with limited time it's expensive.
Originally posted by Cuathon
Explain how some kid with a trust fund starts at 2x-10x as good at gaining exp and killing monsters as me.
In a non-competitive environment, explain to me why you should give a flying fig.
For some yes. You are being obtuse to think that people can give up responsibilities to obtain time as they see fit. They are called responsibilities for a reason.
People choose to take on responsibilities. If you have a family that is your own fault. No one grabbed you and forced you to have intercourse with your wife or adopt. If you choose to go outside and get plastered all weekend instead of playing MMOs that is also a choice. As opposed to money where I am pretty sure many people would choose to make more if they could, or be born with it. But you can't. You can however choose how you manage your time.
Originally posted by Cuathon
Further time cannot be dumped all at once as money can. You can spend 8 hours only in 8 hours. You can spend $80 in a second.
This is a valid point. I acknowledge it. It's not overpowering, but time as a resource is naturally more limited than money.
Originally posted by Cuathon
The point of video games is that my time should be just as valuable as your time. In the real world not everyone's time is equal.
What? That has nothing to do with being "the point of video games." Actually, the opposite is My point. In video games not everyone's time is equal, because to those with massive amounts of time, time is cheap. To those with limited time it's expensive.
This implies that how much time you have is somehow not under your control.
Originally posted by Cuathon
Explain how some kid with a trust fund starts at 2x-10x as good at gaining exp and killing monsters as me.
In a non-competitive environment, explain to me why you should give a flying fig.
I prefer Sandboxes, in which case you might not have FFA Full Loot PvP but being able to do any given thing twice to ten times as fast is a huge deal. And if you did have FFA PvP than it would be even more unfair.
People choose to take on responsibilities. If you have a family that is your own fault. No one grabbed you and forced you to have intercourse with your wife or adopt. .
[mod edit]
No I don't think they would give up their life. But it was their choice not to. Time is a choice and money is not. People give up their life for their job or for sports or for other hobbies all the time, why does it upset you so much that people like video games?
If you care more about having a family or a hardcore job or some other thing, and someone else cares more about video games, its not their fault that you made a different decision.
You are so entitled. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Luckily you can. There are a million themepark games for you.
If the point of life is to be selfless and altruistic, why would I ever pay for an advantage?
because the point of video games is NOT to be selfless and altruistic. It is to have fun.
But whenever a community of people get together, on videogames or otherwise, the basic ethical principals will still apply. For example, it might be fun to be a ninja looter, but it's the opposite of altruism and everyone will hate you. OR it might be fun to be a Player Killer against the noobs, but again it's the opposite of altruism and people will try to get you to stop.
Or it might be fun to buy out the cash shop and be #1, but you'll have once again done the opposite of altruism. By taking advantages unrelated to the game, such as personal IRL wealth, and applied it to the game, you have shown that you will spend money to be #1... It's not the same as say, buying an expensive car, or subscribing to a health club. It's spending money to literally beat other people at a game. It would be like using real life money to buy more Monopoly Money, or using real life money to buy more soldiers in Risk, etc. etc.
And that's why I won't ever pay for an advantage on a game!
So? People ninja loot all the time. Everyone needs on LFR in WOW. That is why Blizz is changing the loot rules. Whatever you think the ethical principles are, they don't matter at all. People do whatever they want.
And how can people to try to get anyone to stop ninja looting? It is obviously not working, whatever they try.
You have no real argument of why atruism is important, only that you like it. What if I don't? There is really nothing you can do about it. In fact, from my observations in MMOs, it is the norm to be selfish.
Plus, in the case of P2W, it is only fair that those who pay to subsidize your game got some advantages out of it.
It depends upon the community and structure of the game....in a game like WoW there is no interdependance required and it's a large a generaly crappy community...
Try behaving like a general a%%-hat in a game like Gemstone4 and see how far you get. The moment when there are consequences for ones behavior, is when things start to go south for folks who are unwilling to follow some minimal societal norms.
It's only in games that tend to isolate players from the consequences of thier actions that you tend to get more then a tiny fraction of players willing to consider things like ninja-looting.
No. I am not comfortable with purchasable advantages through a CashShop.
The reasons are numerous, but mainly because any game is a Controlled Environment based on calculated results by nature and therefore can be manipulated at will to yield any desired result in advantage of player X versus player Y.
Now you may say that this is no different than a newbie starting off today and trying to go against a veteran player that has been playing for a year. But it is not, because at one point the newbie will also graduate to veteranship and will be able to catch up to the veteran and the factors of the differences equalised as far as the calulated portion of the gameplay is concerned.
When you offer unequal advantages for real cash you are looking to make money as a business but at the same time you are introducing in to your game unequal elements, and a way for some players to cheat their way to them using their wallet.
It can even be argued that the practice is based on an unnethical principle, yet lets not go to that direction at this time.
Plain and simply from a pure gameplay perspective it renders that gameplay unequal between players and most players expect and want systemic equality or balance, so that then their own qualities as players make the difference faced with any given challenge within that game.
Cash shop advantages destroy the systemic equality of players and balance of gameplay. As simple as that.
Does that mean that Microstransactions as a Concept is a flawed one?
Not necessarilly, I beleive it all depends on its implementation. If the Microstransaction Plan is based on some sound principles that the Designer/Dev/Publisher set for their game, in a way as to never offer unequal advantages to players, and only offer, convenience and customisation (cosmetic items), then I think a microtransaction plan can work.
