"Pay to Win"

[pateuvasiliu]

So under your definition every single game is pay to win? Even offline Skyrim/Fallout/Minesweeper/Solitaire? Because you could always get ahead by paying real dollars to some powerleveler to level you up or progress you in the game.

So?

The developers don't support it.

- - - Updated - - -

Pay to win is also a term people invented.. What is your point?



If the current game is P2W, then those were aswell. People have been selling boost runs since vanilla..

There's a difference between Blizzard condoning that and Blizzard banning that.

Don't be obtuse.

[Quibble]

There's a difference between Blizzard condoning that and Blizzard banning that.

Don't be obtuse.

Blizzard have never banned people for boosting for gold

Stop shit posting.

[pateuvasiliu]

Blizzard have never banned people for boosting for gold

Stop shit posting.

Boosting for gold? Why would that be bannable? That's not pay to win. It's only pay to win if you obtained the gold from a chinese gold seller. But that's bannable.

I'm talking about boosting for real life money.

[Grimlokh]

Do my eyes deceive me? Jaylock has been banned? Justice has been served today. Like 3 years late. Better late than never I guess...

[Deleted]

You said it yourself, describing the very process that existed for years before the token.

There are two entirely and fundamentally different things. For the average player, the option of safely buying gold did not exist before. It was not an option the majority even considered because of the risks involved. Blizzard also actively fought against it.

It's like arguing that it's ok to put botting in the game because some people cheat and use third party botting software. Do you honestly think that nothing in the game would change if suddenly rotation and gathering bots were build right into the official client? Because that's the argument you're trying to make here. Your argument is simply not convincing whatsoever.

Pre-order a game, get to play it earlier than someone else.
Oh wait, that makes it pay to win surely because you gain an advantage.

If you can pay more to get access to the game before others, then that is absolutely pay2win. Being able to get into an xpac before the rush is an absolutely massive advantage, and selling it for money is extreme and blatant pay2win.

[ComputerNerd]

There are two entirely and fundamentally different things. For the average player, the option of safely buying gold did not exist before. It was not an option the majority even considered because of the risks involved. Blizzard also actively fought against it.

It's like arguing that it's ok to put botting in the game because some people cheat and use third party botting software. Do you honestly think that nothing in the game would change if suddenly rotation and gathering bots were build right into the official client? Because that's the argument you're trying to make here. Your argument is simply not convincing whatsoever.



If you can pay more to get access to the game before others, then that is absolutely pay2win. Being able to get into an xpac before the rush is an absolutely massive advantage, and selling it for money is extreme and blatant pay2win.

No, you said it yourself.
You keep changing the definition to suit.
Firstly you said it didnt exist, which was wrong.
Now you say it must require "safe" buying.

You can't make up your mind what defines pay to win.
You change it every time you lose an argument.
That proves how stupid it is.

A pre-order doesn't necessarily cost more, so you aren't "paying" for an advantage, when there is no extra payment involved in all cases.

You can't say the game has become something when the token changed nothing mechanically about what can and can't be traded.
There is nothing "fundamental" being changed.
Throwing around your latest buzzword to try and join the cool crowd, but like many just look stupid.
You can either prove that or shut up and redeem yourself slightly.
But I suspect you will just do what you did many times already.

Tell me how you changing your definition each time proves any argument.
It does not.

[Deleted]

You cuold say:"Well, if both Blizzard and State stop selling Gold/Weapon, everything cuold be better!". False, becasue both in WoW and in real life, there will always be someone willing to buy Gold and Weapons from illegal sources. Blizzard decision to sell gold is perfectly in line with a anti gold seller policy.

How can you make such a claim?
Forget about P2W and about WOW, do you know the huge difference between countries that allow selling weapons and those who do not in terms of number of deaths?
Seriously what were you thinking about to make such a stupid assertion?

[Deleted]

You keep changing the definition to suit.

