RMT wasn't "pay to win" , since no one lost anything , you get gears , accounts ect ... and other player get money (for they play time) . publisher don't lost anything.
"pay to win" mean player lost and publisher win. (even if you pay , you still lost lol)
They can created infinity mall that you have to buy to complete game ,
it kind of cheat because the seller side can created infinity mall and don't have to spend time to play and hunt in game.
Make it simple:
in RMT
In a race , you pay other players to let you win . It may sound unfair but no one lost , you win , other get money. Everyone happy
in P2W
You pay for the host and let him make you win again other players , you lost money amd win, other players lost
I don't see what has you confused in all honesty. It seems simple to me... Yes, character development is a measure of how well you are doing in a MMORPG. You buy any part of that from a cash shop and you are, in my eyes, paying to 'win'.
You cannot see that MMORPGs are a series of micro 'wins'?
And, no, it's nothing like your example here at all.
Except they are not, atleast not on the game level. One can say "I am done" or that they "won a match" or "world first" but none of those are "winning" the game. The game does not end until they shut off the servers, and even then there is no winning or losing, merely the resolution of the conflict. Having the best gear in the game is not the end or even really the point of the game. Nor is being the most skilled, or completing the most content, or playing the game the longest.
Originally posted by SoMuchMassHope you caught the difference.
There is no difference.
You progress through content, in a way or another.
You however imply that only one way is the right one and that is how MMOs are designed:
Originally posted by SoMuchMass And the argument against this is time and/or skill should be currency of game progression not real life cash. If you don't have time/skill you should be behind.... That is pretty much how 99% of MMOs are designed. It isn't just "me".
If that was truth tho, there would be no need for this rant thread as there would be no other ways of progression - all games would be grind to win.
That's weird, I always thought the idea of paying to win had something to do with pvp specifically. As in, two players get into a fight, if one of them has paid for BiS or some overenchanted piece of virtual trash, that person usually won the fight.
Like the first times that I saw that term being thrown around, almost a decade ago, it always had something to do with pvp.
I have been living under a rock, how did this change?
You progress through content, in a way or another.
You however imply that only one way is the right one and that is how MMOs are designed:
Originally posted by SoMuchMass
And the argument against this is time and/or skill should be currency of game progression not real life cash. If you don't have time/skill you should be behind.
...
That is pretty much how 99% of MMOs are designed. It isn't just "me".
If that was truth tho, there would be no need for this rant thread as there would be no other ways of progression - all games would be grind to win.
It is true, most MMOs while leveling you are behind if you don't put the time in it. If you think otherwise give me an example of three MMOs that doesn't require time/skill while leveling? I personally would be glad to see examples that tell me otherwise.
Again, but now at max level in several MMOs (not all) you can buy the best gear in the game with real life money. Mostly in F2P MMOs. This thread is needed because this is the case in some MMOs not all MMOs. I specifically said F2P/B2P games if you read the original post.
To me the definition of "Pay-to-Win" has always been something in an MMO that let you gain an in-game advantage. In almost all F2P/B2P MMOs you can get some of the best gear in the game with real life money, usually by converting real life money to game currency and buying epics. For example, I can gear my character in GW2 or Neverwinter in full "epics" with real life money.
I keep hearing players and developers now say that if you can get this gear in game with game currency, it isn't "Pay-to-Win". When did this become the definition become the norm?
If I can get the best gear in the game with real life money, and I can get it with in-game currency. It is still "Pay-to-Win". Because usually you can buy in-game currency with real life money.
Star Citizen and Chris Roberts recently took this approach. In Star Citizen you can buy all the ships with real life money. When people said it was "Pay-to-Win", RSI said it isn't "Pay-to-Win" because you can buy the ships in game.
So am I wrong? What is the definition of "Pay-to-Win"?
You feel entitled of playing AAA games without paying anything ?
Why don;t YOU make a free MMO which is not pay to win and is not subscription based instead of moaning?
Bellow is everything you need to make you game and make it free for all no cash shop no subscription.