Will it offer the same income opportunities? In the short term no, but in the long term I think yes.
The truth is that many players, I would say most, play in a very coservative way when it comes to real cash, and the moment we know that there is no direct advantage to be had we will prefer the items available within the game and ignore the cash shop. But this up to a point, there comes a time when most players will also like to express own individuality within the virtual world and seek originality. It does take some time to reach that point however.
Yet, to this day I do not beleive that there has been any F2P game which actually was able to wait long enough for a game community to establish itself in a game, grow and prosper within what is offered by default by the game and reach the level of originality and luxury.
If we examine our History the same can be observed by any society upon this planet. The great empires of the ancient world did not start with prosperity, originality and Luxury they started very humbly, many as tribes no different than the next, achieved step by step greatness and once Combat Prowess, Conquest and Glory became things everyone had tasted, experienced and talked about then the next level became greatness via originality, this is when Fashion takes over, this is when Coliseums and Acropilises are built, great and lavishly decorated Palaces and Temples.
The same behavior I beleive works within a virtual world because the behavior is all too Human. Yet, no game has ever given the opportunity to its player base to mature to that level before showering the game with all kinds of Advantage and Unbalancing Offerings.
A B2P game (such as GW2), may actually be able to afford leting the game's population mature enough so that when that population reaches a certain level of it, such as most players having discovered the world and its secrets most players having fought countless battles and most players having experienced the greatest challenges and have had the rewards, then many of these players may seek to pass on to the next level pushed by their own individualism, and hunger for novelty as well as originality to spend a few bucks so that they can be a bit different than the next player besides them, customize their look according to their own world view of and experiences within the virtual world.
So, it depends in the end if a given company can afford to invest to the long term or is out for the short term income.
We shall see what comes, all i know is that I quit playing games that offer such Artificial Advantages for Cash the moment that my own efforts as a player are overtaken by these, it is the signal to me that the game is no longer Balanced or ofering equal opportunity for success to all its players.
For all your pretty words of maximum inspiration, if you are THAT concerned about someone paying a few bucks to level slighly faster than you then you're nothing but a petty malcontent.
Also
games don't follow the same path to greatness that empires do
Fashion was not the cause of the Acropolis or the Colliseums
GW2 is being built with a cash shop in mind, so there is no magical level of "originality and luxury" to obtain before switching over.
There is not magical level of "originality and luxury" period. Seriously... WTF?
You overestimate the market for pretty things. I don't think a single game has ever been able to sustain this business model.
I think you misread, or maybe misunderstood.
I do not consider having a buff that gives you more XP to level faster an Advantage.... this is a Convenience Item, and I said I am fine with Convenience Offerings.
What I do not like is, items that give you an advantage in a Player vs Player Situation, I could not care less what you do with NPC's...it is your game, you enjoy it as you want and your wallet permits.
Cosmetic Offerngs and Convenience offerings are fine to have in my book, just not anything that alters the balance of results between a paying player and non paying player within the context of these two players being engaged in a competitive struggle.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
So people have no choice in how much money they make? Nice argument there, Marx.
Is it my fault you chose to play video games all day and don't have a good enough job to afford to pay to play the games you want?
Jeeze. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Lucky for you there are plenty of subscription based time suckers for you to waste your worthless time on.
I do not consider having a buff that gives you more XP to level faster an Advantage.... this is a Convenience Item, and I said I am fine with Convenience Offerings.
What I do not like is, items that give you an advantage in a Player vs Player Situation, I could not care less what you do with NPC's...it is your game, you enjoy it as you want and your wallet permits.
Cosmetic Offerngs and Convenience offerings are fine to have in my book, just not anything that alters the balance of results between a paying player and non paying player within the context of these two players being engaged in a competitive struggle.
To me, a cash shop is broken when either the game, at some point, forces you to buy items just to be able to play properly, or something like a Legendary piece of equipment that cannot be obtained by ingame means.
An XP gain boost does not fit that.
Therefor, I find the explanation of the cash shop and it's consequences quite simplistic, as you have simply compiled your own dislikes about them and then turned them into facts.
I do not consider having a buff that gives you more XP to level faster an Advantage.... this is a Convenience Item, and I said I am fine with Convenience Offerings.
What I do not like is, items that give you an advantage in a Player vs Player Situation, I could not care less what you do with NPC's...it is your game, you enjoy it as you want and your wallet permits.
Cosmetic Offerngs and Convenience offerings are fine to have in my book, just not anything that alters the balance of results between a paying player and non paying player within the context of these two players being engaged in a competitive struggle.
Well, the responses you get will make more sense if you understand the tactics used by Anet fans to defend the GW2 cash shop. Many of the below tactics are used depending on the circumstances:
1) The "You are ignorant" defense. Basically implying that you don't know what you are talking about and do not understand the cash shop. This defense is still used despite there now being a lot of information regarding the cash shop
2) The "Its only beta" defense. Basically this presumes that beta features are meaningless, despite the fact that a "beta" is by definition a very strong correlation to what production will be. Otherwise it would be an alpha. Yes, things can still change, but more likely than not beta features will be production features
3) The "divert to less objectionable item" defense. For instance, if you complain about the clear pay2win realmoney->gems->gold->influence->RvRvR PVP advantages then they will divert it to "Well who cares about EXP boosters" even though that wasn't what you were complaining about
4) The "why should people who play more get advantage" defense. This seems to imply that hard work is to be frowned on and shouldn't provide an advantage, while at the same time implying paying more real life money is ok. This just goes against all moral notions that high skill and hard work are things that should be rewarded, and cheating/glitching/buying advantage should be avoided
5) The "You are a troll" defense. This is used when you have defeated all of the above arguments and they have nothing else to say...
