If you CAN use any form of real cash to gain anything other than playtime, (meaning a monthly subscription, not exp boosters ect.), then you are paying to "Win", since you are dishing out more money to make yourself better, either in appearance, or in competitiveness.
Everything else is semantics, and ways for people to excuse themselves for having said advantage.
I have paid to win before (particularly in card games), and I make no apologies.
Fair and Honest answer...
If it has a cash shop- Its has P2W aspects imho... Even cosmetic items.
some poor people have more time than money. Some rich people have more money than time. P2W gives the rich people the advantage, and not having it gives poor people the advantage. Therefore, I would say that P2W is a tool to define what audience you are targeting your product for.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
PvP => direct competition, thus, automatically becomes P2W.
PvE => only competition if scores or ranks are displayed publicly.
Does a fansite keeping track of people dungeons time qualifies as "displayed publicly"? Yep. I think it does.
This in fact IS an example of "Pay to Win"... IF Real Money was used in order to achieve any form of advantage, not even necessarily over anyone else that competed. Literally, the "Pay to Win" could have paid through the nose and still come in last place, so long as it was for a mechanical PVP and-or PVE advantage that they otherwise would NOT HAVE HAD.
So we've established that all MMO with PvE are potentially P2W then, since it is obvious that a fansite can be put in place for any website. Not that we care much, but I was just pointing out that your "distinction" between "direct competition" or not makes no sense.
STOP THE BS about P2W is SUBECTIVE... IT IS NOT.
Just proved you it is with my example.
Even more so because you say it isn't subjective and I say it is. When everyone has a different perception on the topic, it's called subjective by definition.
And yet you completely blew off my next simple point, or it went well over your head.
And you're missing my even more obvious simple point: the simple fact that we are all debating what is P2W, and that we are not all in agreement means it's subjective.
I really don't know how I can put it more simply to you.
Unless you believe your opinion to be the "right one" which we should all listen to and follow?
The Earth is obviously flat.
Not it's not, and people have proven scientifically it wasn't long ago.
You have (so far) proven nothing. Concretely, I am still waiting for you to bring an irrefutable proof that "P2W is NOT subjective" (I'm not even asking for a scientific proof).
The best proof we have so far that "P2W is subjective" is that you and I, and others, are debating it. Thus we do not agree on the definition of P2W and it is subjective. Couldn't be more in your face than this but you refuse to see it.
Since I countered your opinion and brought proof that your demonstration is invalid - does that mean you agree that I'm right then and that it is subjective?
This, or you need to think again and read my first paragraph.
Unfortunately for your "countering my opinion," you have not countered the underlying concept, of which the terminology of "Pay to Win" fits exactly in relaying that definition. Now, if perhaps you could actually counter the definition, rather than joining those whom still believe (thinking not included) they can obscure and twist a term... then perhaps you would actually have said anything at all. On that basis, what proof have you brought but yet another example of "Pay to Win"?
So no, you can not be correct when your statement completely ignores the underlying concept.
What "underlying concept"? There is no underlying concept. The definition of "P2W" is either perfectly obvious, clear and identical for everyone (objective) or it depends on each individual personal bias, preferences and choices (subjective).
Obviously it is subjective since for me GW2 isn't a P2W game, whereas for many others it is.
Any game mechanic that can only be bought with real money or which cannot be easily obtained with in game means that gives one player a combat advantage of any size against players of their own level.
By this definition, I primarily exclude experience boosters and "buying levels" right off the bat, as these do not provide an advantage over other players of one's level. It merely gets one's level up faster, and this can actually be a disadvantage when trying to learn and gear characters.
I also exclude useful non-combat utilities like character slots, storage, and other such items. These provide an economic advantage of sorts, but they do not transition directly into gameplay.
Lastly, I've excluded currency conversion. I do not personally believe that money -> gold conversion is a form of pay-to-win simply because the advantages gained from it are designed to be readily obtained in game. The mileage here may vary depending on how gear tiers are designed, however. But overall, I feel like currency conversion is a praiseworthy mechanic that allows anyone to obtain cash shop items with effort, and I tend to applaud devs for including it.
Any game mechanic that can only be bought with real money or which cannot be easily obtained with in game means that gives one player a combat advantage of any size against players of their own level.