Only thing you will need is to pay for servers at some point but maybe you convince a datacenter to gave you some for free in exchange for publicity.
To me the definition of "Pay-to-Win" has always been something in an MMO that let you gain an in-game advantage. In almost all F2P/B2P MMOs you can get some of the best gear in the game with real life money, usually by converting real life money to game currency and buying epics. For example, I can gear my character in GW2 or Neverwinter in full "epics" with real life money.
I keep hearing players and developers now say that if you can get this gear in game with game currency, it isn't "Pay-to-Win". When did this become the definition become the norm?
If I can get the best gear in the game with real life money, and I can get it with in-game currency. It is still "Pay-to-Win". Because usually you can buy in-game currency with real life money.
Star Citizen and Chris Roberts recently took this approach. In Star Citizen you can buy all the ships with real life money. When people said it was "Pay-to-Win", RSI said it isn't "Pay-to-Win" because you can buy the ships in game.
So am I wrong? What is the definition of "Pay-to-Win"?
You feel entitled of playing AAA games without paying anything ?
Why don;t YOU make a free MMO which is not pay to win and is not subscription based instead of moaning?
Bellow is everything you need to make you game and make it free for all no cash shop no subscription.
Only thing you will need is to pay for servers at some point but maybe you convince a datacenter to gave you some for free in exchange for publicity.
No, I stick to subscription games. I played Neverwinter and paid $60 for the Founder's pack. You assumed a lot there, everything being false. As LoL and Path of Exile proved you can be successful with cosmetic items.
It doesn't really matter what the developers call it. If you feel it's P2W then that's what it is to you. Then base your decisions on that.
Developers like to spin things in their favor. If sandbox is the word of the month, then that's the word they will use to describe their game (Example: Skyrim), If people complain about their game missing too many MMO features to be a MMO then, they will withdraw the MMO part (Example: Defiance) and label it something else. I wouldn't put too much stock into what developers say or do. Their objective is to sell a game any way possible
Originally posted by SoMuchMass Based on some peoples logic here, if I started an MMO and could buy a character at max level with full epics when the game launches it would not be F2P? Since you can do that in game anyway?
You are correct, if you buy that char and in 6 months I get to max level with epics, we are both on an equal footing but who got cheated, it would be you because I played the game for 6 months and had a blast and felt pride in my task.
Did it bother me that you got you char in 5 min's no. it did not effect me at all, you lost out by buying it.
If I go up against your char in pvp and another char that grinded out the gear I don't know the difference and don't care.
Cash should just be to help you along because you don't have the time other people have, if you just buy everything you just cheat yourself not the game.
What if i gank your level 2 non stop with my max level epic geared char?
To me the definition of "Pay-to-Win" has always been something in an MMO that let you gain an in-game advantage. In almost all F2P/B2P MMOs you can get some of the best gear in the game with real life money, usually by converting real life money to game currency and buying epics. For example, I can gear my character in GW2 or Neverwinter in full "epics" with real life money.
I keep hearing players and developers now say that if you can get this gear in game with game currency, it isn't "Pay-to-Win". When did this become the definition become the norm?
If I can get the best gear in the game with real life money, and I can get it with in-game currency. It is still "Pay-to-Win". Because usually you can buy in-game currency with real life money.
Star Citizen and Chris Roberts recently took this approach. In Star Citizen you can buy all the ships with real life money. When people said it was "Pay-to-Win", RSI said it isn't "Pay-to-Win" because you can buy the ships in game.
So am I wrong? What is the definition of "Pay-to-Win"?
You feel entitled of playing AAA games without paying anything ?
Why don;t YOU make a free MMO which is not pay to win and is not subscription based instead of moaning?
Bellow is everything you need to make you game and make it free for all no cash shop no subscription.
Only thing you will need is to pay for servers at some point but maybe you convince a datacenter to gave you some for free in exchange for publicity.
No, I stick to subscription games. I played Neverwinter and paid $60 for the Founder's pack. You assumed a lot there, everything being false. As LoL and Path of Exile proved you can be successful with cosmetic items.
