1. There are more people playing a game than you and me. You would have a leveling advantage over anyone who started playing at the same time as you and was able to commit the same amount of time to their hobby as you. Depending on the game in question, this can have severe to negligible consequences. Regardless of the size of the consequence, however, you would still be paying for an advantage (growing in power more quickly) over the other player. I find this inherently wrong, as the foundation for any good game in my opinion is equal treatment under the laws of the natural game world, including experience modifiers.
2. Simply because your leveling faster than I did days/months/years after I hit the level cap doesn't change the fact that you are purchasing a special ruleset for yourself. This is a common flaw I see in people with regards to other more important matters (social justice, discrimination, etc.) in life. Just because an injustice (or a paid for advantage) doesn't effect me doesn't mean it has no impact on other people.
First this is what I originally meant, so meh.. :P the goal posts are being questioned already..
Anyway, what you're not considering are people at a disadvantage in general, the guy with little time is one case, the guy who needs a little help (physical impairment) another. Etc... These people are at an outright disadvantage.That's who a lot of these products are aimed at. They're not aimed at you, they're aimed to help people keep up with you.
Wow, so p2w is really charitable then, so the rich disabled can beat the poor disabled
Jump a little higher next time you missed that one.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
1. There are more people playing a game than you and me. You would have a leveling advantage over anyone who started playing at the same time as you and was able to commit the same amount of time to their hobby as you. Depending on the game in question, this can have severe to negligible consequences. Regardless of the size of the consequence, however, you would still be paying for an advantage (growing in power more quickly) over the other player. I find this inherently wrong, as the foundation for any good game in my opinion is equal treatment under the laws of the natural game world, including experience modifiers.
2. Simply because your leveling faster than I did days/months/years after I hit the level cap doesn't change the fact that you are purchasing a special ruleset for yourself. This is a common flaw I see in people with regards to other more important matters (social justice, discrimination, etc.) in life. Just because an injustice (or a paid for advantage) doesn't effect me doesn't mean it has no impact on other people.
First this is what I originally meant, so meh.. :P the goal posts are being questioned already..
Anyway, what you're not considering are people at a disadvantage in general, the guy with little time is one case, the guy who needs a little help (physical impairment) another. Etc... These people are at an outright disadvantage.That's who a lot of these products are aimed at. They're not aimed at you, they're aimed to help people keep up with you.
And I don't feel that this is an inherently bad idea, but if this part of the customer base is the one pumping the most money into the game, why should a game company bother to cater to the other guys? Why should they bother to keep making new content for players that aren't paying as much if anything, when they could both save and make more money just by creating some novelty widget, chuck it in the cash shop, and call it a day?
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
I am comfortable to an extent, because my comfort level changes based on the item content within the cash shop. I don't see cash shops as good or bad. I started to use your examples and state why I was comfortable, or not, with those types of items. However, the determining factor (for me) really is in the details of those items. If a player receives a benefit from an item, then the variables of that item being consumable, rechargable, reusable on cooldown, as well as the type of benefit (movement speed, experience bonus), in combination with percentages, etc, all come into the calculation of whether or not I have an issue. I cannot speak for others, but that's how I see it.
With the varying degrees to which cash shops exist and the range of items of a beneficial nature included in said cash shop, i am ok with some but not with others. My main outlook is based upon these factors: the amount of my involvement in that particular game and if the involvement is high, they the amount of bonus cs items provide. If i am heavy into a game and the cash shop provides heaps of items of a beneficial nature to those willing to pay out of the ass for it, then yeah, i hate it. This will not cause me to stop playing a game that i am heavy involved in however. If i only play the game casually with little interest towards the main goal of that game, then i don't care if they put super hack type stat bonuses into the cash shop cause i care little about the game as a whole. I enjoy playing LoL, but i mostly play vs bots and don't care how much ip i have. If the advantages sold (as a whole) are very small in scale and hardly detrimental to the game, then more power to the people paying for them, they will need it when they face me. I hope this type of answer is what you were looking for.
I'm sorry but the only one saying anything about the second coming is you. Fans of a game accept its flaws and strengths.
1. There are more people playing a game than you and me. You would have a leveling advantage over anyone who started playing at the same time as you and was able to commit the same amount of time to their hobby as you. Depending on the game in question, this can have severe to negligible consequences. Regardless of the size of the consequence, however, you would still be paying for an advantage (growing in power more quickly) over the other player. I find this inherently wrong, as the foundation for any good game in my opinion is equal treatment under the laws of the natural game world, including experience modifiers.