By this definition, I primarily exclude experience boosters and "buying levels" right off the bat, as these do not provide an advantage over other players of one's level. It merely gets one's level up faster, and this can actually be a disadvantage when trying to learn and gear characters.
I also exclude useful non-combat utilities like character slots, storage, and other such items. These provide an economic advantage of sorts, but they do not transition directly into gameplay.
Lastly, I've excluded currency conversion. I do not personally believe that money -> gold conversion is a form of pay-to-win simply because the advantages gained from it are designed to be readily obtained in game. The mileage here may vary depending on how gear tiers are designed, however. But overall, I feel like currency conversion is a praiseworthy mechanic that allows anyone to obtain cash shop items with effort, and I tend to applaud devs for including it.
we just have the same opinion ...
+1 Agree! The key points are that it can only be purchased with real money and it cannot be attained easily through regular gameplay, and that it provides a combat advantage over players of the SAME level.
I also agree that this is somewhat of a subjective term, but it really shouldn't be. Otherwise, I would challenge someone to bring up a game that is NOT P2W. Why? Because I can pay to win any game I want. It might be outside of the rules of that game, but I can certainly do it. A P2W game would, theoretically, provide advantages that could not be achieved any other way than through the cash shop.
That's what the term has always meant until apologists of the F2P model started to redefine it.
Pretty much. Though I'll add that there is a condition that I personally have in that if the game doesn't have PvP, then I don't care what others do. Or if they disabled any purchased gear / equipment during PvP.
If one player keeps on losing to another, and the loser buys an item and actually wins for a change. That is P2W. Even if the first guy can eventually earn the same piece of gear by doing something. The loser has literally bought an item and won a fight from it.
This may be true with games with an economy as well, at times. If you buy the most powerful thing at or before launch and can chase others away or get an advantage in keeping a monopoly, you get an actual return investment for the thousands you have played and are already way above others due to spending real money. It does not matter if they eventually are able to get the same thing through working in game; the advantage was already given and capitalized on.
Due to frequent travel in my youth, English isn't something I consider my primary language (and thus I obtained quirky ways of writing). German and French were always easier for me despite my family being U.S. citizens for over a century. Spanish I learned as a requirement in school, Japanese and Korean I acquired for my youthful desire of anime and gaming (and also work now). I only debate in English to help me work with it (and limit things). In addition, I'm not smart enough to remain fluent in everything and typically need exposure to get in the groove of things again if I haven't heard it in a while. If you understand Mandarin, I know a little, but it has actually been a challenge and could use some help.
Also, I thoroughly enjoy debates and have accounts on over a dozen sites for this. If you wish to engage in such, please put effort in a post and provide sources -- I will then do the same with what I already wrote (if I didn't) as well as with my responses to your own. Expanding my information on a subject makes my stance either change or strengthen the next time I speak of it or write a thesis. Allow me to thank you sincerely for your time.
Buying weapons and armor in a cash shop IMO is fine as long as they are no better then med end dungeon drop. Top end gear should be earned. If I come to a game thats been out many years, I should be able to skip the grind with a little cash to get me right into end game with my friends. So I can start tier 1 raiding right away when I get max level.
Buying anything in the shop which advances the strength or progression of your character. If something is sold to circumvent a game mechanic, it's p2w.
To understand "Pay to Win", consider the original Nintendo Super Mario Bros game. Imagine you could buy coins (If I remember correctly, 100 coins gave +1 extra life), one ups (automatically gave +1 extra life), stars (gave temporary invincibility), mushrooms (made you bigger, and thus 2 shots to die rather than 1), plugs or bridges for pits (which falling into would automatically result in death), a fireball flower (allowed you to shoot fireballs to kill the creatures)...
Realize, there is no competition in this scenario, just YOU vs the Game.
Realize, these items are all entirely possible to reasonably acquire through gameplay.
Realize, THIS IS PAY TO WIN. Period. WTF else would you call such purchases?
Realize that P2W in MMO means buying an advantage over another player. Companies need to make money and if they are F2P with a cash shop, the cash shop needs to have items players will want to buy. So to be fair to the company and to players you need to draw a line where buying items in a cash shop excludes the non paying customer from content. So if you have 2 tanks that want to join your team. One has a sword from the cash shop that makes him a much better tank so you would always pick him first, then you have P2W. Having pots that can be used in competitive PvP that give you an edge, again is P2W.
We love games and as gamers we need to be fair to the companies as well or they wont make money and we wont have games.