By the way, the tactic that was used on you was #3 above, where your concern about competetive advantage was diverted to EXP boosters.
GW2 "built from the ground up with microtransactions in mind" 1) Cash->Gems->Gold->Influence->WvWvWBoosts = PAY2WIN 2) Mystic Chests = Crass in-game cash shop advertisements
So people have no choice in how much money they make? Nice argument there, Marx.
Is it my fault you chose to play video games all day and don't have a good enough job to afford to pay to play the games you want?
Jeeze. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Lucky for you there are plenty of subscription based time suckers for you to waste your worthless time on.
Choosing to make less money is much easier than choosing to make more. Nice attempt at being clever. You are pretty close to getting a ban for trolling though. Calling another poster worthless is poor behavior.
I think you misread, or maybe misunderstood. I do not consider having a buff that gives you more XP to level faster an Advantage.... this is a Convenience Item, and I said I am fine with Convenience Offerings. What I do not like is, items that give you an advantage in a Player vs Player Situation, I could not care less what you do with NPC's...it is your game, you enjoy it as you want and your wallet permits. Cosmetic Offerngs and Convenience offerings are fine to have in my book, just not anything that alters the balance of results between a paying player and non paying player within the context of these two players being engaged in a competitive struggle.
Well, the responses you get will make more sense if you understand the tactics used by Anet fans to defend the GW2 cash shop. Many of the below tactics are used depending on the circumstances:
1) The "You are ignorant" defense. Basically implying that you don't know what you are talking about and do not understand the cash shop. This defense is still used despite there now being a lot of information regarding the cash shop
2) The "Its only beta" defense. Basically this presumes that beta features are meaningless, despite the fact that a "beta" is by definition a very strong correlation to what production will be. Otherwise it would be an alpha. Yes, things can still change, but more likely than not beta features will be production features
3) The "divert to less objectionable item" defense. For instance, if you complain about the clear pay2win realmoney->gems->gold->influence->RvRvR PVP advantages then they will divert it to "Well who cares about EXP boosters" even though that wasn't what you were complaining about
4) The "why should people play more get advantage" defense. This seems to imply that hard work is to be frowned on and shouldn't provide an advantage, while at the same time implying paying more real life money is ok. This just goes against all moral notions that high skill and hard work are things that should be rewarded, and cheating/glitching/buying advantage should be avoided
5) The "You are a troll" defense. This is used when you have defeated all of the above arguments and they have nothing else to say...
By the way, the tactic that was used on you was #3 above, where your concern about competetive advantage was diverted to EXP boosters.
Nicely done
And the sad thing is that will be the attitude they take into beta and any chance of limiting the cash shop will be lost.
Anyone who says that, because they have a family, a job, a child, etc. That prevents them from playing as much as others, and therefore think they should be allowed advantages, two things:
#1 No one cares. Plenty of people have all those things and still make time to play games fair and square. You are not special, you are not entitled, and you are very selfish for thinking that it's OK to ruin the game for everyone else because you don't have time to play. If playing the game takes too much time away from your responsibilities, don't play. Simple.
#2 This line of logic would not work anywhere else. Imagine if you said that, because responsibilities take up so much time, that you:
-Should start with a Monopoly and 2 hotels when Playing Monopoly
-When playing chess, your opponent should start wihtout rooks or bishops.
-When you go to a fighting game tournament, you should be able to pick a banned character, because your job and family don't let you practice.
You be laughed at and told to GTFO. So why should this line of logic work with MMO's?
There is no justification for Pay to Win, not ever.
Anyone who says that, because they have a family, a job, a child, etc. That prevents them from playing as much as others, and therefore think they should be allowed advantages, two things:
#1 No one cares. Plenty of people have all those things and still make time to play games fair and square. You are not special, you are not entitled, and you are very selfish for thinking that it's OK to ruin the game for everyone else because you don't have time to play. If playing the game takes too much time away from your responsibilities, don't play. Simple.
#2 This line of logic would not work anywhere else. Imagine if you said that, because responsibilities take up so much time, that you:
-Should start with a Monopoly and 2 hotels when Playing Monopoly
-When playing chess, your opponent should start wihtout rooks or bishops.
-When you go to a fighting game tournament, you should be able to pick a banned character, because your job and family don't let you practice.
You be laughed at and told to GTFO. So why should this line of logic work with MMO's?
There is no justification for Pay to Win, not ever.
Unfortunately they are built to consume time, and as such are already ruined. Allowing players to skip the BS that designers intentionally put into games in order to extend the time play is not ruining the game for anyone else.
And I could say the same thing about advantages for having more time to play Monopoly/Chess. A better chess player should be a better chess player, regardless of how often they play. Strike a chord wrong? Of course it does, because MMOs do not have any level playing field to begin with.
So, I've gotten carried away with this thread, I realize that. It's also been taking away time from my work responsibilities, which is quite ironic given my statements earlier.
