depend on the game xp potions can and can not be a p2w, if a game require you to grind over 5 hours to lvl a certain lvl but with a xp potion or premium you just need 1 hour or less then its pay to win
pay to win is mostly things will make your char be stronger or forces you hard to spend if not the game can't be enjoyed, the ones I know and I remember right now are DDO(sorry op buying tomes who gives +5 on stats is pay to win, also limiting part of the game is annoying) SWtor, most if not all chinese games (yes paying for higher chance to lvl gear is pay to win).
but the worse problem is the players, they know the game is pay to win but as long he can pay and keep on top echelon of his server he don't care till he find someone more stupid to spend even more then him then he start to cry and quit the game saying its pay to win, would be so easy for the whole genre if plyers just stoped playing or at least paying for this kind of game or at least limit his paying to 15 a month, doing so would show the devs they can't milk players with garbage and would force then to up they games.
I don't get the DDO reference. How does having a stat boost you can buy make it p2w? There isn't any pvp (besides dual-type which mean nothing), so how can someones stats being higher win you anything? Just because they have items that u can't get in-game, doesn't make it p2w if it has no impact on others gameplay (nor xp boosts). And yes it is annoying to freeloaders to have content limited if they don't pay, but how else would this game as f2p make enough to stay open and add content (which they have done much since f2p switch). With unlimited free to all content few would use CS and they would be out of biz. Not being cheap and 10/month solves that problem. I played with sub and never had any problem or even notice of others spending habits in CS, so didn't notice anyone winning or me losing.
To OP, I agree that too many create silly things as p2w that gives no advantage. Seems like most of them just want everything free. I hate CS and would prefer the sub model, as long as the devs make a good enough game to deserve any money. To me, if a game isn't worth 10-15/month, then it isn't even worth playing.
Edit: Of course games with pvp, resource control, realistic economics, crafting, etc are different as you are competing against others and not just engaging with content.
As I said earlier some of you people have clearly not played a P2W game because if you had you would all be singing a different tune.
PAY 2 WIN IS WHEN YOU CAN BUY SOMETHING FROM A CASH STORE AS IN REAL MONEY THAT IS UNATAINABLE IN GAME AND GIVES A MASSIVE ADVANTAGE OVER NON CASH SHOP USERS.
Two best examples of this are APB at one point you could buy upgraded version of weapons armour and cars that were unattainable by actually playing the game. And these were slightly better the were massively more powerful. Another one which I believe has been removed now was a AMMO in World of tanks that was a lot better than anything attainable in game.
If you can earn something in game that is also in a cash shop it is not pay to win. Some of you people need to get over yourselves.
As I said earlier some of you people have clearly not played a P2W game because if you had you would all be singing a different tune.
PAY 2 WIN IS WHEN YOU CAN BUY SOMETHING FROM A CASH STORE AS IN REAL MONEY THAT IS UNATAINABLE IN GAME AND GIVES A MASSIVE ADVANTAGE OVER NON CASH SHOP USERS.
No it is not it is using cash to obtain ANY advantage plain and simple. There are many different degrees of just how bad and explicit that advantage is but regardless of the degree an advantage is an advantage and one that you used cash to pay for is the very definition of pay to win.
I find it rather ironic that the OP argues that subjectivity should be eliminated from the definition of "win" in Pay-2-Win and then goes on to present us with his own personal ("subjective") opinion of what constitutes "winning".
Here is the deal. Since MMO's are persistant games that never actualy end (absent the company closing the doors), there can be no real objectively quantifiable definition of "winning" them....thus the OP could argue that even one which sold users a "I WIN" button wasn't "Pay-2-Win."
However, that's a circular arguement and nonsense in this context. "Winning" and "Pay-2-Win" are NECCESARLY subjective measures in this context. ABSOLUTELY certain games are and can be considred "Pay-2-Win" by one (or many individuals)..... and that's really all that matters. If I think a games chosen payment model creates an unfair advantage that detracts from my enjoyment and desire to play the game sufficiently that I don't want to play it....then it's "Pay-2-Win" as far as I'm concerened and I'm not going to play it. That doesn't have to be determinative of what YOU might decide....but that's only relavent to you....and as far as the Developer is concerned, if he's got a whole lot of people feeling like me and not so much like you, then he's got a serious potential problem....if not, then he doesn't.
As I said earlier some of you people have clearly not played a P2W game because if you had you would all be singing a different tune.
PAY 2 WIN IS WHEN YOU CAN BUY SOMETHING FROM A CASH STORE AS IN REAL MONEY THAT IS UNATAINABLE IN GAME AND GIVES A MASSIVE ADVANTAGE OVER NON CASH SHOP USERS.