Seems odd to me this obsession with rl money some how being different then any other advantage. The fact is rl money has been a part of MMOs for a very long time. There was only a very breif period of time where the early P2P games were "pure" We can argue about violation of EULA but all players that used gold farmers did not get band. I'd say the addition of money into games was a direct result of players using gold farmers. If this is what players want why not give them a legit way to do it in game? If I can earn the same thing that can be paid for it' has never bothered me.
On a related note I think i dislike RNG to win most of all. Based off pure luck someone can gain a huge advantage over others. In some cases, many of the most powerful items are bound so to get them you just need to be lucky. No money, no time (although you could increase your odds), no skill.
I consider P2W any benefit you can get by paying money, I seperate the P2W in about 4 category
Heavy P2W: Any item of equipment that are obviously better than the standard and which normally are very very hard to obtain if you don't pay
Medium P2W: Any Exp/Gold Bonus for an amount of times, I consider that its still a P2W method in a sense, were if you have money you can go faster
Light P2W: Any kind of Character slot, bag slot, inventory slot or similar small bonus, those are normally not a big deal and can easily be not bough unless you really invest a lot of time
Non P2W: Anything cosmetic, skin, appearance change and such.
Also I prefer game which allow you to get the "paid" ressource no matter what, I hate that some game don't allow to gain them in anyway, so if you don't have money, you can't get any kind of bonus once in a while
To put it simple, teamed and competitive content should be seen as a gate. If you can buy items that give you an advantage over non-cash shop players once you enter that gate, you have pay to win. If its solo content and you can pay to have an advantage, where is the harm? If it earns the developers a little extra cash to make new content, that can only help everyone. Again we need to be fair to the developers as well, they dont make money, then we dont have games.
To understand "Pay to Win", consider the original Nintendo Super Mario Bros game. Imagine you could buy coins (If I remember correctly, 100 coins gave +1 extra life), one ups (automatically gave +1 extra life), stars (gave temporary invincibility), mushrooms (made you bigger, and thus 2 shots to die rather than 1), plugs or bridges for pits (which falling into would automatically result in death), a fireball flower (allowed you to shoot fireballs to kill the creatures)...
Realize, there is no competition in this scenario, just YOU vs the Game.
Realize, these items are all entirely possible to reasonably acquire through gameplay.
Realize, THIS IS PAY TO WIN. Period. WTF else would you call such purchases?
Realize that P2W in MMO means buying an advantage over another player. Companies need to make money and if they are F2P with a cash shop, the cash shop needs to have items players will want to buy. So to be fair to the company and to players you need to draw a line where buying items in a cash shop excludes the non paying customer from content. So if you have 2 tanks that want to join your team. One has a sword from the cash shop that makes him a much better tank so you would always pick him first, then you have P2W. Having pots that can be used in competitive PvP that give you an edge, again is P2W.
We love games and as gamers we need to be fair to the companies as well or they wont make money and we wont have games.
Hold on, but the scenario I delivered outside of an MMO is in fact pay to win? Or is it not? If it is in fact pay to win, then it too is in fact pay to win in all other scenarios. That is simply one of those silly little study of logic aspects defined about a "truth". For something to be "true" it must be "true" for all cases. One "false" scenario renders it "false." As a matter of fact, even the fields of both mathematics and physics (which is the study of nature, you know, reality) recognize the same thing.
In an MMO, it is not that P2W from a non-mmo scenario should hold any difference in definition... The actual "difference" is that an MMO having multiple players, said players will have a tendency to point out and emphasize said P2W points that they do not approve of. Usually this means P2W aspects that work against them, thus giving them a disadvantage, and thus the P2W player an advantage (for whom else would be paying to win but other players? Certainly not the npc encounters.). This "difference and resulting tendencies" are what people are confusing with being "subjective" surrounding any definition of P2W.
This is the same lack of ability to pinpoint actual problems with other terminologies as well. Consider the terminologies of "Free to Play" and "Cash Shop." Many players know they do not like "Free to Play" and-or "Cash Shops," while they fail to see neither of those are actually the issue at all. The real issues are in the way such have been implemented thus far by games they have seen these in. I myself have not seen produced any implementation of these that I consider proper, thus, I can understand their confusion and ignorant disliking.
