Precursors selling for 65 Gold on TP!
Right now, you can pay 100 bucks for gems to buy a precursor.
Give me 1 reason why Anet should devaluate their product just because they have the posibility to do so?
If ANet is keeping the value of Legendaries artificially high to deliberately incentivize players to buy them using gems, then they have committed a grave pay2win sin and deserve no respect from any quarter. Gems should be used primarily to buy gem store items, not to convert to gold to buy large scale purchases with. Ideally they would just remove the gold/gem exchange entirely. I do buy gems, and spend them, but only to buy items on the gem store that I believe are worthy of my purchase, because I do want to support the game, but if they are deliberately trying to get players to buy legendaries with cash then that is just predatory “evil gaming” behavior. South Park just did an excellent episode on that very topic.
You’re taking his example too literally. He’s not making a 1:1 comparison. His point is simple. People want luxury goods for cheap and it’s because they don’t understand how stuff is valued.
And the counterpoint is equally simple, there are no luxury goods in games.
Luxury goods in real life exist because the materials or craftsmanship used in their construction are naturally scarce, and therefore supply is by necessity lower than demand. In a game, supply is whatever the devs say it is, scarcity is always artificial. No item is necessary, no item is a luxury.
For example: Everyone wants to show off their Gy….something ghost dog mini pet.
No one runs around with Mini Queen Jennah.
My main rocks a mini-Marjory. She’s like my little sister.
Where did I say I want precursors for free? Seriously, where did you get that nonsense from? I’m questioning their way of acquiring precursors, not the time one needs to get precursors.
It’s called a straw-man argument, they love them around here.
He’s not implying they are a gemstore item.
But he is implying that players should be expected to buy them using gems, and that their market value is based on the fact that many players could never afford them without resorting to gems, which would make them a defacto gem store item.
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
Allow me to pick apart all the places where you’re wrong.
Gems should be used primarily to buy gem store items, not to convert to gold to buy large scale purchases with.
While this is your own opinion as to how GW2 should function, consider the fact that you aren’t the producer and designer of this game. Anet allows players to use purchased Gems to get in-game cosmetics or convenience items, as well as use them to trade for in-game Gold. If you want to make large scale purchases to convert to enough Gold to buy a Legendary, what successful business wouldn’t want all that revenue? Anet lets the players choose how to spend their optional Gem purchases. I know of a player who spent tens of thousands of real life dollars on microtransactions in another game.
And the counterpoint is equally simple, there are no luxury goods in games.
Luxury goods in real life exist because the materials or craftsmanship used in their construction are naturally scarce, and therefore supply is by necessity lower than demand. In a game, supply is whatever the devs say it is, scarcity is always artificial. No item is necessary, no item is a luxury.
Not sure how any of us can explain how Capitalism works to help you understand. You take a highly demanded item that’s hard to get, couple that with other players willing to pay large sums of Gold for it, and you have yourself a perfectly working market. Supply and Demand. Every single highly demanded skin in this game is a luxury item. As with real life, you can still get to the store in the same amount of time driving a Toyota as you would a Ferrari. Your creditcards are held in place the same in a generic Walmart wallet as it would be in a Gucci one. And my crafted Pearl Broadsword does the same amount of damage as Dawn. The only differences is the looks or function. I don’t need to look good driving to the store, I don’t need to have a wallet that no one knows I have until I take it out of my pocket, and I don’t need to craft Sunrise to beat the game.
Luxury goods have always existed in games. In fact, it’s more important in Asian gaming cultures than anything else. Having status in game is extremely important in the Chinese and Korean markets. That status can either be extreme skill (which actually pays off with sponsorships in competitive circuits) or best looking weapons/armors. That’s why P2W games thrive in Asia. Players are more willing to spend all their disposable income buying the best gear in an MMO than their US or European counterparts.
While this is your own opinion as to how GW2 should function, consider the fact that you aren’t the producer and designer of this game. Anet allows players to use purchased Gems to get in-game cosmetics or convenience items, as well as use them to trade for in-game Gold. If you want to make large scale purchases to convert to enough Gold to buy a Legendary, what successful business wouldn’t want all that revenue? Anet lets the players choose how to spend their optional Gem purchases. I know of a player who spent tens of thousands of real life dollars on microtransactions in another game.