2. Simply because your leveling faster than I did days/months/years after I hit the level cap doesn't change the fact that you are purchasing a special ruleset for yourself. This is a common flaw I see in people with regards to other more important matters (social justice, discrimination, etc.) in life. Just because an injustice (or a paid for advantage) doesn't effect me doesn't mean it has no impact on other people.
First this is what I originally meant, so meh.. :P the goal posts are being questioned already..
Anyway, what you're not considering are people at a disadvantage in general, the guy with little time is one case, the guy who needs a little help (physical impairment) another. Etc... These people are at an outright disadvantage.That's who a lot of these products are aimed at. They're not aimed at you, they're aimed to help people keep up with you.
And I don't feel that this is an inherently bad idea, but if this part of the customer base is the one pumping the most money into the game, why should a game company bother to cater to the other guys? Why should they bother to keep making new content for players that aren't paying as much if anything, when they could both save and make more money just by creating some novelty widget, chuck it in the cash shop, and call it a day?
Very good point as I agree, many will take advantage of those who will pay,and focus on them, not to mention they can't control who takes advantage of these features. So they do a horrible job of balancing the environment, I'm not oblivious to that. Which is why I don't support the change to RMT.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I voted no but I disagree with your definition of pay to win. I would agree with 3 and 4. Anything that provides a solid, comparable statistical advantage is unfair. XP boosts etc I think are merely convenient, so I completely disagree with 1 and 2, largely due to the way you've worded them and the bias that's been included.
The whole problem with this debate is where the goal posts are. You'll never get everyone to agree on what's pay to win and what isn't. That being said I have never bought anything from a game's cash shop, and if I find that progression becomes hindered by that I have stopped playing the game.
Would you find experience boosts simply a "matter of convenience" in a competitive open PvP MMORPG? Would you disagree that leveling faster/gaining more gold/gaining better armor through various consuambles that increase your XP gain, gold gain, and probability at finding quality gear would constitute an advantage in the hypothetical game world?
It probably would but I wouldn't play such a game for 3 main reasons. 1st, level based PvP games suck no matter which way you look at it. 2nd, gear grind types of games which result in PvP imbalance due to gear also suck. 3rd, I detest open world FFA PvP games because they attract the absolute worst kind of gankers and griefers.
We're back to those goal posts again. In some games those items would be a problem but in others they're really not. It's impossible to make blanket statements about what would or wouldn't be unfair without looking at the specific MMO. If you're looking at MMO's with competetive PvP and it's level based or gear based, then yes you have a problem. If the game is primarily about PvE then it isn't.
If the game's PvP based but not gear dependant and more about skill, and you get scaled up/down then again, I'd say not a problem. Like, for example, GW2.
Look at WoW. If you could get xp boosts in their cash shop as well as your celestial mount, would it really break the game? I don't think it would. They've done a good enough job of that already with the gear grind, so who cares if you level an alt up a bit faster?
This is far too complex a subject to just say "this is good and this is bad" due to the large number of other factors which have to be taken into account, and which vary from game to game.
Very recently, Micro transactions have surpassed the subscription model in popularity among a certain demographic. And I love that term to...there is little that is "micro" about them.
The idea is that the benevolent development company is intentionally sabotaging their own shop for the improved online experience of those who are admittedly NOT going to use it over the experience of those who would. They are convinced that the contents of the shop are pointless and have no value in the game...to those in the know. Even though the shop is still in beta and the company probably wanted to only test a few of the borderline items and that the real contents were probably NOT yet released to the beta test group.
But, I'd just like to point out one thing:
It's a fact Pay to Win = Pay The Bills
All you gotta do is go over to PWI's website and you will see one of the largest and fastest growing online gaming companies there is. P2W has brought PWI up to 13 titles in only a few years. So it would seem there are enough who will buy advantage to justify it.
But OH NO, this benevolent company will stand in the gap! No, they are not interested in profits like the ones mentioned above, and will be satisfied with simply keeping the electric bills paid as long as it puts a smile on their happy customer's faces. Yep, that's right. They are gonna keep coding their game for a bunch of freeloaders who think people with money are stupid.
Now, if you put yourself in the spender's shoes....Why are you going to use the shop?
I mean consistently..not once or twice?
It's to better your overall experience. How that happens depends on the game.
