"Pay to Win"

[Deleted]

There is no fallacy.
There is an outright refusal to the one thing that very easily counters much of my argument, my main point.
That you cannot do what was asked.

If you can, do it.
Constant refusal makes it clear you are lying.

And don't be so quick to call on the mods, considering you have called me an idiot, that I required special treatment despite not being the only one with those options, and other comments.
Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

All I have done is point out a refusal to do something I have been told is simple, is obvious.
When the reality is very different.

Your actions alone dictate how successful my argument is.
You either prove or disprove it by your willingness to put together something described as being very easy to do, yet proving very hard to do.

You demanded I provided an opinion based on that definition, and myself and other have pointed out how poor that definition was.
And despite not being the only one, you have singled me out on more than one occasion.
You are a sore loser.

You spend more time arguing I am wrong instead of doing what would prove that.

Pay cash to get an in game advantage. It still stands, as promised, nothing more then the definition, as you came with nothing new.

- - - Updated - - -

I made a true statement. My grandson understands things more than what's clearly been explained to you by multiple people. You're using your opinion to argue facts.

Yea what i said is a true statement as well, it explains a lot. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree as you have shown us.

- - - Updated - - -

In what way is he winning, though? He has mythic gear. So do you all. Is he better than you? Does he pull more DPS? Is he a better PvPer? How is he "winning"? There's nothing he can do that I, as a player who has never paid for a carry, can't do.

So you cant pay to win because other people have "won" before you did?? That would mean that every pay to win game can only be won by 1 person, everyone after that cant win because others already have won.

[Deathquoi]

Pay cash to get an in game advantage. It still stands, as promised, nothing more then the definition, as you came with nothing new.

- - - Updated - - -



Yea what i said is a true statement as well, it explains a lot. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree as you have shown us.

If your definition is literally "paying money to get an in-game advantage", no matter how small, here's a list of pay to win games:

Team Fortress 2
Dragon Age Inquisition
Mass Effect 3
Battlefield 1
Rainbow 6 Siege
XCOM 2
Dark Souls 3

I mean, literally any game with DLC or microtransactions that aren't purely cosmetic meets your definition of pay to win.

- - - Updated - - -

So you cant pay to win because other people have "won" before you did?? That would mean that every pay to win game can only be won by 1 person, everyone after that cant win because others already have won.

I didn't say that at all, not sure where you got that from. What I said is that this person, despite spending a ton of money on the game, still relies on other players who are not spending money to carry him. He is not a PvP god, he is not a good raider, he is just a guy with some fancy gear.

[ComputerNerd]

Pay cash to get an in game advantage. It still stands, as promised, nothing more then the definition, as you came with nothing new.

- - - Updated - - -



Yea what i said is a true statement as well, it explains a lot. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree as you have shown us.

- - - Updated - - -



So you cant pay to win because other people have "won" before you did?? That would mean that every pay to win game can only be won by 1 person, everyone after that cant win because others already have won.

What I have been "promised" is what you refuse to do.
Describe ALL of that in a single post.
No, having it in a dozen places around the thread does not count as ONE post.
You are again lying, by saying what I asked for is what I got.
Not even close.

What I asked for was all those extra clarifications and additions that you think are necessary to define who is being pad, what characteristics of an advantage makes it good or bad, why that constitutes "winning", and what exactly it was that according to anklestabber that "fundamentally" changed with the token.

The reality is being able to pay cash for something that has in-game value was introduced way before even the pet, as soon as there was any way of redeeming a code for something connected to the game.

It came at least as early as the TCG codes.
How direct it is remains irrelevant, since you arbitrarily dictate that gold to buy a boost, which is then dependant on the wonders of RNG counts, but dismiss other trades.
You do not buy an "advantage" with cash, you trade cash for gold which in turn buys something which "might" then gain you something which by a personal and completely artificial differentiation is deemed the only advantage worth talking about.
It is a trade of multiple steps, a long way from what you describe, and present a long time before the token.
Hell as long as you have been able to trade with a player a code of ANY sort, it has been possible.
So that came with the gametime cards even, or why not when the game license first required a code, from the very start.
The trade of a code bought for cash for in-game gold.
That has been around as long as I remember.