Yes, but if they make design decisions with this in mind then it is the worst kind of predatory game development, and would make me think considerably less of the developers. They should never view high gold prices as dollar signs for themselves.
Not sure how any of us can explain how Capitalism works to help you understand. You take a highly demanded item that’s hard to get, couple that with other players willing to pay large sums of Gold for it, and you have yourself a perfectly working market. Supply and Demand.
But again, in the game, both supply and demand are artificially controlled, they are not innate to the product as they are in the real world. If Ferrari could churn out millions of their cars per year, all with the same level of quality and with a solid profit margin on each, I’m sure they would do so, but they can’t. ANet CAN do this, so there’s no reason why they shouldn’t.
And seriously, people who care about “status” in a game are just pathetic anyways, who cares what they get up to?
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
But again, in the game, both supply and demand are artificially controlled, they are not innate to the product as they are in the real world.
Since items are not constrained by production or material costs for the most part, the supply for listed items is actually determined by demand in this game. People need foxfires so wood price drops, ori is at a higher price, so farmers go hit all the ori nodes and increase supply.
The demand for Dawn/Twilight means higher prices for all things associated for greatswords rise in price based on demand for them, the Supply for those things also increases because there is a higher revenue for people to farm it.
Yes all the drop rates are set by the Devs, but whats on the TP comes from players getting it there through their play time.
If, however, the purpose is to be a long term goal that carries the prestige of being both time consuming and rare, then, yes, there must be a cost intensive aspect.
That is literally what the icy runestones are for.
If, however, the purpose is to be a long term goal that carries the prestige of being both time consuming and rare, then, yes, there must be a cost intensive aspect.
That is literally what the icy runestones are for.
That is a fixed, insignificant cost. They exist exclusively as a minor gold sink.
If ANet is keeping the value of Legendaries artificially high to deliberately incentivize players to buy them using gems, then they have committed a grave pay2win sin
What do you win? The Lions Arch AFK beauty pageant? 5 Achievement Points for the leaderboard? This is either intentional hyperbole or you aren’t familiar with actual pay to win games.
If, however, the purpose is to be a long term goal that carries the prestige of being both time consuming and rare, then, yes, there must be a cost intensive aspect.
That is literally what the icy runestones are for.
That is a fixed, insignificant cost. They exist exclusively as a minor gold sink.
legendaries would not need precursors to be legitimate long term goal, ignoring the precursor completely, a substantial amount of time is spend on the other components. They have people who got a lucky precursor a year ago, and are still working their way towards the non precursor requirements.
If, however, the purpose is to be a long term goal that carries the prestige of being both time consuming and rare, then, yes, there must be a cost intensive aspect.
That is literally what the icy runestones are for.
That is a fixed, insignificant cost. They exist exclusively as a minor gold sink.
legendaries would not need precursors to be legitimate long term goal, ignoring the precursor completely, a substantial amount of time is spend on the other components. They have people who got a lucky precursor a year ago, and are still working their way towards the non precursor requirements.
I got my lucky precursor early this summer. I’ve only got the Gift of Magic and Gift of Might left to go.
I’ve been casually farming the materials (saving my precious gold) and as of right now, of the 2,250 T6 Materials and Glob of Ecto required for the Gift of Fortune, I’ve got only 768 left to go (that number is actually less, as I haven’t updated my tracking log in 2 weeks).
I am coming from a nearly empty bank of T6 as I was leveling up to 500 in several crafting professions when my lucky precursor showed up.
It really does not take that long to accumulate the non-precursor parts if you are working towards that goal.
If, however, the purpose is to be a long term goal that carries the prestige of being both time consuming and rare, then, yes, there must be a cost intensive aspect.
That is literally what the icy runestones are for.
That is a fixed, insignificant cost. They exist exclusively as a minor gold sink.
legendaries would not need precursors to be legitimate long term goal, ignoring the precursor completely, a substantial amount of time is spend on the other components. They have people who got a lucky precursor a year ago, and are still working their way towards the non precursor requirements.
I got my lucky precursor early this summer. I’ve only got the Gift of Magic and Gift of Might left to go.
I’ve been casually farming the materials (saving my precious gold) and as of right now, of the 2,250 T6 Materials and Glob of Ecto required for the Gift of Fortune, I’ve got only 768 left to go (that number is actually less, as I haven’t updated my tracking log in 2 weeks).
