Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
A Moderator can Close this Thread... Thank you.
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Success and victory is what winning is and that is subjective. You cannot advance an argument that win is not subjective because success and victory are subjective otherwise there would be no such thing as a Pyrrhic victory. Your argument is out of whack .
If we stick to the 'win' being not subjective then the contents of the expansion pack should not matter either as anything in it is win.
You don't see how unreasonable you are being? You are saying "It's not subjective. It's a fact that it's pay to win."
Look back through all your posts and in each one you walk step by step through the process and make it perfectly clear that it is... Pay. That's it. Just PAY. You add the 'to win' part in each post despite no logical step or even an illogical leap to that.
Don't take my word for it. Read your posts, dude. You have done that over and over again. The only one talking in circles is you. This time around you said you are willing to take subjectivity out, and then deem that the objective answer is PAY TO WIN, when AGAIN your steps only conclude PAY.
I'm glad this is in print and not a spoken conversation so that anyone can look back through the posts and see this circle you are going in. No matter how something is explained to you, you will do the same dance each time, completely convinced that it makes sense.
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
I also made it clear that someone is getting something for that "Pay" that others aren't getting.
Kind of important in this topic that probably (read as "critically") shouldn't be left out, eh?
I'm glad it's in print too. So that gamers can see the games you industry people are playing.
Once upon a time....
It is clear that the 'win' part is what is being debated.
In most contests, and in many many games there is a clear win scenario. These are objective wins, that can be confirmed. We all know who 'won' the superbowl, because the rules are clear on this. It is possible to make a list of the winners of such competitions.
In RPG's, and in most MMO's, there is no similar win scenario. We cant look at the list of 'winners' for WoW, because there is no way to make such a list. The 'win' scenario in these games is subjective. The players themselves are setting personal goals, and if they achieve them, they 'win'. This ties back to their individual motivations, and is not an exclusive scenario. There can be many winners, all for different reasons.This is why the definition needs to be all inclusive, if anyone thinks that X is a win... then it is, for them. There is no valid way to dispute their personal win.
In the scenario of P2W, this means that if anyone can get something for money that someone else wants to get by playing the game, it is P2W. You dont have to agree with them about what a win is (for them), you just have to respect their ability to decide for themselves (as they allow you to decide for yourself).
Unlike F2P, P2W is not a markettng term. It is derogitory, or insult term. Its definition is set by the masses, not the gaming companies. This makes the extremely broad definition acceptable, because it is a term of the people. You can not really narrow the scope of a broadly generalized insulting term... it is by its definition, designed to be used to described anything that the user dislikes.
What the fuck did you play? In most reasonable major AAA MMOs this doesn't happen.
Half of your post didn't make any sense.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
"Pay to Win" is simply the term that has been used to describe "a player advantage in-game gained by way of real life money." You can attempt to deny that all you like, it will still mean the exact same thing.
The "Win" is something you all can twist as much as you like, but from P&P / TT RPGs, there was NO "Win" when compared to any other type of game (remember, this was before computers or even consoles were commonplace). It is from that very foundation (the comparison of P&P / TT RPGs to any other game), that there also can be recognized NO "Win Condition" with respect to MMORPGs. Thus, the term of "Win" is in fact in reference to said player advantage.
Thus, the P2W Player Advantage can be gained simply by buying any tradeable item (yes, cosmetics / vanities included) from the cash shop using real money, and then turning that item into in-game currency by way of selling it in-game to another player. Had real money not been used, said advantage would have not otherwise existed.
P2W can also be recognized as a Player Advantage, simply by looking at what was considered Player Advantages in the Subscription Without Cash Shops' Model. Those player advantages include (but are not limited to) "Skill," "Time," Social Aptitude" and "Managing-Organizing Guild-Raid sized Groups." All player advantages stem from real life, if you care to actually think about it.
There is no reason to limit the Time-based Player Advantage, as time is already a limited advantage. This is when compared to P2W, whereas not only has P2W shown itself to be just another player advantage, but P2W has also been shown to be THEE Advantage that trumps all others.
Hence the reason behind this thread (even though there is still nonsense about what P2W is if at all anything). And it is nonsense, because it is clearly defined.
PS. For a topic that has been stated "is not a topic / does not really exist," it does appear for some reason to have swelled up in views and replies, to quite some extent as a thread. Opposition itself, usually is a sign of something to oppose. If the subject were in fact nonsense, the "professionals" would have left it to rest, as "it is just one guy posting nonsense." Or perhaps not?