I imagine it seems like I'm saying P2W is the best thing since sliced bread, but that's not how I feel. Let me clarify my point one last time and be done with this forsaken thread.
P2W
P2W is bad, however, it needs to be looked at realistically. Often times an "advantage" over another player does not affect your game. Other times it seems that the bonuses will cause a certain type of player to become over powered, when really they are meant to bring players who could otherwise not experience the game the opportunity to do so (such as a XP boost).
There are plenty of cases where P2W is just bad. When it provides real benefits over those who don't play, and over those who aren't able to spend a reasonable amount of time to make up for the benefit. When it locks content out that others need to progress their character. Or when the time to progress without P2W is unacceptably long (MMORTS are notorious for this).
Cash Shops vs. Subscriptions
Both of these models have almost the exact same pros and cons, just a difference between whether the advantage goes to those with time or money (usually it will go to those with time anyway). Subscriptions do have a small advantage in that there is a sense of accomplishment doing something that takes a long time to accomplish, and that the money spent on cash shops can spiral out of control easily.
However subscriptions and cash shops can both just as easily do the worse thing imaginable: Intentionally weaken the core gameplay experience of the consumer to make more money. Cash shops do this if they require cash to be successful. Subscriptions do this if there are lots of time sinks put in purposefully.
Markets
There are markets for both models. Those who are trying to get rid of cash shops completely are trying to hurt the industry as a whole, because having both models helps divide the market into proper niches, so that you can play with the people you want to play with. It also provides a competitive business model, which means subscription companies will have a tougher time abusing their model.
GW2 and cash shop
Most of the people bitching about P2W are not really the core audience of GW2. GW2 is not designed for the pure Progressionist (although they can certainly enjoy the content for awhile, just like they would with any game), and it is not a sandbox.
As such, it really is a good game to model what a fair cash shop can look like in an MMO. It won't be perfect, and I don't mind people complaining about the implementation. However, saying that it shouldn't have any advantages for any player under any circumstance and that cash shops should never be in any game ever is just ridiculous.
I do not consider having a buff that gives you more XP to level faster an Advantage.... this is a Convenience Item, and I said I am fine with Convenience Offerings.
What I do not like is, items that give you an advantage in a Player vs Player Situation, I could not care less what you do with NPC's...it is your game, you enjoy it as you want and your wallet permits.
Cosmetic Offerngs and Convenience offerings are fine to have in my book, just not anything that alters the balance of results between a paying player and non paying player within the context of these two players being engaged in a competitive struggle.
Well, the responses you get will make more sense if you understand the tactics used by Anet fans to defend the GW2 cash shop. Many of the below tactics are used depending on the circumstances:
1) The "You are ignorant" defense. Basically implying that you don't know what you are talking about and do not understand the cash shop. This defense is still used despite there now being a lot of information regarding the cash shop
2) The "Its only beta" defense. Basically this presumes that beta features are meaningless, despite the fact that a "beta" is by definition a very strong correlation to what production will be. Otherwise it would be an alpha. Yes, things can still change, but more likely than not beta features will be production features
3) The "divert to less objectionable item" defense. For instance, if you complain about the clear pay2win realmoney->gems->gold->influence->RvRvR PVP advantages then they will divert it to "Well who cares about EXP boosters" even though that wasn't what you were complaining about
4) The "why should people play more get advantage" defense. This seems to imply that hard work is to be frowned on and shouldn't provide an advantage, while at the same time implying paying more real life money is ok. This just goes against all moral notions that high skill and hard work are things that should be rewarded, and cheating/glitching/buying advantage should be avoided
5) The "You are a troll" defense. This is used when you have defeated all of the above arguments and they have nothing else to say...
By the way, the tactic that was used on you was #3 above, where your concern about competetive advantage was diverted to EXP boosters.
Nicely done
And the sad thing is that will be the attitude they take into beta and any chance of limiting the cash shop will be lost.
1) The "you are ignorant" defense is also used as an offense from an anti-GW2 or GW2 troll. This is used in defense sometimes because the poster really appears to pull false assumptions from an un-known source, and there-fore why should I try to reason with someone about a game I have researched and they have clearly not.
2) The "It's only beta" defense. Completely agree with you when people use this it's like.... Just stop now.
3)The "Divert to objectionable item" defense. Common practice, but a lot is still speculation. Yes in "theory" you can pay for with real money, Guild Buffs in a WvWvW zone. BUT, the big thing speculation point being, do they stack? Is it one buff at a time? Is it a max of 2? Is there a re-use timer greater than the duration of the use-able buff? (I.E. 12 hour vitality buff, re-use of 24 hours) Yes there is reason for concern, but claiming it is P2W over 5% buff? In one keep of the entire realm? non-sense. Reason for worrying? agreed, P2W? At this point, speculation.
4) The "Why should people play more get advantages" defense. GW2 is not a gear grinding MMO, it's not a level curve MMO, it's end-game content is un-like large box titles (WoW, SW:ToR), in which if you have 70 valor armor you can stomp n00bs cause they havent ground it out yet. So, with that said, WHAT advantages do you get from playing longer? Mainly skills, of course lvl 80 gear will be better than starter, but there isn't "top tier" anything.
