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.
WoW is not free to play game, it's a game with monthly subscription fee. You are comparing a free trial to a full game. Boggles my mind why you would even attempt to compare those two.
Just because P2P is MORE P2W than F2P, doesnt make it exempt.. in fact it only re-enforces the fact the the OP was wrong, becuase they missed the obvious.
Trial is just that, a trial to try something out before buying so you don't have to buy pig in a poke. It is not free to play WoW account, it is try before buying account. There simply is NO F2P WoW. It does not exist as a means of playing for free, but for trying it out. Kinda like you are allowed to try on those shoes before buying them. Or allowed to test drive a car before buying it.
And i 100% agree with the OP.
Exp. Boosts and stuff like that are not P2W. Sure they will get you there faster, but you can still get there without em.
Example of P2W:
Gold ammo in World of Tanks (before they changed it).
Gold ammo was simply more powerful ammunition for your tank with increased penetration, which meant that you could shoot and damage things you could not with normal ammunition (or just had very slim chance to do so). It also removed the need to know or aim at the weak spots on enemy tanks in order to damage them.
Now that is what pay to win is.
Albeit they have now patched it and changed it so that you can buy gold ammo with in-game credits, so it is not anymore P2W aspect in the game. But you only could buy it with real life money, for a very long time.
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.
WoW is not free to play game, it's a game with monthly subscription fee. You are comparing a free trial to a full game. Boggles my mind why you would even attempt to compare those two.
Just because P2P is MORE P2W than F2P, doesnt make it exempt.. in fact it only re-enforces the fact the the OP was wrong, becuase they missed the obvious.
actually Superman0X you are completely wrong on this Vilu was right.
You are claiming that a trial account has less in the game. Now lets look at this "trial" word. Lets replace it with Demo. You are getting a demo of the game . A demo is a small amount of game available to the player. If that person buys that demo, The person stats goes to normal game play. Now If you compare the 2 you are comparing apples and oranges.
Now if i did buy it before and tried the trial of MoP. I get everything that the guy that bought the game and all expansions. No P2W there. But i only get it for 10 days.
Is this P2W? Nope. i dont pay i dont play. its simple.
If i play COD like i paid for do you think a person that downloads the demo should get the same amount as i do. No cause its not FREE.
Same as the trial. The game isn't free.
Now you can compare to DCUO with the sub. and free accounts. But WoW was a bad example. a really bad one.
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.
Why is a company themselves selling loot different from players themselves selling loot? Because the content still has to be completed in game one way and not the other? I'm not buying that logic at all.
So there's no way i can go buy a bunch of gold and then hire a merc guild to get me anything i want? That's not me using real life money to win in game?
Every single MMO has some sort of P2W aspects to it whether players want to admit it or not.
You cant throw out a MMO (A.K.A. EVE) that doesn't fit your side of an argument and call for people to use subjectivity in the same thread.
EVE's Plex system is a pretty much cut-and-dried P2W system.
Buying X amount of plex+selling X amount of Plex for ISK+ using Said ISK to fund your wardec=P2W.
This is a legitimate strategy for smaller Alliances to fight bigger, richer ones
So, with this one game your statement of "No P2W in AAA MMO's" has been rebuffed.
( your best move now is to argue that EvE is not a AAA MMO )
In EVE, the MMO created on a comparatively low budget and not backed by a publisher, you can defeat a bigger alliance just by wardeccing them? You have to teach me that one sometime.
Don't be facisious.
you know what I meant in regards to wardec.
In EvE: ISK=more potential power (indiviual or Alliance)
the OP listed DDO as a AAA MMO, I think EvE is a bit bigger than that.
Secondly, EVE was released in 2003. Did It release with the plex system??
No.
So is it out of the running in regards to P2W?
No.
Because MMO's evolve over time. . .
What this thread is about (and perhaps You failed to grasp this simple concept) is MMO's TODAY in their current form.
EvE may have started out small, but TODAY is just as big if not bigger that other AAA MMO's
So dont try to play the "it started out small, so regardless of how its grown over the years its still just as small" card. It doesn't work here.
Any cash shop that sells ANYTHING that gives one player an in game advantage over another player would mean the game is P2W. Now of course there are many different levels of what can be sold and just how badly P2W is in any one game, but the fact is you still bought an advantage that another player didn't.
You cant throw out a MMO (A.K.A. EVE) that doesn't fit your side of an argument and call for people to use subjectivity in the same thread.
EVE's Plex system is a pretty much cut-and-dried P2W system.
Buying X amount of plex+selling X amount of Plex for ISK+ using Said ISK to fund your wardec=P2W.
This is a legitimate strategy for smaller Alliances to fight bigger, richer ones
So, with this one game your statement of "No P2W in AAA MMO's" has been rebuffed.