I am coming from a nearly empty bank of T6 as I was leveling up to 500 in several crafting professions when my lucky precursor showed up.
It really does not take that long to accumulate the non-precursor parts if you are working towards that goal.
4-5 months is a long term goal in a videogame. You also probably had karma already.
regardless i think that spending 4-5 months on one item is about as much as developer should ask.
If, however, the purpose is to be a long term goal that carries the prestige of being both time consuming and rare, then, yes, there must be a cost intensive aspect.
That is literally what the icy runestones are for.
That is a fixed, insignificant cost. They exist exclusively as a minor gold sink.
legendaries would not need precursors to be legitimate long term goal, ignoring the precursor completely, a substantial amount of time is spend on the other components. They have people who got a lucky precursor a year ago, and are still working their way towards the non precursor requirements.
I got my lucky precursor early this summer. I’ve only got the Gift of Magic and Gift of Might left to go.
I’ve been casually farming the materials (saving my precious gold) and as of right now, of the 2,250 T6 Materials and Glob of Ecto required for the Gift of Fortune, I’ve got only 768 left to go (that number is actually less, as I haven’t updated my tracking log in 2 weeks).
I am coming from a nearly empty bank of T6 as I was leveling up to 500 in several crafting professions when my lucky precursor showed up.
It really does not take that long to accumulate the non-precursor parts if you are working towards that goal.
4-5 months is a long term goal in a videogame. You also probably had karma already.
regardless i think that spending 4-5 months on one item is about as much as developer should ask.
Don’t forget that how and what you do within those 4-5 months matters too. If you spend them farming then you should have a legendary within that time period. If you’re just casually playing then it’s unlikely that you will. Using 4-5 months can also be misleading without considering hours played as well.
I’m on the fence about whether 4-5 months would be considered long term in the MMO realm. I’m thinking more along the lines of twice that. This is just my opinion though.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
Since items are not constrained by production or material costs for the most part, the supply for listed items is actually determined by demand in this game. People need foxfires so wood price drops, ori is at a higher price, so farmers go hit all the ori nodes and increase supply.
This argument has been made numerous times, but it’s not entirely true. Supply is influenced by demand, and yes, if demand rises to the level that it’s worth someone’s time to harvest it then supply will increase, but supply is determined by ANet, who decided that Foxfire only drops from the two top tier tree types (alliteration much?), not the other trees, that it only appears roughly every 5-10 trees or whatever the average is, rather than every 50, or on every tree, etc. They set the rules for how commonly/rarely the material drops, and therefore how likely it is to enter the world.
Players can either choose to engage that mechanism to increase that natural supply level (by spending more time harvesting trees than they used to), or keep the production levels at the natural supply level (by harvesting no more trees than they used to), but ultimately it’s ANet that defines the outcome, and reserve the right to change those mechanisms if the result is significantly outside their projections.
If players didn’t take the bait and supplies were lower than they wanted them to be, they would increase the drop rates per tree, or increase the variety of trees that provided them. If Foxfire were flooding the markets to a degree that they were not comfortable with, they would do the opposite. This is not “supply and demand,” as in a true supply and demand system, these natural factors are outside of human control, the amount of ore available and the difficulty in harvesting it are fixed factors in the world, and it is only the “players” that can influence how they interact with that reality.
That is a fixed, insignificant cost. They exist exclusively as a minor gold sink.
It’s a fairly insignificant cost when TP barons are running around with thousands of gold, but it was quite significant when Precursors were selling for a couple hundred gold, and when 200 gold was seen as a reasonable “max” achievement reward.
What do you win? The Lions Arch AFK beauty pageant? 5 Achievement Points for the leaderboard? This is either intentional hyperbole or you aren’t familiar with actual pay to win games.
This is a very cosmetics-oriented game. Yes, looking cool is “winning,” just as much as coming out ahead on PvP leaderboards might be in a more PvP-oriented game.
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
^not to mention that t6 mats for the most part are not targetable due to dr kicking in and rather low drop rates coupled with rng preventing farming. This makes supply mostly based from random drops and not supply created via demand.
