To me an advantage is being able to do something I can't at any particular level. If you can kill something faster than I can because of something you bought in a game and is not available to me without using the CS (in a reasonable, i know subjective, time frame) thats an advantage.
Is an "advantage" winning?
Winning would be the end result of said advantage
But if what do you win in a pve game? In fact, isn't true that if you group with someone who has an "advantage", it will improve your dungeon run efficiencies too?
So it is *good* for you.
It doesn't matter if they are winning or not, or whether there is anything to win or not, or what your definition or anyone's definitino of winning is. They can do something I can't because of something they bought.
And that is bad? Why?
If you play a DPS, and they play a healer. They can do something you cannot, even in a p2p game. And that is a good thing, because they help you in a group.
To me an advantage is being able to do something I can't at any particular level. If you can kill something faster than I can because of something you bought in a game and is not available to me without using the CS (in a reasonable, i know subjective, time frame) thats an advantage.
Is an "advantage" winning?
Winning would be the end result of said advantage
But if what do you win in a pve game? In fact, isn't true that if you group with someone who has an "advantage", it will improve your dungeon run efficiencies too?
So it is *good* for you.
It doesn't matter if they are winning or not, or whether there is anything to win or not, or what your definition or anyone's definitino of winning is. They can do something I can't because of something they bought.
And that is bad? Why?
If you play a DPS, and they play a healer. They can do something you cannot, even in a p2p game. And that is a good thing, because they help you in a group.
Yes IMO that is bad, it encourages a game to be based more off how much you pay, than what you can do. It is the steroids of the video games world.
With your healer dps, it doesn't apply. There is nothing stopping me from making a healer in the game, I do not have to pay extra for that.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
To me an advantage is being able to do something I can't at any particular level. If you can kill something faster than I can because of something you bought in a game and is not available to me without using the CS (in a reasonable, i know subjective, time frame) thats an advantage.
Is an "advantage" winning?
Winning would be the end result of said advantage
But if what do you win in a pve game? In fact, isn't true that if you group with someone who has an "advantage", it will improve your dungeon run efficiencies too?
So it is *good* for you.
It doesn't matter if they are winning or not, or whether there is anything to win or not, or what your definition or anyone's definitino of winning is. They can do something I can't because of something they bought.
And that is bad? Why?
If you play a DPS, and they play a healer. They can do something you cannot, even in a p2p game. And that is a good thing, because they help you in a group.
Yes IMO that is bad, it encourages a game to be based more off how much you pay, than what you can do. It is the steroids of the video games world.
With your healer dps, it doesn't apply. There is nothing stopping me from making a healer in the game, I do not have to pay extra for that.
There is nothing stopping you from spending money in the cash shop either. The playing field is leveled.
And again, why is it bad for you? Grouping with someone who paid for advantages translate some of those advantages to you. Don't you want your DPS to put out great dps, and your tank stays alive. Don't you want him to spend money on that plate armor so he can tank properly and keep you alive?
In fact, it is great .. you get the advantage by grouping with those who pay .. you don't even have to pay yourself.
The playing field inside the game is not level. One has more.
I do not get the advantage when grouping with them, they still have the advantage, they are able to do more. I may get to share in the rewards though.
I would imagine they are also looking to optimize their dps. I would be slowing that down.
So once again. A cs that sells power encourages what I will call in game discrimination, further causing a gear/rush mentality. IMO those are bad.
There is no difference between your dollar and his. Just like your time and his. Are you saying if someone has more "anything", then it is no level playing field? If so, i have to work 50 hours and someone else only needs to work 30 hrs .. the playing field is not level in games without cash shop. So there is no level playing field anyway .. why care then?
If you share in the rewards, you have a temporarily advantage. And even just a reward ... is a good thing.
Discrimination? There is plenty in p2p games already. I don't think cashshop makes it much worse.
The playing field inside the game is not level. One has more.
I do not get the advantage when grouping with them, they still have the advantage, they are able to do more. I may get to share in the rewards though.
I would imagine they are also looking to optimize their dps. I would be slowing that down.
So once again. A cs that sells power encourages what I will call in game discrimination, further causing a gear/rush mentality. IMO those are bad.