( your best move now is to argue that EvE is not a AAA MMO )
In EVE, the MMO created on a comparatively low budget and not backed by a publisher, you can defeat a bigger alliance just by wardeccing them? You have to teach me that one sometime.
Don't be facisious.
you know what I meant in regards to wardec.
In EvE: ISK=more potential power (indiviual or Alliance)
the OP listed DDO as a AAA MMO, I think EvE is a bit bigger than that.
Secondly, EVE was released in 2003. Did It release with the plex system??
No.
So is it out of the running in regards to P2W?
No.
Because MMO's evolve over time. . .
What this thread is about (and perhaps You failed to grasp this simple concept) is MMO's TODAY in their current form.
EvE may have started out small, but TODAY is just as big if not bigger that other AAA MMO's
So dont try to play the "it started out small, so regardless of how its grown over the years its still just as small" card. It doesn't work here.
I never said EVE was small. Had that been my intent, I would have mentioned the 20-40 people that developed it. Not sure where that tangent came from.
On your PLEX thing, let's explore that one. I would like you to give me what you think is the answer to this question:
Do you feel that if someone threw stacks of PLEX at you, that you - you, personally - could topple NCdot, AAA, Razor or any of the other big alliances? I'm speaking solely from a gameplay and game mechanics perspective, and not including anything out of game, as that could easily be accomplished in any MMO with PayPal or a wad of paper money, which has nothing to do with PLEX advantage.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by 123443211234 Any cash shop that sells ANYTHING that gives one player an in game advantage over another player would mean the game is P2W. Now of course there are many different levels of what can be sold and just how badly P2W is in any one game, but the fact is you still bought an advantage that another player didn't.
Yes. We would all agree with that.
The trouble is we don't agree on what is an advantage.
I don't think leveling faster is an advantage because at any particular level they can't do anything more or better than other. Other people say they are.
I personaly define advantage as if someone is the same level (and preferably the same class/skills for easy comparison) as me can they do something I can't or be more efficient in whatever they are doing then me because of something they bought that is not available to me in the game at that level.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I would think for any game to be pay to win, the "win" state would have to be achievable primarily through paying money. If both paying players and non-paying players end up at the same "win" state, then a game isn't really pay to win.
In Eve, if a small corporation can hire another corporation to defeat a rival corporation using money from outside the game, then that is a pay to win scenario. However, the game itself would allow a corporation to earn enough ISK to do the same thing. Both the paying and non-paying players can arrive at the same win state, so it doesn't seem the game itself is a pay to win game.
In a theme park game with raiding, if a player or guild gets a boss kill by buying items from the store's cash shop, and cannot defeat the boss without those items, then that is a pay to win scenario. I do not think a game like this exists, so I can't really come up with an example.
In any scenario where the paying players and non-paying players reach the same state, it's not pay to win, because there is no "did not pay and lost" group of players.
There are areas where the line between P2W and NotP2W gets blurry though. Just because something is possible doesn't mean it's feasible. I'll use an extreme example. In the mobile game Clash of Clans, the time and resources it takes to upgrade resource gathering, resource storage, offensive installations and defensive measures increases as the game progresses, seemingly using an exponential function. The eighth upgrade, of which there are many, many upgrades, takes twenty four hours. This amount of time can be lessened by purchasing increasing amounts of gems from the developer. Now, with enough patience, a non-paying player can go through the same amount of upgrades as a paying player. However, the extreme amount of time this would take makes it infeasible. The non-paying player is more likely to just quit the game rather than keep playing. In other words, arriving at the same "win" state of max level is so unlikely as to be considered an impossibility. Clash of Clans in this scenario is a P2W game.
I cannot think of a AAA game at this time that falls into the same scenario as Clash of Clans. I can't think of many games that aren't mobile games that are as extreme as CoC or other mobile games. I haven't gone over every single possible scenario or every possible game, but it seems more likely that the OP is right rather than wrong to me.
**
I also think that a lot of the reason P2W is such a big deal for some people is that they want to keep their advantage of being able to invest time into a game. If another player cannot invest the same amount of time into a game it's not "fair" that they can buy an advantage, even if all that does is put both players on par with each other.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by 123443211234 Any cash shop that sells ANYTHING that gives one player an in game advantage over another player would mean the game is P2W. Now of course there are many different levels of what can be sold and just how badly P2W is in any one game, but the fact is you still bought an advantage that another player didn't.
Yes. We would all agree with that.
The trouble is we don't agree on what is an advantage.
I don't think leveling faster is an advantage because at any particular level they can't do anything more or better than other. Other people say they are.
I personaly define advantage as if someone is the same level (and preferably the same class/skills for easy comparison) as me can they do something I can't or be more efficient in whatever they are doing then me because of something they bought that is not available to me in the game at that level.