Good for you. Subscription games worked when the number of mmos was small. I play now and then 5-6 mmos. I will not pay for 5 mmos for sure subscription. I don;t mind paying now and then some real money to keep up gear based with the rest.
I played eve and wow for some time but just to play 5-10 hours per month a subscription does not worth.
This is the today reality, few people stick with a single game.
Unless i get some value for my money in a item shop obviously i won;t pay. I don;t care about cosmetic stuff. I don;t want something game-breaking or bleeding edge, just some that can help me to "stay in game" and "have a chance" (not the I win button) against hardcore players.
BTW somebody posted about world of tanks. The gold ammo was only used by noobs that can't aim in regular games . It was used by everybody in territory holding games but then the gold was provided by the territory itself. Never the less you can buy gold ammo now with ingame currency.
Semantics. There is no winning an MMO. It's not that sort of thing. However you can achieve a series of goals or you can simply buy your way past them and achieve nothing but lining the developers pockets.
Sure, but who gets to decide what goals are important? Why do you get to decide having great gear is a "win" when its nothing but a hindrance to get to the content I want to enjoy? Whats more, why should we not be lining their pockets? Games are far from cheap to produce or keep running and paying them for their work is always great when they provide entertainment for us. Why do athletes get paid millions and most devs are lucky to be scratching 6 figures.
Someone needs to create a MMO in the vein of progress quest where how far you progress depends on how many XP boosters you buy rather than clicking a mouse button. There could be a ladder showing the top spenders for the week and overall. There really wouldn't need to be any gameplay at all. That way the experience of people who pay to win wouldn't be cheapened by the hoi-polloi who can't afford to keep up with the real gamers. /eyeroll
To me the definition of "Pay-to-Win" has always been something in an MMO that let you gain an in-game advantage. In almost all F2P/B2P MMOs you can get some of the best gear in the game with real life money, usually by converting real life money to game currency and buying epics. For example, I can gear my character in GW2 or Neverwinter in full "epics" with real life money.
I keep hearing players and developers now say that if you can get this gear in game with game currency, it isn't "Pay-to-Win". When did this become the definition become the norm?
If I can get the best gear in the game with real life money, and I can get it with in-game currency. It is still "Pay-to-Win". Because usually you can buy in-game currency with real life money.
Star Citizen and Chris Roberts recently took this approach. In Star Citizen you can buy all the ships with real life money. When people said it was "Pay-to-Win", RSI said it isn't "Pay-to-Win" because you can buy the ships in game.
So am I wrong? What is the definition of "Pay-to-Win"?
I agree with everything you said. Im not sure about neverwinter but Guild Wars 2 you can definetely use gems to get the gold and buy an awesome set of gear. The main difference I see with GW2 is that in order to get that same type of gear (stat wise) in game it really isnt that difficult with a few dungeon runs. Other games make it pretty much impossible to gear up without money which really bothers me.
All this moaning about pay to win is from kids that want PWN new players or from Chinese farmers that can't farm anymore and people who hacked accounts to sell gold etc.
Only legitimate cases of pay to win complain are IF there are some uber weapon/armor that are couple of times better than regular stuff that can be obtained through game play.
Make no mistake, you could always buy this stuff, just not from the game maker.
Examples: gold in wow you could buy it from farmers and buy stuff from AH
you could order in wow to level a character and to have it equipped with various epics gear level.
You could buy ISK in eve and buy any ship/gear you wanted etc.
All that cash shop did was to regularize this and to direct this income to the game maker.
As long as the stuff from item shop is not game breaking suck it up , the developers needs to make money otherwise you would play solitaire.
All this moaning about pay to win is from kids that want PWN new players or from Chinese farmers that can't farm anymore and people who hacked accounts to sell gold etc.
Only legitimate cases of pay to win complain are IF there are some uber weapon/armor that are couple of times better than regular stuff that can be obtained through game play.
More assumptions, again which are false. Also, no one here is a law maker and can tell others what is "legitimate" or what isn't. It looks like each person has their own personal definition of what pay-to-win is.
