"Pay to win"

[KYH]

It's really sad (to me) how people validate themselves and their accomplishments from a videogame like this, because honestly, no one gives a shit about this stuff outside of this game/forums and I don't think a lot of people realize that.

If people wanna spend money for time, who cares? Illidan world first was 12 years ago. This has literally all been done and it's like people can't wrap their heads around that concept.

But then again I suppose this game is like life because there will always be people, who, no matter the circumstances, will always be trying to keep up but can't.

[Daymanmb]

you would play the game anyway, so you can´t take that 2-3 months of subscription into account

If a boost is going to cost you roughly the same amount in sub fees to level, why wouldnt you boost? You save a ton of time for roughly the same price. It seems like a no brainer for a new player.

[Tanduita]

If a boost is going to cost you roughly the same amount in sub fees to level, why wouldnt you boost? You save a ton of time for roughly the same price. It seems like a no brainer for a new player.

so you are going to buy the boost in 2-3 months and set your account on inactive until then, so that it equals out moneywise? [X] doubt

[Daymanmb]

so you are going to buy the boost in 2-3 months and set your account on inactive until then, so that it equals out moneywise? [X] doubt

No? Now you can finish leveling to 60 and spend that time gearing up before June first. I think youre misunderstanding what Im saying.

[Lolites]

Paying real life money to gain an in-game advantage is the litteral definition of pay2win, regardless of how small or minor the advantage is. Skipping the lvling process up to level 58 certainly qualifies, thats 2-3 months for a casual player.

didnt casual players have like two years where they could level to 60? and they paid for gametime while doing so, so people who will keep their character from vanila instead of starting completely new one use p2w feature, according to your definition...

you would be right if TBC started with clean slate, everyone on lvl 1 just boosters on 58, but now, with people using their chars from vanila, what advantage you gain by boosting?

compared to "Vanilla Joe" who:
1. is higher level
2. have better gear
3. have faster mount
4. have skilled profesions
5. have more gold and mats and whatever

someone who use boost is actualy WORSE of than someone who played vanilla... and, unless the Vanilla Joe hated every minute of playing it, its not like the time is a factor, he used the time to play the game he loves, so whats the issue?

only issue i can see with boost is some people who leveled "normaly" (most of them via dungeon boosting anyway) see having lvl 60 as achievment, and they have to protect their fragile ego

[Tanduita]

No? Now you can finish leveling to 60 and spend that time gearing up before June first. I think youre misunderstanding what Im saying.

you compare it moneywise, which does not make sense at all. i get the idea and it may be nice for people who start fresh and want to play with friends who are already 60, but your calculation about money is wrong, you can´t compare the costs of 2-3 months of subscription to that boost because you would pay the subscription anyway

[Daymanmb]

you compare it moneywise, which does not make sense at all. i get the idea and it may be nice for people who start fresh and want to play with friends who are already 60, but your calculation about money is wrong, you can´t compare the costs of 2-3 months of subscription to that boost because you would pay the subscription anyway

Okay, lets work the math... Im going to work with CAD bc those are the prices I see.

Lets say leveling takes 2.5 months (happy medium btwn 2-3 months) that equals $50, but to be honest, subs dont work like that. Youd be charged the full 3 months to level, which would be $60.

Boost costs $55 and no time investment.

So for roughly the same price, you save 2.5 months of work. Any sub time spent afterwards isnt factored into this equation, its irrelevant. Both cases are still paying for a sub after leveling, or after boosting.

[Tanduita]

Okay, lets work the math... Im going to work with CAD bc those are the prices I see.

Lets say leveling takes 2.5 months (happy medium btwn 2-3 months) that equals $50, but to be honest, subs dont work like that. Youd be charged the full 3 months to level, which would be $60.

Boost costs $55 and no time.

So for roughly the same price, you save 2.5 months of work. Any sub time spent afterwards isnt factored into this equation. Its irrelevant, both cases are still paying for a sub after leveling, or after boosting.

you.are.still.paying.the.sub.and.do.not.save.any.money.

if you argue with your salary/hour, yeah well mate, you should buy everything this game has to offer including lots of gold because you would earn more money by working that time than farming. seems like playing wow does not spark any joy to you and feels like working, in that case it is definetely better to buy everything. but if you are having fun playing the game with all its circumstances (leveling, farming (moderate), this does not make sense (boost makes sense in the mentioned case)

[Daymanmb]

you.are.still.paying.the.sub.and.do.not.save.any.money.

Quote me where I said save money... you misunderstood what I said. Idk how, but I never once mentioned saving money lol

Everything you said afterwards is a non-sequitur, so Im ignoring it.

[erifwodahs]

you compare it moneywise, which does not make sense at all. i get the idea and it may be nice for people who start fresh and want to play with friends who are already 60, but your calculation about money is wrong, you can´t compare the costs of 2-3 months of subscription to that boost because you would pay the subscription anyway

You can and that is very simple.
Without boost to play with your friends -> 3 months sub + continuous sub
With boost -> Continuous sub.

Price for the bus ticket will be less if you buy if from mid point rather than the start. How does that make no sense? "You would still be paying for the bus ticket" yes, but half of it only.

