Give me three examples in the "current MMO market" that while leveling isn't base on time/skill. Thanks.
You are arguing with yourself, I do not see my part here.
Since you said the "current MMO market" is not based on time/skill. I am asking you, give me examples in this "current MMO market". I am guessing you have none.
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 can buy a max level and max geared character in any game you care to mention for real money. Life is pay to win. Sorry to give you the bad news.
Give me three examples in the "current MMO market" that while leveling isn't base on time/skill. Thanks.
You are arguing with yourself, I do not see my part here.
Since you said the "current MMO market" is not based on time/skill. I am asking you, give me examples in this "current MMO market". I am guessing you have none.
RMT has been around since the earliest MMOs. There were people buying stuff for real cash in Everquest and DAOC.
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 can buy a max level and max geared character in any game you care to mention for real money. Life is pay to win. Sorry to give you the bad news.
This was brought up several times. It is different when a 3rd party does it against the terms of service and when a game developer does it themselves. Secondly, games are not life. The reason people play games is because it isn't life, that is what gives us the motivation and entertainment.
P2W is you buy OP items from a cash shop that is NOT obtainable ingame.
That is the pure definition of P2W.
Yeah, my personal opinion is that its something that influences your characters strength that isnt available in game or achieved through normal gameplay.
But people seem to think convenience items and appearance gear are pay to win these days.
You are not making any point nor address any of mine.
Competition and games are 2 different concepts as I pointed out before. Games can be competitive, nothing is inherited.
Games are played for competition, entertainment, education, etc., games are played for many reasons and purposes.
By your definition, single player games are no games since you are not competing with anyone there.
Such definition is obviously incorrect.
Not at all, you are still competing against the ai. This is where you start getting into edge cases though. Like the debate over Journey, and whether or not its a game at all. Or any of the various art games. Game in general is starting to become a rather nebulous term for those very reasons. Choose your own adventure books are interactive entertainment, but are certainly not games for example.
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 can buy a max level and max geared character in any game you care to mention for real money. Life is pay to win. Sorry to give you the bad news.
This was brought up several times. It is different when a 3rd party does it against the terms of service and when a game developer does it themselves. Secondly, games are not life. The reason people play games is because it isn't life, that is what gives us the motivation and entertainment.
The point is that you cant stop it. If leveling convenience and faster itemisation are being sold, how is that any worse than someone just buying a max geared character outright? At least with the former, it is the developer making money, which leads to further development. Rather than going to farmers and grinders.
P2W is you buy OP items from a cash shop that is NOT obtainable ingame.
That is the pure definition of P2W.
Yeah, my personal opinion is that its something that influences your characters strength that isnt available in game or achieved through normal gameplay.
But people seem to think convenience items and appearance gear are pay to win these days.
No one really said that. Buying the best gear in the game with real life money is what people are calling pay-to-win. Regardless of the fact you can buy it in game or not.
This was brought up several times. It is different when a 3rd party does it against the terms of service and when a game developer does it themselves. Secondly, games are not life. The reason people play games is because it isn't life, that is what gives us the motivation and entertainment.
Have you actually looked at why its against the Tos? Uo for example allowed it for some time, Koster himself has said he used to use Ebay prices as a judgement for the ingame economy. It was put in against the Tos because the companies themselves could not get a peice of the pie, much like how they are making moves to limit and eventually get rid of the used secondary market.
P2W is you buy OP items from a cash shop that is NOT obtainable ingame.
That is the pure definition of P2W.
Yeah, my personal opinion is that its something that influences your characters strength that isnt available in game or achieved through normal gameplay.
But people seem to think convenience items and appearance gear are pay to win these days.
No one really said that. Buying the best gear in the game with real life money is what people are calling pay-to-win. Regardless of the fact you can buy it in game or not.
People bring it up all the time in GW2 and Neverwinter threads. XP potions are pay to win!
I am not making a living also from game development. However because there are some aspects that i don;t like in current mmos i decided to give it a shot at making a game in my free time. Probably i will never finish the game but at least i understand a little bit how complex is to make one including the money process.
Good for you, that means nothing to me, nor do I care. I understand some of the complexities of making a game let alone an MMO, again a false assumption. And I doubt you actually understand how complex it is. And I as a consumer of games have the right to give my feedback/criticism at the direction these MMOs are taking. And good developers welcome this feedback and criticism.