To me the definition of "Pay-to-Win" has always been something in an MMO that let you gain an in-game advantage. In almost all F2P/B2P MMOs you can get some of the best gear in the game with real life money, usually by converting real life money to game currency and buying epics. For example, I can gear my character in GW2 or Neverwinter in full "epics" with real life money.
I keep hearing players and developers now say that if you can get this gear in game with game currency, it isn't "Pay-to-Win". When did this become the definition become the norm?
If I can get the best gear in the game with real life money, and I can get it with in-game currency. It is still "Pay-to-Win". Because usually you can buy in-game currency with real life money.
Star Citizen and Chris Roberts recently took this approach. In Star Citizen you can buy all the ships with real life money. When people said it was "Pay-to-Win", RSI said it isn't "Pay-to-Win" because you can buy the ships in game.
So am I wrong? What is the definition of "Pay-to-Win"?
You feel entitled of playing AAA games without paying anything ?
Why don;t YOU make a free MMO which is not pay to win and is not subscription based instead of moaning?
Bellow is everything you need to make you game and make it free for all no cash shop no subscription.
Only thing you will need is to pay for servers at some point but maybe you convince a datacenter to gave you some for free in exchange for publicity.
No, I stick to subscription games. I played Neverwinter and paid $60 for the Founder's pack. You assumed a lot there, everything being false. As LoL and Path of Exile proved you can be successful with cosmetic items.
Same thing apply, you don;t like the current trend- make your own game. Everything is available for free. Work hard for 2-3 years and then make it free to play and then see how some dude start to comment that he does not like something.
To me the definition of "Pay-to-Win" has always been something in an MMO that let you gain an in-game advantage. In almost all F2P/B2P MMOs you can get some of the best gear in the game with real life money, usually by converting real life money to game currency and buying epics. For example, I can gear my character in GW2 or Neverwinter in full "epics" with real life money.
I keep hearing players and developers now say that if you can get this gear in game with game currency, it isn't "Pay-to-Win". When did this become the definition become the norm?
If I can get the best gear in the game with real life money, and I can get it with in-game currency. It is still "Pay-to-Win". Because usually you can buy in-game currency with real life money.
Star Citizen and Chris Roberts recently took this approach. In Star Citizen you can buy all the ships with real life money. When people said it was "Pay-to-Win", RSI said it isn't "Pay-to-Win" because you can buy the ships in game.
So am I wrong? What is the definition of "Pay-to-Win"?
You feel entitled of playing AAA games without paying anything ?
Why don;t YOU make a free MMO which is not pay to win and is not subscription based instead of moaning?
Bellow is everything you need to make you game and make it free for all no cash shop no subscription.
Only thing you will need is to pay for servers at some point but maybe you convince a datacenter to gave you some for free in exchange for publicity.
No, I stick to subscription games. I played Neverwinter and paid $60 for the Founder's pack. You assumed a lot there, everything being false. As LoL and Path of Exile proved you can be successful with cosmetic items.
Same thing apply, you don;t like the current trend- make your own game. Everything is available for free. Work hard for 2-3 years and then make it free to play and then see how some dude start to comment that he does not like something.
I don't make games for a living. If I don't like something I give feedback, that is how the world works. Again, comments like this add nothing to the discussion.
All this moaning about pay to win is from kids that want PWN new players or from Chinese farmers that can't farm anymore and people who hacked accounts to sell gold etc.
Only legitimate cases of pay to win complain are IF there are some uber weapon/armor that are couple of times better than regular stuff that can be obtained through game play.
More assumptions, again which are false. Also, no one here is a law maker and can tell others what is "legitimate" or what isn't. It looks like each person has their own personal definition of what pay-to-win is.
LOL
Dude , you don;t like the game don;t play it. I did this. There are hundreds of MMO. There is no point to throw shit in developers.
All this moaning about pay to win is from kids that want PWN new players or from Chinese farmers that can't farm anymore and people who hacked accounts to sell gold etc.