In a PVP based game guess what. That means for the spender to have a better overall experiences than a non spender, it means WIN. otherwise why on earth would the spender come back and spend again.
I wonder if it would be possible to limit usage to certain cash-shop items on a time based basis, say you can't buy an exp. pot (or at least use it) if you put [this much] time into the game on a given weekly basis.
Would that at least make these things more acceptable to people?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Let's not limit it to only paying for advantages. What about those who get advantages from having more game time? If you are going to be honest, that needs to be balanced as well. There are also computer and network advantages that can matter in some design approaches.
After you solve those small problems, what are you going to do to balance people with physical differences? Mental differences?
There are many factors that just don't include paying for advantages. Address all of them OR none of them.
All of these are externalities that are not controllable by a developer. A developer-created cash shop, however, is. If you wish to discuss external factors that impact MMORPGs this is not the thread to do so. Please stay on topic.
So if you start 3 weeks before me and level to max, and I buy a xp boost potion, what advantage do I gain over you?
Two things.
1. There are more people playing a game than you and me. You would have a leveling advantage over anyone who started playing at the same time as you and was able to commit the same amount of time to their hobby as you. Depending on the game in question, this can have severe to negligible consequences. Regardless of the size of the consequence, however, you would still be paying for an advantage (growing in power more quickly) over the other player. I find this inherently wrong, as the foundation for any good game in my opinion is equal treatment under the laws of the natural game world, including experience modifiers.
2. Simply because your leveling faster than I did days/months/years after I hit the level cap doesn't change the fact that you are purchasing a special ruleset for yourself. This is a common flaw I see in people with regards to other more important matters (social justice, discrimination, etc.) in life. Just because an injustice (or a paid for advantage) doesn't effect me doesn't mean it has no impact on other people.
Point 1 is a good one, but what if i'm not as good at the game as that other person. If I keep failing events because my coordination isn't so good, then he'll probably be ahead of me in xp despite my potion. Or what if I play on a server that isn't as helpful as his. The people there. Will help him get further in the game than me.
Point 2 is also good, but I perceive it to be more a personal opinion which I can respect.
I'm not trying to be annoying to you, just want to point out that many factors make up an advantage.
Also in my personal opinion a xp.boost would be a disadvantage, I'd rather learn my characters limits
You're not annoying me at all. You're making me think through my positions which was part of the intent of this thread. I want us all to go through the mental excercise and really work through what we think and why we think it. Thanks for playing along.
Your inability to complete an event, mission, or dungeon would in fact hinder your progress and put the person(s) without cash shop advantages ahead of you. However, not all cash shop players will be bad, nor will they all be good. The fact remains that the average player with advantage granting cash shop items will have an edge over the average player without cash shop items.
With regards to people on different servers being more or less helpful than those on other servers, that's not really something a developer can control. However, even if your server is more helpful than the other, you would all be playing by the same natural game rules, so I don't think that argument is directly analagous to the impacts of cash shop advantages, which by their nature alter the game rules for those who use them.
I can see where you're coming from with regards to learning your character. However, most games have rather low learning curves, ensuring that you will get up to speed pretty quickly and just spam the same rotations over and over. I don't think 20% faster leveling will directly correlate to a 20% reduced understanding of one's character with how easy games have gotten in today's market.
I wonder if it would be possible to limit usage to certain cash-shop items on a time based basis, say you can't buy an exp. pot (or at least use it) if you put [this much] time into the game on a given weekly basis.
Would that at least make these things more acceptable to people?
Well exp pot don't bother me really but I figure you just used them as an example so..
While that might make sense from a gamers side. I've played enough F2P titles to know some of the biggest spenders are some of the people who also play the most. So from a company perspective limiting the buying power of your biggest consumer to appease someone who is no more then a potential customer is hard thing for them to do.
Seems to me OP you asked a very simple question, in the event a cash shop sold advantages, would you be comfortable buying them. It is really just a yes or no.
I wonder if it would be possible to limit usage to certain cash-shop items on a time based basis, say you can't buy an exp. pot (or at least use it) if you put [this much] time into the game on a given weekly basis.
Would that at least make these things more acceptable to people?
If that were a goal earned through gameplay that was not purchaseable on the shop then yes, I'd be fine with it as everyone has access to it without using the cash shop to get more of it. Otherwise this would be the cash shop equivalent of giving out free heroin to get everyone hooked on it, turning them into customers. I'm aware that boosts aren't addictive, but its the same general marketing principle.