There is no difference between your dollar and his. Just like your time and his. Are you saying if someone has more "anything", then it is no level playing field? If so, i have to work 50 hours and someone else only needs to work 30 hrs .. the playing field is not level in games without cash shop. So there is no level playing field anyway .. why care then?
If you share in the rewards, you have a temporarily advantage. And even just a reward ... is a good thing.
Discrimination? There is plenty in p2p games already. I don't think cashshop makes it much worse.
There is a difference between a game, and the real world.
If someone has more access to something because of how much they paid that is not a level playing field.
Yes there is plenty of discrimination allready, we should be trying to get rid of it, cs that offer power IMO do not get rid of it, they make it worse. Most people do not like being discriminated against.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
If someone has more access to something because of how much they paid that is not a level playing field.
How is that different from someone has access to something because they have more free work (shorter working hours)?
Real life is always there.
And how is what you describe not "level" when your dollar is the same as "his". You can say you don't like it (which i get) .. but it is as level as it gets.
I can get the EXACT same sword by the EXACT same mean .. that is the definition of a level playing field.
If someone has more access to something because of how much they paid that is not a level playing field.
How is that different from someone has access to something because they have more free work (shorter working hours)?
Real life is always there.
And how is what you describe not "level" when your dollar is the same as "his". You can say you don't like it (which i get) .. but it is as level as it gets.
I can get the EXACT same sword by the EXACT same mean .. that is the definition of a level playing field.
Well the game is up for 24 hours a day. The other person has 24 hours, I have 24 hours. We both have just as much opportunity to play the game. There may be more or less RL consequences but we have the same number of hours.
Our dollars are the same (assuming we are in the same region), but he is using his dollars to buy things in game - big difference. That means that in the game there is not a level playing field.
IMO the amount of money I have outside of a game, should not impact how good or effective I am inside a game.
I don't know about you but I couldn't afford this:
If right now I can get the top tier of gear in WoW (for example) with real life cash then that is pay-to-win, period. It doesn't matter if I can get the item in game. If I buy a character using third party sources with the best gear in the game, I am paying-to-win. Period. The definition of "win" doesn't matter.
There are few that are ok with gear being sold as long as you can get it in game. Even greedy developers haven't crossed that line yet. You can't buy gear especially top tier gear in any game directly from the developer. It looks like a decent number support straight out pay-to-win which is why we will see it gain popularity eventually.
Let me put it this way; without breaking NDA because I won't mention the title...
You have two out of six slots unlocked for these items that you can obtain that may yield one or more extra abilities for you to use. In order to unlock the other four slots (which means four or more skills) you have to pay real money. These items yield different skills but the possibilities are vast and seemingly endless. I'm talking about PBAOE HOTs, AOE DOTs, DD, PBAOE Heals, Debuffs, Buffs, Resource Gathering Buffs, etc. etc.
Now tell me that isn't Pay to Win? When you're fighting someone who only has four of these extra skills (because so far two skills is what I've found to be the maximum; remember two slots by default) and you have twelve (all six slots unlocked with two skills each) extra skills. It's domination.
Not enough...? Well you can put these items into storage and swap them out. But the storage only has two slots by default... now guess how you can get more? That's right. So while the 'free' player has a total of eight skills (hauling four and storing four) the 'paying' player has twenty-four (hauling twelve and storing twelve) at his disposal.
THAT is my example of Pay to Win; and it is a real example sadly.
Do you count the guy that you are rolling for a loot drop against after running a dungeon, as an example, as competition?
Can you link to the MMO where you can buy a better loot roll? If not, then that's irrelevant to his statement.
You are trying too hard to be clever.
I was simply exploring his definition of 'competition'. Once I understand where he is coming from I will carry on talking to him based on the answer he gives.
What you consider relevant or irrelevant means little to me in this case.
It is only p2w when you can buy items that are more powerfull and cannot be obtained any other way.
What if the only way to obtain the item is to play 10,000 hours. "or" you can spend 1000$ to buy it.
That is the reality with those asian f2p games right? Sure if I play 15 hours a day everyday I can keep up. But in reality how many people can do that?
