On this whole pay to win thing...I just think it's hilarious that a game dev could essentially say:
Hey guys, we're making a game where you can become more powerful by:
A. Adventuring, slaying monsters, completing quests, crafting, delving in dungeons, etc...
or
B. Paying real money
And then some players actually pick option B.
I think there's a difference between paying real money to become powerful (by itself), and paying real money to reduce the amount of monster slaying you have to do to become more powerful.
There's a grey line somewhere along the path, but there is definitely a difference between the end points.
[EDIT]
I tried to post this in another thread, but it got locked and I wanted to get my idea out. This seems like the closest fit.
There are a lot of people who will gain more fun by buying an expedited path through content, especially if they feel its taking too long to progress to interesting stuff and they don't have enough time available.
For instance, in SW:ToR I hated that I had to do a lot of the quests. They generally felt unheroic, uninteresting, and eventually uninspired (which is understandable with a game with 1532356636125463612345913563957934719496 quests to try to appease content locusts.) Unfortunately, I had to do (most of) them if I wanted to stay up to level compared to my content. If I was given the option to increase my experience and loot gain to allow me to avoid a lot of this mundane crap that shouldn't have been in the game to begin with, I would have taken it in a heartbeat.
On this whole pay to win thing...I just think it's hilarious that a game dev could essentially say:
Hey guys, we're making a game where you can become more powerful by:
A. Adventuring, slaying monsters, completing quests, crafting, delving in dungeons, etc...
or
B. Paying real money
And then some players actually pick option B.
I think there's a difference between paying real money to become powerful (by itself), and paying real money to reduce the amount of monster slaying you have to do to become more powerful.
There's a grey line somewhere along the path, but there is definitely a difference between the end points.
[EDIT]
I tried to post this in another thread, but it got locked and I wanted to get my idea out. This seems like the closest fit.
There are a lot of people who will gain more fun by buying an expedited path through content, especially if they feel its taking too long to progress to interesting stuff and they don't have enough time available.
For instance, in SW:ToR I hated that I had to do a lot of the quests. They generally felt unheroic, uninteresting, and eventually uninspired (which is understandable with a game with 1532356636125463612345913563957934719496 quests to try to appease content locusts.) Unfortunately, I had to do (most of) them if I wanted to stay up to level compared to my content. If I was given the option to increase my experience and loot gain to allow me to avoid a lot of this mundane crap that shouldn't have been in the game to begin with, I would have taken it in a heartbeat.
Sure, but look at the root problem here. SW:ToR is a game and was designed by people...everything in it was essentially put there intentionally. So if you feel parts of the game are unheroic, uninteresting and uninspired, then that is really the fault of the game designers and nothing else. The point is that the game could have been better.
Now you may think that an option to pay in order to skip undesireable content would be nice, but in reality, you are paying your money to avoid their bad game design. It's almost a con...it really is. Having a successful cash shop that relies on "pay to skip" items basically relies on there being content in a game that people will want to skip. In other words, a "pay to skip" cash shop relies on bad game design.
So I really think you have to look at the big picture here. If you think that pay to skip cash shops are okay...then you are essentially encouraging game design that you feel is bad.
If you pay some money and they send you a certificate that says "Congratulations you won the game!" then its pay to win.
Sounds dumb but it illustrates the point. We don't know what winning is in an MMORPG. To some people advancing as quick as possible is "winning". Might sound dumb to some people but that is what they think and the game does not really say or guide players towards anything except constant accumulation so it not entirely wrong.
I think a better, although less succinct, term is "pay to get more power than a non-payer can get".
In this regard XP boost does not qualify since you can still get to max level either way, but armor that is 10% better than any drop does count.
This is also why the issue becomes much clear cut for PvP as well. Because in the end PvP is all about power and we know what "win" means. It means you win matches or duels. And that is basicaly the measure of power.
I am dead set against "pay to get more power than a non-payer can get". Other things I don't really care so much about.
Pay to Win = Game design/programming choices that FORCE a cash payment requirement either through in-game player manipulation or missing/blocked/lockedcontent availability.
Anything else that can be sold is a persons choice as to whether they play for the item and pay in game gold, or buy in the cash shop.
Guess it depends on what goals you set for yourself in a MMO. Some players see competition everywhere in a game, PVE, playertrade, PVP. Others only see it where you actually do combat against other players. I only see competition in PVP. Because in that situation every player is aware of the competition. Which is not the case in PVE.
PVP:
- I find P2W the most disruptive if cash shop items affects PVP. It is usually the only situation where I would talk in terms of P2W.