No it is not it is using cash to obtain ANY advantage plain and simple. There are many different degrees of just how bad and explicit that advantage is but regardless of the degree an advantage is an advantage and one that you used cash to pay for is the very definition of pay to win.
Very well said. Black and White. People here have been trying to color it with all shades of gray.
edit- And you know, I fine with this, in this day and age. EVE, AoW, GW2, Neverwinter, Swtor, ANY game with a cash to in game currency is p2w. I always has been and always will be.
My game of choice is p2w just like the others I mentioned. I wish it wasn't.
As I said earlier some of you people have clearly not played a P2W game because if you had you would all be singing a different tune.
PAY 2 WIN IS WHEN YOU CAN BUY SOMETHING FROM A CASH STORE AS IN REAL MONEY THAT IS UNATAINABLE IN GAME AND GIVES A MASSIVE ADVANTAGE OVER NON CASH SHOP USERS.
No it is not it is using cash to obtain ANY advantage plain and simple. There are many different degrees of just how bad and explicit that advantage is but regardless of the degree an advantage is an advantage and one that you used cash to pay for is the very definition of pay to win.
Very well said. Black and White. People here have been trying to color it with all shades of gray.
Now all you have to do is get people at agree on what an advantage really is and it will be black and white.
As I said earlier some of you people have clearly not played a P2W game because if you had you would all be singing a different tune.
PAY 2 WIN IS WHEN YOU CAN BUY SOMETHING FROM A CASH STORE AS IN REAL MONEY THAT IS UNATAINABLE IN GAME AND GIVES A MASSIVE ADVANTAGE OVER NON CASH SHOP USERS.
No it is not it is using cash to obtain ANY advantage plain and simple. There are many different degrees of just how bad and explicit that advantage is but regardless of the degree an advantage is an advantage and one that you used cash to pay for is the very definition of pay to win.
Very well said. Black and White. People here have been trying to color it with all shades of gray.
Now all you have to do is get people at agree on what an advantage really is and it will be black and white.
Thanks for your opinion OP. Mine is as follows. Since the "primary" goal of the game is advancing your character, then advancing in levels is considered winning. If you, personally, can advance faster by spending money; that equates to P2W.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Thanks for your opinion OP. Mine is as follows. Since the "primary" goal of the game is advancing your character, then advancing in levels is considered winning. If you, personally, can advance faster by spending money; that equates to P2W.
Thanks for your opinion, Arclan. Mine is as follows. Since the "primary" goal of a game is entertaining me, advancing some levels that considered boring is considered skipping, and not winning. If you, personally, can skip content by spending money, that does not equate to p2w.
It is rather very simple if you agree not to argue right away, but think a little first.
It is, as people already noted, in a meaning of word “win”.
It is a market. If you are buying something, it means you want it. Because it is a game, there is nothing you can buy that will not influence your game experience. You are buying to improve your game one way or another, why you would do that in opposite case.
Because we are talking about RPG (not a shooter) killing is not the only thing that is important in a game.
P2W means you have an opportunity to buy something that you wouldn’t have otherwise. No matter what it is. Even cosmetics (if you are buying it – so, it is important for you) make you enjoy game better. You can buy time if you value it. Winning means to have something YOU VALUE, that next guy doesn’t have. Exactly the way as winning in sense of killing someone will give you a feeling of selfimportance and pride.
It is not about winning PvP encounter however. It is P2W, not P2WPvP. So, wining is used in its general sense. Winning over someone doesn’t necessary means killing that one.
We do not do killing very often in real life, but it doesn’t prevent us from saying “I won”.
As I understand it P2W means ability to pay for advantage. Whatever advantage you value. If you want to look better in a game, you can buy this advantage and look better than one who didn’t.
And if somebody will tell me it is not a winning, just grow up. Winning is not always about killing, ask your wife.
P2W means you can buy inequality, unfairness, etc. Some will say, but it might not influence actual gameplay.
Who are you to impose your narrow vision on another person gameplay.
Who are you to impose your narrow vision on another person gameplay.
No one can impose their views on others. I doubt any mind is being changed here.
It boils down to different people don't agree on which game is p2w, and which is not. That is totally fine since i don't play games based on others' preferences anyway. I play games based on mine.
Originally posted by kkarrabbassWho are you to impose your narrow vision on another person gameplay.
No one can impose their views on others. I doubt any mind is being changed here.
It boils down to different people don't agree on which game is p2w, and which is not. That is totally fine since i don't play games based on others' preferences anyway. I play games based on mine.
Ultimately you're correct that this is essentially an argument of semantics.