While I think there is a point of reasonable time requirements beyond which the drop rate is just not comparable i.e. buying god sword in cs or .0001% drop rate is IMO stupid and I'll call that p2w)
the first question to ask is:
"Do you care about keeping up?' I certainly don't.
My point s if you actually played those asian f2p games, they give you the chance to buy "everything" with in game gold. It just takes an "absurb" amount of time if you don't use real cash.
I mean I can try playing atlantica online now and get the best gear in the game, it'll just take me say... maybe 20,000 hours playtime to obtain it. "Or" I can just use real cash so I can catch up. I would call that pay 2 win even though everything can be obtained in game without spending real cash.
And picking the worse grind game in the F2P repertoire is like me pointing out that back in ye oldy days on Everquest 1 it would take 6-12 months of hard gaming to even hit level cap.
But the point is many if not most f2p games give you the ability to obtain any item in the game. But people call those pay 2 win. So just because you can obtain any item in the game without spending real cash dont' mean it is not pay 2 win.
Originally posted by seanfitzs Player A earns full epic gear in game, player B buys full epic gear. Player A and Player B meet who has the advantage?
I am player c I don't have any gear, I meet player A and player B they both kick my ass, which one has the advantage?
You do. with one quick transaction you can play with the big boys.
So my advantage is that if i buy the gear it puts me on an equal footing with them but I got to do it a week or two faster then they did? wow that's an amazing advantage
What you mean by p2w is pay to join the big boys, how do i actually win when i pay?
You really have hard time understanding it?
What if the non-paying pleyer is halfway geared? Would it then be P2W? On a sidenote - What if my grandmother was male? Would she be my grandfather? (PRO TIP: It does no matter who wins, who is better geared, who... blah blah blah)
Pay to win is a phrase that came to describe the act of EXCHANGING REAL MONEY FOR POWER. It really is that simple.
Its entirely another thing that devs have interest to try to read it literally. And there of course are ppl that lack even tiny amount of abstract thinking to understand the phrase P2W or they simply have interest in pay to win
Pay to Win isn't just about buying equipment either. There are many games with tiered spender advantages, VIP titles, stat boosting potions and the most Pay to Win of them all is item reinforcement. You know, those games with +1 to +10 reinforcement systems that are nearly impossible to advance beyond +5 without the guaranteed upgrade or destruction prevention items sold in the cash shop. I would define Pay to Win as being any game where a player with less experience and/or skill can have an advantage over a more skilled/more experienced player by spending cash.
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
More then who? Me, you, him or the next one? We are all not paying but diferently well geared. How much time it must involve and, by who's playing standards? What is "reasonable"?
What you talk is absolutely subjective and there is no way to define it when its beyond simple concept and definition.
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
I actually really like this definition.
There have always been virtual blackmarkets where you can buy anything from gear to actual in-game characters. This pre-dates F2P. I mean if you wanted to pick up WoW, for instance, you could buy a toon completely decked out in end-game gear, with all professions leveled, and even Arena points etc. . It's just that Blizzard isn't the one taking your money.
If someone is selling an actual advantage that cannot be gained outside of paying money to obtain it, that's P2W in my opinion. If you can, and you just don't want to invest the time to get that, well that's your problem, that's not P2W.
I guess that you could then ask what is a "subjectively reasonable amount of time" lol
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
More then who? Me, you, him or the next one? We are all not paying but diferently well geared. How much time it must involve and, by who's playing standards? What is "reasonable"?
What you talk is absolutely subjective and there is no way to define it when its beyond simple concept and definition.
No it no subjective, it is very objective, except for the time requirement
If you pay more than someone else (objective), anyone else, and that gives you more power(objective) than is available in game to someone else within a reasonable period of time (that is the sujbjective part).
Than it is p2w.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
More then who? Me, you, him or the next one? We are all not paying but diferently well geared. How much time it must involve and, by who's playing standards? What is "reasonable"?
What you talk is absolutely subjective and there is no way to define it when its beyond simple concept and definition.