PVE:
- If players can buy their way into the economy. In PVE and playertrade I can get concerned if cash shop items have an influence on player economy. I wouldn't use the abbreviation P2W though. Because there is nothing really to win (I don't see how you 'win' from a different player who didn't even realise he was taking part in a competition:p ).
- If players can buy their way to the end of the game. XP potions or other buffs that speed ups some form of progress. These confuse me the most. It makes me wonder if the devs slowed down progression as much as possible to make those consumables more in demand. Without slowing it down too much so that players get bored and quit right away ofc.
(For GW2 cash shop I only worry about being able to buy your way into player economy and causing faster inflation, I don't see P2W there)
Sure, but look at the root problem here. SW:ToR is a game and was designed by people...everything in it was essentially put there intentionally. So if you feel parts of the game are unheroic, uninteresting and uninspired, then that is really the fault of the game designers and nothing else. The point is that the game could have been better.
Now you may think that an option to pay in order to skip undesireable content would be nice, but in reality, you are paying your money to avoid their bad game design. It's almost a con...it really is. Having a successful cash shop that relies on "pay to skip" items basically relies on there being content in a game that people will want to skip. In other words, a "pay to skip" cash shop relies on bad game design.
So I really think you have to look at the big picture here. If you think that pay to skip cash shops are okay...then you are essentially encouraging game design that you feel is bad.
Accurate assessment of root problem, however, I'm also not a good baseline by which to set a game's content. I probably like a lot less content than most MMO players would find anywhere near acceptable.
Bottom line is people play games differently, for different reasons, and enjoy different aspects of them. If a cash shop is used to enhance their experiences, then speeding up or slowing down the content is perfectly okay and not considered p2w to me.
Shops that gives an advantage that is unobtainable by spending a reasonable amount of time instead is p2w. The only thing that matters is what is considered "reasonable".
Im done with P2W games and i wont buy D3 either, Blizzard will probarly make 1 billion $ on retail, and the money AH will make the same each year. I dont like this direction of future games.
The phrase "Pay2win" implies that the microtransaction within THAT game, alter the game because your character is now more powerful than if u hadn't just spent that $7.49 sword..
Any payed transaction that isn't customizing ur character, but bolstering his power over another player is: paying to win...
Because, you buy an advantage..!
How, or why the definition is being debated this late in the thread implies people speak without first framing.... their thoughts.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
The phrase "Pay2win" implies that the microtransaction within THAT game, alter the game because your character is now more powerful than if u hadn't just spent that $7.49 sword..
Any payed transaction that isn't customizing ur character, but bolstering his power over another player is: paying to win...
Because, you buy an advantage..!
How, or why the definition is being debated this late in the thread implies people speak without first framing.... their thoughts.
It's still debated at this point, I think, because the phrase is a lot more subjective than I had even thought when I first wrote the post.
I think it does depend on the game and the players of that game. I can see where XP boosters would make an open PvP game a Pay2Win scenario, but I don't think that's the case where your PvE leveling doesn't really have much to do with PvP.
So, apparently the term is very opinion based. Something I actually hadn't considered earlier.
You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???
My definition of Pay2Win is a game with a Cash Shop where the shop sells items that actually give you an advantage over someone else, especially in PvP situations. It does not include XP boosters or anything like that especially if those things are found in game. Basically, it's armor, or weapons (or anything else) that are overpowered compared to what you can find in the game itself, especially if those things can be used against other players.
Areas in the game that are necessary for progression but are locked unless you pay for them are also (by definition) Pay2Win.
I would even go so far as to say that it could be gear that allows you to, say get through a 5 man dungeon by yourself, if you can't also get that gear in game. Or if it's extremely difficult to get that gear in the game.
There has been a lot of talk lately about Pay2Win Cash Shops in games, but I believe most of that talk is hyperbole and/or misinformed. What do you think?
Edit: Added the comment about areas in the game.
I agree with your first two points, your third is kinda confusing.
I consider Pay to Win to be any boost to character power (either gear, character advancements or combat boosts) that is simply unobtainable without spending money in a cash shop. SoE have a perfect example of Pay to Win with EQ1 and EQ2... you simply cannot be competitive without injecting cash into the cash shop. Age of Conan also falls in this category by gating off the highest quality content and preventing free players from earning alternate advancement.
Time savers like XP boosts, valor boosts, karma boosts etc are not Pay to Win. Two equal level players have exactly the same character potential regardless of whether they have spent any money in a cash shop or not. Saving time is not winning, and if you really want to rush past the content, theres obviously something wrong with the game itself, so why even bother playing?