I have not changed anything. You're desperately trying to claim that some hackers coming up with cheats, or some chinese farmers selling gold outside the game against the ToS -- for which people have consistently been banned -- is somehow relevant. But it is clearly not.

You can't make up your mind what defines pay to win.

I have stated the definition multiple times, and so far I have not heard any convincing argument for why the definition is bad or why some other definition is better: "Pay2win is the ability to pay cash for an in-game advantage."

A pre-order doesn't necessarily cost more, so you aren't "paying" for an advantage, when there is no extra payment involved in all cases.

If there is no extra payment, then it is obviously not pay2win.

You can't say the game has become something when the token changed nothing mechanically about what can and can't be traded. There is nothing "fundamental" being changed.

That is precisely what I am saying. Blizzard starting to sell gold via the token mechanism fundamentally changed the game into pay2win. It is an absolutely massive and fundamental difference to some hackers or farmers illegally selling gold in the past. It changes everything.

[Banard]

What did you win? Gear 4 months after its relevant?

As i said 5 times in this thread already, only people that have no clue how the game works and what it is think of it this way or people that believe raiding is some hard thing to do.

the same thing you win in every other mmo that is pay to win....

[Deleted]

pay2win means spending real $$$, not spending gold. Gold is easily earned in game without spending a single cent of real $$$, hence how it is that tokens are sold for gold in the first place....



No. Of course not. Don't be silly.



You can earn the gold in-game without spending $$$ and buy the boost that way. Like I said, buying a boost for gold is not p2w.

Except you can "pay" for gold from Blizz by buying tokens with real money. So it is really simple...

You PAY money to get token, which you sell ingame for gold, which you use ingame to WIN something you would otherwise not be able to get yourself because you are just not good enough...

Aka:= you PAY to WIN.

Case Closed.

[faithbane]

Although it hurts me to respond to a jaylock thread.. I must agree that WoW contains pay to win elements. Now before you rage reply to my comment, actually read it. if you can use real money in a game to boost your characters actual power, basically anything above cosmetic, it is considered pay to win. It doesn't have to be like the Chinese browser games where u get - "you win" level legendary items that you can't get without real money or takes impossibly long to grind said items, for it to be pay to win.

For that reason the WoW-token system in game becomes pay to win because you go for real money > gold > power increase. Yes there is an intermediary step added in between but it doesn't change the fact that I converted real money into power increase without earning it in game. With the gold you get from tokens you can:

- buy highest BOE items in game through AH
- Buy BMAH items which can sell current tier ilvl items through gearboxes or directly
- Buy my way into a mythic raid and go afk through the whole thing and still gather highest ilvl gear available in game in the process
- Get carried through the pvp ladder. (I understand you actually need to contribute in arenas to a degree but you can literally go afk in chain RBG runs and still get rewards.

Also, although if this was the only thing, I wouldn't count it as "pay to win" but since the store sells some of the most OP pets like ragnros and the monk exclusively and there are now WQs, pet battle "raids" and more coming. It looks like pet battles are getting integrated into more aspects of the game and it could count somewhat as pay to win in addition to everything listed above.

I know some of you will say bla bla but you can get the gold yourself hurrr durr its so easy. That is not the point. The point is you pay real money to increase your power which I have to invest significant amount of time in the game to do myself.

[Raelbo]

Except you can "pay" for gold from Blizz by buying tokens with real money. So it is really simple...

You PAY money to get token, which you sell ingame for gold, which you use ingame to WIN something you would otherwise not be able to get yourself because you are just not good enough...

Aka:= you PAY to WIN.

Case Closed.

Irrelevant.

The term "pay2win" carries with it the implication that not paying = not winning.

But you're right, it is really simple (you just got it wrong):

You play the game casually, don't do anything particularly special and you get enough gold to pay for a boost without spending a cent of $$$.

Aka you don't pay, you can still win without too much difficulty.

Case Closed.