^^ Exactly why Ohoni’s idea of having people farm their T6 mats instead of buying won’t work. Under a scheme where the unique element of crafting a legendary is NOT the boundary to ownership, then something else becomes that boundary. Anet would basically have to increase all other mats orders of magnitude. That’s not to ensure it stays cheap, that’s to ensure that all the other items like armor, etc… stay within a reasonable range of purchase price for entry level players.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
^^ Exactly why Ohoni’s idea of having people farm their T6 mats instead of buying won’t work. Under a scheme where the unique element of crafting a legendary is NOT the boundary to ownership, then something else becomes that boundary. Anet would basically have to increase all other mats orders of magnitude.
The thing is, the existing “boundaries” of requiring World Completion, enough karma for Gift of Luck, enough WvW for Gift of Battle, etc. are already plenty of “boundary,” the money boundary is entirely unnecessary.
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
Those are personal rewards that don’t affect others in the same way purchases on the market does. They really aren’t comparable as boundaries to ownership like a precursor. Besides, I think it’s debatable that those are even significant boundaries at all. Precursor will always be the definite materials boundary because the value and effort can be gauged. Those other ones are rather nebulous.
That still doesn’t change the fact that shifting boundary of ownership from precursor to something else fixes any issue with legendary ownership. Steal Paul, pay Peter kind of thing going on here.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Those are personal rewards that don’t affect others in the same way purchases on the market does. They really aren’t comparable as boundaries to ownership like a precursor.
Those two statements are completely irrelevant to each other. A boundary to ownership IS a personal one, it’s what stands between you and the thing you want, whether that barrier is purely generated by the game or whether some other player is a part of that barrier. To an individual player it makes no difference whether he lacks the widget he wants because the game did not provide it to him, or because the game provided it to a different player and that player won’t give it to him, all that matters is that he does not have it.
Precursor will always be the definite materials boundary because the value and effort can be gauged. Those other ones are rather nebulous.
That’s nonsense, it’s the value of the precursor that is nebulous, because it could drop for you today, tomorrow, or never, and the market value is constantly in flux. It’s the direct barriers in the Legendary recipe that are fixed in nature, they require a set number of activities to achieve with very little randomness involved.
That still doesn’t change the fact that shifting boundary of ownership from precursor to something else fixes any issue with legendary ownership. Steal Paul, pay Peter kind of thing going on here.
For one thing, I can’t speak for others, but I would prefer a system in which I were “fighting the game” to one where I was “fighting the other players.” I would prefer a stable, low RNG option to earning Precursors from the game directly, to one in which I’m constantly fighting against market forces.
For another, you seem to be insisting that however you earn a Legendary, it has to be equivalent to earning ~3000 gold to buy all that stuff on the TP, and I do not believe that has to be, or should be the case. The total cost should come down considerably, back to what it was nearer to launch.
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
All nice academic discussion but precursor is clearly the limiting factor here and for good reason; it allows it to be a control on legendary ownership without affecting of other goods in the game. You still haven’t grasped this fundamental design. It’s not coincidence that this is how it works. Increasing their availability does not solve anything. Suggesting things that won’t happen because they go against the values and intent that Anet has is completely academic.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
^not to mention that t6 mats for the most part are not targetable due to dr kicking in and rather low drop rates coupled with rng preventing farming. This makes supply mostly based from random drops and not supply created via demand.
You can get 40 or so bags of t6 mats a month guaranteed from the laurel vendor.
All nice academic discussion but precursor is clearly the limiting factor here and for good reason; it allows it to be a control on legendary ownership without affecting of other goods in the game.
That’s nonsense, as others on this thread, usually arguing against me, have insisted, the Precursors are integrally tied into the markets, and the one element that would be most difficult for ANet to fool around with (which is not a reason why they shouldn’t, just that they need to exercise care when doing so).
If ANet were to, say, drop the Precursor prices to zero, ignoring all other possible ramifications for the moment and assuming all else remains the same, and they wanted to make Legendaries just “harder to get” in a general sense, they have plenty of other levers. They could require ten times as many dungeon tokens. They could require a higher WvW rank (I still don’t have the rank necessary for buying GoB currently, although I picked up a couple pre-shift just in case). They could add in new requirements like PvP rank, total Achievement points, etc. There are any number of ways they could shift the required ingredients around to make Legendaries harder to get that would make more sense than Precursors.