The only false assumptions here are that ones you made in the title of the thread and that you care about the other posts in this thread.
Originally posted by Livnthedream Not at all, you are still competing against the ai.
You are not competing against an AI, the game goal isn't to spar with AI but complete the game. Progress through, not to kill the most NPC or hardest opponent - that would be indeed a competitive game, not all games are tho.
You are just being stuck in your rigid perception that everything is competition, it is not.
Originally posted by Kazuhiro Your correct, you have the only "real" definition of Pay-2-Win. Sadly a lot of quite frankly stupid/ignorant people today seem to have a messed up definition of it. Pay-2-Win is simply ANY situation where you can spend real world money to obtain an item/upgrade/etc in a game that gives an advantage, period, regardless of the item being available in the game or not. Since you are paying real money, to obtain an item, that allows you to win situations easier. Hence Pay-2-Win. Cosmetic items are the only thing a game that can sell realistically that isn't pay-2-win. (And some other rare exceptions, like server transfers/name changes/character slots/etc.)
Wrong. This is YOUR OPINION and not a fact. In MY OPINION, if you can get it in game, by normal game mechanics, without spending real world money then it is not pay to win. It is pay to be faster. Which is whatever.
If you can spend RL money on stuff that people can not get by just playing the game and not spending money, and it gives you an advantage, then it is pay to win.
MOST F2P games are pay to be lazy, not pay to win. Just because you can't get the best gear as soon as you level, you have to work a bit for it does not make a game pay to win.
Like it or lump it, paying to be lazy does not mean pay to win. Get that through your heads.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Wrong. This is YOUR OPINION and not a fact. In MY OPINION, if you can get it in game, by normal game mechanics, without spending real world money then it is not pay to win. It is pay to be faster. Which is whatever.
If you can spend RL money on stuff that people can not get by just playing the game and not spending money, and it gives you an advantage, then it is pay to win.
So if you can buy it in store with real cash. But it will take a average player 2 years to farm. Would that be ok with you? What is the time threshold?
Originally posted by Kazuhiro Your correct, you have the only "real" definition of Pay-2-Win. Sadly a lot of quite frankly stupid/ignorant people today seem to have a messed up definition of it. Pay-2-Win is simply ANY situation where you can spend real world money to obtain an item/upgrade/etc in a game that gives an advantage, period, regardless of the item being available in the game or not. Since you are paying real money, to obtain an item, that allows you to win situations easier. Hence Pay-2-Win. Cosmetic items are the only thing a game that can sell realistically that isn't pay-2-win. (And some other rare exceptions, like server transfers/name changes/character slots/etc.)
Wrong. This is YOUR OPINION and not a fact. In MY OPINION, if you can get it in game, by normal game mechanics, without spending real world money then it is not pay to win. It is pay to be faster. Which is whatever.
If you can spend RL money on stuff that people can not get by just playing the game and not spending money, and it gives you an advantage, then it is pay to win.
MOST F2P games are pay to be lazy, not pay to win. Just because you can't get the best gear as soon as you level, you have to work a bit for it does not make a game pay to win.
Like it or lump it, paying to be lazy does not mean pay to win. Get that through your heads.
Yep, thats just it. Free to play games feed off the time poor, but IRL rich players, and surrounds them with players willing to work rather than pay. This seems to bother a vocal minority who neither want to work for their items or pay for the convenience.
Wrong. This is YOUR OPINION and not a fact. In MY OPINION, if you can get it in game, by normal game mechanics, without spending real world money then it is not pay to win. It is pay to be faster. Which is whatever.
If you can spend RL money on stuff that people can not get by just playing the game and not spending money, and it gives you an advantage, then it is pay to win.
So if you can buy it in store with real cash. But it will take a average player 2 years to farm. Would that be ok with you? What is the time threshold?
I doubt a game that would take 2 years to get the best items would keep many players. Its up to the company to balance the time vs cost vs reward. Do you know of any current games that take this long?
Wrong. This is YOUR OPINION and not a fact. In MY OPINION, if you can get it in game, by normal game mechanics, without spending real world money then it is not pay to win. It is pay to be faster. Which is whatever.
If you can spend RL money on stuff that people can not get by just playing the game and not spending money, and it gives you an advantage, then it is pay to win.
So if you can buy it in store with real cash. But it will take a average player 2 years to farm. Would that be ok with you? What is the time threshold?