[Deleted]

The term "pay2win" carries with it the implication that not paying = not winning.

It does not. That would not be a meaningful definition, since just by having a minute theoretical chance of winning without paying would turn any P2W game into non-P2W. Pay2win just means you increase your chances of winning by paying.

You play the game casually, don't do anything particularly special and you get enough gold to pay for a boost without spending a cent of $$$

And someone that does buy gold can buy more boosts and get better gear than you. A.k.a., "win". Straight up pay2win. Case Closed.

[Deleted]

Irrelevant.

The term "pay2win" carries with it the implication that not paying = not winning.

But you're right, it is really simple (you just got it wrong):

You play the game casually, don't do anything particularly special and you get enough gold to pay for a boost without spending a cent of $$$.

Aka you don't pay, you can still win without too much difficulty.

Case Closed.

I am sorry, you just spin the definition of p2w to fit your argument. A lot of mobile or Facebook games that feature p2w mechanics allow you to also obtain the same items during gameplay. It just takes a really, really, really long time. So some people "pay to win" instead of "play to win".. being able to "play to win" doesn't make it impossible to also "pay to win".

[Elim Garak]

I am sorry, you just spin the definition of p2w to fit your argument. A lot of mobile or Facebook games that feature p2w mechanics allow you to also obtain the same items during gameplay. It just takes a really, really, really long time. So some people "pay to win" instead of "play to win".. being able to "play to win" doesn't make it impossible to also "pay to win".

You just don't understand the term. If you can play 2 win there can be no pay 2 win no matter what you can buy. These two things are mutually exclusive. It's either play or pay 2 win. And the win is always about direct competition with other players. Pay and kill everyone in PvP, Pay and dominate the leaderboards, Pay and dominate damage meters. Do you get it now?

[Deleted]

You just don't understand the term. If you can play 2 win there can be no pay 2 win no matter what you can buy. These two things are mutually exclusive. It's either play or pay 2 win. And the win is always about direct competition with other players. Pay and kill everyone in PvP, Pay and dominate the leaderboards, Pay and dominate damage meters. Do you get it now?

No I do not, because they can and are not mutually exclusive. Also the win can be anything, "an achievement", "gear", "progression", "a pet or mount".. But as we have fundamentally different visions on what we consider to be "p2w" the argument cannot be resolved and thus discussing this further is futile. We will just have to agree to disagree as nothing I say will change your opinion and vice versa.

[Raelbo]

Although it hurts me to respond to a jaylock thread.. I must agree that WoW contains pay to win elements. <snip>

I agree with the point you are making 100%. But it's largely irrelevant, a red herring to what the debate is actually about: The reason this topic is debated is that some people come with the argument of:

-Pay2win is bad
-faithbane's argument proves that tokens make WoW Pay2win
-Tokens are bad

The massive fallacy in their argument of course is that their definition of Pay2win is completely different from yours. That which makes "pay2win" bad is not mandatory in your definition.

Which is why, as far as I am concerned, as long as people who read the term "pay2win" insist on classifying it as a negative thing, then we cannot accept your perfectly rational semantic explanation of why tokens make WoW "pay2win". Because while you're technically correct, it actually completely misses the argument that is actually happening.

I know some of you will say bla bla but you can get the gold yourself hurrr durr its so easy. That is not the point.

Actually it is the point. People only want to have these arguments to try and prove that WoW is pay2win, because they wish to use it in the logically fallacious argument I showed above. If it is perfectly feasible to obtain the gold without paying $$$ for it then it becomes moot what label you put on it. All that is important is that it isn't a problem.

The point is you pay real money to increase your power which I have to invest significant amount of time in the game to do myself.

While this is true, have you ever thought of the practical implications of players actually buying enough tokens to achieve this?

Sure, one player with a shitload of cash could, conceiveably, buy enough tokens to make a significant impact to his power level. That does not, however, mean that any significant number would be able to. Because of the way the token transactions work, the more people that try to do this, the more tokens would land up on the AH, the cheaper they would become.

