Guild Wars 2

TChalla.7146:

killcannon.2576:

TChalla.7146:

killcannon.2576:

TChalla.7146:

AcidicVision.5498:

Incorrect. You have to look at the impact of that singular item on the game as a whole. In that regard sprockets are insignificant.

Arguing any point to those with the “Pay to Win” mindset or the “I got screwed because they added an unlimited use pick that gives sprockets and all I got was this lousy pick that I can use forever but only gives me ore” mentality is futile. They are going to believe what they believe, regardless of how flawed the logic might be. Your best course of action is just to play the game the same as you have been, and come in here periodically for either a good laugh or to be reminded just how fun it must be to try and please some people.

The only wrong point of view here is trying to say that p2w is subjective. It is not.

Anything that sets one player above another in any way that can not be obtained through normal play in game is p2w. This includes qol items.

The only subjective part that comes in is if it makes a difference to you. How much p2w is ok, and where is the line for individual players.

Against my better judgment, I’ll go ahead and bite.

First of all, the term “pay to win” has no true definition. It is a made up term. However, even if you want to argue over a definition that doesn’t truly exist, we’ll use the definition that is most commonly touted.

Pay2Win means any money exchange that will allow a player to gain a significant advantage over their opponents.

I have highlighted the word significant. Now go ahead and give me your perception of what significant is. And while you do that, you can think long and hard about just how subjective the very definition of Pay to Win is, making it a ridiculous argument all unto itself. Once you realize that, you’ll realize just how ridiculous the argument is about the “oh-so-important and ‘must have to compete’ sprockets” is.

Let it sink in.

The term Significant is subjective and can not be part of any definition.

Then you cannot argue Pay to Win at all, since there is no set definition of Pay to Win.

I gave you the definition. If you choose to ignore it, it is your choice.

AcidicVision.5498:

killcannon.2576:

The gem store is not part of the game, any more than Gamestop is part of the game.

That is subjective. I can open the gem store in the game. I get items from the gem store in my in-game mail. I get gem store items for achievement rewards. It is just your opinion its not “part” of the game.

See how this works?

It is indeed not subjective. It’s a store.

killcannon.2576:

It is indeed not subjective. It’s a store.

A store that is part of the game.

part
pärt/Submit
noun
1.
a piece or segment of something such as an object, activity, or period of time, which combined with other pieces makes up the whole.

But you are free to disagree. Its your opinion. And opinions are subjective.

With that I am done. I think all of your arguments have been sufficiently stuffed, using your own words.

killcannon.2576:

TChalla.7146:

killcannon.2576:

TChalla.7146:

killcannon.2576:

TChalla.7146:

AcidicVision.5498:

Incorrect. You have to look at the impact of that singular item on the game as a whole. In that regard sprockets are insignificant.

Arguing any point to those with the “Pay to Win” mindset or the “I got screwed because they added an unlimited use pick that gives sprockets and all I got was this lousy pick that I can use forever but only gives me ore” mentality is futile. They are going to believe what they believe, regardless of how flawed the logic might be. Your best course of action is just to play the game the same as you have been, and come in here periodically for either a good laugh or to be reminded just how fun it must be to try and please some people.

The only wrong point of view here is trying to say that p2w is subjective. It is not.

Anything that sets one player above another in any way that can not be obtained through normal play in game is p2w. This includes qol items.

The only subjective part that comes in is if it makes a difference to you. How much p2w is ok, and where is the line for individual players.

Against my better judgment, I’ll go ahead and bite.

First of all, the term “pay to win” has no true definition. It is a made up term. However, even if you want to argue over a definition that doesn’t truly exist, we’ll use the definition that is most commonly touted.

Pay2Win means any money exchange that will allow a player to gain a significant advantage over their opponents.

I have highlighted the word significant. Now go ahead and give me your perception of what significant is. And while you do that, you can think long and hard about just how subjective the very definition of Pay to Win is, making it a ridiculous argument all unto itself. Once you realize that, you’ll realize just how ridiculous the argument is about the “oh-so-important and ‘must have to compete’ sprockets” is.

Let it sink in.

The term Significant is subjective and can not be part of any definition.

Then you cannot argue Pay to Win at all, since there is no set definition of Pay to Win.

I gave you the definition. If you choose to ignore it is your choice.

Now I know you’re arguing just to argue.

There is no set definition of what Pay to Win is. What you gave me was your definition. Go Google “pay 2 win definition.” You’ll get plenty of opinions about what it is, but you will NOT find a true definition.

As I said before (and thank you for proving my point), there is no sense in making the “Pay to Win” conspiracy theorists try and understand. I’ll continue reading this topic, laughing at those that think this is Pay to Win.

AcidicVision.5498:

killcannon.2576:

It is indeed not subjective. It’s a store.

A store that is part of the game.

part
pärt/Submit
noun
1.
a piece or segment of something such as an object, activity, or period of time, which combined with other pieces makes up the whole.

But you are free to disagree. Its your opinion. And opinions are subjective.

Incorrect. You consider it part of the game because you can buy things from it to use in game. This definition would also include any and all electronic retailers, brick and mortar stores that sell gemcards or copies of the game itself. Since this is obviously not true………..

TChalla.7146:

killcannon.2576:

TChalla.7146:

killcannon.2576:

TChalla.7146:

killcannon.2576:

TChalla.7146:

AcidicVision.5498:

Incorrect. You have to look at the impact of that singular item on the game as a whole. In that regard sprockets are insignificant.