TL:DR:
More powerful character than obtainable without cash shop - Pay to Win
Cosmetic items, convenience items and time savers - Not Pay to Win
Pay to win, to me, is required purchases from a cash shop needed to either progress through content (locked otherwise) or to compete in PvP. If you can buy a sword for example that practically ensures you'll beat someone that didn't, that's pay to win. If the advanced areas of the game are completely locked off to you unless you cough up the cash, that's pay to win.
Where is the advantage of a more advanced toon outside of a PvP scenario? The games I've played so far have contained convenience items such as XP boosts or fast mounts, etc. in their cash shops but also have those items either in the game itself, as loot, or as part of a lottery system that anyone can play. I have yet to feel disadvantaged because someone is a higher level than me regardless of how they reached that level. I figure I'll get there some time and be just as powerful as they are. So the time factor doesn't really bother me very much and I just enjoy the game.
In nearly every MMO the more advanced toon the easier it is to obtain the game's currency and rare loot. Unfortuneately, most are designed to significantly increase the reward at later levels. Whether or not you feel disadvantaged at a slower pace has absolutely no bearing on whether or not a CS item is P2W.
My definition of Pay2Win is a game with a Cash Shop where the shop sells items that actually give you an advantage over someone else, especially in PvP situations. It does not include XP boosters or anything like that especially if those things are found in game. Basically, it's armor, or weapons (or anything else) that are overpowered compared to what you can find in the game itself, especially if those things can be used against other players.
Areas in the game that are necessary for progression but are locked unless you pay for them are also (by definition) Pay2Win.
I would even go so far as to say that it could be gear that allows you to, say get through a 5 man dungeon by yourself, if you can't also get that gear in game. Or if it's extremely difficult to get that gear in the game.
There has been a lot of talk lately about Pay2Win Cash Shops in games, but I believe most of that talk is hyperbole and/or misinformed. What do you think?
Edit: Added the comment about areas in the game.
Pay2Win for me is when a cash shop sells an item that is 100x more powerful then something you can find in the world. Or being able to 1 shot a player. What GW2 is doing is called: PAY2REDUCEGRIND.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
I agree with the most common definition here. Pay2Win is only something that is require to progress or advance above someone who isnt willing or able to pay for it.
That means getting into locked areas, obtaining otherwise locked or special items, or gaining a stat boost either to the character directly or through an item that cant be otherwise obtained.
It most certainly IS NOT Xp boosts that allow a character to advance faster but not beyond the limits of someone who isnt paying. Everyone already levels or progresses at different speeds. I am a hardcore gamer, im also unemployed. This allows me to play 16-20 hours a day. I level extremely fast in a gamers sense, and i dont need an xp pot to do it. Someone who works or has school and can only play 4-6 hours a day will level extremely slow compared to me. So if they use a cash-shop xp boost, they will still level slower than i am. Does that mean they have an advanage over me because they bought a cash shop item? Even though im a higher level? Is my character P2W because i progress faster than you, even though i never spend a dime in a cash shop? See how your definition is flawed.
Get off your high horses people. Cash shops are not P2W. They can provide P2W bonuses, but having a shop does not automatically make the game P2W. And convenience items are not, nor have they ever been Pay to Win, and anyone who thinks so is only sore that they cant afford them. They in no way impact your gameplay, or allow you to progress to an otherwise unreachable state. Time is not Pay to Win people.
Thanks for being here and telling us how we should feel on the subject. /golfclap
PTW involves any item not of the vanity variety. Anytime you are skipping content, be it by potions, or by getting an item out right, you have participated in PTW. CCPs allowing Plex to be traded to another person for game time is a huge PTW. Same thing with GW2s use of buying gems.
I have no issue with cash shops in SPGs, as you can set the terms of the game for yourself. I have a huge issue with cash shops, and/or gold sellers in MMOs. I feel folks should abide by the same rules, and only have what they earn in game.
Someone stated game unlocks are PTW.....I suppose it depends. EQ has areas that can be unlocked....or you pay a sub fee for access. This isnt what I would define PTW. The exp potions though.....definite PTW.
If you agree with cash shops offering an advantage, that is your choice. Just dont expect others not to call it for what it is.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Someone stated game unlocks are PTW.....I suppose it depends. EQ has areas that can be unlocked....or you pay a sub fee for access. This isnt what I would define PTW. The exp potions though.....definite PTW.