No it no subjective, it is very objective, except for the time requirement
If you pay more than someone else (objective), anyone else, and that gives you more power(objective) than is available in game to someone else within a reasonable period of time (that is the sujbjective part).
Than it is p2w.
So you mean that if i come into a game and play for say month to have half the PVP set. Then you, month later, enter too and within 5min you have the full PVP set for X amount of $ and then make me look stupid in a pvp arena its not P2W?
I just have to say LOL
edit: what we say here doent matter. Just watch NWN drop on a daily basis in the Twitch game list beacuse western market rejects money to power.
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
More then who? Me, you, him or the next one? We are all not paying but diferently well geared. How much time it must involve and, by who's playing standards? What is "reasonable"?
What you talk is absolutely subjective and there is no way to define it when its beyond simple concept and definition.
No it no subjective, it is very objective, except for the time requirement
If you pay more than someone else (objective), anyone else, and that gives you more power(objective) than is available in game to someone else within a reasonable period of time (that is the sujbjective part).
Than it is p2w.
So you mean that if i come into a game and play for say month to have half the PVP set. Then you, month later, enter too and within 5min you have the full PVP set for X amount of $ and then make me look stupid in a pvp arena its not P2W?
I just have to say LOL
Possibly. I'm assuming we are also the same level? You stated a month to get half the pvp set, so I'm just going to assume 2 months to get a full set. If that is a long time to you than it would be beyond the reasonable amount of time, so yes p2w.
Me. I wouldn't care., 2 months to get a full set is nothing if I like what I'm doing, so the subjective time component is not a factor. And by the end of that we both have the same power level so the objective power component is not a factor. Therefore it is not p2w.
edit - if you wanted to get a more general definition of reasonable amount of time. We would have to set up polls or descriptive studies to determine a majority opinion.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
More then who? Me, you, him or the next one? We are all not paying but diferently well geared. How much time it must involve and, by who's playing standards? What is "reasonable"?
What you talk is absolutely subjective and there is no way to define it when its beyond simple concept and definition.
No it no subjective, it is very objective, except for the time requirement
If you pay more than someone else (objective), anyone else, and that gives you more power(objective) than is available in game to someone else within a reasonable period of time (that is the sujbjective part).
Than it is p2w.
So you mean that if i come into a game and play for say month to have half the PVP set. Then you, month later, enter too and within 5min you have the full PVP set for X amount of $ and then make me look stupid in a pvp arena its not P2W?
I just have to say LOL
Possibly. I'm assuming we are also the same level? You stated a month to get half the pvp set, so I'm just going to assume 2 months to get a full set. If that is a long time to you than it would be beyond the reasonable amount of time, so yes p2w.
Me. I wouldn't care., 2 months to get a full set is nothing if I like what I'm doing. And by the end of that we both have the same power level so not p2w.
You do realise that by that time you woud be beaten countless times by noobs with money and you are actualy in the next game already :P
edit: to repeat myself. Just watch NWN - the gam that a lot of ppl say have decent gameplay. Just watch :P
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
More then who? Me, you, him or the next one? We are all not paying but diferently well geared. How much time it must involve and, by who's playing standards? What is "reasonable"?
What you talk is absolutely subjective and there is no way to define it when its beyond simple concept and definition.
No it no subjective, it is very objective, except for the time requirement
If you pay more than someone else (objective), anyone else, and that gives you more power(objective) than is available in game to someone else within a reasonable period of time (that is the sujbjective part).
Than it is p2w.
So you mean that if i come into a game and play for say month to have half the PVP set. Then you, month later, enter too and within 5min you have the full PVP set for X amount of $ and then make me look stupid in a pvp arena its not P2W?
I just have to say LOL
Possibly. I'm assuming we are also the same level? You stated a month to get half the pvp set, so I'm just going to assume 2 months to get a full set. If that is a long time to you than it would be beyond the reasonable amount of time, so yes p2w.
Me. I wouldn't care., 2 months to get a full set is nothing if I like what I'm doing. And by the end of that we both have the same power level so not p2w.