Having the full game over the trial is an "advantage", you gain player power due to increased cap and less restrictions.
And that is way more direct and impactful as an advantage than what you claim.
So every expansion which allows more player power, when bought from the developer (with cash) - as in every legitimate one, is paying for a LOT of advantages, including exactly what you defined as wrong, player power.

[xindralol]

not pay to win, but play a LOT to have a huge advantage in rated pvp

[Deleted]

If your definition is literally "paying money to get an in-game advantage", no matter how small, here's a list of pay to win games:

Team Fortress 2
Dragon Age Inquisition
Mass Effect 3
Battlefield 1
Rainbow 6 Siege
XCOM 2
Dark Souls 3

I mean, literally any game with DLC or microtransactions that aren't purely cosmetic meets your definition of pay to win.

- - - Updated - - -



I didn't say that at all, not sure where you got that from. What I said is that this person, despite spending a ton of money on the game, still relies on other players who are not spending money to carry him. He is not a PvP god, he is not a good raider, he is just a guy with some fancy gear.

And all those games do have a p2w element in them. Because you get an advantage over other players that did not pay to get these items.

It doesn't matter that he isn't a pvp god or that other players are better. He is starting point is better then other players who didn't pay. He didn't have to put in the time to play the game in order to get to were he is, he bought his way.

- - - Updated - - -

What I have been "promised" is what you refuse to do.
Describe ALL of that in a single post.
No, having it in a dozen places around the thread does not count as ONE post.
You are again lying, by saying what I asked for is what I got.
Not even close.

What I asked for was all those extra clarifications and additions that you think are necessary to define who is being pad, what characteristics of an advantage makes it good or bad, why that constitutes "winning", and what exactly it was that according to anklestabber that "fundamentally" changed with the token.

The reality is being able to pay cash for something that has in-game value was introduced way before even the pet, as soon as there was any way of redeeming a code for something connected to the game.

It came at least as early as the TCG codes.
How direct it is remains irrelevant, since you arbitrarily dictate that gold to buy a boost, which is then dependant on the wonders of RNG counts, but dismiss other trades.
You do not buy an "advantage" with cash, you trade cash for gold which in turn buys something which "might" then gain you something which by a personal and completely artificial differentiation is deemed the only advantage worth talking about.
It is a trade of multiple steps, a long way from what you describe, and present a long time before the token.
Hell as long as you have been able to trade with a player a code of ANY sort, it has been possible.
So that came with the gametime cards even, or why not when the game license first required a code, from the very start.
The trade of a code bought for cash for in-game gold.
That has been around as long as I remember.

Having the full game over the trial is an "advantage", you gain player power due to increased cap and less restrictions.
And that is way more direct and impactful as an advantage than what you claim.
So every expansion which allows more player power, when bought from the developer (with cash) - as in every legitimate one, is paying for a LOT of advantages, including exactly what you defined as wrong, player power.

Paying cash to get an in game advantage, it still stands. Nothing you have said here hasn't been addressed.

[Vorality]

Even in WoW's current state, if someone would literally be able to buy all the gear/legendary items they want through a vendor with real life money, it still wouldn't be pay to win. The important word being WIN here. Outside of World/Server firsts...there is no possible way to pay to win in WoW. I see people saying "Paying cash to get an advantage" - but it's just simply not possible in WoW. WoW has become such a Single Player MMO *laugh*...that I couldn't care less if some other player bought items to get the best possible gear. Why does it matter to me? It doesn't affect me or anyone else as a player at all...thus they're not getting any advantage over anyone.

The people that would theoretically spend money on in-game items would only be saving time to inevitably do more damage in a raid that doesn't matter (or at least should matter to others) This of course would be the case outside of world/server first kills. PvP is completely irrelevant for the most part when it comes to gear. It takes, what?, a week at most to get all the artifact traits unlocked (Not the new ones), about 2 weeks at most if you play regularly to get the new ones as well...and this is not with M+ spamming.