Unfortunately that doesn't change the debate as advantage is still subjective.
You are defining P2W as you see fit for your argument. Monetizing content is definitely controversial but it is a side affect of taking away other options to pay like a monthly fee. It has the benefit was countering the disparity of time commitment among players in games attaching time with progression and allows a portion of the population to play for free (with varying restrictions) in order to expand the player base for game systems requiring a health population to work.
Most here on each side of the conversation conveniently forget all the benefits and drawbacks to all payment systems. You can't simply say something in a cash shop is P2W because one player can purchase something another cannot or must spend time to obtain it when the payment is based entirely around this concept. It is exactly the same as saying someone paying a sub shouldn't have full access to in game content over someone wanting to play the game entirely free. The game MUST have income over the entirely of it's online existence or it won't exist. You are slapping a definition on anything and everything to vilify something you don't while ignoring all other factors behind each model.
It IS open to debate because your definition is based on ignorance and selective reasoning.
If a payment model exists to bring in cash flow to a company that provides no barrier to content within game other than bypassing time commitment then it IS NOT PAY TO WIN. Stop twisting the reality of the gaming industry to fit your argument. There are many games out there that are entirely based upon spending cash to progress through the game and NO OTHER option reasonably exists. Those are pay to win games! If you have not experienced one then go out and do a little research. They are light years beyond the more common F2P models and simply grouping them all together is inaccurate and false representation in order to advance your propaganda.
There are various payment models which include:
1. Subscription (with and without cash shops)
2. Buy to Play (with and without cash shops)
3 Free to Play (usually entirely dependent upon cash shops)
4. Pay 2 Win (a whale hunting model usually from foreign markets with larger discrepancy of income and life style targeting a specific type pf player willing to spend money over time. The entire model is based around earning nearly all cash flow through 1-5% of the player base and provides NO effective means to in game to reach equal power scaling)
If so many here refuse to discuss payment models in rational detail while open to every benefit and drawback each model brings in order to simply push their agenda of payment model hate then this argument will never go anywhere. Many conversations can spring from this like what drives the need for different payment models is different styles of mmos. In fact that is the core reason why they exist. Subscriptions offer great equality in highly social and interaction mmos. B2P and F2P work great for very casual and solo friendly mmos which have a greater rotation of players. Each company has to look as how their game is designed and what model fits it best. This is reality. Choosing the wrong model can make the difference between the game existing for not. Whether or not a company decides to throw in P2W features is often independent of the base model unless it is designed from the ground up as P2W.
This thread is a mess because few here are bothering to take a realistic and educated view point on the subject of F2P and the reality of why it exists and the type of games it exists in. You CANNOT globally apply the definition of P2W simply to progress your own agenda over drastically different approaches to cash shop models. That is adolescent and lazy.
You stay sassy!
But people are still getting something in game by paying money for it. Those who don't pay up don't get it (or have to work for it in game).
It doesn't matter what anyone thinks that is. It is what it is. Most of us call that P2W.
Ok, here, lets change the term. How about "Pay To Get Something Other Players Can't Have Unless They Work For It". "P2GSOPCHUTW4I". That has a nice ring to it, don't you think?
"It's a P2GSOPCHUTW4I game."
Once upon a time....
I'm merely defining it for what it is.
By the way, by "realistic and educated" do you mean "falls in line" view point? Because that's what this really is. The gaming industry wanting gamers to fall in line with their company line.
Once upon a time....
No. Most do not think that just buying an item from a cash shop means a win or an advantage. Most look at what the item does and decide from that if it is a win or an advantage.
I've never actually heard anyone say just buying an item, any item regardless of what is or does is a win, or advantage.
P2W is not a business model. It is a derogitory term. Insults are not something you discuss rationally, they are terms that are used emotionally. Business does not have an issue with P2W, because they recognize the reality of the term.
Any good business will adjust their business model to both the market, and the product that they are offering... so none of this discussion is in any way relevant... but it is always interesting to see.
Very well stated, Tamanous. Thank you.
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
I had missed that in Tam's post. Thanks for pointing that out. The most common models are:
Subscription is a monthly fee, however it is flawed as a model in many ways. For one, raising a subscription rate is rarely without a loss of subscribers. It is especially hard to do when every other player in the field is staying at the existing price point. MMO devs learned early on to augment that with expansion packs to boost revenue in an otherwise capped business model. Very few MMOs were ever subscription only and even those (Asheron's Call, Lineage 2, EVE Online) eventually introduced box products and other services over time.