His statement is just semi incorrect. It isn't whether or not the advantage is over another player, but if the advantage helps a player achieve their goal.
Originally posted by 123443211234 Any cash shop that sells ANYTHING that gives one player an in game advantage over another player would mean the game is P2W. Now of course there are many different levels of what can be sold and just how badly P2W is in any one game, but the fact is you still bought an advantage that another player didn't.
Yes. We would all agree with that.
The trouble is we don't agree on what is an advantage.
I don't think leveling faster is an advantage because at any particular level they can't do anything more or better than other. Other people say they are.
I personaly define advantage as if someone is the same level (and preferably the same class/skills for easy comparison) as me can they do something I can't or be more efficient in whatever they are doing then me because of something they bought that is not available to me in the game at that level.
His statement is just semi incorrect. It isn't whether or not the advantage is over another player, but if the advantage helps a player achieve their goal.
To me that isn't necessarily p2w. If their goal is to get to max level, and they bought their way there, well at that level they can't do anything I can't so it's not p2w.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by 123443211234 Any cash shop that sells ANYTHING that gives one player an in game advantage over another player would mean the game is P2W. Now of course there are many different levels of what can be sold and just how badly P2W is in any one game, but the fact is you still bought an advantage that another player didn't.
Yes. We would all agree with that.
The trouble is we don't agree on what is an advantage.
I don't think leveling faster is an advantage because at any particular level they can't do anything more or better than other. Other people say they are.
I personaly define advantage as if someone is the same level (and preferably the same class/skills for easy comparison) as me can they do something I can't or be more efficient in whatever they are doing then me because of something they bought that is not available to me in the game at that level.
His statement is just semi incorrect. It isn't whether or not the advantage is over another player, but if the advantage helps a player achieve their goal.
To me that isn't necessarily p2w. If their goal is to get to max level, and they bought their way there, well at that level they can't do anything I can't so it's not p2w.
See I would actually consider experience boosters as p2w. I understand your leveling power analogy but that is only half the story. The reason being that endgame is everyone's goal and that is where the "good" and "valuable" loot and items is. So if you get to the "good" stuff weeks or months before me that is a huge advantage as now you have access and CONTROL over better items. You can justify the scale of p2w however you want, its still p2w.
The ONLY definition I use to figure out weather something is pay to win or not is this....If an item is ONLY attainable through the cash shop ( and no, I don't mean an AH, after all it has to come from the cash shop) as in there is no way of getting it in game AND it helps with the conquering of an ingame system (from item enhancing to pvp, but not limited to)..that's how I define pay to win.
Costumes are not p2w to me, but exp potions could be if you have to spend cash ,or otherwise not attainable through any ingame means.
Buying weps to help with pve , is p2w to me. Imagine someone buying a top tier wep from the CS, and then doing high end raiding. You could argue that bigger and badder weps do not equal skill, and I would agree....BUT now imagine a game vet buying that same wep.
Trying to define p2w in such a small scope won't work...has to be broader.
"The problem is definition of win, by rule there can only be one definition so taking your subjectivity out of it is important."
I think that's the biggest hurdle in these discussions. Many of the people who call those games "pay to win" have some personal area where they are competing with the other players or I agree that removing that subjectivity would help make discussion far more constructive, but i don't see it happening.
Some like to label anything P2W. I've even people a few people label things like buying Storage Space or Character slots pay to win which is asinine.
The only definition that makes true sense is buying power not found inside the game or accessed in the game. Buying a sword of a thousand truths that deal twice the damage as something found on a boss drop is P2W.
OP I'd add Neverwinter to the list as well. Nothing in the game requires money to buy but people label it anyway because they think you "have" to have those rank 10 enchantments or epic mounts.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by 123443211234 Originally posted by VengeSunsoarOriginally posted by thinktank001Originally posted by VengeSunsoarOriginally posted by 123443211234Any cash shop that sells ANYTHING that gives one player an in game advantage over another player would mean the game is P2W. Now of course there are many different levels of what can be sold and just how badly P2W is in any one game, but the fact is you still bought an advantage that another player didn't.
Yes. We would all agree with that.The trouble is we don't agree on what is an advantage.I don't think leveling faster is an advantage because at any particular level they can't do anything more or better than other. Other people say they are.I personaly define advantage as if someone is the same level (and preferably the same class/skills for easy comparison) as me can they do something I can't or be more efficient in whatever they are doing then me because of something they bought that is not available to me in the game at that level.His statement is just semi incorrect. It isn't whether or not the advantage is over another player, but if the advantage helps a player achieve their goal. To me that isn't necessarily p2w. If their goal is to get to max level, and they bought their way there, well at that level they can't do anything I can't so it's not p2w.See I would actually consider experience boosters as p2w. I understand your leveling power analogy but that is only half the story. The reason being that endgame is everyone's goal and that is where the "good" and "valuable" loot and items is. So if you get to the "good" stuff weeks or months before me that is a huge advantage as now you have access and CONTROL over better items. You can justify the scale of p2w however you want, its still p2w.