You do realise that by that time you woud be beaten countless times by noobs with money and you are actualy in the next game already :P
Did you miss the part where I said, "If I like what I'm doing". If I like what I'm doing I wouldn't leave the game.
edit -I would also likley be beaten countless times by people who did not use the shop, I'm not very good at pvp.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
More then who? Me, you, him or the next one? We are all not paying but diferently well geared. How much time it must involve and, by who's playing standards? What is "reasonable"?
What you talk is absolutely subjective and there is no way to define it when its beyond simple concept and definition.
No it no subjective, it is very objective, except for the time requirement
If you pay more than someone else (objective), anyone else, and that gives you more power(objective) than is available in game to someone else within a reasonable period of time (that is the sujbjective part).
Than it is p2w.
So you mean that if i come into a game and play for say month to have half the PVP set. Then you, month later, enter too and within 5min you have the full PVP set for X amount of $ and then make me look stupid in a pvp arena its not P2W?
I just have to say LOL
Possibly. I'm assuming we are also the same level? You stated a month to get half the pvp set, so I'm just going to assume 2 months to get a full set. If that is a long time to you than it would be beyond the reasonable amount of time, so yes p2w.
Me. I wouldn't care., 2 months to get a full set is nothing if I like what I'm doing. And by the end of that we both have the same power level so not p2w.
You do realise that by that time you woud be beaten countless times by noobs with money and you are actualy in the next game already :P
Did you miss the part where I said, "If I like what I'm doing". If I like what I'm doing I wouldn't leave the game.
edit -I would also likley be beaten countless times by people who did not use the shop, I'm not very good at pvp.
Im sorry. I missed the part where you said you enjoy to be beaten in PVP until you have max gear and finally reach others that spend money to win. Ofc you mean this scenario only in a purely not P2W game, right?
Definition are always a problem . I don't think that will ever change and this one is as subjective as any. This topic has been around before. I remember asking if city clothing (non-combat) or items to decorate a house are p2w and in fact to some they are because "winning" is getting all of the clothing or all of the housing items.
This thread leans heavy on the time to acquire being some how more "right" then paying to acquire the exact same loot. The idea seems to be -
"If I have more time I have a right to be better."
Even that falls apart to some degree because of the RNG so we have to add a little more to it:
"If I have more time and more luck I have a right to be better."
Again not quite because now we have item that can be purchased but I have to earn the gold I can't buy it. I end up with:
"If I have more time and/or a very good gold strat and/or luck I have a right to be better."
Personally, I don't have a problem with items that can be purchased with money as long as they can be earned in game. I don't do real money purchases myself because I play games in my spare time to have fun. I want the experiece. I can understand someone who wants to catch up to friends or be competitive because that is the part of the game they like. I agree with others who have said it really doesn't matter if it is time spent, money spent, luck or a better gold strat either way someone will always have more then me and that doesn't bother me.
You used to "buy" advantages through time-invested.
Because it was the first/earliest, it is the "right" way to play.
All else is blather. We know how enormously tricky that "right" word is, particularly when it's up to the developers to balance profit motive against their game's integrity.
As players we really don't, and never did, have any say about it. Vote with your feet; it's the only meaningful vote you'll ever have.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Comments
And that is bad? Why?
If you play a DPS, and they play a healer. They can do something you cannot, even in a p2p game. And that is a good thing, because they help you in a group.
Yes IMO that is bad, it encourages a game to be based more off how much you pay, than what you can do. It is the steroids of the video games world.
With your healer dps, it doesn't apply. There is nothing stopping me from making a healer in the game, I do not have to pay extra for that.
There is nothing stopping you from spending money in the cash shop either. The playing field is leveled.
And again, why is it bad for you? Grouping with someone who paid for advantages translate some of those advantages to you. Don't you want your DPS to put out great dps, and your tank stays alive. Don't you want him to spend money on that plate armor so he can tank properly and keep you alive?
In fact, it is great .. you get the advantage by grouping with those who pay .. you don't even have to pay yourself.
The playing field inside the game is not level. One has more.
I do not get the advantage when grouping with them, they still have the advantage, they are able to do more. I may get to share in the rewards though.
I would imagine they are also looking to optimize their dps. I would be slowing that down.