The problem, as I see it, is that 'P2W' is basically a curse word in the mmo community and it is wielded like a hammer in the discussion of almost any game. More of an indictment on the state of gaming forums than anything else.
"This game sucks! P2W!" - says almost every game detractor ever
Originally posted by kkarrabbassWho are you to impose your narrow vision on another person gameplay.
No one can impose their views on others. I doubt any mind is being changed here.
It boils down to different people don't agree on which game is p2w, and which is not. That is totally fine since i don't play games based on others' preferences anyway. I play games based on mine.
Ultimately you're correct that this is essentially an argument of semantics.
The problem, as I see it, is that 'P2W' is basically a curse word in the mmo community and it is wielded like a hammer in the discussion of almost any game. More of an indictment on the state of gaming forums than anything else.
"This game sucks! P2W!" - says almost every game detractor ever
If pay 2 win arguments must define what "win" is. then free 2 play needs to define what "play" is, and it better be free.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
The reason people have so much trouble defining what "win" is...is because just about everyone uses the term wrong. Pay to win is a pvp term. It comes from when microtransactions first started to show up. Some of the first items that got tried where...... stat boosts, because.....why wouldn't you want to buy those ?
The argument quickly came up that pvp is about skill and those items give an advantage to people who pay....hence the words.....pay....to....win.
Now that free to play is wide spread and other things are getting put onto the cash shops that people don't like to see on there, well the term p2w was already popular so they started to call it that as well.
It doesn't make sense when you argue it for pve because there is obviously no real " win" in pve compared to other people. It makes total sense in it's original usage. The guy left alive, won.
What's going on now, is people are trying to make a square peg fit into a round hole and wondering why it doesn't work.
So there is some history on the term for people who are really struggling with the word win.
The truth is, it was never about winning. It was always about paying. That is what troubled the penniless unwashed masses.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
The reason people have so much trouble defining what "win" is...is because just about everyone uses the term wrong. Pay to win is a pvp term. It comes from when microtransactions first started to show up. Some of the first items that got tried where...... stat boosts, because.....why wouldn't you want to buy those ?
The argument quickly came up that pvp is about skill and those items give an advantage to people who pay....hence the words.....pay....to....win.
Now that free to play is wide spread and other things are getting put onto the cash shops that people don't like to see on there, well the term p2w was already popular so they started to call it that as well.
It doesn't make sense when you argue it for pve because there is obviously no real " win" in pve compared to other people. It makes total sense in it's original usage. The guy left alive, won.
What's going on now, is people are trying to make a square peg fit into a round hole and wondering why it doesn't work.
So there is some history on the term for people who are really struggling with the word win.
Players made a game of getting to endgame fastest. I think it's weird, but it is reality. I doubt they care if that wasn't supposed to be the game. Pve progression isn't a game unless you beat it. So there is some History for people who are struggling to accept it.
Gamers play games.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
In my opinion, for a game to be considered PAY TO WIN, the MAXIMUM potential of your character must be allowed to be raised in a way that is NOT obtainable through in-game means. This is almost never the case (I'm sure someone is gonna come in with some one-off convoluted instance we don't remember, or an indie game 600 people play).
Soooooo in your opinion if I can reach the MAXIMUM potential of my character without using the cash shop but it takes me grinding 24 hours a day for 6 years to achieve what can be bought in the cash shop in one week the game is NOT pay to win.
Take two players, have one buy the game, and monthly sub. Have the other play for free... and compare the results. There will be a drastic difference in the player experience based on the money paid. This is P2W.
Take two players, have one buy the game, and monthly sub. Have the other play for free... and compare the results. There will be a drastic difference in the player experience based on the money paid. This is P2W.
Not sure if serious....
I agree that it might be a stretch to call WoW a AAA game, but humor me...
Take two players, have one buy the game, and monthly sub. Have the other play for free... and compare the results. There will be a drastic difference in the player experience based on the money paid. This is P2W.
Not sure if serious....
Of course it is.
The free version of WoW let you level up to 20.
You have to pay to level to L90.
Last time i check, L90 has more power than L20. So it is p2w by the definition of many here.
Take two players, have one buy the game, and monthly sub. Have the other play for free... and compare the results. There will be a drastic difference in the player experience based on the money paid. This is P2W.
Not sure if serious....
Of course it is.
The free version of WoW let you level up to 20.
You have to pay to level to L90.
Last time i check, L90 has more power than L20. So it is p2w by the definition of many here.
I guess they rather talk about F2P as a whole game and not about some kind of endless trial. It is just a trial but clever marketed as a "F2P" option. WoW is not a true F2P game...get real.