I doubt a game that would take 2 years to get the best items would keep many players. Its up to the company to balance the time vs cost vs reward. Do you know of any current games that take this long?
It was a extreme example, to figure out a threshold of how far we can go with this. Would 6 months be ok?
Pay to win does not exist in a cooperative environment, unless that environment is competitive. For example, if you were able to buy gear for raids with real money, that would be P2W. You can't really have an advantage over another player cooperatively since you are both going for the same goal. The only thing paying for gear does at that point is help you either catch up to your friends or get you bored with the game faster. To me, P2W is when you are paying real life money to win in a competitive environment. WvW skates the line of this in GW2 but considering how relaxed gearing is in GW2 I don't consider it P2W. NW is P2W in PvP but not otherwise.
Some people don't like it when other people have better gear then them because they paid for it. Well, you know what, get over it. Thats just how it is in almost any situation. Sports teams pay other team's members all the time to come over to their team. This has been happening in MMOs since before cash shops.
The only time cash shops bother me is when it is P2ETG (Pay 2 enjoy the game) IE: SWTOR,LOTRO,ect. Games that force you to pay or you will simply not enjoy the game. Mostly based around this lovely "hybrid" or "freemium" model we love to hear so much about.
Wrong. This is YOUR OPINION and not a fact. In MY OPINION, if you can get it in game, by normal game mechanics, without spending real world money then it is not pay to win. It is pay to be faster. Which is whatever.
If you can spend RL money on stuff that people can not get by just playing the game and not spending money, and it gives you an advantage, then it is pay to win.
So if you can buy it in store with real cash. But it will take a average player 2 years to farm. Would that be ok with you? What is the time threshold?
yeah that is fine with me. 2 different play styles, I play the journey for the journey, idc about being 'leet' or getting to end game first, see my ego is not tied to a game.
Again, keep in mind these are MY OPINIONS and while I support you posting yours, I feel that in this situation, we disagree. I don't care how much someone has to be the 'best' if you tie your skill to the gear you own, in the end (however long that may be) I will be better, because I feel I play more aspects of the game and therefore am exposed to more and that translates into better, IMO and from what I have personally seen.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
You are not competing against an AI, the game goal isn't to spar with AI but complete the game. Progress through, not to kill the most NPC or hardest opponent - that would be indeed a competitive game, not all games are tho.
You are just being stuck in your rigid perception that everything is competition, it is not.
Yep, thats just it. Free to play games feed off the time poor, but IRL rich players, and surrounds them with players willing to work rather than pay. This seems to bother a vocal minority who neither want to work for their items or pay for the convenience.
It seems like there is no "vocal minority", just various definitions of what it is. And no majority standard.
I'm from the school of buying gold is bad. The company selling gold is even worse. That being said, I play Age of Wushu, an absolutely amazing mmorpg. The company sells gold just like GW2, and NW. I've never been compelled or felt the need to buy gold in AoW though.
It is there for those type of people though. People who think they need it now, and think they will get ahead. They wont, but they will try. I think we will see more "sucker systems" like this, where no matter how much you pay, you wont win. People will still try though.
Do I like the trend? Not at all, but who am I to say how a company makes their money if the way they do doesn't effect my game play? And if they are going to make money off someone I'd rather it be these weak minded suckers than me.
Comments
Since you said the "current MMO market" is not based on time/skill. I am asking you, give me examples in this "current MMO market". I am guessing you have none.
I never said that.
You make up stuff, you deal with it. I am not involved in any way.
I can buy a max level and max geared character in any game you care to mention for real money. Life is pay to win. Sorry to give you the bad news.
RMT has been around since the earliest MMOs. There were people buying stuff for real cash in Everquest and DAOC.
P2W is you buy OP items from a cash shop that is NOT obtainable ingame.
That is the pure definition of P2W.
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
This was brought up several times. It is different when a 3rd party does it against the terms of service and when a game developer does it themselves. Secondly, games are not life. The reason people play games is because it isn't life, that is what gives us the motivation and entertainment.
Yeah, my personal opinion is that its something that influences your characters strength that isnt available in game or achieved through normal gameplay.
But people seem to think convenience items and appearance gear are pay to win these days.
Not at all, you are still competing against the ai. This is where you start getting into edge cases though. Like the debate over Journey, and whether or not its a game at all. Or any of the various art games. Game in general is starting to become a rather nebulous term for those very reasons. Choose your own adventure books are interactive entertainment, but are certainly not games for example.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
The point is that you cant stop it. If leveling convenience and faster itemisation are being sold, how is that any worse than someone just buying a max geared character outright? At least with the former, it is the developer making money, which leads to further development. Rather than going to farmers and grinders.