Again, no one is saying "companies do not need to make money", or even a boat load of money when speaking of MMORPGs especially. And such point is completely irrelevant to properly defining a terminology of "pay to win" for what it is, with the only exception being for propaganda purposes.
There are ways for companies to make money, and I have stated this countless times by now. Obviously "Free to Play" is the mandatory path to take, with the only exceptions are companies and-or titles that already have followings. Obviously a "Cash Shop" becomes necessity, as it is the only real way to fund an MMORPG, as optional subscriptions just will not cover it. But none of that says "Pay to Win" should continue "Unrestricted."
The thread I posted in the Developers forums is specifically about Pay to Win Reduction Methods (In the F2P Business Model). Perhaps people do not agree with exactly what I have made as points in order to reduce P2W, but at least it is a damn good beginning to a good direction to head in. Those that opposed such concepts entirely are certainly not the thinking types, and it is the thinking types that said thread needs in order to expand the base idea to a point that people will recognize as good. The first issue with such a concept, ironically, is the definition of "Pay to Win." "Subjective" as a definition would have no results to said end.
So just to refresh people's memories, take a real close look at the Super Mario Bros example... THAT is PAY TO WIN.
But we are talking about MMOs not single player games. At best we could use your example to look at the solo part all MMOs have. If you can buy say an item that buffed you for 4hrs that gave you 20% exp boots and did 10% more damage to quest mobs. Where would be the harm? If at end game the guy to didnt buy the boots and the guy who did have equal access to all teamed and competitive content and no advantage over it, what does it really matter? We need to be fair to the companies who make games as well. If they dont make money, we dont have games. If some people drop money in a cash shop to solo faster, this only helps all players as this means the devs have more money to make more content.
Now if once you enter teamed and competitive content and a player can buy an edge, now you really have a P2W game and where the real problem lies.
To understand "Pay to Win", consider the original Nintendo Super Mario Bros game. Imagine you could buy coins (If I remember correctly, 100 coins gave +1 extra life), one ups (automatically gave +1 extra life), stars (gave temporary invincibility), mushrooms (made you bigger, and thus 2 shots to die rather than 1), plugs or bridges for pits (which falling into would automatically result in death), a fireball flower (allowed you to shoot fireballs to kill the creatures)...
Realize, there is no competition in this scenario, just YOU vs the Game.
Realize, these items are all entirely possible to reasonably acquire through gameplay.
Realize, THIS IS PAY TO WIN. Period. WTF else would you call such purchases?
Realize that P2W in MMO means buying an advantage over another player. Companies need to make money and if they are F2P with a cash shop, the cash shop needs to have items players will want to buy. So to be fair to the company and to players you need to draw a line where buying items in a cash shop excludes the non paying customer from content. So if you have 2 tanks that want to join your team. One has a sword from the cash shop that makes him a much better tank so you would always pick him first, then you have P2W. Having pots that can be used in competitive PvP that give you an edge, again is P2W.
We love games and as gamers we need to be fair to the companies as well or they wont make money and we wont have games.
Hold on, but the scenario I delivered outside of an MMO is in fact pay to win? Or is it not? If it is in fact pay to win, then it too is in fact pay to win in all other scenarios. That is simply one of those silly little study of logic aspects defined about a "truth". For something to be "true" it must be "true" for all cases. One "false" scenario renders it "false." As a matter of fact, even the fields of both mathematics and physics (which is the study of nature, you know, reality) recognize the same thing.
In an MMO, it is not that P2W from a non-mmo scenario should hold any difference in definition... The actual "difference" is that an MMO having multiple players, said players will have a tendency to point out and emphasize said P2W points that they do not approve of. Usually this means P2W aspects that work against them, thus giving them a disadvantage, and thus the P2W player an advantage (for whom else would be paying to win but other players? Certainly not the npc encounters.). This "difference and resulting tendencies" are what people are confusing with being "subjective" surrounding any definition of P2W.
This is the same lack of ability to pinpoint actual problems with other terminologies as well. Consider the terminologies of "Free to Play" and "Cash Shop." Many players know they do not like "Free to Play" and-or "Cash Shops," while they fail to see neither of those are actually the issue at all. The real issues are in the way such have been implemented thus far by games they have seen these in. I myself have not seen produced any implementation of these that I consider proper, thus, I can understand their confusion and ignorant disliking.
Again, no one is saying "companies do not need to make money", or even a boat load of money when speaking of MMORPGs especially. And such point is completely irrelevant to properly defining a terminology of "pay to win" for what it is, with the only exception being for propaganda purposes.