Game unlocks are Pay to Win if people without them are at a gear disadvantage. Although EQ also sells XP potions, requires content unlocks, gear unlocks, requires spell upgrade unlocks and AA unlocks. SoE models are the perfect example of Pay to Win.... although I dont consider the XP potions the part that makes it Pay to Win.
Im done with P2W games and i wont buy D3 either, Blizzard will probarly make 1 billion $ on retail, and the money AH will make the same each year. I dont like this direction of future games.
And I have already pre-purchase D3. From what i have seen and heard (a friend is on the beta), it is a very fun game. So what if it has a real money AH. In fact, it would be great to make some money off it when i am having fun.
Pay to win, to me, is required purchases from a cash shop needed to either progress through content (locked otherwise) or to compete in PvP. If you can buy a sword for example that practically ensures you'll beat someone that didn't, that's pay to win. If the advanced areas of the game are completely locked off to you unless you cough up the cash, that's pay to win.
Necessary advantages.
I'll subscribe to this definition, close enough.
You have it right in the first part, the second part is wrong, though. If someone buys an expansion and others don't, it is not pay2win. That's like saying someone who regularly pays the subscription fee has an advantage over someone who doesn't. Paying more sub fees than others is not pay2win, even though they can spend more time in the game.
Comments
I think there's a difference between paying real money to become powerful (by itself), and paying real money to reduce the amount of monster slaying you have to do to become more powerful.
There's a grey line somewhere along the path, but there is definitely a difference between the end points.
[EDIT]
I tried to post this in another thread, but it got locked and I wanted to get my idea out. This seems like the closest fit.
There are a lot of people who will gain more fun by buying an expedited path through content, especially if they feel its taking too long to progress to interesting stuff and they don't have enough time available.
For instance, in SW:ToR I hated that I had to do a lot of the quests. They generally felt unheroic, uninteresting, and eventually uninspired (which is understandable with a game with 1532356636125463612345913563957934719496 quests to try to appease content locusts.) Unfortunately, I had to do (most of) them if I wanted to stay up to level compared to my content. If I was given the option to increase my experience and loot gain to allow me to avoid a lot of this mundane crap that shouldn't have been in the game to begin with, I would have taken it in a heartbeat.
Sure, but look at the root problem here. SW:ToR is a game and was designed by people...everything in it was essentially put there intentionally. So if you feel parts of the game are unheroic, uninteresting and uninspired, then that is really the fault of the game designers and nothing else. The point is that the game could have been better.
Now you may think that an option to pay in order to skip undesireable content would be nice, but in reality, you are paying your money to avoid their bad game design. It's almost a con...it really is. Having a successful cash shop that relies on "pay to skip" items basically relies on there being content in a game that people will want to skip. In other words, a "pay to skip" cash shop relies on bad game design.
So I really think you have to look at the big picture here. If you think that pay to skip cash shops are okay...then you are essentially encouraging game design that you feel is bad.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
If you pay some money and they send you a certificate that says "Congratulations you won the game!" then its pay to win.
Sounds dumb but it illustrates the point. We don't know what winning is in an MMORPG. To some people advancing as quick as possible is "winning". Might sound dumb to some people but that is what they think and the game does not really say or guide players towards anything except constant accumulation so it not entirely wrong.
I think a better, although less succinct, term is "pay to get more power than a non-payer can get".
In this regard XP boost does not qualify since you can still get to max level either way, but armor that is 10% better than any drop does count.
This is also why the issue becomes much clear cut for PvP as well. Because in the end PvP is all about power and we know what "win" means. It means you win matches or duels. And that is basicaly the measure of power.
I am dead set against "pay to get more power than a non-payer can get". Other things I don't really care so much about.
Pay to Win = Game design/programming choices that FORCE a cash payment requirement either through in-game player manipulation or missing/blocked/lockedcontent availability.
Anything else that can be sold is a persons choice as to whether they play for the item and pay in game gold, or buy in the cash shop.
Guess it depends on what goals you set for yourself in a MMO. Some players see competition everywhere in a game, PVE, playertrade, PVP. Others only see it where you actually do combat against other players. I only see competition in PVP. Because in that situation every player is aware of the competition. Which is not the case in PVE.
PVP:
- I find P2W the most disruptive if cash shop items affects PVP. It is usually the only situation where I would talk in terms of P2W.
PVE:
- If players can buy their way into the economy. In PVE and playertrade I can get concerned if cash shop items have an influence on player economy. I wouldn't use the abbreviation P2W though. Because there is nothing really to win (I don't see how you 'win' from a different player who didn't even realise he was taking part in a competition:p ).
