Pay to win is an English language phrase. It is defined exactly by what it's words mean.
verb: pay; 3rd person present: pays; past tense: paid; past participle: paid; gerund or present participle: paying
1. give (someone) money that is due for work done, goods received, or a debt incurred.
1.used with the base form of a verb to indicate that the verb is in the infinitive, in particular. expressing purpose or intention.
verb: win; 3rd person present: wins; past tense: won; past participle: won; gerund or present participle: winning
1. be successful or victorious in (a contest or conflict).
The hyphens attached on message boards are largely unnecessary. The phrase is not cryptic- it means exactly what it says. Pay to win.
You have to pay something and gain a win. Or winning, present participle.
This could not be true for any game ever made. It's impossible.A "win" in an MMO can be something as small as getting a mount at level 20. A "win" can also be getting an epic drop while questing. MMOs are a series of wins, many small some large. Even cosmetic items can be considered a "win".
What you are describing is personal perception.
Gameplay is a objective reality. How one feels about gameplay is not.
Yes. It could or could not make a difference to your win state based on game and game mode.Time is an asset being sold.
Saving time in itself is not necessarily a win in all games or modes.
Not always. There are gameplay modes where by one doesn't or isn't expressly rewarded for time invested or there is a factor beyond time that is a core function of a mode.But in MMOs time investment leads to greater rewards, taking a short cut in terms of time is almost cheating.
The one informed by the English language.So what is your actual definition of pay-to-win?
That could potentially be paying to win.being able to pay to remove half the opponents pieces would not be pay-to-win in Chess.
The state of a win or process of winning is defined by the game rules itself. And as you said, losing pieces is not inherent to a win in Chess as the gameplay of Chess does not keep tick on how many pieces one has lost. But does depend on the capture or surrender of an opponent by way of their King piece.
One would be buying a winning advantage. Which could potentially and most likely lead to a win and inequity in play. Now that would be pay to win.
It's actually only defined by the game. The player is free to give up or call it a day when they wish or when a point of perceived inevitable defeat is reached."Winning" is nearly always a consensus decision between the game and the players.
Some games do end regardless of the player's attitude to their situation. Such as in solitaire or minesweeper.
Some do not.
The rules of a game define it's win state/conditions.
Yes. The gameplay informs such by rule and design.Taking WoW - do you win when you clear the top raid on heroic?
Yes. The gameplay informs such by rule and design.when you're in BiS gear?
No. The gameplay does not inform such by rule or design.when you finish a season as gladiator?
No. The gameplay does not inform such by rule or design.when your gear is better than any other player on your server?
No. The gameplay does not inform such by rule or design.when you've collected all the rare drop pets?
No. The gameplay does not inform such by rule or design.when you've got your perfect transmog set?
Inequity via time commitment is contra to fair competition. Time gating ignores mastery wholly.Time is effort. If I spend more time at the gym, I expect to end up fitter then someone who puts in half the time. If I spend more time working on a game, I expect to do better than someone who spends the same amount of time at work & digs out their credit card in-game. In the short term, that might not work out - I could be less skilled, genetically gifted, whatever - but over the long term, time equates to practice equates to skill equates to success
It could be that one player is supremely skilled but short on time. But if an asymmetrical field of play is set up such that he need overcome a factor of time and not skill, then the game state is allowing an inequity between two players of desperate skill.
One of my first apartments had access to the bathroom, living room and bedroom included. Kitchen, washer/dryer and dishwasher were an extra cost per month. Or I could choose to use certain services as needed for a fee- $1.25 in change or so for the washer/dryer.
It's not uncommon in large cities where living space is at a premium.