But again, they shouldn’t make legendaries harder to get than they are, they should make them at least slightly easier than they currently are for non-wealthy players.
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
Having status in game is extremely important in the Chinese and Korean markets. That status can either be extreme skill (which actually pays off with sponsorships in competitive circuits) or best looking weapons/armors. That’s why P2W games thrive in Asia. Players are more willing to spend all their disposable income buying the best gear in an MMO than their US or European counterparts.
Not only in games, also in real life. I was in China a couple of days ago and status is everything. Also, the VIP-word is somewhat redundant, VIP is everywhere, phone numbers, separate rooms, hotel lounges etc etc. People were always asking about my Swiss watch and how much it cost, was kinda funny. Where I live no one asks me about this and people don’t ask about money or status – they try to look equal.
Oh one other thing, someone wrote that buying a precursor with real money is pay to win. No it isn’t. The precursor is not better than any other BiS item. So this doesn’t count. Coming from one who bought a precursor with real money twice… I didn’t have luck until now with a drop or forge.
‘would of been’ —> wrong
Oh one other thing, someone wrote that buying a precursor with real money is pay to win. No it isn’t. The precursor is not better than any other BiS item.
Again, it totally depends on what your victory condition is. This is a largely non-competitive game in which the difference between full Exotic and full Ascended is negligible. Cosmetics are the major reward, not superior stats, so being able to buy those cosmetics with cash money, while other players have to grind for them, is pay to win. The only thing players should be spending cash money on is stuff in the gem store, which is explicitly tagged as cash stuff.
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
Oh one other thing, someone wrote that buying a precursor with real money is pay to win. No it isn’t. The precursor is not better than any other BiS item.
Again, it totally depends on what your victory condition is. This is a largely non-competitive game in which the difference between full Exotic and full Ascended is negligible. Cosmetics are the major reward, not superior stats, so being able to buy those cosmetics with cash money, while other players have to grind for them, is pay to win. The only thing players should be spending cash money on is stuff in the gem store, which is explicitly tagged as cash stuff.
Having the term “pay 2 win” apply to personal victory conditions makes it a meaningless term.
As it is meaningless, it would be irrational for you to care if the game is pay 2 win or not.
Oh one other thing, someone wrote that buying a precursor with real money is pay to win. No it isn’t. The precursor is not better than any other BiS item.
Again, it totally depends on what your victory condition is. This is a largely non-competitive game in which the difference between full Exotic and full Ascended is negligible. Cosmetics are the major reward, not superior stats, so being able to buy those cosmetics with cash money, while other players have to grind for them, is pay to win. The only thing players should be spending cash money on is stuff in the gem store, which is explicitly tagged as cash stuff.
Totally subjective definition and wrong. P2W only applies to ingame statistical advantage bought for real money, Not cosmetics.
And dont pull the “you dont understand what im saying line” that you over use. People understand what you are saying. You are just wrong.
Totally subjective definition and wrong. P2W only applies to ingame statistical advantage bought for real money, Not cosmetics.
Yeeeah, getting kinda of tired of seeing P2W as an insult to GW2. Aside from being able to pay real money for gold to buy things off the trading post, it’s not pay to win. Even then, it’s pay for convenience.
If you want to gripe about P2W, there’s ArcheAge for that. Want land to farm in peace? No other choice but to pay. Want to use the friggin’ auction house? Pay. Want 10x the labor points for gathering and crafting, you better become a “sponsor,” which is a monthly subscription.
AA == P2W.
GW2 =/= P2W.
“I’m finding companies should sell access to forums,
it seems many like them better than the games they comment on.” -Horrorscope.7632
Totally subjective definition and wrong. P2W only applies to ingame statistical advantage bought for real money, Not cosmetics.
Yeeeah, getting kinda of tired of seeing P2W as an insult to GW2. Aside from being able to pay real money for gold to buy things off the trading post, it’s not pay to win. Even then, it’s pay for convenience.
If you want to gripe about P2W, there’s ArcheAge for that. Want land to farm in peace? No other choice but to pay. Want to use the friggin’ auction house? Pay. Want 10x the labor points for gathering and crafting, you better become a “sponsor,” which is a monthly subscription.
AA == P2W.
GW2 =/= P2W.
