I think the actual mechanics of a game contribute a lot to whether a game can potentially be p2w. Any game with a steep vertical power curve and long grind lends itself well to becoming p2w, since any power sold through the shop in the form of experience/gear/stat boosts or whatever has a significant impact and will tend to attract whales and the like.
For example the cash shop in two different games could sell the same "p2w" items: in this case 50% xp boosts and stabilizers to increase the chance of success when crafted enchanted gear.
Game A is designed around more of a horizontal progression system where the difference in power between a well geared player and a player with regular gear is relatively small, and power gains as a player levels become progressively smaller. Game B has a vertical progression system with progressively higher power gains and requires a long time to level and or gear up.
The impact on the game of these "p2w" items would be minor in game A because it would be impossible to buy immense power, while the exact same items sold in game B's cash shop would cause massive imbalances between highly geared players that have bought or grinded their way to power and new or more casual players that don't spend up big.
I think the actual mechanics of a game contribute a lot to whether a game can potentially be p2w. Any game with a steep vertical power curve and long grind lends itself well to becoming p2w, since any power sold through the shop in the form of experience/gear/stat boosts or whatever has a significant impact and will tend to attract whales and the like.
For example the cash shop in two different games could sell the same "p2w" items: in this case 50% xp boosts and stabilizers to increase the chance of success when crafted enchanted gear.
Game A is designed around more of a horizontal progression system where the difference in power between a well geared player and a player with regular gear is relatively small, and power gains as a player levels become progressively smaller. Game B has a vertical progression system with progressively higher power gains and requires a long time to level and or gear up.
The impact on the game of these "p2w" items would be minor in game A because it would be impossible to buy immense power, while the exact same items sold in game B's cash shop would cause massive imbalances between highly geared players that have bought or grinded their way to power and new or more casual players that don't spend up big.
That's an excellent point. I haven't played GW2, but from what I read about it, it is an excellent example of an horizontal game where the effect of the feature of selling item mall currency for for ingame currency has very low effects due to the horizontal power scaling.
Stizzled said:
A game is P2W the moment that a player thinks they need to spend any amount of money in a F2P game, apparently. P2P games get a free pass to charge money.
This. Just... this.
Really - what about P2P games that have a cash shop that sell like instant level 90 boosts etc...?
P2P games can have just as aggressive cash shops as F2P games - sometimes even more so.
Exactly his point. No one calls WoW P2W even if you can get mounts and max level characters with real money, because it's P2P.
His point was, every F2P game is P2W in someone's opinion because they feel they should pay something for it. It doesn't matter if they would actually need to pay to reach the same conclusion, only that they feel like they have to.
Anytime an item is sold via out of game money that gives a direct advantage to an in game scenario unless said item can be gained in game through normal play.
For example, selling a mount with 200% speed, but in game mounts only cap at 150% speed with no way to gain said mount.
What if the 200% mount inside the game takes a player on average 10 years to acquire, but can be bought with 5 dollars through the item mall?
Would you not consider that to be pay to win?
As mentioned, hyperbolic examples are rarely useful in discussion, because the answer is obvious, of course your example is unacceptable.
But if we use more realistic and likely examples such as 3 months of grinding (or even 6) vs a $20 mount (a far more likely price) then the conversation can continue.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
But if we use more realistic and likely examples such as 3 months of grinding (or even 6) vs a $20 mount (a far more likely price) then the conversation can continue.
And that's where it all unravels...
I'm willing to bet that the average MMO player doesn't stick to a new MMO for even 3 months. So even if they COULD earn everything in the Cash Shop if they played for 4 months, that becomes purely theoretical.
Their experience of the game will be that they played alongside people who spent freely in the Cash Shop in the first week. They were at a disadvantage for the entire time they played (unless they started spending).
The fact that they could have had it all for freeif only they had played for X monthsis totally irrelevant.
And western audience also utterly ignorant about "pay2win", look at how people think that having a cash shop mount that runs faster is pay2win. Of course i understand in western culture it is taught that "ignorance is bliss" and these arguments come from ignorance but it is pretty awful to read how ignorant western audiences are.
I'm gonna go with whatever is the polar opposite of what this guys is saying. (btw he is trying to defend AA here, the very poster child of a p2w disaster MMO).