The most fair and equitiable experience boost I've seen is rested experience. Everyone gets equal access to it without having to use a cash shop, and it really is there to help "casual" players keep up with "hardcore" players.
Conditional yes. The only part of your definition that i see as an unfair advantage (Pay to Win) is number 3. SO without that yes, absolutely i love games that include all other parts of this (not seen as Pay to win, but definately still an advantage)
I think its important to note that OP believes any "advantage" makes a game Pay to Win. Im unemployed, and therefore i spend at least 16-20 hours every day in a game. I can therefore level and progress WAY more than the average or casual player. This gives me a HUGE advantage over those players, therefore by OP definition, every single game i play (regardless of what the game is) is Pay to Win.
Congratulations "every company that creates games" for making every single title ever Pay to Win. /sarcasm
What's interesting is if you mention the oldest form of "paying for advantage"--the purchase of account play time, the natural "advantage" that is simply a result of superior hours of leisure time invested.
One purchased advantage is sacrosanct...all others are verbotten.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Conditional yes. The only part of your definition that i see as an unfair advantage (Pay to Win) is number 3. SO without that yes, absolutely i love games that include all other parts of this (not seen as Pay to win, but definately still an advantage)
I think its important to note that OP believes any "advantage" makes a game Pay to Win. Im unemployed, and therefore i spend at least 16-20 hours every day in a game. I can therefore level and progress WAY more than the average or casual player. This gives me a HUGE advantage over those players, therefore by OP definition, every single game i play (regardless of what the game is) is Pay to Win.
Congratulations "every company that creates games" for making every single title ever Pay to Win. /sarcasm
Extremely logical fallacy and frankly a failure to read the original post in its entirety.
You do not purchase play time from the cash shop. How much you or I actually play the game has nothing to do with the cash shop. Playing the game more than other people is not an advantage granted by the cash shop. The question I asked was do you support cash shops selling you advantages, which I define as anything that bends the normal rules of the game.
What's interesting is if you mention the oldest form of "paying for advantage"--the purchase of account play time, the natural "advantage" that is simply a result of superior hours of leisure time invested.
One purchased advantage is sacrosanct...all others are verbotten.
Purchasing play time is not an advantage. It the means of accessing the game to begin with. Once you access the game, you are beholden to the same rules as everyone else unless there is a cash shop that sells items/perks that break the rules for those that buy them.
The question is whether or not you support the idea of a cash shop selling in-game advantages. Please stay on topic.
1. The item you obtain increases in usefulness depending on level
2. The item can be traded
They have to do it in a way that it feels balanced, but not in a way where the cash items in shop are exactly the same as the ones you can find in the game. If the item only had a visual difference this is completely acceptable.
So a person using cash to buy an item can literally use that item from level 1-50 and not have to change. They obviously want to make more money from paying customers as well so costumes with stat boosts or without stat boosts are useful.
Also where the first paragraph it makes it seem like it is just anticash shops for 1-4 listed.
I'm okay with these items being sold in the shop because if they do it right without completely unbalancing the game people will continue to play and put in money.
Lets look at the examples
1. Zod runes can be found in-game, but even if they were found in the store as a limited item possibly. They will have a cash market in D3 so they will get something like 10-20% and you will get something as well. If only those zod runes could open common chests this would be a failure on blizzards part and you know how well they test their games. Possibility of course, but only for items that you carry in your inventory.
2. Those boosts grant only a slight boost to xp-ip gain and only the most hardcore players will take advantage of them.
8 normal games a day required vs buying a champion directly though with runes at such a high cost you will save at most 25% of your time, but you will have to put in more time daily into the game. Guild Wars skill unlock packs I personally did not like them, but since there is a market for players who want their skills instantly they just filled the void as some of the skill quests take a while.
3. Actually im slightly against items that are much better than those found in games unless. (points listed above) Also almost no game would do this as it would require less money to play. So many instead have items that can be purchased at each level with fixed stats. If items are extremely powerful and unbalanced the market will die on its own as people will stop playing the game. Anything over 5% is already considered grossly overpowered.
As long as similar items can be found in the game ( though probably very rare items) for the most part people will feel that it is fine as long as it is a possibly. (see this in many mmos)
4. I'm very much against this one as the item provides such a stat boost a free to play or another subbed player cannot possibly catch up. Though if it were only a costume or visual changes to a rare item with similar stats it would be fine.