Only legitimate cases of pay to win complain are IF there are some uber weapon/armor that are couple of times better than regular stuff that can be obtained through game play.
More assumptions, again which are false. Also, no one here is a law maker and can tell others what is "legitimate" or what isn't. It looks like each person has their own personal definition of what pay-to-win is.
LOL
Dude , you don;t like the game don;t play it. I did this. There are hundreds of MMO. There is no point to throw shit in developers.
Nobody forces you to play game x or game y.
I don't play it. I am talking about a concept. Stop making assumptions please, so far you are 0 for 3.
Well by these standards every mmo inte the world is p2w, I bought gold in Wow and full epic after that. How is this different then a cash shop, except its a thrid party that gets the cash.
All games that don't have a cash shop you can always buy from a third party who will sell you gold or gear.
Comments
Seems to me that the attitude is:
P2W is someone else buying advantage with RL cash.
non-P2W is me buying advantage with RL cash
It is not, your assumptions and implication is wrong tho.
Concept of game does not imply that there must be someone first as one of the game objectives.
You are mistaking competition for game.
I have played the game for dozens of hours and watched countless streams never seen that combo. I have seen a couple dwarf female clerics though.
RMT wasn't "pay to win" , since no one lost anything , you get gears , accounts ect ... and other player get money (for they play time) . publisher don't lost anything.
"pay to win" mean player lost and publisher win. (even if you pay , you still lost lol)
They can created infinity mall that you have to buy to complete game ,
it kind of cheat because the seller side can created infinity mall and don't have to spend time to play and hunt in game.
Make it simple:
in RMT
In a race , you pay other players to let you win . It may sound unfair but no one lost , you win , other get money. Everyone happy
in P2W
You pay for the host and let him make you win again other players , you lost money amd win, other players lost
and the host get money.
In P2W , only winner are the host
Except they are not, atleast not on the game level. One can say "I am done" or that they "won a match" or "world first" but none of those are "winning" the game. The game does not end until they shut off the servers, and even then there is no winning or losing, merely the resolution of the conflict. Having the best gear in the game is not the end or even really the point of the game. Nor is being the most skilled, or completing the most content, or playing the game the longest.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
There is no difference.
You progress through content, in a way or another.
You however imply that only one way is the right one and that is how MMOs are designed:
If that was truth tho, there would be no need for this rant thread as there would be no other ways of progression - all games would be grind to win.
'Win', the topic title? Can you 'win' (or lose) without competing?
You implied players would flee mmos if they were made to be 'losers'. Surely players would not compete at all, if they were such wusses?
But...mmos didn't go "boom" until they got competitive...
That's weird, I always thought the idea of paying to win had something to do with pvp specifically. As in, two players get into a fight, if one of them has paid for BiS or some overenchanted piece of virtual trash, that person usually won the fight.
Like the first times that I saw that term being thrown around, almost a decade ago, it always had something to do with pvp.
I have been living under a rock, how did this change?
It is true, most MMOs while leveling you are behind if you don't put the time in it. If you think otherwise give me an example of three MMOs that doesn't require time/skill while leveling? I personally would be glad to see examples that tell me otherwise.
Again, but now at max level in several MMOs (not all) you can buy the best gear in the game with real life money. Mostly in F2P MMOs. This thread is needed because this is the case in some MMOs not all MMOs. I specifically said F2P/B2P games if you read the original post.
You feel entitled of playing AAA games without paying anything ?
Why don;t YOU make a free MMO which is not pay to win and is not subscription based instead of moaning?
Bellow is everything you need to make you game and make it free for all no cash shop no subscription.
Only thing you will need is to pay for servers at some point but maybe you convince a datacenter to gave you some for free in exchange for publicity.
game engine: http://unity3d.com/
3d modeling: http://www.blender.org/
free textures: http://cgtextures.com/
Funny you bring this up in video game board... How many players did you beaten up when playing single player games?
Winning is a state of achieving a game goal, that does not necessarily imply any ranking ladder.