In reality, anything that affects gameplay and can be bought for money is p2w. Whether or not you personally use said item to 'win' is irrelevant. Whether you care if someone else uses that item to get an advantage is irrelevant.
This thread is full of people just trying to define a term based on their own personal tastes without even a nod towards objectivity. "Why would I care about XP potions, I just want to play the game anyway, why do I care, etc etc' > well, moron, some people race to max level, some games have extreme benefits for leveling fast like claiming open world housing plots or vendors first. Buying harmless heal potions or revives leads to situations where people can solo group content, etc. Just because you are too naive too see how people can exploit these seemingly benign advantages doesn't make them not real advantages.
I think the actual mechanics of a game contribute a lot to whether a game can potentially be p2w. Any game with a steep vertical power curve and long grind lends itself well to becoming p2w, since any power sold through the shop in the form of experience/gear/stat boosts or whatever has a significant impact and will tend to attract whales and the like.
For example the cash shop in two different games could sell the same "p2w" items: in this case 50% xp boosts and stabilizers to increase the chance of success when crafted enchanted gear.
Game A is designed around more of a horizontal progression system where the difference in power between a well geared player and a player with regular gear is relatively small, and power gains as a player levels become progressively smaller. Game B has a vertical progression system with progressively higher power gains and requires a long time to level and or gear up.
The impact on the game of these "p2w" items would be minor in game A because it would be impossible to buy immense power, while the exact same items sold in game B's cash shop would cause massive imbalances between highly geared players that have bought or grinded their way to power and new or more casual players that don't spend up big.
That's an excellent point. I haven't played GW2, but from what I read about it, it is an excellent example of an horizontal game where the effect of the feature of selling item mall currency for for ingame currency has very low effects due to the horizontal power scaling.
Exactly, that's why GW2 can have a robust cash shop and even allow players to buy game currency with cash and yet you don't see much outrage about it being p2w. Meanwhile, as a recent example, the gaming community is up in arms about games like ArcheAge because buying power has such a profound impact on the game.
This is why I expect Black Desert to suffer from a p2w syndrome, since even though the cash shop seems very mild (which is good), the game's design amplifies to the extreme the effect of any cash shop items.
I believe such extreme vertical progression systems (coupled with very long leveling/gearing curves) can have a negative impact on any mmo, even if it is a sub based game, and in particular if the game has a pvp focus, because it creates a large barrier to entry for new players.
For example constantly getting pawned by an overgeared player with the prospect of perhaps a year or more before being on the other side of the boot is not very appealing to most people. Or in a pve game the community becomes gradually more and more fragmented, with newer players basically unable to play with veteran players.
So mmo devs have this quandary, how do we give players a sense of progression without shooting ourselves in the foot?
You would think most experienced devs would be aware of this, so why would they implement systems like in Black Desert where high level players/gear gets almost exponentially more powerful? Do they do this precisely because it helps in monetizing the game? Or are they just stupid?
erm, i'd say if you didn't understand p2w by now, you won't understand it
it's quite simple, if you can pay to get an advantage, it is pay 2 win. shocking, i know ^^
The argument of this definition has eveloved out of people trying to defend "Their Game" so that it cannot be defined as P2W. And by your definition (I agree with) Every online game is now P2W to some degree. So now we are at a point where it's not whether it's P2W but How bad is the P2W?
You would think most experienced devs would be aware of this, so why would they implement systems like in Black Desert where high level players/gear gets almost exponentially more powerful? Do they do this precisely because it helps in monetizing the game? Or are they just stupid?
They do it because they are Korean developers developing a game for a Korean market that doesn't have the same P2W backlash as we see in the West. Since the Korean players accept it (by continuing to pay) then the developers continue to develop games in this way. Of course they do it on purpose.
BTW the Korean market may just be a glimpse of where our own western markets are headed if players keep apathetically accepting more aggressive monetization. The only difference IMO is that the Korean developers still make good games at their core, then break them on purpose to encourage you to pay. It's an extremely predatory practice that the West (if these forums are any indication) may be preparing to accept.
erm, i'd say if you didn't understand p2w by now, you won't understand it
it's quite simple, if you can pay to get an advantage, it is pay 2 win. shocking, i know ^^
The argument of this definition has eveloved out of people trying to defend "Their Game" so that it cannot be defined as P2W. And by your definition (I agree with) Every online game is now P2W to some degree. So now we are at a point where it's not whether it's P2W but How bad is the P2W?