- - - Updated - - -

didnt casual players have like two years where they could level to 60? and they paid for gametime while doing so, so people who will keep their character from vanila instead of starting completely new one use p2w feature, according to your definition...

Imo BC should have had fresh servers, but for some reason Blizzard didn't want that, which is probably even bigger disappointment than the delux edition, but what he said and what you are saying is not comparable.
Lvl boost is pay to win in essence, but the thing is that it's probably even less impactful than a cosmetic items, which stay with you forever, and you level boost is very diminished. IDK why people get mad because of it. WoW leveling is outdated and has been done by most of us for 30 times.

[Nite92]

Getting a single character to level 58 is not "winning" WoW.

That is all.

Well, it depends on what you define as "winning".
What is winning in WoW classic? Killing Ragnaros? Because it takes less effort to level from 58-60 and clear MC, than it takes to get from 1-58.
Or is it just killing KT?

The "win" in pay to "win" is pretty loosely defined, and starts (in an mmo) as soon as you are able to skip an "significant" amount of content (imo).

[Kralljin]

if game wants to survive it need to adapt to us.

There is a version of WoW that "adapted" to the players, it's modern WoW.

This is a relaunch, not a product that is in active development.

[Shaetha]

You have a different definition of "winning". Thats fine. Looting illidans warglaives or getting gladiator isn't the only way for players to "win". This is an open-ended mmo. You are purposely defining "winning" in a way that fits your narrative. Id say skipping straight to end game allows you more weekly lockouts of gear which would inturn = pay to win.

You know, except the boosts have never been offered in a time where that matters. You've been able to be level 60 for over a year. That's a completely irrelevant argument.

[Mrbleedinggums]

I thought this was a good time to bump and respond to this post now I've been proven 100% correct.



Like I said, why would they level chars manually when they buy a 58 boost and start making gold immediately? Blizzard bans in waves giving them ample time to turn a profit.

it's one per account. So they have to buy an account, buy the game time, then buy the boost.

[Daymanmb]

it's one per account. So they have to buy an account, buy the game time, then buy the boost.

Accounts are free, so you just have to buy a boost and pay for some game time.

[Nalam the Venom]

its 2021 not 2005. we are all 30+ not 10+ .

if game wants to survive it need to adapt to us.

It’s supposed to be a nostalgia trip for the people who feel like re-Living it.

There is no need for ”Survive”

Either you play it or you don’t, No need to change any thing.

If you can not play the game in todays age, Just don’t?

It really should not need to adapt to you.

- - - Updated - - -

it's one per account. So they have to buy an account, buy the game time, then buy the boost.

They make up that money easy with how much time they save to skip 1-58.

Madseason did a good explaining all this

[Fenrys]

Why are we talking about "pay to win" as if it is a clearly defined concept? Anyone can define "pay to win" to include this boost or define such that it falls outside of that definition. That doesn't really mean too much in the scheme of things - fiddling the definition till it suits your agenda doesn't suddenly make it a bad thing. The more pertinent question is whether the boost is good for the health of the game. If it is not, it is the prioritisation of profit over good game design. Successful games are where a profitable concept coexists with good game design. Moaning about capitalism as if that is ipso facto a bad thing is bizarre. Games exist because of capitalistic ideas - that people would trade money for entertainment.

My gut feeling is that the boost has some tangible downsides, but overall promotes the health of TBC Classic more than it hurts it. MMOs are better with more players, and there are a significant number of players who have no interest in Classic (or at least the levelling process of Classic). The advantage afforded them through payment is sufficiently minor insofar as they are skipping the "last" expansion, not the current one, that the benefits of more players is greater than the harm it brings. The harm is also mitigated by the limited nature of the boost.

[erifwodahs]

Madseason did a good explaining all this

His video had some good points, he is extremely biased towards "good old game" and you can tell how some his content is just subjective and without any value. I would not use him as a good point of reference.

[agentsi]

Who the fuck cares if it falls under your semantic definition of pay to win? It’s the fucking principle. Why the FUCK are you defending ANY amount of microtransaction practices? PLEASE tell me WHY you defend capitalist GREED? Do you not want video games to be what they used to be? Do you WANT to be fucked in the ass by greedy Bobby koticks? What the fuck?

It’s like I’ve woken up in a fucking alternate reality where people are actually defending microtransactions. What the hell happened to you people?

I love these kinds of replies. They make me quite happy. This person hates the capitalist greed that microtransactions supposedly represent ... but is typing to a forum, using the internet, from a phone or a computer, which only exists because of guess what... capitalism.....

Besides the idiocy of the poster, which we all can laugh at, their point isn't valid on any level. As many folks have said, boosts are fine, if you don't have the time. Most adults, who make more than minimum wage, are perfectly okay with paying $50 to boost a character to a level if it saves them weeks or months of time. I see zero issues with these things. If they make my life easier and allow me to hang with my friends for a one-time fee.. Why would I be mad about that? Work one hour to pay for a boost, or play the game for 50-100 hours to reach the same results? Uhhhh here is your $50 Blizzard, and thank you for making this an option.

[Nalam the Venom]

His video had some good points, he is extremely biased towards "good old game" and you can tell how some his content is just subjective and without any value. I would not use him as a good point of reference.

Well, i have not seen any one else write out the entire math behind it all other than him.