5) This falls back to argument number "1)" Simply a misinformed person ranting on GW2 who clearly hasn't researched the game, or has researched 2 minutes of it and flames on the bad, before giving it a chance to straighten itself out. GW2 is NOT PAY2WIN, NOR a GEAR GRINDER, so when people flant and flame over P2W or "there isn't a carrot!?!?!" they are clearly misinformed and don't want to be properly informed, aka "troll"
On a side note, the PvP advantages "could" be P2W >>IF<< they stack, IMO. Who cares if you can pay to level your guild if you can only have one buff at a time, and i'm guessing have ONE buff up constantly, whether it be back forth from two, or one over and over, isn't going to cost very much, especially once a few people in the guild get past the mid level range. Plus no one will have the gold, and few the desire, to spend gold on gems within the first month or two, why should i waste my gold on gems right away when we don't even know our classes? I understand speculation but dam claiming it's pay2win over one little thing is.... IMHO trolling, call me a fanboi on my white horse all you want, but atleast i'm trying to be reasonable and see the other side of the fence (even though i disagree completely)
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
It depends upon the community and structure of the game....in a game like WoW there is no interdependance required and it's a large a generaly crappy community...
Try behaving like a general a%%-hat in a game like Gemstone4 and see how far you get. The moment when there are consequences for ones behavior, is when things start to go south for folks who are unwilling to follow some minimal societal norms.
It's only in games that tend to isolate players from the consequences of thier actions that you tend to get more then a tiny fraction of players willing to consider things like ninja-looting.
And how many players do Gemstone4 has? Why would anyone want to play a game that put all sort of social constraints on oneself?
There is a reason why LFR, LFD .. and all the matching making feature popular .. aside from the convenience. People LIKE not to be able to deal with other people's expectation and can behave anyway they want to.
Community is way over rated. I don't see a reason to always be forced to be nice to strangers. It is enough to be nice to a few friends. If i am in a good mood, sure, i will be nice. Isnt behavior without consequences a way to escape from the real world?
Anyone who says that, because they have a family, a job, a child, etc. That prevents them from playing as much as others, and therefore think they should be allowed advantages, two things:
#1 No one cares. Plenty of people have all those things and still make time to play games fair and square. You are not special, you are not entitled, and you are very selfish for thinking that it's OK to ruin the game for everyone else because you don't have time to play. If playing the game takes too much time away from your responsibilities, don't play. Simple.
#2 This line of logic would not work anywhere else. Imagine if you said that, because responsibilities take up so much time, that you:
-Should start with a Monopoly and 2 hotels when Playing Monopoly
-When playing chess, your opponent should start wihtout rooks or bishops.
-When you go to a fighting game tournament, you should be able to pick a banned character, because your job and family don't let you practice.
You be laughed at and told to GTFO. So why should this line of logic work with MMO's?
There is no justification for Pay to Win, not ever.
Unfortunately they are built to consume time, and as such are already ruined. Allowing players to skip the BS that designers intentionally put into games in order to extend the time play is not ruining the game for anyone else.
If you don't like the mechanics of the game, don't play. If playing the meat of the game bores you, maybe the game isn't that good? If so, why are you giving them money because they made a game poorly? How does that make sense?
And I could say the same thing about advantages for having more time to play Monopoly/Chess. A better chess player should be a better chess player, regardless of how often they play. Strike a chord wrong? Of course it does, because MMOs do not have any level playing field to begin with.
So you're saying that not having time to practice justifies cheating? What?
Also, your statement about MMO's not being an even playing field is false. In a WELL DESIGNED game, everyone has the same oprotunity to succeed. Obviously, if you don't spend time playing in an MMO, or any other game, you aren't going to get very far. If you don't have the time to play a game, DON'T PLAY. Paying for power in a game is cheating, it hurts everyone else playing the game, and it makes you looks like a selfish ass when you say you are entitled to it because (Insert reason here).
So, I've gotten carried away with this thread, I realize that. It's also been taking away time from my work responsibilities, which is quite ironic given my statements earlier.
If you have the time to stay on these forums and argue...
I imagine it seems like I'm saying P2W is the best thing since sliced bread, but that's not how I feel. Let me clarify my point one last time and be done with this forsaken thread.
P2W
P2W is bad, however, it needs to be looked at realistically. Often times an "advantage" over another player does not affect your game.
An advantage over another player does not affect the game? Are you on drugs?
Other times it seems that the bonuses will cause a certain type of player to become over powered, when really they are meant to bring players who could otherwise not experience the game the opportunity to do so (such as a XP boost).
You are experienceing the game just by playing it.
There are plenty of cases where P2W is just bad.
I.E. Every case.
When it provides real benefits over those who don't play, and over those who aren't able to spend a reasonable amount of time to make up for the benefit. When it locks content out that others need to progress their character. Or when the time to progress without P2W is unacceptably long (MMORTS are notorious for this).
So if Pay 2 Win is bad, why are you defending it? Is it because you think that pay to win is bas unless it's YOU that's gaining an advantage from it? Because based on your past posts, that seems to be the case.
Cash Shops vs. Subscriptions
Both of these models have almost the exact same pros and cons, just a difference between whether the advantage goes to those with time or money (usually it will go to those with time anyway). Subscriptions do have a small advantage in that there is a sense of accomplishment doing something that takes a long time to accomplish, and that the money spent on cash shops can spiral out of control easily.
However subscriptions and cash shops can both just as easily do the worse thing imaginable: Intentionally weaken the core gameplay experience of the consumer to make more money. Cash shops do this if they require cash to be successful. Subscriptions do this if there are lots of time sinks put in purposefully.