Actually, I see it as worse than that. See the P2W discussion has devolved to a point where people now say that cosmetics are P2W because that's why they play the game. So by making it so ambiguous, the line blurs as far as what P2W is. At this point, there is no line. Why this is a problem is that now we will begin to see ACTUAL P2W items make their way into the market because "...since everything is P2W, right?" It's unfortunate, but I think that it's the communities who have led to the inclusion of some of the more questionable items.
erm, i'd say if you didn't understand p2w by now, you won't understand it
it's quite simple, if you can pay to get an advantage, it is pay 2 win. shocking, i know ^^
The argument of this definition has eveloved out of people trying to defend "Their Game" so that it cannot be defined as P2W. And by your definition (I agree with) Every online game is now P2W to some degree. So now we are at a point where it's not whether it's P2W but How bad is the P2W?
Actually, I see it as worse than that. See the P2W discussion has devolved to a point where people now say that cosmetics are P2W because that's why they play the game. So by making it so ambiguous, the line blurs as far as what P2W is. At this point, there is no line. Why this is a problem is that now we will begin to see ACTUAL P2W items make their way into the market because "...since everything is P2W, right?" It's unfortunate, but I think that it's the communities who have led to the inclusion of some of the more questionable items.
I don't necessarily think it's that far off base. GW2 was originally designed to be a cosmetic race at endgame to see who could look the best. All gear was the same statistically. It differed only by appearance. That was the design objective and what was important to the majority of the player base. Based on the games designed objectives, one could make the argument for P2W. I think it's a legit argument. But what it boils down to, is, OK Yeah, that qualifies as P2W.....Does it affect the way I play the game? For me, no. Nothing they sold to me or anyone else was requred or gave an advantage based on the objectives in the game that were important to me. Now, if the game went and created a reward system that gave loot or what ever based on the gear (differentiated by appearance) That would be a different story.
To me, I really don't care about how to define P2W. I want to see what the player base is doing. And how those players who are at the top of the game are meeting the major objectives set forth in the game. If the cash shop is a major part of how and why they got to the top and remain at the top, and thus spending real money is required to compete with them, then I don't care if we call it P2W or not. It's a bad game for me.
On the other hand, SWTOR could technically be called P2W with the relate of Hyper-crates on the Auction. People who bought and sold them made tons of money. But in the end, it had little impact on me and my game. It did not impede my progress, I wasn't competing with these players in any circles, I didn't need to go back and use the shop so I was happy.
I work 60 hours a week and have money, you play a game 60 hours a week and have no money. Which is right? Which is wrong? Am I not allowed to have an enjoyable experience because I have responsibilities outside of a game? As long as items, etc. can be earned both ways in a game I don't see a problem with it. One thing is for sure, content doesn't get developed with out money.
No matter what F2P is P2W in any forum. Why? Because these F2P shops allow players to buy parts of the game for an advantage even if it is only to advance faster like in ArchAge. For example I played with someone who spend over $10,000 to re-grade his gear to a point few could beat him because of it. Thats P2W because he could use his Wallet to better his chance at being better than anyone else.
P2W is also in a F2P game like SWTOR where Winning is more on the end of EA because they made a game that was so high cost that nothing less than half of WOWs subs could sustain it. Yet they switched over to a system where they knew players would spend so much time and money in their cash shop where EA wins a high profit margin. They also spend more development time on the cash shop that they do in their game because it makes them money yet players dont see that EA is screwing players over.
And yes there is P2W in P2P games without a cash shop. Its called gold farmers. But before cash shops and WOW not wanting to ever ban someone because it hurt their bottom line players got ban for gold farming or buying gold if caught. Yes a small group of people were never caught BUT there was such a small group of players that did the P2W in these days that buying gold didnt hurt the overall game one bit. Also it took so long to make currencies in these games that someone couldnt spend $1000 on buying gold, if they did it might take the vendor 2 or 3 months to make that gold.