There are ways for companies to make money, and I have stated this countless times by now. Obviously "Free to Play" is the mandatory path to take, with the only exceptions are companies and-or titles that already have followings. Obviously a "Cash Shop" becomes necessity, as it is the only real way to fund an MMORPG, as optional subscriptions just will not cover it. But none of that says "Pay to Win" should continue "Unrestricted."
The thread I posted in the Developers forums is specifically about Pay to Win Reduction Methods (In the F2P Business Model). Perhaps people do not agree with exactly what I have made as points in order to reduce P2W, but at least it is a damn good beginning to a good direction to head in. Those that opposed such concepts entirely are certainly not the thinking types, and it is the thinking types that said thread needs in order to expand the base idea to a point that people will recognize as good. The first issue with such a concept, ironically, is the definition of "Pay to Win." "Subjective" as a definition would have no results to said end.
So just to refresh people's memories, take a real close look at the Super Mario Bros example... THAT is PAY TO WIN.
I think your definition relies on any paid advantage over the game. Where as many others feel within the context of an MMO it's any paid advantage over other players. Bring in console games is problematic as in many cases there are cheat codes to get the items for free; it's read to win.
To understand "Pay to Win", consider the original Nintendo Super Mario Bros game. Imagine you could buy coins (If I remember correctly, 100 coins gave +1 extra life), one ups (automatically gave +1 extra life), stars (gave temporary invincibility), mushrooms (made you bigger, and thus 2 shots to die rather than 1), plugs or bridges for pits (which falling into would automatically result in death), a fireball flower (allowed you to shoot fireballs to kill the creatures)...
Realize, there is no competition in this scenario, just YOU vs the Game.
Realize, these items are all entirely possible to reasonably acquire through gameplay.
Realize, THIS IS PAY TO WIN. Period. WTF else would you call such purchases?
Realize that P2W in MMO means buying an advantage over another player. Companies need to make money and if they are F2P with a cash shop, the cash shop needs to have items players will want to buy. So to be fair to the company and to players you need to draw a line where buying items in a cash shop excludes the non paying customer from content. So if you have 2 tanks that want to join your team. One has a sword from the cash shop that makes him a much better tank so you would always pick him first, then you have P2W. Having pots that can be used in competitive PvP that give you an edge, again is P2W.
We love games and as gamers we need to be fair to the companies as well or they wont make money and we wont have games.
Hold on, but the scenario I delivered outside of an MMO is in fact pay to win? Or is it not? If it is in fact pay to win, then it too is in fact pay to win in all other scenarios. That is simply one of those silly little study of logic aspects defined about a "truth". For something to be "true" it must be "true" for all cases. One "false" scenario renders it "false." As a matter of fact, even the fields of both mathematics and physics (which is the study of nature, you know, reality) recognize the same thing.
In an MMO, it is not that P2W from a non-mmo scenario should hold any difference in definition... The actual "difference" is that an MMO having multiple players, said players will have a tendency to point out and emphasize said P2W points that they do not approve of. Usually this means P2W aspects that work against them, thus giving them a disadvantage, and thus the P2W player an advantage (for whom else would be paying to win but other players? Certainly not the npc encounters.). This "difference and resulting tendencies" are what people are confusing with being "subjective" surrounding any definition of P2W.
This is the same lack of ability to pinpoint actual problems with other terminologies as well. Consider the terminologies of "Free to Play" and "Cash Shop." Many players know they do not like "Free to Play" and-or "Cash Shops," while they fail to see neither of those are actually the issue at all. The real issues are in the way such have been implemented thus far by games they have seen these in. I myself have not seen produced any implementation of these that I consider proper, thus, I can understand their confusion and ignorant disliking.
Again, no one is saying "companies do not need to make money", or even a boat load of money when speaking of MMORPGs especially. And such point is completely irrelevant to properly defining a terminology of "pay to win" for what it is, with the only exception being for propaganda purposes.
There are ways for companies to make money, and I have stated this countless times by now. Obviously "Free to Play" is the mandatory path to take, with the only exceptions are companies and-or titles that already have followings. Obviously a "Cash Shop" becomes necessity, as it is the only real way to fund an MMORPG, as optional subscriptions just will not cover it. But none of that says "Pay to Win" should continue "Unrestricted."