The players who paid money to get there ahead of time are going to get to the resources first, but they are not going to block access to those resources from other players, and they are not going to control the distribution of those resources. The resources are not limited, and access control is done by the game developer, not by the players. By your own logic it's not P2W because the players aren't capable of doing what you're saying they are doing.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The players who paid money to get there ahead of time are going to get to the resources first, but they are not going to block access to those resources from other players, and they are not going to control the distribution of those resources. The resources are not limited, and access control is done by the game developer, not by the players. By your own logic it's not P2W because the players aren't capable of doing what you're saying they are doing.
There is no common resource for gameplay happened in instances.
Plus, even in the world, spawn rate (i.e. resource) can easily be upped if there are more players. It is easy to get rid of interactions in pve gameplay, and hence no p2w.
Originally posted by 123443211234 Any cash shop that sells ANYTHING that gives one player an in game advantage over another player would mean the game is P2W. Now of course there are many different levels of what can be sold and just how badly P2W is in any one game, but the fact is you still bought an advantage that another player didn't.
Yes. We would all agree with that.
The trouble is we don't agree on what is an advantage.
I don't think leveling faster is an advantage because at any particular level they can't do anything more or better than other. Other people say they are.
I personaly define advantage as if someone is the same level (and preferably the same class/skills for easy comparison) as me can they do something I can't or be more efficient in whatever they are doing then me because of something they bought that is not available to me in the game at that level.
His statement is just semi incorrect. It isn't whether or not the advantage is over another player, but if the advantage helps a player achieve their goal.
To me that isn't necessarily p2w. If their goal is to get to max level, and they bought their way there, well at that level they can't do anything I can't so it's not p2w.
See I would actually consider experience boosters as p2w. I understand your leveling power analogy but that is only half the story. The reason being that endgame is everyone's goal and that is where the "good" and "valuable" loot and items is. So if you get to the "good" stuff weeks or months before me that is a huge advantage as now you have access and CONTROL over better items. You can justify the scale of p2w however you want, its still p2w.
But you might (actually would likely) get to that stuff weeks or months ahead of me anyway so that doesn't change anything. You might play longer, or just be naturally better. Getting there ahead of someone, but not being able to do anything different than anyone else when you are there, to me is not p2w.
What if I started a year after the game launched, there are thousands of people ahead of me. To me the speed that someone progresses through the game is not p2w.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Me and my friends all argue about this xp potion shit..
To me xp potions regardless if they cut the lvling down by 75% saying takes 5 hours to gain 1 lvl without and 1 hour with. convenience, your just saving time..
I see those as if players dont have time but the money to buy them and keep up with there friends with them.. so be it..
if some kiddo no lifes the game and has a part time job so be it...
If a game isnt selling end game gear.. there is no way that its p2w..
another thing is players call those items that help you enchant with a higher chance p2w but 90% they can be bought in game with in game currency so how is it p2w?
I agree with the OP ... Pay to Win is not the same as Pay to Advance or Pay for Advantage. Advance and Advantage are not win conditions. You can still loose with an advantage, or win when at a disadvantage ... Luck, Skill, Strategy, and Friends (Guild) usually play a much bigger role in Winning.
I think using the time saved argument as a case for p2w is a bit flawed since most MMOs are not a racing game where the first one to a certain point wins, and in the end the guy that bought the items is at the same place as the guy that spent the time. It is the case that the OP mentions where the guy that spends $ gets to power position that the non-spending guy can't reach. The problem is that subjective arguments for or against p2w are no different than opinions, and are open to interpretation. A win condition is an objective thing, I can tell you who won the last World Series, Stanley Cup, Super Bowl or Americas Cup as the win conditions were achieved by one team before the other, but I can not tell you who won EQ2, WoW, DDO, or TSW.
The real question should be does an MMO have a win condition or do the individual players have a win condition. If it is the individuals that have the win conditions how does that mean any thing outside of their opinion is pay to win for every other player of the game.
I dislike cash shops not because they are p2w or whatever other acronym people can come up with, but because they shift game design from making an awesome game to how can I sell more stuff.
Originally posted by 123443211234 Any cash shop that sells ANYTHING that gives one player an in game advantage over another player would mean the game is P2W. Now of course there are many different levels of what can be sold and just how badly P2W is in any one game, but the fact is you still bought an advantage that another player didn't.
Yes. We would all agree with that.
The trouble is we don't agree on what is an advantage.
I don't think leveling faster is an advantage because at any particular level they can't do anything more or better than other. Other people say they are.