Yet skins are the main driving factor of GW2. You don’t need to pay to win the game, but if you want to have new skins which make the game unique, you have to pay (or convert all your gold).
Pay2Unique is hardly something anyone should be mad about. If they are, I would suggest not playing any games with microtransactions anymore, because the state of the industry is not going in a direction you’ll be comfortable with.
Yet skins are the main driving factor of GW2. You don’t need to pay to win the game, but if you want to have new skins which make the game unique, you have to pay (or convert all your gold).
I certainly recognize that as well. But that has more to do with how rewards are distributed as a matter of RNG, which is a rather lengthy discussion in another thread.
“I’m finding companies should sell access to forums,
it seems many like them better than the games they comment on.” -Horrorscope.7632
No one has ever complained in gw2 PVP that someone was able to beat them because of those OP toxic shoulder skins.
The only thing that comes close to a P2W item is the watchwork pick because it gives additional items compared to the vendor items. But since there is the ability of each player to trade gold for gems and buy one it doesn’t really count. If fact I fall into the school of thought that since you can convert gold to gems there is no real possibility for gw2 to be P2W unless they try really hard.
No one has ever complained in gw2 PVP that someone was able to beat them because of those OP toxic shoulder skins.
The only thing that comes close to a P2W item is the watchwork pick because it gives additional items compared to the vendor items. But since there is the ability of each player to trade gold for gems and buy one it doesn’t really count. If fact I fall into the school of thought that since you can convert gold to gems there is no real possibility for gw2 to be P2W unless they try really hard.
I wouldn’t even say that the Watchwork pick is on the P2W track. It did set an unpleasant precedent of a Gem Store item having an economy impact (and it is also the main reason I’m holding out on buying any other tools, just in case they release another perked version), but it certainly wasn’t pay to win.
I’m not sure why some insist that p2w is so specific. It has become an eponym for anything where rl cash is used to obtain a goal in an advantageous fashion over not using rl cash. It is very much like a brand name becoming the standard for something. Examples of this are Kleenex for tissues, in the UK Hoover for vacuum/ing, or aspirin for acetylsalicylic acid.
Ofc if we must insist on it being so specific we can always just categorize things not encompassed by it as simply cheating.
(edited by Essence Snow.3194)
I’m not sure why some insist that p2w is so specific. It has become an eponym for anything where rl cash is used to obtain a goal in an advantageous fashion over not using rl cash. It is very much like a brand name becoming the standard for something. Examples of this are Kleenex for tissues, in the UK Hoover for vacuum/ing, or aspirin for acetylsalicylic acid.
But the fact that some skins are only available in the gem store and that people can exchange real cash for gold was clear from the start, so there is no reason to make a fuss about it now.
Bloin – Running around, tagging Keeps, getting whack on Scoobie Snacks.
Didn’t realize stating the truth was the same as fussing.
I’m not sure why some insist that p2w is so specific. It has become an eponym for anything where rl cash is used to obtain a goal in an advantageous fashion over not using rl cash. It is very much like a brand name becoming the standard for something. Examples of this are Kleenex for tissues, in the UK Hoover for vacuum/ing, or aspirin for acetylsalicylic acid.
Ofc if we must insist on it being so specific we can always just categorize things not encompassed by it as simply cheating.
If the term “P2W” has morphed into a synonym for “anything I don’t like in the cash store”, then it has lost its ability to be used in intelligent debate as it no longer objectively classifies something.
I’m not sure why some insist that p2w is so specific. It has become an eponym for anything where rl cash is used to obtain a goal in an advantageous fashion over not using rl cash. It is very much like a brand name becoming the standard for something. Examples of this are Kleenex for tissues, in the UK Hoover for vacuum/ing, or aspirin for acetylsalicylic acid.
Ofc if we must insist on it being so specific we can always just categorize things not encompassed by it as simply cheating.
If the term “P2W” has morphed into a synonym for “anything I don’t like in the cash store”, then it has lost its ability to be used in intelligent debate as it no longer objectively classifies something.
Is that what I said? I don’t believe so.
Is that what I said? I don’t believe so.
It is the distilled result of what you said. It may not be how you personally would use the term, but it is how many people already are using the term.