League of Legends and Guild Wars are very balanced as the items with the same stats are easy to get, but it is more about visuals such as skins characters or items.
Games that feel balanced and have a cash shop. Mostly trinkets and nik naks with visual changes. Confortable with certain items being sold, but against items that completely skew game balance.
Originally posted by Badgered86 The point of this thread is not to discuss the goal post, but rather how you would feel about cash shops selling advantages as defined in this thread. Please stay on topic.
You need a "Maybe" answer in your poll, then, since you have mixed together such disparate things in your definition of "advantage" that I certainly couldn't answer either "Yes" or "No", and I suspect many others couldn't either.
Sorry...still laughing. A lot of players holding up their games-played history as a sort of "game competence" resume are sorely mistaken, it seems.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
When you can name a game that doesn't have a "paying" way to gain advantages, legal or illegal, then this dicussion would be worthy. I'm sure there were some who figured out how to limit gold sellers, but so far I have yet to encounter someone who hasn't exploited a game by opening up their wallets.
Till then, GW2 offers probably the least p2w format out there. What little you think is there, at least that money goes to the company that made the game and can hopefully use it for better future content. That said, cash shops are a slippery slope, so I am glad your protests exist, to keep them honest.
Conditional yes. The only part of your definition that i see as an unfair advantage (Pay to Win) is number 3. SO without that yes, absolutely i love games that include all other parts of this (not seen as Pay to win, but definately still an advantage)
I think its important to note that OP believes any "advantage" makes a game Pay to Win. Im unemployed, and therefore i spend at least 16-20 hours every day in a game. I can therefore level and progress WAY more than the average or casual player. This gives me a HUGE advantage over those players, therefore by OP definition, every single game i play (regardless of what the game is) is Pay to Win.
Congratulations "every company that creates games" for making every single title ever Pay to Win. /sarcasm
Extremely logical fallacy and frankly a failure to read the original post in its entirety.
You do not purchase play time from the cash shop. How much you or I actually play the game has nothing to do with the cash shop. Playing the game more than other people is not an advantage granted by the cash shop. The question I asked was do you support cash shops selling you advantages, which I define as anything that bends the normal rules of the game.
i did read your post in its entirety. I also read the other 4 pages of posts, along with the dozens of threads on this very topic (with dozens more on specific games). My point i was trying to make, which you seem to have missed, is that your definition, being what it is, is flawed from the start. All youre trying to do is make "your" personal definition fit into something you personally dislike, and asking people to back you up. Excludiing certain aspects that dont fit in with your definition or could otherwise disprove or make your point obsolete. Well sir, I give you an A for effort, but reading the comments here, you failed fantastically at making people fall into your way of thinking.
If the definition includes any of the 4 items, then I'd vote a conditional yes, depending on which items and on which terms.
If it includes all of the 4 items, I'd vote a no.
A bit more elaborate:
1. Depends on the contents of the chests. If the chests contain items covered in 2, no problem. If they contain items in 3, then I'd say it's a big no.
2. No problem here as long as the standard game rules aren't skewed to the point where I'd need to use the game shop items. For example, if a game offers XP boosts, but there's more than enough content in the game to level at a reasonable pace, no problem with them. On the other hand, if the game didn't have enough content to level without resorting to a long mindless grind without using the items from the cash store.
3. Big problem here. In general, I don't agree with gear with stats being sold in item stores in general. Only exception I might make is for gear dependant games (like WoW or Rift, for example) that have been out for a long time, I wouldn't have a problem with the sale of a basic starter raiding and/or PvP set when it would be very hard for a newcomer to find groups to get the gear to start raiding the normal way. If a new server were to be open, then this starter gear shouldn't be available for a long time.
4. If it comes to drops, no problem as long as it isn't prohibitively hard to get the drops otherwise. If it comes to other probability edges, specially when it comes to combat (as in, increase probability of critical hits and the like), then I might be ok with its use in open world PvE, but not in PvP or in dungeons.
In general, my phylosophy is... I wouldn't buy something from a cash shop for several reasons that aren't really relevant, but I'm confortable with games with cash shops as long as its existence doesn't affect my game experience and fun, and I don't feel forced to buy something from it to continue doing the game content (excluding expansions added after the game release, of course) or that makes it doing said content without cash shop items not fun to do.