So once again. A cs that sells power encourages what I will call in game discrimination, further causing a gear/rush mentality. IMO those are bad.
There is no difference between your dollar and his. Just like your time and his. Are you saying if someone has more "anything", then it is no level playing field? If so, i have to work 50 hours and someone else only needs to work 30 hrs .. the playing field is not level in games without cash shop. So there is no level playing field anyway .. why care then?
If you share in the rewards, you have a temporarily advantage. And even just a reward ... is a good thing.
Discrimination? There is plenty in p2p games already. I don't think cashshop makes it much worse.
There is a difference between a game, and the real world.
If someone has more access to something because of how much they paid that is not a level playing field.
Yes there is plenty of discrimination allready, we should be trying to get rid of it, cs that offer power IMO do not get rid of it, they make it worse. Most people do not like being discriminated against.
How is that different from someone has access to something because they have more free work (shorter working hours)?
Real life is always there.
And how is what you describe not "level" when your dollar is the same as "his". You can say you don't like it (which i get) .. but it is as level as it gets.
I can get the EXACT same sword by the EXACT same mean .. that is the definition of a level playing field.
Well the game is up for 24 hours a day. The other person has 24 hours, I have 24 hours. We both have just as much opportunity to play the game. There may be more or less RL consequences but we have the same number of hours.
Our dollars are the same (assuming we are in the same region), but he is using his dollars to buy things in game - big difference. That means that in the game there is not a level playing field.
IMO the amount of money I have outside of a game, should not impact how good or effective I am inside a game.
I don't know about you but I couldn't afford this:
http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701594/most-expensive-virtual-item-sells-for-330000/
If right now I can get the top tier of gear in WoW (for example) with real life cash then that is pay-to-win, period. It doesn't matter if I can get the item in game. If I buy a character using third party sources with the best gear in the game, I am paying-to-win. Period. The definition of "win" doesn't matter.
There are few that are ok with gear being sold as long as you can get it in game. Even greedy developers haven't crossed that line yet. You can't buy gear especially top tier gear in any game directly from the developer. It looks like a decent number support straight out pay-to-win which is why we will see it gain popularity eventually.
Let me put it this way; without breaking NDA because I won't mention the title...
You have two out of six slots unlocked for these items that you can obtain that may yield one or more extra abilities for you to use. In order to unlock the other four slots (which means four or more skills) you have to pay real money. These items yield different skills but the possibilities are vast and seemingly endless. I'm talking about PBAOE HOTs, AOE DOTs, DD, PBAOE Heals, Debuffs, Buffs, Resource Gathering Buffs, etc. etc.
Now tell me that isn't Pay to Win? When you're fighting someone who only has four of these extra skills (because so far two skills is what I've found to be the maximum; remember two slots by default) and you have twelve (all six slots unlocked with two skills each) extra skills. It's domination.
Not enough...? Well you can put these items into storage and swap them out. But the storage only has two slots by default... now guess how you can get more? That's right. So while the 'free' player has a total of eight skills (hauling four and storing four) the 'paying' player has twenty-four (hauling twelve and storing twelve) at his disposal.
THAT is my example of Pay to Win; and it is a real example sadly.
You are trying too hard to be clever.
I was simply exploring his definition of 'competition'. Once I understand where he is coming from I will carry on talking to him based on the answer he gives.
What you consider relevant or irrelevant means little to me in this case.
But the point is many if not most f2p games give you the ability to obtain any item in the game. But people call those pay 2 win. So just because you can obtain any item in the game without spending real cash dont' mean it is not pay 2 win.
You really have hard time understanding it?
What if the non-paying pleyer is halfway geared? Would it then be P2W? On a sidenote - What if my grandmother was male? Would she be my grandfather? (PRO TIP: It does no matter who wins, who is better geared, who... blah blah blah)
Pay to win is a phrase that came to describe the act of EXCHANGING REAL MONEY FOR POWER. It really is that simple.
Its entirely another thing that devs have interest to try to read it literally. And there of course are ppl that lack even tiny amount of abstract thinking to understand the phrase P2W or they simply have interest in pay to win
Naw. P2W is not just about spending RL money for power. It is about spending RL money to have an advantage over someone that does not pay, to have MORE power than someone who does not pay.