Distilled? How? I fail to understand how:
“anything I don’t like in the cash store”
can be a distilled result of
“where rl cash is used to obtain a goal in an advantageous fashion over not using rl cash”
Unless a)reading comprehension fail b) Strawman c) didn’t read
Distilled? How? I fail to understand how:
“anything I don’t like in the cash store”
can be a distilled result of
“where rl cash is used to obtain a goal in an advantageous fashion over not using rl cash”Unless a)reading comprehension fail b) Strawman c) didn’t read
P2W meant “pay to win”. You can only win when there are objective win/loss criteria. You can only pay to win when you can improve your character’s ability to win by paying real life money.
If we now state that P2W means “real life cash is used to obtain a goal faster”, then everything is P2W because literally anything can be a goal.
Since P2W applies to literally everything, I can honestly state that everything I don’t like is P2W while leaving out the part about everything being P2W.
That’s the net result. Everything is P2W, but I only call it P2W when I don’t like it.
You see your second sentence is where the issue is. You are imposing a specific defined criteria to something where it is not necessary. To win something does not require improving ability (ability used in specific context). What is the objective? How is that objective obtained? Can more than one compete for said objective in some manner? Can one use paying to gain advantage over another in the fashion to which that objective is obtained?
edit* rewording for sake of the confusion to which I know that will cause
(edited by Essence Snow.3194)
You see your second sentence is where the issue is. You are imposing a specific defined criteria to something where it is not necessary. To win something does not require improving ability.
Paying to win requires that you can pay to improve your ability to win.
If paying does not improve your ability to win, then it isn’t pay to win.
Take chess, for example. If I have the option to buy an extra Queen that will replace one of my Pawns, then that is P2W because it bestows an increased ability to win in exchange for cash. I didn’t get better at chess, I simply paid for the ability to win more easily. By a similar token, if I have the option to pay for green pieces instead of white, it is not P2W even if my goal is to have green pieces since having green pieces is not a condition of winning a chess match and in fact has no bearing on my ability to win the match. It allows me to have more green pieces than you, but I didn’t win anything.
(edited by mtpelion.4562)
Having the term “pay 2 win” apply to personal victory conditions makes it a meaningless term.
As it is meaningless, it would be irrational for you to care if the game is pay 2 win or not.
Neither of those statements make any sense. “Pay 2 win” ONLY applies to “personal victory conditions.” If having slightly higher stats that make you more likely to win a fight matters to you, then that is a “personal victory condition.” And whether it’s irrational for someone to care whether a game is P2W, and whether that bothers them, is entirely their own choice.
Totally subjective definition and wrong. P2W only applies to ingame statistical advantage bought for real money, Not cosmetics.
Totally subjective definition and wrong. P2W applies to any ingame advantage bought for real money, including cosmetics.
Aside from being able to pay real money for gold to buy things off the trading post, it’s not pay to win. Even then, it’s pay for convenience.
That’s what P2W means, being able to use cash money to bypass ingame effort. There are very few exploitative money games out there in which you can’t “win” without spending the extra money, but spending the money makes “winning” much more convenient, by for example allowing you to bypass long cooldowns.
If you want to gripe about P2W, there’s ArcheAge for that. Want land to farm in peace? No other choice but to pay. Want to use the friggin’ auction house? Pay. Want 10x the labor points for gathering and crafting, you better become a “sponsor,” which is a monthly subscription.
AA == P2W.
GW2 =/= P2W.
One game being worse does not mean that another cannot still have problems.
No one has ever complained in gw2 PVP that someone was able to beat them because of those OP toxic shoulder skins.
Sure, but PvP competition is not the only metric of victory, especially for those that don’t engage in PvP at all.
Let’s engage in a thought experiment, here are a few potential scenarios:
1. You can only earn Legendaries through in-game activities. There is no Legendary component that can be bought through gems, or through gems converted into gold. Any person you see with a legendary, you know that they personally did a bunch of difficult and time consuming ingame activities to earn it.
2. You can only buy Legendaries right off the gem store, just like the mining tools. This would mean that aside from the cosmetic appearance, it would mean nothing more than that you had extra dollars to spend.
3. Legendaries are meant to represent a significant gameplay achievement, yet it can be bought with dollars if you so choose, representing absolutely no game achievement on your part. You have gained this achievement using dollars rather than using gameplay skill and effort. How is this not paying to avoid ingame effort?