The ONLY TRUE non affecting PW2 system is to go back to P2P only games and kick anyone who buys gold from the game. Everyone is on a leveling playing field and their Opportunity in the game is only limited in 2 ways, their skills and personal abilities and their ability to pay to play the game. Thats it there will be no other limits. If in a game like ArcheAge where to have no cash shop and everything was in the game, a player was not able to make friendships they will likely fail. If in a game like WOW that couldnt learn to play their character to its fullest they will never get Raid gear. Yet today games want to give everyone a participation trophy and if you want the best stuff in game just spend money on it; then you could be like everyone else there too. No skills, no pushing players to become better. Just a system where Business people make money off you so you feel special.
For me P2W can also be the whole "500% XP/gold/cheese while subbing" (silly large increases), making it otherwise impossible to progress. SWTOR used to have that.
Also, things that (even for a limited time) give you an advantage, like say Pre-Order exclusive weapons, or selling early access to certain elements.
And PVE can also be competitive in my view, so you can have P2W in games with competitive PvE
For something to be pay to win it must satisfy the exact definition of the word. 1. A game has to have a win condition. Getting to a level faster than someone else when both are at the "same level" does not constitute win as there is no advantage to you over them. I
For something to be pay to win it must satisfy the exact definition of the word. 1. A game has to have a win condition. Getting to a level faster than someone else when both are at the "same level" does not constitute win as there is no advantage to you over them. I
If i't's not P2W, what would you call it when a player can spend real money and be able to dominate in the game? Let me know what your term is for that situation so that we can discuss what really happens in the games without using the term "P2W".
For something to be pay to win it must satisfy the exact definition of the word. 1. A game has to have a win condition. Getting to a level faster than someone else when both are at the "same level" does not constitute win as there is no advantage to you over them. I
Arguing pure semantics of a colloquialism isn't a remotely legitimate avenue. 'Win' is a catchall for gaining advantages. Why does this need to be explained over and over, it's a brutally simple concept.
In a purely PvE game there is no "win" maybe pay 2 rush or pay to get guaranteed item boosts etc.
In a PvP (open world) game P2W can be something as simple as XP boosters because it gives the purchaser an rush advantage and at least in the early stages typically a level / skill point advantage over other players who do not "buy in".
This is taking away the obvious tropes like gear, enhancements etc.
Honestly though... there is no "win" in MMO's... my days of server firsts, and rushing to the inevitable end are over... Maybe as a "40's gamer" I like to slow things down and play it my own way which at times may be throwing some coin at the shop or subbing to a premium option.
But even in my day of competitive play I never felt like I won anything... Maybe it's just these young'ns who never been spanked and got trophies as a kid just for participating...
Selling levels is just cheap no matter how you look at it. You send the message that the leveling content in your MMO is garbage. I consider it P2W. It's no different from selling gear.
MMO's have sent this message for years, even subscription ones. "Double XP weekend" is a staple of the genre, and it pretty much says that what people are interested in is going up quickly in levels, and not actually doing any content.
Selling levels is just cheap no matter how you look at it. You send the message that the leveling content in your MMO is garbage. I consider it P2W. It's no different from selling gear.
MMO's have sent this message for years, even subscription ones. "Double XP weekend" is a staple of the genre, and it pretty much says that what people are interested in is going up quickly in levels, and not actually doing any content.
at the same time, having new players play alone or virtually alone for x days or weeks until they get to where 90+% of the population is isnt good for retention either. Of course you can make the argument that that kind of progression style and content invalidation/nullification is bad design in and of itself.
I got a lot of hours in GW2 and I never seen any costume brawl. I didn't realize they were actually doing that. There's a lot of content in that game and well I just don't do half of it. So I agree that what you described is pay to win but I would ask where does anyone get costumes? I believe I only have 1 costume myself and this is from years of playing. So far as I can tell the only way to even fight in this brawl minigame is to spend real money on a costume. I doubt that minigame will give anyone an item I cannot get from some other source without spending any money. Only thing you are missing is an achievement really.