If you can earn equivalent power in game (within a subjectively reasonable amount of time) IMO it is not p2w.
More then who? Me, you, him or the next one? We are all not paying but diferently well geared. How much time it must involve and, by who's playing standards? What is "reasonable"?
What you talk is absolutely subjective and there is no way to define it when its beyond simple concept and definition.
I actually really like this definition.
There have always been virtual blackmarkets where you can buy anything from gear to actual in-game characters. This pre-dates F2P. I mean if you wanted to pick up WoW, for instance, you could buy a toon completely decked out in end-game gear, with all professions leveled, and even Arena points etc. . It's just that Blizzard isn't the one taking your money.
If someone is selling an actual advantage that cannot be gained outside of paying money to obtain it, that's P2W in my opinion. If you can, and you just don't want to invest the time to get that, well that's your problem, that's not P2W.
I guess that you could then ask what is a "subjectively reasonable amount of time" lol
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
No it no subjective, it is very objective, except for the time requirement
If you pay more than someone else (objective), anyone else, and that gives you more power(objective) than is available in game to someone else within a reasonable period of time (that is the sujbjective part).
Than it is p2w.
So you mean that if i come into a game and play for say month to have half the PVP set. Then you, month later, enter too and within 5min you have the full PVP set for X amount of $ and then make me look stupid in a pvp arena its not P2W?
I just have to say LOL
edit: what we say here doent matter. Just watch NWN drop on a daily basis in the Twitch game list beacuse western market rejects money to power.
Possibly. I'm assuming we are also the same level? You stated a month to get half the pvp set, so I'm just going to assume 2 months to get a full set. If that is a long time to you than it would be beyond the reasonable amount of time, so yes p2w.
Me. I wouldn't care., 2 months to get a full set is nothing if I like what I'm doing, so the subjective time component is not a factor. And by the end of that we both have the same power level so the objective power component is not a factor. Therefore it is not p2w.
edit - if you wanted to get a more general definition of reasonable amount of time. We would have to set up polls or descriptive studies to determine a majority opinion.
You do realise that by that time you woud be beaten countless times by noobs with money and you are actualy in the next game already :P
edit: to repeat myself. Just watch NWN - the gam that a lot of ppl say have decent gameplay. Just watch :P
Did you miss the part where I said, "If I like what I'm doing". If I like what I'm doing I wouldn't leave the game.
edit -I would also likley be beaten countless times by people who did not use the shop, I'm not very good at pvp.
Im sorry. I missed the part where you said you enjoy to be beaten in PVP until you have max gear and finally reach others that spend money to win. Ofc you mean this scenario only in a purely not P2W game, right?
Definition are always a problem . I don't think that will ever change and this one is as subjective as any. This topic has been around before. I remember asking if city clothing (non-combat) or items to decorate a house are p2w and in fact to some they are because "winning" is getting all of the clothing or all of the housing items.
This thread leans heavy on the time to acquire being some how more "right" then paying to acquire the exact same loot. The idea seems to be -
"If I have more time I have a right to be better."
Even that falls apart to some degree because of the RNG so we have to add a little more to it:
"If I have more time and more luck I have a right to be better."
Again not quite because now we have item that can be purchased but I have to earn the gold I can't buy it. I end up with:
"If I have more time and/or a very good gold strat and/or luck I have a right to be better."
Personally, I don't have a problem with items that can be purchased with money as long as they can be earned in game. I don't do real money purchases myself because I play games in my spare time to have fun. I want the experiece. I can understand someone who wants to catch up to friends or be competitive because that is the part of the game they like. I agree with others who have said it really doesn't matter if it is time spent, money spent, luck or a better gold strat either way someone will always have more then me and that doesn't bother me.
my 2 cents
You used to "buy" advantages through time-invested.
Because it was the first/earliest, it is the "right" way to play.
All else is blather. We know how enormously tricky that "right" word is, particularly when it's up to the developers to balance profit motive against their game's integrity.
As players we really don't, and never did, have any say about it. Vote with your feet; it's the only meaningful vote you'll ever have.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.