Personally, I don’t have a problem with Gw2’s gem store, at least not with most of it. I do have problems with the gem exchange. I would prefer a hard firewall between gems and gold, such that it would be impossible to buy gem store items using ingame means, and impossible to buy ingame items using cash. This way, if you see someone walking around wearing Zodiac armor, you can appreciate how it looks, but you would know exactly how they got it, and if you saw someone with an Infinite Light, you can appreciate how it looks, and know that they earned it in game, not using cash.
They can put cool stuff on the gem store if they like, I have no problem with that and would even buy it from time to time, but interaction between the gem store and the in-game economy are not good.
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
Yeah nvm the whole edit……just carry on………(sarcasm btw)
All of that completely depends on what the objective is. If the two players are trying to get green pieces and one can pay to get green pieces faster…..then yes they can p2w. There are multitudes possibilities in terms of objectives. Even in chess…..least amount of clock time, most losses while using the most logical moves (losses can be a win if that’s the objective), most games played consecutively, etc etc….
It all depends on the objective and means to that objective.
Yeah nvm the whole edit……just carry on………(sarcasm btw)
All of that completely depends on what the objective is. If the two players are trying to get green pieces and one can pay to get green pieces faster…..then yes they can p2w. There are multitudes possibilities in terms of objectives. Even in chess…..least amount of clock time, most losses while using the most logical moves (losses can be a win if that’s the objective), most games played consecutively, etc etc….
It all depends on the objective and means to that objective.
The objective of chess is to checkmate the other King piece.
That is how you win.
The people playing chess may have objectives that are unrelated to checkmating the other King piece (such as having green pieces). My ability to buy green pieces helps me accomplish my personal objective, but it does not impact the objective of the game. Thus I cannot pay to win at chess by getting green pieces.
Yeah nvm the whole edit……just carry on………(sarcasm btw)
All of that completely depends on what the objective is. If the two players are trying to get green pieces and one can pay to get green pieces faster…..then yes they can p2w. There are multitudes possibilities in terms of objectives. Even in chess…..least amount of clock time, most losses while using the most logical moves (losses can be a win if that’s the objective), most games played consecutively, etc etc….
It all depends on the objective and means to that objective.
The objective of chess is to checkmate the other King piece.
That is how you win.
The people playing chess may have objectives that are unrelated to checkmating the other King piece (such as having green pieces). My ability to buy green pieces helps me accomplish my personal objective, but it does not impact the objective of the game. Thus I cannot pay to win at chess by getting green pieces.
you have identitifed your own winning conditions.
GW2 has not identified winning conditions.
by your definition any game without pvp cannot be pay to win.
However, having such an open definition of win, does lead to communication problems, and a nebulous meaning of the word. However, winning is basically a nebulous term.
you have identitifed your own winning conditions.
GW2 has not identified winning conditions.
by your definition any game without pvp cannot be pay to win.However, having such an open definition of win, does lead to communication problems, and a nebulous meaning of the word. However, winning is basically a nebulous term.
The expression “pay to win” originated in and exclusively applied to PvP games. I would argue that applying it to PvE would be incorrect unless redefined to be nebulous enough to be irrelevant.
I think an appropriate term for PvE would be “P4A” or pay for advantage.
If you’re trying to get green pieces and happen to be playing chess while doing so then yes you can.
There are multiple possible objectives<—————very easy concept
If you’re trying to get green pieces and happen to be playing chess while doing so then yes you can.
There are multiple possible objectives<—————very easy concept
Yes, and there is a difference between personal objectives and THE objective when playing a game.
And just what would that objective while playing the game be?
you have identitifed your own winning conditions.
GW2 has not identified winning conditions.
by your definition any game without pvp cannot be pay to win.However, having such an open definition of win, does lead to communication problems, and a nebulous meaning of the word. However, winning is basically a nebulous term.
The expression “pay to win” originated in and exclusively applied to PvP games. I would argue that applying it to PvE would be incorrect unless redefined to be nebulous enough to be irrelevant.
I think an appropriate term for PvE would be “P4A” or pay for advantage.
This is what that watchwork pick would fall under. In gw2 there are no “winning conditions” other than sPvP/WvW victory conditions or the ability to complete end game PvE. None of these things are enhanced by precursors or legendary weapons.