Take two players, have one buy the game, and monthly sub. Have the other play for free... and compare the results. There will be a drastic difference in the player experience based on the money paid. This is P2W.
Not sure if serious....
Of course it is.
The free version of WoW let you level up to 20.
You have to pay to level to L90.
Last time i check, L90 has more power than L20. So it is p2w by the definition of many here.
I guess they rather talk about F2P as a whole game and not about some kind of endless trial. It is just a trial but clever marketed as a "F2P" option. WoW is not a true F2P game...get real.
That is just semantics. I cannot play certainly classes on LOTRO if i don't pay. I cannot use certain star ships on STO if i don't pay. So those are not whole games too?
It is just a matter of degree. In fact, WoW is *more* p2w than these games, because the difference between free (L20) and pay (L90) is HUGE. WoW is the worse p2w game.
Take two players, have one buy the game, and monthly sub. Have the other play for free... and compare the results. There will be a drastic difference in the player experience based on the money paid. This is P2W.
Not sure if serious....
Of course it is.
The free version of WoW let you level up to 20.
You have to pay to level to L90.
Last time i check, L90 has more power than L20. So it is p2w by the definition of many here.
So you agree that p2w is found everywhere in f2p games then. At least one person is willing to acknowledge it. It's a start.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
Comments
I don't get the DDO reference. How does having a stat boost you can buy make it p2w? There isn't any pvp (besides dual-type which mean nothing), so how can someones stats being higher win you anything? Just because they have items that u can't get in-game, doesn't make it p2w if it has no impact on others gameplay (nor xp boosts). And yes it is annoying to freeloaders to have content limited if they don't pay, but how else would this game as f2p make enough to stay open and add content (which they have done much since f2p switch). With unlimited free to all content few would use CS and they would be out of biz. Not being cheap and 10/month solves that problem. I played with sub and never had any problem or even notice of others spending habits in CS, so didn't notice anyone winning or me losing.
To OP, I agree that too many create silly things as p2w that gives no advantage. Seems like most of them just want everything free. I hate CS and would prefer the sub model, as long as the devs make a good enough game to deserve any money. To me, if a game isn't worth 10-15/month, then it isn't even worth playing.
Edit: Of course games with pvp, resource control, realistic economics, crafting, etc are different as you are competing against others and not just engaging with content.
Yeah.
And since i don't p2w, i don't play sub-only games.
As I said earlier some of you people have clearly not played a P2W game because if you had you would all be singing a different tune.
PAY 2 WIN IS WHEN YOU CAN BUY SOMETHING FROM A CASH STORE AS IN REAL MONEY THAT IS UNATAINABLE IN GAME AND GIVES A MASSIVE ADVANTAGE OVER NON CASH SHOP USERS.
Two best examples of this are APB at one point you could buy upgraded version of weapons armour and cars that were unattainable by actually playing the game. And these were slightly better the were massively more powerful. Another one which I believe has been removed now was a AMMO in World of tanks that was a lot better than anything attainable in game.
If you can earn something in game that is also in a cash shop it is not pay to win. Some of you people need to get over yourselves.
No it is not it is using cash to obtain ANY advantage plain and simple. There are many different degrees of just how bad and explicit that advantage is but regardless of the degree an advantage is an advantage and one that you used cash to pay for is the very definition of pay to win.
I find it rather ironic that the OP argues that subjectivity should be eliminated from the definition of "win" in Pay-2-Win and then goes on to present us with his own personal ("subjective") opinion of what constitutes "winning".
Here is the deal. Since MMO's are persistant games that never actualy end (absent the company closing the doors), there can be no real objectively quantifiable definition of "winning" them....thus the OP could argue that even one which sold users a "I WIN" button wasn't "Pay-2-Win."
However, that's a circular arguement and nonsense in this context. "Winning" and "Pay-2-Win" are NECCESARLY subjective measures in this context. ABSOLUTELY certain games are and can be considred "Pay-2-Win" by one (or many individuals)..... and that's really all that matters. If I think a games chosen payment model creates an unfair advantage that detracts from my enjoyment and desire to play the game sufficiently that I don't want to play it....then it's "Pay-2-Win" as far as I'm concerened and I'm not going to play it. That doesn't have to be determinative of what YOU might decide....but that's only relavent to you....and as far as the Developer is concerned, if he's got a whole lot of people feeling like me and not so much like you, then he's got a serious potential problem....if not, then he doesn't.
Very well said. Black and White. People here have been trying to color it with all shades of gray.
edit- And you know, I fine with this, in this day and age. EVE, AoW, GW2, Neverwinter, Swtor, ANY game with a cash to in game currency is p2w. I always has been and always will be.