The only pay to win you could have in WoW is if a player can add currency to their account via real money, and use this currency to receive unobtainable and slightly stronger gear than what a non-paying player could receive just by playing the game.

Blizzard 100% should not go a Pay to Win route...but they definitely should add more "Pay to Save Time" options. Aka, being able to buy Artifact Power, Knowledge, Exp potions, etc. There should obviously be limits to these things, like not allowing a person to purchase AK passed what is currently available to others in-game, and putting roadblocks behind AP gains where a player would only be able to put so much purchased AP into a weapon so that it doesn't exceed their "Mains" current AP.

[Deathquoi]

And all those games do have a p2w element in them. Because you get an advantage over other players that did not pay to get these items.

It doesn't matter that he isn't a pvp god or that other players are better. He is starting point is better then other players who didn't pay. He didn't have to put in the time to play the game in order to get to were he is, he bought his way.

- - - Updated - - -

Ok good, at least we've established that you think everything is pay to win and you don't actually know what pay to win means. Good enough for me.

[ComputerNerd]

And all those games do have a p2w element in them. Because you get an advantage over other players that did not pay to get these items.

It doesn't matter that he isn't a pvp god or that other players are better. He is starting point is better then other players who didn't pay. He didn't have to put in the time to play the game in order to get to were he is, he bought his way.

- - - Updated - - -



Paying cash to get an in game advantage, it still stands. Nothing you have said here hasn't been addressed.

Correction - nothing has.
Your statement is rubbish, plain and simple.
You simply ignore anyone disagreeing with you.
Constantly refusing is not equal to addressing.

I asked you to put it in one statement, you refuse and still claimed that you provided what I wanted.
Your argument is inconsistent, fragmented.
That is why you should put it all together.
But you refuse because you know that argument is full of holes.

You repeating the same statement does not improve it.
You don't argue why I am wrong, you just keep saying I am.
That is not addressing anything, but more sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending I don't exist.

Actually address it, instead of telling me you have.

[cqwrteur]

Legion is P2W. Regardless how a fan boy denies it, it is.

[Aquamonkey]

The only way to win WoW is to stop playing it, and that's free. Therefore, WoW is not P2W.

[cheesefan141]

"Pay to accelerate" and "pay to look cool" are not the same as "pay to win". You can access all the big boy stuff with just the subscription, in my experience.

[Montanahax]

What is YOUR definition of "pay to win"?

As it relates to WoW, do you believe the game is now pay to win, or not at all pay to win?

Real money to buy tokens>sell token for gold>use gold to pay carry runs>win. You pay to win

[Deleted]

Ok good, at least we've established that you think everything is pay to win and you don't actually know what pay to win means. Good enough for me.

Yea, same here, you have no clue what p2w entails, as it doesn't matter to you that one can spend money on the game, and it doesn't matter that you can buy power, its not p2w according to you.

- - - Updated - - -

Correction - nothing has.
Your statement is rubbish, plain and simple.
You simply ignore anyone disagreeing with you.
Constantly refusing is not equal to addressing.

I asked you to put it in one statement, you refuse and still claimed that you provided what I wanted.
Your argument is inconsistent, fragmented.
That is why you should put it all together.
But you refuse because you know that argument is full of holes.

You repeating the same statement does not improve it.
You don't argue why I am wrong, you just keep saying I am.
That is not addressing anything, but more sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending I don't exist.

Actually address it, instead of telling me you have.

Paying cash to get an in game advantage, it still stand. Again, come up with new stuff, not stuff that has already been addressed.

[ComputerNerd]

Yea, same here, you have no clue what p2w entails, as it doesn't matter to you that one can spend money on the game, and it doesn't matter that you can buy power, its not p2w according to you.

- - - Updated - - -



Paying cash to get an in game advantage, it still stand. Again, come up with new stuff, not stuff that has already been addressed.

You know full well that is not sufficient
There are lots of bits scattered around the thread, with wow specific clarifications.
Even putting those altogether fails to describe pay to win if you have tailored it to a specific game.
If you cannot take your definition as it is, and apply that to another game then it isn't good enough.