Fair enough.
Markets
There are markets for both models. Those who are trying to get rid of cash shops completely are trying to hurt the industry as a whole, because having both models helps divide the market into proper niches, so that you can play with the people you want to play with. It also provides a competitive business model, which means subscription companies will have a tougher time abusing their model.
Also true. However, a lot of the cash shop hate extends from the fact that SO MANY games use this model to implement pay to win mechanics. It's not that the cash shop model itself is bad, it's how it's used.
GW2 and cash shop
Most of the people bitching about P2W are not really the core audience of GW2. GW2 is not designed for the pure Progressionist (although they can certainly enjoy the content for awhile, just like they would with any game), and it is not a sandbox.
As such, it really is a good game to model what a fair cash shop can look like in an MMO. It won't be perfect, and I don't mind people complaining about the implementation. However, saying that it shouldn't have any advantages for any player under any circumstance and that cash shops should never be in any game ever is just ridiculous.
Didn't you just say that pay to win is bad? But now you're saying that it's wrong to complain about paid advantages in a game? WELL WHICH IS IT?!
Comments
What's highlight in the red and underlined, is the main reason why their cash shop is not P2W or pay to get an advatange.
We all know what the op is directing this thread at( the game) as well.
The end.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
For all your pretty words of maximum inspiration, if you are THAT concerned about someone paying a few bucks to level slighly faster than you then you're nothing but a petty malcontent.
Also
games don't follow the same path to greatness that empires do
Fashion was not the cause of the Acropolis or the Colliseums
GW2 is being built with a cash shop in mind, so there is no magical level of "originality and luxury" to obtain before switching over.
There is not magical level of "originality and luxury" period. Seriously... WTF?
You overestimate the market for pretty things. I don't think a single game has ever been able to sustain this business model.
I don't think it's fair that those without jobs have more time than me to play an mmo, it puts me at a disadvantage and means I can never catch them up.
So until mmos cap time spent in the game = better gear than I say P2W FTW
Quit your job. Problem solved. Instantly. Now tell me how I can instantly get a job as good as people who pay 200$ a week in a cash shop. I have a job, its just not that good. Games were supposed to be free from class stratification. But of course money is power and only people with money count.
There are a few games like this, but the vast majority of western mmorpgs the opposite is true.
Time is power and only people with time count.
Obviously there needs to be a balance between the two.
So? People ninja loot all the time. Everyone needs on LFR in WOW. That is why Blizz is changing the loot rules. Whatever you think the ethical principles are, they don't matter at all. People do whatever they want.
And how can people to try to get anyone to stop ninja looting? It is obviously not working, whatever they try.
You have no real argument of why atruism is important, only that you like it. What if I don't? There is really nothing you can do about it. In fact, from my observations in MMOs, it is the norm to be selfish.
Plus, in the case of P2W, it is only fair that those who pay to subsidize your game got some advantages out of it.
based purely on your options the asnwer is no, nothing should ever be sold in a cash shop that is exclusive to the shop and not avaliable in game, and no items should be sold in your fictional shop that are more powerful in anyway shape or form than what can be got in the game its self.
i do not have a problem with a cash shop that sells "fluff" items, armour skins etc or items of a same level in power that i can get from questing/dungeon runs/raid etc, XP boosts and the like, if player X goes and buys a high end item i just got from a dungeon boss or raid and its cost them £10,$10 or whatever then what do i care, a fool and his money are easily parted and all that.
Time is much more easily obtained than money. And furthermore you cannot save up time. No matter how much time you spend doing nothing you don't build up a giant pile of time that you or your family can utilize. Further time cannot be dumped all at once as money can. You can spend 8 hours only in 8 hours. You can spend $80 in a second.
If you are so rich that you can blow hundreds of dollars on a video game, get a reduction in hours or something.
The point of video games is that my time should be just as valuable as your time. In the real world not everyone's time is equal.
Its ironic that the majority of people arguing for cash shops are ostensibly the people complaining that games should be based on player skill. Explain how some kid with a trust fund starts at 2x-10x as good at gaining exp and killing monsters as me.
For some yes. You are being obtuse to think that people can give up responsibilities to obtain time as they see fit. They are called responsibilities for a reason.
This is a valid point. I acknowledge it. It's not overpowering, but time as a resource is naturally more limited than money.
What? That has nothing to do with being "the point of video games." Actually, the opposite is My point. In video games not everyone's time is equal, because to those with massive amounts of time, time is cheap. To those with limited time it's expensive.
In a non-competitive environment, explain to me why you should give a flying fig.
I prefer Sandboxes, in which case you might not have FFA Full Loot PvP but being able to do any given thing twice to ten times as fast is a huge deal. And if you did have FFA PvP than it would be even more unfair.
No I don't think they would give up their life. But it was their choice not to. Time is a choice and money is not. People give up their life for their job or for sports or for other hobbies all the time, why does it upset you so much that people like video games?
If you care more about having a family or a hardcore job or some other thing, and someone else cares more about video games, its not their fault that you made a different decision.
You are so entitled. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Luckily you can. There are a million themepark games for you.
It depends upon the community and structure of the game....in a game like WoW there is no interdependance required and it's a large a generaly crappy community...
Try behaving like a general a%%-hat in a game like Gemstone4 and see how far you get. The moment when there are consequences for ones behavior, is when things start to go south for folks who are unwilling to follow some minimal societal norms.