No, I stick to subscription games. I played Neverwinter and paid $60 for the Founder's pack. You assumed a lot there, everything being false. As LoL and Path of Exile proved you can be successful with cosmetic items.
Competition is inherent in games. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5jDspIC4hY (check the description, lots of resources there)
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
It doesn't really matter what the developers call it. If you feel it's P2W then that's what it is to you. Then base your decisions on that.
Developers like to spin things in their favor. If sandbox is the word of the month, then that's the word they will use to describe their game (Example: Skyrim), If people complain about their game missing too many MMO features to be a MMO then, they will withdraw the MMO part (Example: Defiance) and label it something else. I wouldn't put too much stock into what developers say or do. Their objective is to sell a game any way possible
What if i gank your level 2 non stop with my max level epic geared char?
Good for you. Subscription games worked when the number of mmos was small. I play now and then 5-6 mmos. I will not pay for 5 mmos for sure subscription. I don;t mind paying now and then some real money to keep up gear based with the rest.
I played eve and wow for some time but just to play 5-10 hours per month a subscription does not worth.
This is the today reality, few people stick with a single game.
Unless i get some value for my money in a item shop obviously i won;t pay. I don;t care about cosmetic stuff. I don;t want something game-breaking or bleeding edge, just some that can help me to "stay in game" and "have a chance" (not the I win button) against hardcore players.
BTW somebody posted about world of tanks. The gold ammo was only used by noobs that can't aim in regular games . It was used by everybody in territory holding games but then the gold was provided by the territory itself. Never the less you can buy gold ammo now with ingame currency.
Sure, but who gets to decide what goals are important? Why do you get to decide having great gear is a "win" when its nothing but a hindrance to get to the content I want to enjoy? Whats more, why should we not be lining their pockets? Games are far from cheap to produce or keep running and paying them for their work is always great when they provide entertainment for us. Why do athletes get paid millions and most devs are lucky to be scratching 6 figures.
You mean kinda like this project http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2411939,00.asp Though that is not entirely what you are talking about its not too far off.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
I agree with everything you said. Im not sure about neverwinter but Guild Wars 2 you can definetely use gems to get the gold and buy an awesome set of gear. The main difference I see with GW2 is that in order to get that same type of gear (stat wise) in game it really isnt that difficult with a few dungeon runs. Other games make it pretty much impossible to gear up without money which really bothers me.
All this moaning about pay to win is from kids that want PWN new players or from Chinese farmers that can't farm anymore and people who hacked accounts to sell gold etc.
Only legitimate cases of pay to win complain are IF there are some uber weapon/armor that are couple of times better than regular stuff that can be obtained through game play.
Make no mistake, you could always buy this stuff, just not from the game maker.
Examples: gold in wow you could buy it from farmers and buy stuff from AH
you could order in wow to level a character and to have it equipped with various epics gear level.
You could buy ISK in eve and buy any ship/gear you wanted etc.
All that cash shop did was to regularize this and to direct this income to the game maker.
As long as the stuff from item shop is not game breaking suck it up , the developers needs to make money otherwise you would play solitaire.
More assumptions, again which are false. Also, no one here is a law maker and can tell others what is "legitimate" or what isn't. It looks like each person has their own personal definition of what pay-to-win is.
Same thing apply, you don;t like the current trend- make your own game. Everything is available for free. Work hard for 2-3 years and then make it free to play and then see how some dude start to comment that he does not like something.
I don't make games for a living. If I don't like something I give feedback, that is how the world works. Again, comments like this add nothing to the discussion.
LOL
Dude , you don;t like the game don;t play it. I did this. There are hundreds of MMO. There is no point to throw shit in developers.
Nobody forces you to play game x or game y.
I don't play it. I am talking about a concept. Stop making assumptions please, so far you are 0 for 3.
Well by these standards every mmo inte the world is p2w, I bought gold in Wow and full epic after that. How is this different then a cash shop, except its a thrid party that gets the cash.
All games that don't have a cash shop you can always buy from a third party who will sell you gold or gear.