You keep lying, over and over again.
And keep refusing again and again.

You are again being a hypocrite, saying that I need to come up with "something new"< when you are guilty of parroting the same flawed phrase repeatedly.
I argued many individual points, you just say the same thing many times.

You lost the argument, because you refuse to do what you cannot.
Properly define pay to win.

You dont come up with any reason why I am wrong, you just repeat yourself.
Simply saying that I am.

[Tharkkun]

Real money to buy tokens>sell token for gold>use gold to pay carry runs>win. You pay to win

You're not paying Blizzard anything additional. You're selling your tokens and paying players for their services. I've yet to ever see Blizzard advertise gold, carry runs, arena boosts, etc, because they don't. Everything you list is obtainable without spending a single penny other than your monthly subscription.

- - - Updated - - -

Pay cash to get an in game advantage. It still stands, as promised, nothing more then the definition, as you came with nothing new.

- - - Updated - - -



Yea what i said is a true statement as well, it explains a lot. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree as you have shown us.

- - - Updated - - -



So you cant pay to win because other people have "won" before you did?? That would mean that every pay to win game can only be won by 1 person, everyone after that cant win because others already have won.

Actually nothing you've said is true. Blizzard isn't charging players for items to win the game. Players are charging players. Oh and my step-daughter isn't blood so good try.

No one can pay $$$$ to Blizzard for an advantage. It doesn't exist. Rationalizing what other players charge using common currency is different. Open your eyes or keep arguing like a blind man because you don't understand the difference. We ALL understand what you're trying to say but you're wrong. That's not how P2W works.

[Vaelorian]

if one guild decides to buy all the best gear possible from the ah and another guild does buy no gear at all from the ah, you say to me that the first guild will not have an advantage over the second guild in the progression race?

Lets assume that this actually happens.... the first guild is already toooooo late into the progression race to begin with. So while perhaps it will "beat" the 2nd guild, it won't hold a candle to the world 100 race

[Aquamonkey]

No one can pay $$$$ to Blizzard for an advantage. It doesn't exist..

Having gold isn't an advantage? Will you give it all to me then?

[Raelbo]

Yea, same here, you have no clue what p2w entails, as it doesn't matter to you that one can spend money on the game, and it doesn't matter that you can buy power, its not p2w according to you.


Paying cash to get an in game advantage, it still stand. Again, come up with new stuff, not stuff that has already been addressed.

Cool. Let's say I accept your definition of P2W and therefore WoW is P2W. Please explain how this is a bad thing?

Congratulations. I used to think P2W was this awful terrible thing for everyone. But now that people like you have decided to extend the definition (legitimately so) to include WoW tokens, suddenly P2W is something that can easily be dismissed as completely benign. It used to be that if a game was P2W I would know to avoid it, but now with people calling everything P2W, simply being P2W tells me nothing.

So really what exactly is the point of the argument anyway? So what if WoW is now P2W? You have just proven that being P2W doesn't really mean anything anyway, so why bother with the term?

- - - Updated - - -

Having gold isn't an advantage? Will you give it all to me then?

Nice strawman!

Gold doesn't have to give you an advantage to have value. For example, I have enough gold, and make enough simply playing the game the way I enjoy playing it, that the ability to buy more doesn't give me any advantage whatsoever. The fact that I, like many others, have been buying tokens since they became available, to cover my game time proves this.

The reason I won't just give my gold away has nothing to do with me losing some advantage. Simply having that gold doesn't give me any magical boost, unless I spend it. But as it so happens I tend not to spend it (hence why I have so much of it). I am not going to give it away because it has monetary value and represents time and effort I put into earning it.

[potis]

This thread is still going with the same LFR raiders (Being polite, the correct term gets me banned ) thinking buying gear runs is P2W .

Then again, if i was running around in 860 gear so long inside the expansion i would think the same if i was missing a few IQ points.

[Prawnapple]

Well TECHNICALLY... if you have money irl you can buy tokens and sell the tokens for gold and use that gold to buy epic gear for a newly levelled character. So in that way, it's kind of pay to win, but only to a very chilled extent.