Comments
Jump a little higher next time you missed that one.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
And I don't feel that this is an inherently bad idea, but if this part of the customer base is the one pumping the most money into the game, why should a game company bother to cater to the other guys? Why should they bother to keep making new content for players that aren't paying as much if anything, when they could both save and make more money just by creating some novelty widget, chuck it in the cash shop, and call it a day?
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
I am comfortable to an extent, because my comfort level changes based on the item content within the cash shop. I don't see cash shops as good or bad. I started to use your examples and state why I was comfortable, or not, with those types of items. However, the determining factor (for me) really is in the details of those items. If a player receives a benefit from an item, then the variables of that item being consumable, rechargable, reusable on cooldown, as well as the type of benefit (movement speed, experience bonus), in combination with percentages, etc, all come into the calculation of whether or not I have an issue. I cannot speak for others, but that's how I see it.
My answer is this:
I have no answer for you.
With the varying degrees to which cash shops exist and the range of items of a beneficial nature included in said cash shop, i am ok with some but not with others. My main outlook is based upon these factors: the amount of my involvement in that particular game and if the involvement is high, they the amount of bonus cs items provide. If i am heavy into a game and the cash shop provides heaps of items of a beneficial nature to those willing to pay out of the ass for it, then yeah, i hate it. This will not cause me to stop playing a game that i am heavy involved in however. If i only play the game casually with little interest towards the main goal of that game, then i don't care if they put super hack type stat bonuses into the cash shop cause i care little about the game as a whole. I enjoy playing LoL, but i mostly play vs bots and don't care how much ip i have. If the advantages sold (as a whole) are very small in scale and hardly detrimental to the game, then more power to the people paying for them, they will need it when they face me. I hope this type of answer is what you were looking for.
I'm sorry but the only one saying anything about the second coming is you. Fans of a game accept its flaws and strengths.
Very good point as I agree, many will take advantage of those who will pay,and focus on them, not to mention they can't control who takes advantage of these features. So they do a horrible job of balancing the environment, I'm not oblivious to that. Which is why I don't support the change to RMT.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
It probably would but I wouldn't play such a game for 3 main reasons. 1st, level based PvP games suck no matter which way you look at it. 2nd, gear grind types of games which result in PvP imbalance due to gear also suck. 3rd, I detest open world FFA PvP games because they attract the absolute worst kind of gankers and griefers.
We're back to those goal posts again. In some games those items would be a problem but in others they're really not. It's impossible to make blanket statements about what would or wouldn't be unfair without looking at the specific MMO. If you're looking at MMO's with competetive PvP and it's level based or gear based, then yes you have a problem. If the game is primarily about PvE then it isn't.
If the game's PvP based but not gear dependant and more about skill, and you get scaled up/down then again, I'd say not a problem. Like, for example, GW2.
Look at WoW. If you could get xp boosts in their cash shop as well as your celestial mount, would it really break the game? I don't think it would. They've done a good enough job of that already with the gear grind, so who cares if you level an alt up a bit faster?
This is far too complex a subject to just say "this is good and this is bad" due to the large number of other factors which have to be taken into account, and which vary from game to game.
Very recently, Micro transactions have surpassed the subscription model in popularity among a certain demographic. And I love that term to...there is little that is "micro" about them.
The idea is that the benevolent development company is intentionally sabotaging their own shop for the improved online experience of those who are admittedly NOT going to use it over the experience of those who would. They are convinced that the contents of the shop are pointless and have no value in the game...to those in the know. Even though the shop is still in beta and the company probably wanted to only test a few of the borderline items and that the real contents were probably NOT yet released to the beta test group.
But, I'd just like to point out one thing:
It's a fact Pay to Win = Pay The Bills
All you gotta do is go over to PWI's website and you will see one of the largest and fastest growing online gaming companies there is. P2W has brought PWI up to 13 titles in only a few years. So it would seem there are enough who will buy advantage to justify it.
But OH NO, this benevolent company will stand in the gap! No, they are not interested in profits like the ones mentioned above, and will be satisfied with simply keeping the electric bills paid as long as it puts a smile on their happy customer's faces. Yep, that's right. They are gonna keep coding their game for a bunch of freeloaders who think people with money are stupid.
Now, if you put yourself in the spender's shoes....Why are you going to use the shop?
I mean consistently..not once or twice?
It's to better your overall experience. How that happens depends on the game.
In a PVP based game guess what. That means for the spender to have a better overall experiences than a non spender, it means WIN. otherwise why on earth would the spender come back and spend again.