The thread I posted in the Developers forums is specifically about Pay to Win Reduction Methods (In the F2P Business Model). Perhaps people do not agree with exactly what I have made as points in order to reduce P2W, but at least it is a damn good beginning to a good direction to head in. Those that opposed such concepts entirely are certainly not the thinking types, and it is the thinking types that said thread needs in order to expand the base idea to a point that people will recognize as good. The first issue with such a concept, ironically, is the definition of "Pay to Win." "Subjective" as a definition would have no results to said end.
So just to refresh people's memories, take a real close look at the Super Mario Bros example... THAT is PAY TO WIN.
Yeah, but what you don't understand is that we are saying that P2W is a CLASSIFICATION of game, but your describing it as an activity of some sort. The problem with your entire argument is that EVERY SINGLE GAME is P2W. So it's no longer about Game X is P2W, every game is P2W and therefore there is no differentiation between terms, so why even argue it. We can just accept that all games are P2W and call them Games. Do you understand that? I get the feeling that you're not grasping the fact that based on your characterisation of P2W, literally, every single game is P2W.
The terminology of "pay to win" obviously will not reach an objective conclusion as to it's "definition." Those involved in this conversation can not even accept that a "definition" should have a terminology befitting of it, in order to expedite conversations which are well beyond just simple definitions. "Extensions" of definitions can further be placed in order to expand on such concepts. Where propaganda and-or ignorance reigns supreme, no real conversation can be had.
No we cant, I agree with you but we can talk market value. The common standard the majority will accept and still play your game, like or dislike. Some hate GW2 for selling gems you can convert to gold but gold is almost meaningless in that game because there is no real end game. Just things you do because they are fun. So people who like GW2 can live with their cash shop. Every games needs to find that balance and a real P2W game now days is rare as we have educated ourselves as gamers by the time we spent playing games.
Comments
Fair and Honest answer...
If it has a cash shop- Its has P2W aspects imho... Even cosmetic items.
some poor people have more time than money. Some rich people have more money than time. P2W gives the rich people the advantage, and not having it gives poor people the advantage. Therefore, I would say that P2W is a tool to define what audience you are targeting your product for.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
So we've established that all MMO with PvE are potentially P2W then, since it is obvious that a fansite can be put in place for any website. Not that we care much, but I was just pointing out that your "distinction" between "direct competition" or not makes no sense.
And you're missing my even more obvious simple point: the simple fact that we are all debating what is P2W, and that we are not all in agreement means it's subjective.
I really don't know how I can put it more simply to you.
Unless you believe your opinion to be the "right one" which we should all listen to and follow?
Not it's not, and people have proven scientifically it wasn't long ago.
You have (so far) proven nothing. Concretely, I am still waiting for you to bring an irrefutable proof that "P2W is NOT subjective" (I'm not even asking for a scientific proof).
The best proof we have so far that "P2W is subjective" is that you and I, and others, are debating it. Thus we do not agree on the definition of P2W and it is subjective. Couldn't be more in your face than this but you refuse to see it.
What "underlying concept"? There is no underlying concept. The definition of "P2W" is either perfectly obvious, clear and identical for everyone (objective) or it depends on each individual personal bias, preferences and choices (subjective).
Obviously it is subjective since for me GW2 isn't a P2W game, whereas for many others it is.
IMO pay to win is anything you can pay for that gives one player a significant advantage over another.
So if you can buy an item for 20$ or farm that same item for 20 hours, that is still Pay 2 Win because the advantage is the time you save.
we just have the same opinion ...
+1 Agree! The key points are that it can only be purchased with real money and it cannot be attained easily through regular gameplay, and that it provides a combat advantage over players of the SAME level.
I also agree that this is somewhat of a subjective term, but it really shouldn't be. Otherwise, I would challenge someone to bring up a game that is NOT P2W. Why? Because I can pay to win any game I want. It might be outside of the rules of that game, but I can certainly do it. A P2W game would, theoretically, provide advantages that could not be achieved any other way than through the cash shop.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Pretty much. Though I'll add that there is a condition that I personally have in that if the game doesn't have PvP, then I don't care what others do. Or if they disabled any purchased gear / equipment during PvP.
If one player keeps on losing to another, and the loser buys an item and actually wins for a change. That is P2W. Even if the first guy can eventually earn the same piece of gear by doing something. The loser has literally bought an item and won a fight from it.