I personaly define advantage as if someone is the same level (and preferably the same class/skills for easy comparison) as me can they do something I can't or be more efficient in whatever they are doing then me because of something they bought that is not available to me in the game at that level.
His statement is just semi incorrect. It isn't whether or not the advantage is over another player, but if the advantage helps a player achieve their goal.
To me that isn't necessarily p2w. If their goal is to get to max level, and they bought their way there, well at that level they can't do anything I can't so it's not p2w.
See I would actually consider experience boosters as p2w. I understand your leveling power analogy but that is only half the story. The reason being that endgame is everyone's goal and that is where the "good" and "valuable" loot and items is. So if you get to the "good" stuff weeks or months before me that is a huge advantage as now you have access and CONTROL over better items. You can justify the scale of p2w however you want, its still p2w.
But you might (actually would likely) get to that stuff weeks or months ahead of me anyway so that doesn't change anything. You might play longer, or just be naturally better. Getting there ahead of someone, but not being able to do anything different than anyone else when you are there, to me is not p2w.
What if I started a year after the game launched, there are thousands of people ahead of me. To me the speed that someone progresses through the game is not p2w.
Thats fine that it doesn't meet your definition of p2w, it does meet mine though. I don't consider it that bad or terrible or anything, but I do consider it a p2w mechanic. There are far worse p2w items and mechanics that exist than xp boosters like in the Perfect World Entertainment games where you can pretty much use your credit card to boost your characters stats to a godlike level and then go pvp.....
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).
so now a game can only be p2w if the "maximum" potential is reached with real money?
It is pay to win if you can buy power that gives you an advantage over a player that didnt spend money. No matter how little that advantage is.
STOP defending p2w and hiding your defence behind your whole OP post about "maximum potential". P2W needs to die and a lot of f2p mmos sell power. THey claim not to be p2w because they arent selling the most powerful gear..... I dont care about the most powerful gear because i dont count the end game (where i would use that gear) as the fun part of my game time. The most relevant part of the game to me is the entire leveling from lvl 1 to max, and if there is P2W within that part of the game then that is just WRONG.
I love games that dont have subscriptions but i dont support P2W, not even for one cent.
Originally posted by orionblack Buying weps to help with pve , is p2w to me. Imagine someone buying a top tier wep from the CS, and then doing high end raiding. You could argue that bigger and badder weps do not equal skill, and I would agree....BUT now imagine a game vet buying that same wep.
Trying to define p2w in such a small scope won't work...has to be broader.
This is my point, I can't come up with any AAA (by the way when I say AAA I mean developed on a AAA game studio's budget, I thought people understood that already sorry) game that sells top tier items. Can you? because if you could I feel like you would have mentioned it...
In all of the games I have played with raiding, completing end tier content is reliant on a series of gates that players must unlock through this progression sequence.
1) Level to cap (or near)
2) Acquire entry level gear from solo/small group dungeon/quest/whatever (sometimes this can be purchased, and in any cash store this is usually the highest tier items they will ever sell)
3) Complete small group / solo / quest/ whatever content for entry tier of level cap
4) Organize raid force
5) Defeat boss,
6) Die to next boss, at this juncture you will bash your head against the boss repeatedly until members hate each other. There is some potential for the serene moment where the raidleader manages to get everyone to STFU and somehow you beat the boss undergeared. If not, return to 5, repeat until 6 is easier.
7) rinse repeat until content is cleared.
No where in this algorithm is x) buy uber gear from cash shop and winz!
One thing that isn't mentioned often is that many of these 'advantages' are available to subscription paying players for free due to a monthly bonus of 'coins/points'.
It tends to change the math quite a bit.
In other words, every subbed player has access to that exp potion (for example) without in-game cost so that the base level standard is changed. So there is choice involved on whether to get a cosmetic upgrade or to get a small advantage at no real cost other than the points which could be considered within the price of a sub.
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).
so now a game can only be p2w if the "maximum" potential is reached with real money?
It is pay to win if you can buy power that gives you an advantage over a player that didnt spend money. No matter how little that advantage is.
STOP defending p2w and hiding your defence behind your whole OP post about "maximum potential". P2W needs to die and a lot of f2p mmos sell power. THey claim not to be p2w because they arent selling the most powerful gear..... I dont care about the most powerful gear because i dont count the end game (where i would use that gear) as the fun part of my game time. The most relevant part of the game to me is the entire leveling from lvl 1 to max, and if there is P2W within that part of the game then that is just WRONG.
I love games that dont have subscriptions but i dont support P2W, not even for one cent.
Wait a moment, you say that you don't care about endgame, check. You say that the most relevant part of the game is the entire leveling, check. So buying an experience potion to speed through that part, you find to be paying to win somehow? Wouldn't that be pay to lose by your own understanding?