It's only in games that tend to isolate players from the consequences of thier actions that you tend to get more then a tiny fraction of players willing to consider things like ninja-looting.
I think you misread, or maybe misunderstood.
I do not consider having a buff that gives you more XP to level faster an Advantage.... this is a Convenience Item, and I said I am fine with Convenience Offerings.
What I do not like is, items that give you an advantage in a Player vs Player Situation, I could not care less what you do with NPC's...it is your game, you enjoy it as you want and your wallet permits.
Cosmetic Offerngs and Convenience offerings are fine to have in my book, just not anything that alters the balance of results between a paying player and non paying player within the context of these two players being engaged in a competitive struggle.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
So people have no choice in how much money they make? Nice argument there, Marx.
Is it my fault you chose to play video games all day and don't have a good enough job to afford to pay to play the games you want?
Jeeze. You want to have your cake and eat it too. Lucky for you there are plenty of subscription based time suckers for you to waste your worthless time on.
Apologies.
I can't answer the poll.
To me, a cash shop is broken when either the game, at some point, forces you to buy items just to be able to play properly, or something like a Legendary piece of equipment that cannot be obtained by ingame means.
An XP gain boost does not fit that.
Therefor, I find the explanation of the cash shop and it's consequences quite simplistic, as you have simply compiled your own dislikes about them and then turned them into facts.
Well, the responses you get will make more sense if you understand the tactics used by Anet fans to defend the GW2 cash shop. Many of the below tactics are used depending on the circumstances:
1) The "You are ignorant" defense. Basically implying that you don't know what you are talking about and do not understand the cash shop. This defense is still used despite there now being a lot of information regarding the cash shop
2) The "Its only beta" defense. Basically this presumes that beta features are meaningless, despite the fact that a "beta" is by definition a very strong correlation to what production will be. Otherwise it would be an alpha. Yes, things can still change, but more likely than not beta features will be production features
3) The "divert to less objectionable item" defense. For instance, if you complain about the clear pay2win realmoney->gems->gold->influence->RvRvR PVP advantages then they will divert it to "Well who cares about EXP boosters" even though that wasn't what you were complaining about
4) The "why should people who play more get advantage" defense. This seems to imply that hard work is to be frowned on and shouldn't provide an advantage, while at the same time implying paying more real life money is ok. This just goes against all moral notions that high skill and hard work are things that should be rewarded, and cheating/glitching/buying advantage should be avoided
5) The "You are a troll" defense. This is used when you have defeated all of the above arguments and they have nothing else to say...
By the way, the tactic that was used on you was #3 above, where your concern about competetive advantage was diverted to EXP boosters.
GW2 "built from the ground up with microtransactions in mind"
1) Cash->Gems->Gold->Influence->WvWvWBoosts = PAY2WIN
2) Mystic Chests = Crass in-game cash shop advertisements
I voted yes... I am fine with it.
Choosing to make less money is much easier than choosing to make more. Nice attempt at being clever. You are pretty close to getting a ban for trolling though. Calling another poster worthless is poor behavior.
Well, the responses you get will make more sense if you understand the tactics used by Anet fans to defend the GW2 cash shop. Many of the below tactics are used depending on the circumstances:
1) The "You are ignorant" defense. Basically implying that you don't know what you are talking about and do not understand the cash shop. This defense is still used despite there now being a lot of information regarding the cash shop
2) The "Its only beta" defense. Basically this presumes that beta features are meaningless, despite the fact that a "beta" is by definition a very strong correlation to what production will be. Otherwise it would be an alpha. Yes, things can still change, but more likely than not beta features will be production features
3) The "divert to less objectionable item" defense. For instance, if you complain about the clear pay2win realmoney->gems->gold->influence->RvRvR PVP advantages then they will divert it to "Well who cares about EXP boosters" even though that wasn't what you were complaining about
4) The "why should people play more get advantage" defense. This seems to imply that hard work is to be frowned on and shouldn't provide an advantage, while at the same time implying paying more real life money is ok. This just goes against all moral notions that high skill and hard work are things that should be rewarded, and cheating/glitching/buying advantage should be avoided
5) The "You are a troll" defense. This is used when you have defeated all of the above arguments and they have nothing else to say...
By the way, the tactic that was used on you was #3 above, where your concern about competetive advantage was diverted to EXP boosters.
Nicely done
And the sad thing is that will be the attitude they take into beta and any chance of limiting the cash shop will be lost.Anyone who says that, because they have a family, a job, a child, etc. That prevents them from playing as much as others, and therefore think they should be allowed advantages, two things:
#1 No one cares. Plenty of people have all those things and still make time to play games fair and square. You are not special, you are not entitled, and you are very selfish for thinking that it's OK to ruin the game for everyone else because you don't have time to play. If playing the game takes too much time away from your responsibilities, don't play. Simple.
#2 This line of logic would not work anywhere else. Imagine if you said that, because responsibilities take up so much time, that you:
-Should start with a Monopoly and 2 hotels when Playing Monopoly
-When playing chess, your opponent should start wihtout rooks or bishops.
-When you go to a fighting game tournament, you should be able to pick a banned character, because your job and family don't let you practice.
You be laughed at and told to GTFO. So why should this line of logic work with MMO's?
There is no justification for Pay to Win, not ever.