I wonder if it would be possible to limit usage to certain cash-shop items on a time based basis, say you can't buy an exp. pot (or at least use it) if you put [this much] time into the game on a given weekly basis.
Would that at least make these things more acceptable to people?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You're not annoying me at all. You're making me think through my positions which was part of the intent of this thread. I want us all to go through the mental excercise and really work through what we think and why we think it. Thanks for playing along.
Your inability to complete an event, mission, or dungeon would in fact hinder your progress and put the person(s) without cash shop advantages ahead of you. However, not all cash shop players will be bad, nor will they all be good. The fact remains that the average player with advantage granting cash shop items will have an edge over the average player without cash shop items.
With regards to people on different servers being more or less helpful than those on other servers, that's not really something a developer can control. However, even if your server is more helpful than the other, you would all be playing by the same natural game rules, so I don't think that argument is directly analagous to the impacts of cash shop advantages, which by their nature alter the game rules for those who use them.
I can see where you're coming from with regards to learning your character. However, most games have rather low learning curves, ensuring that you will get up to speed pretty quickly and just spam the same rotations over and over. I don't think 20% faster leveling will directly correlate to a 20% reduced understanding of one's character with how easy games have gotten in today's market.
Well exp pot don't bother me really but I figure you just used them as an example so..
While that might make sense from a gamers side. I've played enough F2P titles to know some of the biggest spenders are some of the people who also play the most. So from a company perspective limiting the buying power of your biggest consumer to appease someone who is no more then a potential customer is hard thing for them to do.
I don't approve of any advantage that can be bought in a cash shop, rewards should be earned imo.
If that were a goal earned through gameplay that was not purchaseable on the shop then yes, I'd be fine with it as everyone has access to it without using the cash shop to get more of it. Otherwise this would be the cash shop equivalent of giving out free heroin to get everyone hooked on it, turning them into customers. I'm aware that boosts aren't addictive, but its the same general marketing principle.
The most fair and equitiable experience boost I've seen is rested experience. Everyone gets equal access to it without having to use a cash shop, and it really is there to help "casual" players keep up with "hardcore" players.
Conditional yes. The only part of your definition that i see as an unfair advantage (Pay to Win) is number 3. SO without that yes, absolutely i love games that include all other parts of this (not seen as Pay to win, but definately still an advantage)
I think its important to note that OP believes any "advantage" makes a game Pay to Win. Im unemployed, and therefore i spend at least 16-20 hours every day in a game. I can therefore level and progress WAY more than the average or casual player. This gives me a HUGE advantage over those players, therefore by OP definition, every single game i play (regardless of what the game is) is Pay to Win.
Congratulations "every company that creates games" for making every single title ever Pay to Win. /sarcasm
What's interesting is if you mention the oldest form of "paying for advantage"--the purchase of account play time, the natural "advantage" that is simply a result of superior hours of leisure time invested.
One purchased advantage is sacrosanct...all others are verbotten.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Extremely logical fallacy and frankly a failure to read the original post in its entirety.
You do not purchase play time from the cash shop. How much you or I actually play the game has nothing to do with the cash shop. Playing the game more than other people is not an advantage granted by the cash shop. The question I asked was do you support cash shops selling you advantages, which I define as anything that bends the normal rules of the game.
Purchasing play time is not an advantage. It the means of accessing the game to begin with. Once you access the game, you are beholden to the same rules as everyone else unless there is a cash shop that sells items/perks that break the rules for those that buy them.
The question is whether or not you support the idea of a cash shop selling in-game advantages. Please stay on topic.
I'm okay with with on 2 points.
1. The item you obtain increases in usefulness depending on level
2. The item can be traded
They have to do it in a way that it feels balanced, but not in a way where the cash items in shop are exactly the same as the ones you can find in the game. If the item only had a visual difference this is completely acceptable.
So a person using cash to buy an item can literally use that item from level 1-50 and not have to change. They obviously want to make more money from paying customers as well so costumes with stat boosts or without stat boosts are useful.
Also where the first paragraph it makes it seem like it is just anticash shops for 1-4 listed.
I'm okay with these items being sold in the shop because if they do it right without completely unbalancing the game people will continue to play and put in money.
Lets look at the examples
1. Zod runes can be found in-game, but even if they were found in the store as a limited item possibly. They will have a cash market in D3 so they will get something like 10-20% and you will get something as well. If only those zod runes could open common chests this would be a failure on blizzards part and you know how well they test their games. Possibility of course, but only for items that you carry in your inventory.