In other words, the game system is self regulating to ensure that tokens will never become a mechanism which people will be forced to use to remain competitive.

Pay2win is only considered a bad thing because it forces everyone to either pay cash, or accept that they will never be able to compete in the game. Tokens can never be this.

So really what is the point in proving that tokens = pay2win, when all your audience hears is "tokens are bad, m'kay"?

- - - Updated - - -

It does not. That would not be a meaningful definition, since just by having a minute theoretical chance of winning without paying would turn any P2W game into non-P2W. Pay2win just means you increase your chances of winning by paying.

Semantically true of course. But utterly useless for this conversation. In effect, by your argument, P2W is neither a bad, nor a good thing. It only becomes a bad thing when it is implemented in such a way that it starts to negatively affect the game.

The problem is that to your audience does not understand that. Pay2win is considered by almost everyone to be a bad thing because it forces players to either pay, or have a second game experience. Unless you can break that negative association, then the definition you have provided is not helpful.

And someone that does buy gold can buy more boosts and get better gear than you. A.k.a., "win". Straight up pay2win. Case Closed.

That's fine. But please explain how this is bad thing? Oh right, it's not.

So please explain the value in proving that something benign fits some semantic definition of pay2win when everyone's actual (flawed) understanding is that pay2win is the spawn of satan, something to be reviled, hated and abhored on principle?

[Deleted]

The reason this topic is debated is that some people come with the argument of:

-Pay2win is bad
-faithbane's argument proves that tokens make WoW Pay2win
-Tokens are bad

You got this wrong. "Pay2win" is not inherently bad or good, it's just a classification.

What the argument is that many people don't enjoy pay2win games, because they are not an even playing field and come with all kinds of issues that make the experience worse. And since tokens are clearly a pay2win mechanic, they make WoW pay2win, which makes it less enjoyable, which means that WoW would be more enjoyable (for them) if the token was removed.

But some people do enjoy pay2win games. Usually because they lack the time/discipline/skill/whatever to perform at as high level as they would like to, so they want the ability to compensate by paying money.

Pay2win is only considered a bad thing because it forces everyone to either pay cash, or accept that they will never be able to compete in the game. Tokens can never be this.

This is not true. Different people consider pay2win bad for different reasons (and some consider it good). Personally I consider pay2win bad because I want the game to provide a level playing field, where "winning" is determined only through the time/effort/skill/dedication that you put into the game. For example, one of the aspects of WoW that I enjoyed in vanilla and TBC was gold making. I was good at it and I was probably in the top 1% of my realm in terms of gold. The ability to buy gold means that there is absolutely no point in that aspect of the game for me. Someone can simply whip out their credit card and buy gold, so the playing field is not even between us.

Further, once the developer makes the choice that pay2win is acceptable, it creates perverse incentives. There is always the pressure for the developer to make the non-extra-paying perform little worse and the advantages on sale for money a little better, so that the company makes more money (which is their goal). I've seen that destroy my enjoyment of so many games that I have no interest in pay2win games anymore.

[Elim Garak]

No I do not, because they can and are not mutually exclusive. Also the win can be anything, "an achievement", "gear", "progression", "a pet or mount".. But as we have fundamentally different visions on what we consider to be "p2w" the argument cannot be resolved and thus discussing this further is futile. We will just have to agree to disagree as nothing I say will change your opinion and vice versa.

The argument was resolved pages ago. You are wrong. You don't know what p2w is. You just seem to be unable to give up, because internet. There will be no agreeing to disagreeing because having delusions is not disagreeing - it's just being wrong. You either accept reality or continue pointless arguing.

[caervek]

The term "pay2win" carries with it the implication that not paying = not winning.

That's not really true, in many game with P2W elements (like WoW) you can do just as well without paying the extra, it just requires significantly more time/luck/skill/etc.