Unfortunately they are built to consume time, and as such are already ruined. Allowing players to skip the BS that designers intentionally put into games in order to extend the time play is not ruining the game for anyone else.
And I could say the same thing about advantages for having more time to play Monopoly/Chess. A better chess player should be a better chess player, regardless of how often they play. Strike a chord wrong? Of course it does, because MMOs do not have any level playing field to begin with.
So, I've gotten carried away with this thread, I realize that. It's also been taking away time from my work responsibilities, which is quite ironic given my statements earlier.
I imagine it seems like I'm saying P2W is the best thing since sliced bread, but that's not how I feel. Let me clarify my point one last time and be done with this forsaken thread.
P2W
P2W is bad, however, it needs to be looked at realistically. Often times an "advantage" over another player does not affect your game. Other times it seems that the bonuses will cause a certain type of player to become over powered, when really they are meant to bring players who could otherwise not experience the game the opportunity to do so (such as a XP boost).
There are plenty of cases where P2W is just bad. When it provides real benefits over those who don't play, and over those who aren't able to spend a reasonable amount of time to make up for the benefit. When it locks content out that others need to progress their character. Or when the time to progress without P2W is unacceptably long (MMORTS are notorious for this).
Cash Shops vs. Subscriptions
Both of these models have almost the exact same pros and cons, just a difference between whether the advantage goes to those with time or money (usually it will go to those with time anyway). Subscriptions do have a small advantage in that there is a sense of accomplishment doing something that takes a long time to accomplish, and that the money spent on cash shops can spiral out of control easily.
However subscriptions and cash shops can both just as easily do the worse thing imaginable: Intentionally weaken the core gameplay experience of the consumer to make more money. Cash shops do this if they require cash to be successful. Subscriptions do this if there are lots of time sinks put in purposefully.
Markets
There are markets for both models. Those who are trying to get rid of cash shops completely are trying to hurt the industry as a whole, because having both models helps divide the market into proper niches, so that you can play with the people you want to play with. It also provides a competitive business model, which means subscription companies will have a tougher time abusing their model.
GW2 and cash shop
Most of the people bitching about P2W are not really the core audience of GW2. GW2 is not designed for the pure Progressionist (although they can certainly enjoy the content for awhile, just like they would with any game), and it is not a sandbox.
As such, it really is a good game to model what a fair cash shop can look like in an MMO. It won't be perfect, and I don't mind people complaining about the implementation. However, saying that it shouldn't have any advantages for any player under any circumstance and that cash shops should never be in any game ever is just ridiculous.
1) The "you are ignorant" defense is also used as an offense from an anti-GW2 or GW2 troll. This is used in defense sometimes because the poster really appears to pull false assumptions from an un-known source, and there-fore why should I try to reason with someone about a game I have researched and they have clearly not.
2) The "It's only beta" defense. Completely agree with you
when people use this it's like.... Just stop now.
3)The "Divert to objectionable item" defense. Common practice, but a lot is still speculation. Yes in "theory" you can pay for with real money, Guild Buffs in a WvWvW zone. BUT, the big thing speculation point being, do they stack? Is it one buff at a time? Is it a max of 2? Is there a re-use timer greater than the duration of the use-able buff? (I.E. 12 hour vitality buff, re-use of 24 hours) Yes there is reason for concern, but claiming it is P2W over 5% buff? In one keep of the entire realm? non-sense. Reason for worrying? agreed, P2W? At this point, speculation.
4) The "Why should people play more get advantages" defense. GW2 is not a gear grinding MMO, it's not a level curve MMO, it's end-game content is un-like large box titles (WoW, SW:ToR), in which if you have 70 valor armor you can stomp n00bs cause they havent ground it out yet. So, with that said, WHAT advantages do you get from playing longer? Mainly skills, of course lvl 80 gear will be better than starter, but there isn't "top tier" anything.
5) This falls back to argument number "1)" Simply a misinformed person ranting on GW2 who clearly hasn't researched the game, or has researched 2 minutes of it and flames on the bad, before giving it a chance to straighten itself out. GW2 is NOT PAY2WIN, NOR a GEAR GRINDER, so when people flant and flame over P2W or "there isn't a carrot!?!?!" they are clearly misinformed and don't want to be properly informed, aka "troll"
On a side note, the PvP advantages "could" be P2W >>IF<< they stack, IMO. Who cares if you can pay to level your guild if you can only have one buff at a time, and i'm guessing have ONE buff up constantly, whether it be back forth from two, or one over and over, isn't going to cost very much, especially once a few people in the guild get past the mid level range. Plus no one will have the gold, and few the desire, to spend gold on gems within the first month or two, why should i waste my gold on gems right away when we don't even know our classes? I understand speculation but dam claiming it's pay2win over one little thing is.... IMHO trolling, call me a fanboi on my white horse all you want, but atleast i'm trying to be reasonable and see the other side of the fence (even though i disagree completely)
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
And how many players do Gemstone4 has? Why would anyone want to play a game that put all sort of social constraints on oneself?
There is a reason why LFR, LFD .. and all the matching making feature popular .. aside from the convenience. People LIKE not to be able to deal with other people's expectation and can behave anyway they want to.
Community is way over rated. I don't see a reason to always be forced to be nice to strangers. It is enough to be nice to a few friends. If i am in a good mood, sure, i will be nice. Isnt behavior without consequences a way to escape from the real world?