My game of choice is p2w just like the others I mentioned. I wish it wasn't.
Now all you have to do is get people at agree on what an advantage really is and it will be black and white.
Thanks for your opinion OP. Mine is as follows. Since the "primary" goal of the game is advancing your character, then advancing in levels is considered winning. If you, personally, can advance faster by spending money; that equates to P2W.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Thanks for your opinion, Arclan. Mine is as follows. Since the "primary" goal of a game is entertaining me, advancing some levels that considered boring is considered skipping, and not winning. If you, personally, can skip content by spending money, that does not equate to p2w.
It is rather very simple if you agree not to argue right away, but think a little first.
It is, as people already noted, in a meaning of word “win”.
It is a market. If you are buying something, it means you want it. Because it is a game, there is nothing you can buy that will not influence your game experience. You are buying to improve your game one way or another, why you would do that in opposite case.
Because we are talking about RPG (not a shooter) killing is not the only thing that is important in a game.
P2W means you have an opportunity to buy something that you wouldn’t have otherwise. No matter what it is. Even cosmetics (if you are buying it – so, it is important for you) make you enjoy game better. You can buy time if you value it. Winning means to have something YOU VALUE, that next guy doesn’t have. Exactly the way as winning in sense of killing someone will give you a feeling of selfimportance and pride.
It is not about winning PvP encounter however. It is P2W, not P2WPvP. So, wining is used in its general sense. Winning over someone doesn’t necessary means killing that one.
We do not do killing very often in real life, but it doesn’t prevent us from saying “I won”.
As I understand it P2W means ability to pay for advantage. Whatever advantage you value. If you want to look better in a game, you can buy this advantage and look better than one who didn’t.
And if somebody will tell me it is not a winning, just grow up. Winning is not always about killing, ask your wife.
P2W means you can buy inequality, unfairness, etc. Some will say, but it might not influence actual gameplay.
Who are you to impose your narrow vision on another person gameplay.
No one can impose their views on others. I doubt any mind is being changed here.
It boils down to different people don't agree on which game is p2w, and which is not. That is totally fine since i don't play games based on others' preferences anyway. I play games based on mine.
Ultimately you're correct that this is essentially an argument of semantics.
The problem, as I see it, is that 'P2W' is basically a curse word in the mmo community and it is wielded like a hammer in the discussion of almost any game. More of an indictment on the state of gaming forums than anything else.
"This game sucks! P2W!" - says almost every game detractor ever
If pay 2 win arguments must define what "win" is. then free 2 play needs to define what "play" is, and it better be free.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
The reason people have so much trouble defining what "win" is...is because just about everyone uses the term wrong. Pay to win is a pvp term. It comes from when microtransactions first started to show up. Some of the first items that got tried where...... stat boosts, because.....why wouldn't you want to buy those ?
The argument quickly came up that pvp is about skill and those items give an advantage to people who pay....hence the words.....pay....to....win.
Now that free to play is wide spread and other things are getting put onto the cash shops that people don't like to see on there, well the term p2w was already popular so they started to call it that as well.
It doesn't make sense when you argue it for pve because there is obviously no real " win" in pve compared to other people. It makes total sense in it's original usage. The guy left alive, won.
What's going on now, is people are trying to make a square peg fit into a round hole and wondering why it doesn't work.
So there is some history on the term for people who are really struggling with the word win.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Players made a game of getting to endgame fastest. I think it's weird, but it is reality. I doubt they care if that wasn't supposed to be the game. Pve progression isn't a game unless you beat it. So there is some History for people who are struggling to accept it.
Gamers play games.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
Soooooo in your opinion if I can reach the MAXIMUM potential of my character without using the cash shop but it takes me grinding 24 hours a day for 6 years to achieve what can be bought in the cash shop in one week the game is NOT pay to win.
Sure, okay.
Not sure if serious....
I agree that it might be a stretch to call WoW a AAA game, but humor me...
Of course it is.
The free version of WoW let you level up to 20.
You have to pay to level to L90.
Last time i check, L90 has more power than L20. So it is p2w by the definition of many here.
I guess they rather talk about F2P as a whole game and not about some kind of endless trial. It is just a trial but clever marketed as a "F2P" option. WoW is not a true F2P game...get real.
That is just semantics. I cannot play certainly classes on LOTRO if i don't pay. I cannot use certain star ships on STO if i don't pay. So those are not whole games too?
It is just a matter of degree. In fact, WoW is *more* p2w than these games, because the difference between free (L20) and pay (L90) is HUGE. WoW is the worse p2w game.
So you agree that p2w is found everywhere in f2p games then. At least one person is willing to acknowledge it. It's a start.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"