- If players can buy their way to the end of the game. XP potions or other buffs that speed ups some form of progress. These confuse me the most. It makes me wonder if the devs slowed down progression as much as possible to make those consumables more in demand. Without slowing it down too much so that players get bored and quit right away ofc.
(For GW2 cash shop I only worry about being able to buy your way into player economy and causing faster inflation, I don't see P2W there)
Accurate assessment of root problem, however, I'm also not a good baseline by which to set a game's content. I probably like a lot less content than most MMO players would find anywhere near acceptable.
Bottom line is people play games differently, for different reasons, and enjoy different aspects of them. If a cash shop is used to enhance their experiences, then speeding up or slowing down the content is perfectly okay and not considered p2w to me.
Shops that gives an advantage that is unobtainable by spending a reasonable amount of time instead is p2w. The only thing that matters is what is considered "reasonable".
Im done with P2W games and i wont buy D3 either, Blizzard will probarly make 1 billion $ on retail, and the money AH will make the same each year. I dont like this direction of future games.
Any payed transaction that isn't customizing ur character, but bolstering his power over another player is: paying to win...
Because, you buy an advantage..!
How, or why the definition is being debated this late in the thread implies people speak without first framing.... their thoughts.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
It's still debated at this point, I think, because the phrase is a lot more subjective than I had even thought when I first wrote the post.
I think it does depend on the game and the players of that game. I can see where XP boosters would make an open PvP game a Pay2Win scenario, but I don't think that's the case where your PvE leveling doesn't really have much to do with PvP.
So, apparently the term is very opinion based. Something I actually hadn't considered earlier.
You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???
Be afraid.....The dragons are HERE!
I agree with your first two points, your third is kinda confusing.
I consider Pay to Win to be any boost to character power (either gear, character advancements or combat boosts) that is simply unobtainable without spending money in a cash shop. SoE have a perfect example of Pay to Win with EQ1 and EQ2... you simply cannot be competitive without injecting cash into the cash shop. Age of Conan also falls in this category by gating off the highest quality content and preventing free players from earning alternate advancement.
Time savers like XP boosts, valor boosts, karma boosts etc are not Pay to Win. Two equal level players have exactly the same character potential regardless of whether they have spent any money in a cash shop or not. Saving time is not winning, and if you really want to rush past the content, theres obviously something wrong with the game itself, so why even bother playing?
TL:DR:
More powerful character than obtainable without cash shop - Pay to Win
Cosmetic items, convenience items and time savers - Not Pay to Win
I'll subscribe to this definition, close enough.
Currently bored with MMO's.
Pay2Win for me is when a cash shop sells an item that is 100x more powerful then something you can find in the world. Or being able to 1 shot a player. What GW2 is doing is called: PAY2REDUCEGRIND.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Thanks for being here and telling us how we should feel on the subject. /golfclap
PTW involves any item not of the vanity variety. Anytime you are skipping content, be it by potions, or by getting an item out right, you have participated in PTW. CCPs allowing Plex to be traded to another person for game time is a huge PTW. Same thing with GW2s use of buying gems.
I have no issue with cash shops in SPGs, as you can set the terms of the game for yourself. I have a huge issue with cash shops, and/or gold sellers in MMOs. I feel folks should abide by the same rules, and only have what they earn in game.
Someone stated game unlocks are PTW.....I suppose it depends. EQ has areas that can be unlocked....or you pay a sub fee for access. This isnt what I would define PTW. The exp potions though.....definite PTW.
If you agree with cash shops offering an advantage, that is your choice. Just dont expect others not to call it for what it is.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Game unlocks are Pay to Win if people without them are at a gear disadvantage. Although EQ also sells XP potions, requires content unlocks, gear unlocks, requires spell upgrade unlocks and AA unlocks. SoE models are the perfect example of Pay to Win.... although I dont consider the XP potions the part that makes it Pay to Win.
And I have already pre-purchase D3. From what i have seen and heard (a friend is on the beta), it is a very fun game. So what if it has a real money AH. In fact, it would be great to make some money off it when i am having fun.
Any advantage in PvP would be P2W imo. Can u win in PvE in a mmo?
Maybe they should rename it "P2S" pay to succeed
. You can definitely be successful in a PvE MMO.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
You have it right in the first part, the second part is wrong, though. If someone buys an expansion and others don't, it is not pay2win. That's like saying someone who regularly pays the subscription fee has an advantage over someone who doesn't. Paying more sub fees than others is not pay2win, even though they can spend more time in the game.