For something to be pay to win it must satisfy the exact definition of the word. 1. A game has to have a win condition. Getting to a level faster than someone else when both are at the "same level" does not constitute win as there is no advantage to you over them. I
Arguing pure semantics of a colloquialism isn't a remotely legitimate avenue. 'Win' is a catchall for gaining advantages. Why does this need to be explained over and over, it's a brutally simple concept.
It is a simple concept, winning is one thing advantage is quite another. How hard is to call something P2A which many things are vs P2W which very few are. Clearly it's a matter of degree, but just like size, degree matters.
In EVE you can buy high level characters, which is a clear advantage, but you win nothing. In fact very few MMOs sell items of power, at least directly, even though some players are willing to pay dearly for them.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
For something to be pay to win it must satisfy the exact definition of the word. 1. A game has to have a win condition. Getting to a level faster than someone else when both are at the "same level" does not constitute win as there is no advantage to you over them. I
Agreed.
If there is an economy or pvp there are win conditions: * Winning in an economy is getting the item instead of someone else getting it. * Winning in PvP is usually achieved by defeating the opponent.
Comments
For example the cash shop in two different games could sell the same "p2w" items: in this case 50% xp boosts and stabilizers to increase the chance of success when crafted enchanted gear.
Game A is designed around more of a horizontal progression system where the difference in power between a well geared player and a player with regular gear is relatively small, and power gains as a player levels become progressively smaller. Game B has a vertical progression system with progressively higher power gains and requires a long time to level and or gear up.
The impact on the game of these "p2w" items would be minor in game A because it would be impossible to buy immense power, while the exact same items sold in game B's cash shop would cause massive imbalances between highly geared players that have bought or grinded their way to power and new or more casual players that don't spend up big.
His point was, every F2P game is P2W in someone's opinion because they feel they should pay something for it. It doesn't matter if they would actually need to pay to reach the same conclusion, only that they feel like they have to.
But if we use more realistic and likely examples such as 3 months of grinding (or even 6) vs a $20 mount (a far more likely price) then the conversation can continue.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I'm willing to bet that the average MMO player doesn't stick to a new MMO for even 3 months. So even if they COULD earn everything in the Cash Shop if they played for 4 months, that becomes purely theoretical.
Their experience of the game will be that they played alongside people who spent freely in the Cash Shop in the first week. They were at a disadvantage for the entire time they played (unless they started spending).
The fact that they could have had it all for free if only they had played for X months is totally irrelevant.
In reality, anything that affects gameplay and can be bought for money is p2w. Whether or not you personally use said item to 'win' is irrelevant. Whether you care if someone else uses that item to get an advantage is irrelevant.
This thread is full of people just trying to define a term based on their own personal tastes without even a nod towards objectivity. "Why would I care about XP potions, I just want to play the game anyway, why do I care, etc etc' > well, moron, some people race to max level, some games have extreme benefits for leveling fast like claiming open world housing plots or vendors first. Buying harmless heal potions or revives leads to situations where people can solo group content, etc. Just because you are too naive too see how people can exploit these seemingly benign advantages doesn't make them not real advantages.
it's quite simple, if you can pay to get an advantage, it is pay 2 win. shocking, i know ^^
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
This is why I expect Black Desert to suffer from a p2w syndrome, since even though the cash shop seems very mild (which is good), the game's design amplifies to the extreme the effect of any cash shop items.
I believe such extreme vertical progression systems (coupled with very long leveling/gearing curves) can have a negative impact on any mmo, even if it is a sub based game, and in particular if the game has a pvp focus, because it creates a large barrier to entry for new players.
For example constantly getting pawned by an overgeared player with the prospect of perhaps a year or more before being on the other side of the boot is not very appealing to most people. Or in a pve game the community becomes gradually more and more fragmented, with newer players basically unable to play with veteran players.
So mmo devs have this quandary, how do we give players a sense of progression without shooting ourselves in the foot?
You would think most experienced devs would be aware of this, so why would they implement systems like in Black Desert where high level players/gear gets almost exponentially more powerful? Do they do this precisely because it helps in monetizing the game? Or are they just stupid?
BTW the Korean market may just be a glimpse of where our own western markets are headed if players keep apathetically accepting more aggressive monetization. The only difference IMO is that the Korean developers still make good games at their core, then break them on purpose to encourage you to pay. It's an extremely predatory practice that the West (if these forums are any indication) may be preparing to accept.