This may be true with games with an economy as well, at times. If you buy the most powerful thing at or before launch and can chase others away or get an advantage in keeping a monopoly, you get an actual return investment for the thousands you have played and are already way above others due to spending real money. It does not matter if they eventually are able to get the same thing through working in game; the advantage was already given and capitalized on.
P2W = ANYTHING that can only be attained via cash shop that gives players a competitive edge over those that do not use it.
Even worse: Paying a sub fee and not having everything in the cash shop be available in game.
See ArcheAge for more information.
Joined 2004 - I can't believe I've been a MMORPG.com member for 20 years! Get off my lawn!
To me P2W is when a player can purchase items that in any way effect PVP combat.
Realize that P2W in MMO means buying an advantage over another player. Companies need to make money and if they are F2P with a cash shop, the cash shop needs to have items players will want to buy. So to be fair to the company and to players you need to draw a line where buying items in a cash shop excludes the non paying customer from content. So if you have 2 tanks that want to join your team. One has a sword from the cash shop that makes him a much better tank so you would always pick him first, then you have P2W. Having pots that can be used in competitive PvP that give you an edge, again is P2W.
We love games and as gamers we need to be fair to the companies as well or they wont make money and we wont have games.
Seems odd to me this obsession with rl money some how being different then any other advantage. The fact is rl money has been a part of MMOs for a very long time. There was only a very breif period of time where the early P2P games were "pure" We can argue about violation of EULA but all players that used gold farmers did not get band. I'd say the addition of money into games was a direct result of players using gold farmers. If this is what players want why not give them a legit way to do it in game? If I can earn the same thing that can be paid for it' has never bothered me.
On a related note I think i dislike RNG to win most of all. Based off pure luck someone can gain a huge advantage over others. In some cases, many of the most powerful items are bound so to get them you just need to be lucky. No money, no time (although you could increase your odds), no skill.
I consider P2W any benefit you can get by paying money, I seperate the P2W in about 4 category
Heavy P2W: Any item of equipment that are obviously better than the standard and which normally are very very hard to obtain if you don't pay
Medium P2W: Any Exp/Gold Bonus for an amount of times, I consider that its still a P2W method in a sense, were if you have money you can go faster
Light P2W: Any kind of Character slot, bag slot, inventory slot or similar small bonus, those are normally not a big deal and can easily be not bough unless you really invest a lot of time
Non P2W: Anything cosmetic, skin, appearance change and such.
Also I prefer game which allow you to get the "paid" ressource no matter what, I hate that some game don't allow to gain them in anyway, so if you don't have money, you can't get any kind of bonus once in a while
But we are talking about MMOs not single player games. At best we could use your example to look at the solo part all MMOs have. If you can buy say an item that buffed you for 4hrs that gave you 20% exp boots and did 10% more damage to quest mobs. Where would be the harm? If at end game the guy to didnt buy the boots and the guy who did have equal access to all teamed and competitive content and no advantage over it, what does it really matter? We need to be fair to the companies who make games as well. If they dont make money, we dont have games. If some people drop money in a cash shop to solo faster, this only helps all players as this means the devs have more money to make more content.
Now if once you enter teamed and competitive content and a player can buy an edge, now you really have a P2W game and where the real problem lies.
I think your definition relies on any paid advantage over the game. Where as many others feel within the context of an MMO it's any paid advantage over other players. Bring in console games is problematic as in many cases there are cheat codes to get the items for free; it's read to win.
Yeah, but what you don't understand is that we are saying that P2W is a CLASSIFICATION of game, but your describing it as an activity of some sort. The problem with your entire argument is that EVERY SINGLE GAME is P2W. So it's no longer about Game X is P2W, every game is P2W and therefore there is no differentiation between terms, so why even argue it. We can just accept that all games are P2W and call them Games. Do you understand that? I get the feeling that you're not grasping the fact that based on your characterisation of P2W, literally, every single game is P2W.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
No we cant, I agree with you but we can talk market value. The common standard the majority will accept and still play your game, like or dislike. Some hate GW2 for selling gems you can convert to gold but gold is almost meaningless in that game because there is no real end game. Just things you do because they are fun. So people who like GW2 can live with their cash shop. Every games needs to find that balance and a real P2W game now days is rare as we have educated ourselves as gamers by the time we spent playing games.