And if you are talking about buying gear, my argument holds true for that as well. There is always better dropped gear for the level than purchased gear for leveling off cash shops. The cash shops usually provide you with a good-but-not-best convenience option so you don't have to worry about gear while leveling. You know, so that you don't have to begin min-maxing until *gasp* endgame.
Comments
Trial is just that, a trial to try something out before buying so you don't have to buy pig in a poke. It is not free to play WoW account, it is try before buying account. There simply is NO F2P WoW. It does not exist as a means of playing for free, but for trying it out. Kinda like you are allowed to try on those shoes before buying them. Or allowed to test drive a car before buying it.
And i 100% agree with the OP.
Exp. Boosts and stuff like that are not P2W. Sure they will get you there faster, but you can still get there without em.
Example of P2W:
Gold ammo in World of Tanks (before they changed it).
Gold ammo was simply more powerful ammunition for your tank with increased penetration, which meant that you could shoot and damage things you could not with normal ammunition (or just had very slim chance to do so). It also removed the need to know or aim at the weak spots on enemy tanks in order to damage them.
Now that is what pay to win is.
Albeit they have now patched it and changed it so that you can buy gold ammo with in-game credits, so it is not anymore P2W aspect in the game. But you only could buy it with real life money, for a very long time.
actually Superman0X you are completely wrong on this Vilu was right.
You are claiming that a trial account has less in the game. Now lets look at this "trial" word. Lets replace it with Demo. You are getting a demo of the game . A demo is a small amount of game available to the player. If that person buys that demo, The person stats goes to normal game play. Now If you compare the 2 you are comparing apples and oranges.
Now if i did buy it before and tried the trial of MoP. I get everything that the guy that bought the game and all expansions. No P2W there. But i only get it for 10 days.
Is this P2W? Nope. i dont pay i dont play. its simple.
If i play COD like i paid for do you think a person that downloads the demo should get the same amount as i do. No cause its not FREE.
Same as the trial. The game isn't free.
Now you can compare to DCUO with the sub. and free accounts. But WoW was a bad example. a really bad one.
and the post above bet me to it.
ASUS G74sx
i7 quad core
16gb ddr3 ram
3gb ram Nvidia 560M
240GB SSD & 750GB
Why is a company themselves selling loot different from players themselves selling loot? Because the content still has to be completed in game one way and not the other? I'm not buying that logic at all.
So there's no way i can go buy a bunch of gold and then hire a merc guild to get me anything i want? That's not me using real life money to win in game?
Every single MMO has some sort of P2W aspects to it whether players want to admit it or not.
Don't be facisious.
you know what I meant in regards to wardec.
In EvE: ISK=more potential power (indiviual or Alliance)
the OP listed DDO as a AAA MMO, I think EvE is a bit bigger than that.
Secondly, EVE was released in 2003. Did It release with the plex system??
No.
So is it out of the running in regards to P2W?
No.
Because MMO's evolve over time. . .
What this thread is about (and perhaps You failed to grasp this simple concept) is MMO's TODAY in their current form.
EvE may have started out small, but TODAY is just as big if not bigger that other AAA MMO's
So dont try to play the "it started out small, so regardless of how its grown over the years its still just as small" card. It doesn't work here.
Is the size of the game the determination as to whether it is triple AAA.
Bit of a smart ass here as I do think Eve is AAA today, however IMO, it is not because it is big.
I never said EVE was small. Had that been my intent, I would have mentioned the 20-40 people that developed it. Not sure where that tangent came from.
On your PLEX thing, let's explore that one. I would like you to give me what you think is the answer to this question:
Do you feel that if someone threw stacks of PLEX at you, that you - you, personally - could topple NCdot, AAA, Razor or any of the other big alliances? I'm speaking solely from a gameplay and game mechanics perspective, and not including anything out of game, as that could easily be accomplished in any MMO with PayPal or a wad of paper money, which has nothing to do with PLEX advantage.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Yes. We would all agree with that.
The trouble is we don't agree on what is an advantage.
I don't think leveling faster is an advantage because at any particular level they can't do anything more or better than other. Other people say they are.
I personaly define advantage as if someone is the same level (and preferably the same class/skills for easy comparison) as me can they do something I can't or be more efficient in whatever they are doing then me because of something they bought that is not available to me in the game at that level.
I would think for any game to be pay to win, the "win" state would have to be achievable primarily through paying money. If both paying players and non-paying players end up at the same "win" state, then a game isn't really pay to win.
In Eve, if a small corporation can hire another corporation to defeat a rival corporation using money from outside the game, then that is a pay to win scenario. However, the game itself would allow a corporation to earn enough ISK to do the same thing. Both the paying and non-paying players can arrive at the same win state, so it doesn't seem the game itself is a pay to win game.
In a theme park game with raiding, if a player or guild gets a boss kill by buying items from the store's cash shop, and cannot defeat the boss without those items, then that is a pay to win scenario. I do not think a game like this exists, so I can't really come up with an example.