Actually, I see it as worse than that. See the P2W discussion has devolved to a point where people now say that cosmetics are P2W because that's why they play the game. So by making it so ambiguous, the line blurs as far as what P2W is. At this point, there is no line. Why this is a problem is that now we will begin to see ACTUAL P2W items make their way into the market because "...since everything is P2W, right?" It's unfortunate, but I think that it's the communities who have led to the inclusion of some of the more questionable items.
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
----------------
To me, I really don't care about how to define P2W. I want to see what the player base is doing. And how those players who are at the top of the game are meeting the major objectives set forth in the game. If the cash shop is a major part of how and why they got to the top and remain at the top, and thus spending real money is required to compete with them, then I don't care if we call it P2W or not. It's a bad game for me.
On the other hand, SWTOR could technically be called P2W with the relate of Hyper-crates on the Auction. People who bought and sold them made tons of money. But in the end, it had little impact on me and my game. It did not impede my progress, I wasn't competing with these players in any circles, I didn't need to go back and use the shop so I was happy.
P2W is also in a F2P game like SWTOR where Winning is more on the end of EA because they made a game that was so high cost that nothing less than half of WOWs subs could sustain it. Yet they switched over to a system where they knew players would spend so much time and money in their cash shop where EA wins a high profit margin. They also spend more development time on the cash shop that they do in their game because it makes them money yet players dont see that EA is screwing players over.
And yes there is P2W in P2P games without a cash shop. Its called gold farmers. But before cash shops and WOW not wanting to ever ban someone because it hurt their bottom line players got ban for gold farming or buying gold if caught. Yes a small group of people were never caught BUT there was such a small group of players that did the P2W in these days that buying gold didnt hurt the overall game one bit. Also it took so long to make currencies in these games that someone couldnt spend $1000 on buying gold, if they did it might take the vendor 2 or 3 months to make that gold.
The ONLY TRUE non affecting PW2 system is to go back to P2P only games and kick anyone who buys gold from the game. Everyone is on a leveling playing field and their Opportunity in the game is only limited in 2 ways, their skills and personal abilities and their ability to pay to play the game. Thats it there will be no other limits. If in a game like ArcheAge where to have no cash shop and everything was in the game, a player was not able to make friendships they will likely fail. If in a game like WOW that couldnt learn to play their character to its fullest they will never get Raid gear. Yet today games want to give everyone a participation trophy and if you want the best stuff in game just spend money on it; then you could be like everyone else there too. No skills, no pushing players to become better. Just a system where Business people make money off you so you feel special.
Also, things that (even for a limited time) give you an advantage, like say Pre-Order exclusive weapons, or selling early access to certain elements.
And PVE can also be competitive in my view, so you can have P2W in games with competitive PvE
http://cdn.funcom.com/ao/crm/2015/dec/web.html
For those who don't know:
buffing "Treatment," "First Aid," and "Computer Literacy" Is HUGE
In a purely PvE game there is no "win" maybe pay 2 rush or pay to get guaranteed item boosts etc.
In a PvP (open world) game P2W can be something as simple as XP boosters because it gives the purchaser an rush advantage and at least in the early stages typically a level / skill point advantage over other players who do not "buy in".
This is taking away the obvious tropes like gear, enhancements etc.
Honestly though... there is no "win" in MMO's... my days of server firsts, and rushing to the inevitable end are over... Maybe as a "40's gamer" I like to slow things down and play it my own way which at times may be throwing some coin at the shop or subbing to a premium option.
But even in my day of competitive play I never felt like I won anything... Maybe it's just these young'ns who never been spanked and got trophies as a kid just for participating...
What are your other Hobbies?
Gaming is Dirt Cheap compared to this...
In EVE you can buy high level characters, which is a clear advantage, but you win nothing. In fact very few MMOs sell items of power, at least directly, even though some players are willing to pay dearly for them.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
If there is an economy or pvp there are win conditions:
* Winning in an economy is getting the item instead of someone else getting it.
* Winning in PvP is usually achieved by defeating the opponent.
Few MMORPGs have neither PvP nor an economy.