No one really said that. Buying the best gear in the game with real life money is what people are calling pay-to-win. Regardless of the fact you can buy it in game or not.
Have you actually looked at why its against the Tos? Uo for example allowed it for some time, Koster himself has said he used to use Ebay prices as a judgement for the ingame economy. It was put in against the Tos because the companies themselves could not get a peice of the pie, much like how they are making moves to limit and eventually get rid of the used secondary market.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
People bring it up all the time in GW2 and Neverwinter threads. XP potions are pay to win!
The only false assumptions here are that ones you made in the title of the thread and that you care about the other posts in this thread.
You are not competing against an AI, the game goal isn't to spar with AI but complete the game. Progress through, not to kill the most NPC or hardest opponent - that would be indeed a competitive game, not all games are tho.
You are just being stuck in your rigid perception that everything is competition, it is not.
Wrong. This is YOUR OPINION and not a fact. In MY OPINION, if you can get it in game, by normal game mechanics, without spending real world money then it is not pay to win. It is pay to be faster. Which is whatever.
If you can spend RL money on stuff that people can not get by just playing the game and not spending money, and it gives you an advantage, then it is pay to win.
MOST F2P games are pay to be lazy, not pay to win. Just because you can't get the best gear as soon as you level, you have to work a bit for it does not make a game pay to win.
Like it or lump it, paying to be lazy does not mean pay to win. Get that through your heads.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
So if you can buy it in store with real cash. But it will take a average player 2 years to farm. Would that be ok with you? What is the time threshold?
Yep, thats just it. Free to play games feed off the time poor, but IRL rich players, and surrounds them with players willing to work rather than pay. This seems to bother a vocal minority who neither want to work for their items or pay for the convenience.
I doubt a game that would take 2 years to get the best items would keep many players. Its up to the company to balance the time vs cost vs reward. Do you know of any current games that take this long?
It was a extreme example, to figure out a threshold of how far we can go with this. Would 6 months be ok?
Pay to win does not exist in a cooperative environment, unless that environment is competitive. For example, if you were able to buy gear for raids with real money, that would be P2W. You can't really have an advantage over another player cooperatively since you are both going for the same goal. The only thing paying for gear does at that point is help you either catch up to your friends or get you bored with the game faster. To me, P2W is when you are paying real life money to win in a competitive environment. WvW skates the line of this in GW2 but considering how relaxed gearing is in GW2 I don't consider it P2W. NW is P2W in PvP but not otherwise.
Some people don't like it when other people have better gear then them because they paid for it. Well, you know what, get over it. Thats just how it is in almost any situation. Sports teams pay other team's members all the time to come over to their team. This has been happening in MMOs since before cash shops.
The only time cash shops bother me is when it is P2ETG (Pay 2 enjoy the game) IE: SWTOR,LOTRO,ect. Games that force you to pay or you will simply not enjoy the game. Mostly based around this lovely "hybrid" or "freemium" model we love to hear so much about.
yeah that is fine with me. 2 different play styles, I play the journey for the journey, idc about being 'leet' or getting to end game first, see my ego is not tied to a game.
Again, keep in mind these are MY OPINIONS and while I support you posting yours, I feel that in this situation, we disagree. I don't care how much someone has to be the 'best' if you tie your skill to the gear you own, in the end (however long that may be) I will be better, because I feel I play more aspects of the game and therefore am exposed to more and that translates into better, IMO and from what I have personally seen.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition
without it there would never be a story told. Any time there is conflict, there is competition.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
It seems like there is no "vocal minority", just various definitions of what it is. And no majority standard.
I'm from the school of buying gold is bad. The company selling gold is even worse. That being said, I play Age of Wushu, an absolutely amazing mmorpg. The company sells gold just like GW2, and NW. I've never been compelled or felt the need to buy gold in AoW though.
It is there for those type of people though. People who think they need it now, and think they will get ahead. They wont, but they will try. I think we will see more "sucker systems" like this, where no matter how much you pay, you wont win. People will still try though.
Do I like the trend? Not at all, but who am I to say how a company makes their money if the way they do doesn't effect my game play? And if they are going to make money off someone I'd rather it be these weak minded suckers than me.