In any scenario where the paying players and non-paying players reach the same state, it's not pay to win, because there is no "did not pay and lost" group of players.
There are areas where the line between P2W and NotP2W gets blurry though. Just because something is possible doesn't mean it's feasible. I'll use an extreme example. In the mobile game Clash of Clans, the time and resources it takes to upgrade resource gathering, resource storage, offensive installations and defensive measures increases as the game progresses, seemingly using an exponential function. The eighth upgrade, of which there are many, many upgrades, takes twenty four hours. This amount of time can be lessened by purchasing increasing amounts of gems from the developer. Now, with enough patience, a non-paying player can go through the same amount of upgrades as a paying player. However, the extreme amount of time this would take makes it infeasible. The non-paying player is more likely to just quit the game rather than keep playing. In other words, arriving at the same "win" state of max level is so unlikely as to be considered an impossibility. Clash of Clans in this scenario is a P2W game.
I cannot think of a AAA game at this time that falls into the same scenario as Clash of Clans. I can't think of many games that aren't mobile games that are as extreme as CoC or other mobile games. I haven't gone over every single possible scenario or every possible game, but it seems more likely that the OP is right rather than wrong to me.
**
I also think that a lot of the reason P2W is such a big deal for some people is that they want to keep their advantage of being able to invest time into a game. If another player cannot invest the same amount of time into a game it's not "fair" that they can buy an advantage, even if all that does is put both players on par with each other.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
His statement is just semi incorrect. It isn't whether or not the advantage is over another player, but if the advantage helps a player achieve their goal.
To me that isn't necessarily p2w. If their goal is to get to max level, and they bought their way there, well at that level they can't do anything I can't so it's not p2w.
See I would actually consider experience boosters as p2w. I understand your leveling power analogy but that is only half the story. The reason being that endgame is everyone's goal and that is where the "good" and "valuable" loot and items is. So if you get to the "good" stuff weeks or months before me that is a huge advantage as now you have access and CONTROL over better items. You can justify the scale of p2w however you want, its still p2w.
There is no "winning" in pve. Hence no p2w.
Sure, you can use money to skip ahead. So it is p2s, not p2w.
The ONLY definition I use to figure out weather something is pay to win or not is this....If an item is ONLY attainable through the cash shop ( and no, I don't mean an AH, after all it has to come from the cash shop) as in there is no way of getting it in game AND it helps with the conquering of an ingame system (from item enhancing to pvp, but not limited to)..that's how I define pay to win.
Costumes are not p2w to me, but exp potions could be if you have to spend cash ,or otherwise not attainable through any ingame means.
Buying weps to help with pve , is p2w to me. Imagine someone buying a top tier wep from the CS, and then doing high end raiding. You could argue that bigger and badder weps do not equal skill, and I would agree....BUT now imagine a game vet buying that same wep.
Trying to define p2w in such a small scope won't work...has to be broader.
Some like to label anything P2W. I've even people a few people label things like buying Storage Space or Character slots pay to win which is asinine.
The only definition that makes true sense is buying power not found inside the game or accessed in the game. Buying a sword of a thousand truths that deal twice the damage as something found on a boss drop is P2W.
OP I'd add Neverwinter to the list as well. Nothing in the game requires money to buy but people label it anyway because they think you "have" to have those rank 10 enchantments or epic mounts.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
His statement is just semi incorrect. It isn't whether or not the advantage is over another player, but if the advantage helps a player achieve their goal.
To me that isn't necessarily p2w. If their goal is to get to max level, and they bought their way there, well at that level they can't do anything I can't so it's not p2w.
See I would actually consider experience boosters as p2w. I understand your leveling power analogy but that is only half the story. The reason being that endgame is everyone's goal and that is where the "good" and "valuable" loot and items is. So if you get to the "good" stuff weeks or months before me that is a huge advantage as now you have access and CONTROL over better items. You can justify the scale of p2w however you want, its still p2w.
The players who paid money to get there ahead of time are going to get to the resources first, but they are not going to block access to those resources from other players, and they are not going to control the distribution of those resources. The resources are not limited, and access control is done by the game developer, not by the players. By your own logic it's not P2W because the players aren't capable of doing what you're saying they are doing.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
There is no common resource for gameplay happened in instances.
Plus, even in the world, spawn rate (i.e. resource) can easily be upped if there are more players. It is easy to get rid of interactions in pve gameplay, and hence no p2w.
But you might (actually would likely) get to that stuff weeks or months ahead of me anyway so that doesn't change anything. You might play longer, or just be naturally better. Getting there ahead of someone, but not being able to do anything different than anyone else when you are there, to me is not p2w.