2. Those boosts grant only a slight boost to xp-ip gain and only the most hardcore players will take advantage of them.
8 normal games a day required vs buying a champion directly though with runes at such a high cost you will save at most 25% of your time, but you will have to put in more time daily into the game. Guild Wars skill unlock packs I personally did not like them, but since there is a market for players who want their skills instantly they just filled the void as some of the skill quests take a while.
3. Actually im slightly against items that are much better than those found in games unless. (points listed above) Also almost no game would do this as it would require less money to play. So many instead have items that can be purchased at each level with fixed stats. If items are extremely powerful and unbalanced the market will die on its own as people will stop playing the game. Anything over 5% is already considered grossly overpowered.
As long as similar items can be found in the game ( though probably very rare items) for the most part people will feel that it is fine as long as it is a possibly. (see this in many mmos)
4. I'm very much against this one as the item provides such a stat boost a free to play or another subbed player cannot possibly catch up. Though if it were only a costume or visual changes to a rare item with similar stats it would be fine.
League of Legends and Guild Wars are very balanced as the items with the same stats are easy to get, but it is more about visuals such as skins characters or items.
Games that feel balanced and have a cash shop. Mostly trinkets and nik naks with visual changes. Confortable with certain items being sold, but against items that completely skew game balance.
I disapprove of buying advantage in a game.
I want to pay my sub
I don't get the logic that twists a sub fee into P2W
I pay 15 bucks I get one month
you pay 15 bucks you get one month
I don't see it, sorry.
Pay to win doesn't have anything to do with ones ability to actually make the best use of said advantage.
Sorry...still laughing. A lot of players holding up their games-played history as a sort of "game competence" resume are sorely mistaken, it seems.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
When you can name a game that doesn't have a "paying" way to gain advantages, legal or illegal, then this dicussion would be worthy. I'm sure there were some who figured out how to limit gold sellers, but so far I have yet to encounter someone who hasn't exploited a game by opening up their wallets.
Till then, GW2 offers probably the least p2w format out there. What little you think is there, at least that money goes to the company that made the game and can hopefully use it for better future content. That said, cash shops are a slippery slope, so I am glad your protests exist, to keep them honest.
i did read your post in its entirety. I also read the other 4 pages of posts, along with the dozens of threads on this very topic (with dozens more on specific games). My point i was trying to make, which you seem to have missed, is that your definition, being what it is, is flawed from the start. All youre trying to do is make "your" personal definition fit into something you personally dislike, and asking people to back you up. Excludiing certain aspects that dont fit in with your definition or could otherwise disprove or make your point obsolete. Well sir, I give you an A for effort, but reading the comments here, you failed fantastically at making people fall into your way of thinking.
Depends.
If the definition includes any of the 4 items, then I'd vote a conditional yes, depending on which items and on which terms.
If it includes all of the 4 items, I'd vote a no.
A bit more elaborate:
1. Depends on the contents of the chests. If the chests contain items covered in 2, no problem. If they contain items in 3, then I'd say it's a big no.
2. No problem here as long as the standard game rules aren't skewed to the point where I'd need to use the game shop items. For example, if a game offers XP boosts, but there's more than enough content in the game to level at a reasonable pace, no problem with them. On the other hand, if the game didn't have enough content to level without resorting to a long mindless grind without using the items from the cash store.
3. Big problem here. In general, I don't agree with gear with stats being sold in item stores in general. Only exception I might make is for gear dependant games (like WoW or Rift, for example) that have been out for a long time, I wouldn't have a problem with the sale of a basic starter raiding and/or PvP set when it would be very hard for a newcomer to find groups to get the gear to start raiding the normal way. If a new server were to be open, then this starter gear shouldn't be available for a long time.
4. If it comes to drops, no problem as long as it isn't prohibitively hard to get the drops otherwise. If it comes to other probability edges, specially when it comes to combat (as in, increase probability of critical hits and the like), then I might be ok with its use in open world PvE, but not in PvP or in dungeons.
In general, my phylosophy is... I wouldn't buy something from a cash shop for several reasons that aren't really relevant, but I'm confortable with games with cash shops as long as its existence doesn't affect my game experience and fun, and I don't feel forced to buy something from it to continue doing the game content (excluding expansions added after the game release, of course) or that makes it doing said content without cash shop items not fun to do.
What can men do against such reckless hate?