Microtransaction is the item mall, the cash shop... the pariah on these forums, however it is just an extension of the expansion box, but divided into individual items. In the west, EA was one of the first to introduce it, creating an entire site in 2003 with transferable in-game tokens that players could buy for various virtual items and game services. The type of items and services offered vary greatly, but most stick to the basic rule that if you can buy it in the shop there is some manner to obtain an equivalent item or reach a similar end through in-game means. Experience/progression boosters tend to be the most popular of these items across the genre. Very few MMOs offer direct advantage for sale. Navy Field, War Rock, and PWI are some of the titles that often come up in conversations about the 'pay to win' microtransactions.
Freemium is the oldest of the three and has taken many forms based on the platform and target audience. Freeware, Nagware, Ad-supported, and Unlimited trials are common takes on the freemium model. Basically, there is a scaled down version for free, and subscribing or microtransactions unlock the rest of the features/gameplay for the player. Like the subscription model, Freemium often has additional virtual goods and services to bolster revenue.
Buy To Play (in MMOs) is essentially a microtransaction game with an up front client fee. See above.
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
Before the subscription model we had pay per hour. AOL and TSN were, iirc, $6.00 per hour. The subscription plan was going to fix all that.
The people calling for F2P were the people demanding subscription back then. I really just think it is people who are cheap.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Well written indeed, except for one issue...
It does not take into consideration the FACT, that this entire thread is based on seeking more methods of accomplishing an intended goal, from a developers' position.
That seems to be the part that completely slips most people's minds, while everyone just spews out "their side of some imaginary argument that their voices tell them exists"... that does not even exist in the topic to begin with.
You cannot discuss your OP without discussing P2W advantages as you cannot discuss issues in a vacuum and your original post had a convoluted system. People are discussing the pay system and P2W because it is relevant and you did ask how to reduce P2W advantages which presupposes that most developers build in these P2W advantages . That is the impression I got from your original post and title.
I am just a housewife who plays games and I play games I enjoy irrespective of what system they use for payment. So I have no agenda here in case ^^ I am called on it.
Winning is part of the parameters of the game.
If someone loses a game and claims they won, they're wrong.
Winning is not subjective.
If someone loses by checkmate in chess, then flips the board over and says "I win!", they haven't won.
In MMORPGs you are rewarded for killing mobs and for a few other activities. These activities are the only place where winning exists. If a purchase gives you an advantage over non-payers in these activities, it's P2W. Most MMORPGs don't do this.
Even if you weren't wrong, your argument implies every single purchased thing is winning and P2W, which should sound obviously wrong to you.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Simpler yet, a choice of A, B, or C:
A. NO cash shop
B. Only cosmetics in cash shop
C. Only cosmetics and a way to buy gametime with ingame gold in cash shop.
A is not an option as long-term you can't sustain profitability
B only works for some games longterm, not all games are suitable for cosmetic only cash-shop. Works for mobas
C again not possible for every type of game
Would be nice to have though especially no cash shop. I have turned away from countless games now because of cash shops. Fortunately / unfortunately at this point removing them will not bring me back, I have become accustomed to life without the need to play every game or play the games with any sort of passion. Cash shops have been my passion breaker.How/Where is winning defined for a MMORPG? If it is part of the game, it should be clearly defined, right?
Competitions/Contest have a clearly defined 'win' scenario, even if they are not a game. However, not all games have such a clear structure, especially if they were designed to be ongoing. The win/lose scenario also creates an 'end' that is not condusive to ongoing gameplay.
If the simple combat scenario is the 'game', and whomever is alive at the end is the 'winner' then there is a lot left unexplained in most MMORPG's. In a FPS, this would be fairly applicable, especially if there are matches of some sort. However, for a MMORPG (PVE Specifically) this generally doesnt work, as there is no clear beginning or end. Both mobs and players respawn, and goals are nebulous as well. Of course, we also have MMORPG's that dont have any combat... which really turn this whole thing upside down.
Lastly, there are the rewards. If you can obtain the rewards, without having to face the challenge, is that winning?
Effectively every commercial game is P2W for someone. This is what makes the term so effective. It is just an insulting form of 'commercial' that is used to describe what would be normal business in derogitory manner.
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