What if I started a year after the game launched, there are thousands of people ahead of me. To me the speed that someone progresses through the game is not p2w.
I logged in just to comment on this..
Me and my friends all argue about this xp potion shit..
To me xp potions regardless if they cut the lvling down by 75% saying takes 5 hours to gain 1 lvl without and 1 hour with. convenience, your just saving time..
I see those as if players dont have time but the money to buy them and keep up with there friends with them.. so be it..
if some kiddo no lifes the game and has a part time job so be it...
If a game isnt selling end game gear.. there is no way that its p2w..
another thing is players call those items that help you enchant with a higher chance p2w but 90% they can be bought in game with in game currency so how is it p2w?
its all pay for convenience too me...
I agree with the OP ... Pay to Win is not the same as Pay to Advance or Pay for Advantage. Advance and Advantage are not win conditions. You can still loose with an advantage, or win when at a disadvantage ... Luck, Skill, Strategy, and Friends (Guild) usually play a much bigger role in Winning.
I think using the time saved argument as a case for p2w is a bit flawed since most MMOs are not a racing game where the first one to a certain point wins, and in the end the guy that bought the items is at the same place as the guy that spent the time. It is the case that the OP mentions where the guy that spends $ gets to power position that the non-spending guy can't reach. The problem is that subjective arguments for or against p2w are no different than opinions, and are open to interpretation. A win condition is an objective thing, I can tell you who won the last World Series, Stanley Cup, Super Bowl or Americas Cup as the win conditions were achieved by one team before the other, but I can not tell you who won EQ2, WoW, DDO, or TSW.
The real question should be does an MMO have a win condition or do the individual players have a win condition. If it is the individuals that have the win conditions how does that mean any thing outside of their opinion is pay to win for every other player of the game.
I dislike cash shops not because they are p2w or whatever other acronym people can come up with, but because they shift game design from making an awesome game to how can I sell more stuff.
Thats fine that it doesn't meet your definition of p2w, it does meet mine though. I don't consider it that bad or terrible or anything, but I do consider it a p2w mechanic. There are far worse p2w items and mechanics that exist than xp boosters like in the Perfect World Entertainment games where you can pretty much use your credit card to boost your characters stats to a godlike level and then go pvp.....
so now a game can only be p2w if the "maximum" potential is reached with real money?
It is pay to win if you can buy power that gives you an advantage over a player that didnt spend money. No matter how little that advantage is.
STOP defending p2w and hiding your defence behind your whole OP post about "maximum potential". P2W needs to die and a lot of f2p mmos sell power. THey claim not to be p2w because they arent selling the most powerful gear..... I dont care about the most powerful gear because i dont count the end game (where i would use that gear) as the fun part of my game time. The most relevant part of the game to me is the entire leveling from lvl 1 to max, and if there is P2W within that part of the game then that is just WRONG.
I love games that dont have subscriptions but i dont support P2W, not even for one cent.
This is my point, I can't come up with any AAA (by the way when I say AAA I mean developed on a AAA game studio's budget, I thought people understood that already sorry) game that sells top tier items. Can you? because if you could I feel like you would have mentioned it...
In all of the games I have played with raiding, completing end tier content is reliant on a series of gates that players must unlock through this progression sequence.
1) Level to cap (or near)
2) Acquire entry level gear from solo/small group dungeon/quest/whatever (sometimes this can be purchased, and in any cash store this is usually the highest tier items they will ever sell)
3) Complete small group / solo / quest/ whatever content for entry tier of level cap
4) Organize raid force
5) Defeat boss,
6) Die to next boss, at this juncture you will bash your head against the boss repeatedly until members hate each other. There is some potential for the serene moment where the raidleader manages to get everyone to STFU and somehow you beat the boss undergeared. If not, return to 5, repeat until 6 is easier.
7) rinse repeat until content is cleared.
No where in this algorithm is x) buy uber gear from cash shop and winz!
One thing that isn't mentioned often is that many of these 'advantages' are available to subscription paying players for free due to a monthly bonus of 'coins/points'.
It tends to change the math quite a bit.
In other words, every subbed player has access to that exp potion (for example) without in-game cost so that the base level standard is changed. So there is choice involved on whether to get a cosmetic upgrade or to get a small advantage at no real cost other than the points which could be considered within the price of a sub.
Yeah, it gets murky.
Wait a moment, you say that you don't care about endgame, check. You say that the most relevant part of the game is the entire leveling, check. So buying an experience potion to speed through that part, you find to be paying to win somehow? Wouldn't that be pay to lose by your own understanding?
And if you are talking about buying gear, my argument holds true for that as well. There is always better dropped gear for the level than purchased gear for leveling off cash shops. The cash shops usually provide you with a good-but-not-best convenience option so you don't have to worry about gear while leveling. You know, so that you don't have to begin min-maxing until *gasp* endgame.