Arguing any point to those with the “Pay to Win” mindset or the “I got screwed because they added an unlimited use pick that gives sprockets and all I got was this lousy pick that I can use forever but only gives me ore” mentality is futile. They are going to believe what they believe, regardless of how flawed the logic might be. Your best course of action is just to play the game the same as you have been, and come in here periodically for either a good laugh or to be reminded just how fun it must be to try and please some people.

The only wrong point of view here is trying to say that p2w is subjective. It is not.

Anything that sets one player above another in any way that can not be obtained through normal play in game is p2w. This includes qol items.

The only subjective part that comes in is if it makes a difference to you. How much p2w is ok, and where is the line for individual players.

Against my better judgment, I’ll go ahead and bite.

First of all, the term “pay to win” has no true definition. It is a made up term. However, even if you want to argue over a definition that doesn’t truly exist, we’ll use the definition that is most commonly touted.

Pay2Win means any money exchange that will allow a player to gain a significant advantage over their opponents.

I have highlighted the word significant. Now go ahead and give me your perception of what significant is. And while you do that, you can think long and hard about just how subjective the very definition of Pay to Win is, making it a ridiculous argument all unto itself. Once you realize that, you’ll realize just how ridiculous the argument is about the “oh-so-important and ‘must have to compete’ sprockets” is.

Let it sink in.

The term Significant is subjective and can not be part of any definition.

Then you cannot argue Pay to Win at all, since there is no set definition of Pay to Win.

I gave you the definition. If you choose to ignore it is your choice.

Now I know you’re arguing just to argue.

There is no set definition of what Pay to Win is. What you gave me was your definition. Go Google “pay 2 win definition.” You’ll get plenty of opinions about what it is, but you will NOT find a true definition.

As I said before (and thank you for proving my point), there is no sense in making the “Pay to Win” conspiracy theorists try and understand. I’ll continue reading this topic, laughing at those that think this is Pay to Win.

Feel free to try to move the goal post anywhere you like.

Guys, I know that this is a heated and divisive topic, but please let’s tone it down on both sides. We’re getting awfully close to getting this thread locked too.

Arguing about logical fallacies and other ephemera misses the point that players are not required to act like robots.

If players feel like they’re being played, they will react in whatever fashion they will.

Logic need not apply, nor will sophistry of any form change anyone’s minds about what they will accept or not accept in an MMO.

Zaxares.5419:

Guys, I know that this is a heated and divisive topic, but please let’s tone it down on both sides. We’re getting awfully close to getting this thread locked too.

Honestly, I’m surprised it hasn’t already been locked anyway. It’s pretty clear by now how people feel about it anyway. It’s been hashed out, discussed and argued to the point of absurdity, and I don’t think more than a handful of opinions have been altered in the least.

This doesn’t even take into consideration the fact that there are multiple threads about this across multiple sections.

The only reason I even typed anything is because the “Pay to Win” argument has been so overused, and it isn’t even a real argument, since nobody can even agree what Pay to Win means.

In simple terms, it’s irritating to see people blindly using useless terms to justify their like or dislike of an item that means so little in the grand scheme of the game.

Majic.4801:

Arguing about logical fallacies and other ephemera misses the point that players are not required to act like robots.

If players feel like they’re being played, they will react in whatever fashion they will.

Logic need not apply, nor will sophistry of any form change anyone’s minds about what they will accept or not accept in an MMO.

True, perception will always trump definition.

TChalla.7146:

Honestly, I’m surprised it hasn’t already been locked anyway. It’s pretty clear by now how people feel about it anyway. It’s been hashed out, discussed and argued to the point of absurdity, and I don’t think more than a handful of opinions have been altered in the least.

This thread is not about trying to change anyone’s minds though. It was just supposed to let ANet know that some of us have concerns about the Watchwork Pick, and what it might mean for future gem store tools. We want a response from ANet about it, and while there are already (several) threads about it in the BLTC forum, this one is here because the General Discussion forum gets more traffic from the devs (including some top level designers), and hopefully someone will get back to us.

Zaxares.5419:

This thread is not about trying to change anyone’s minds though. It was just supposed to let ANet know that some of us have concerns about the Watchwork Pick, and what it might mean for future gem store tools. We want a response from ANet about it, and while there are already (several) threads about it in the BLTC forum, this one is here because the General Discussion forum gets more traffic from the devs (including some top level designers), and hopefully someone will get back to us.

This. I’m not going to let this thread die until a dev has answered some questions.

Questions like:

• Will there be any future gathering tools with bonuses or advantages on them and if so, is there a max to those?
• Don’t you agree that releasing a better pick just a few weeks after selling the molten pick is a decision that would give many people buyer’s remorse?
• Don’t you think that a convenience item that sells for 1/4th of the price of the full game should remain best-in-slot forever?

Shakkara.2641:

This. I’m not going to let this thread die until a dev has answered some questions.

Questions like:

• Will there be any future gathering tools with bonuses or advantages on them and if so, is there a max to those?
• Don’t you agree that releasing a better pick just a few weeks after selling the molten pick is a decision that would give many people buyer’s remorse?
• Don’t you think that a convenience item that sells for 1/4th of the price of the full game should remain best-in-slot forever?

I agree completely, we deserve some answers here.

Buttercup.5871:

@ g e o: Please don’t confuse opinion for fact (“sprockets are useless”) and please don’t think this gemstone strategy will stop at “just” sprockets. Hence the word “precedent”.

It sets a precedence of a cash shop item with an inconsequential secondary effect. I can live with that.

Shakkara.2641:

This. I’m not going to let this thread die until a dev has answered some questions.

Prepare to stay here a long time then. Developers tend to not react to silly threats like this, as they shouldn’t.

killcannon.2576:

AcidicVision.5498:

killcannon.2576:

It is indeed not subjective. It’s a store.

A store that is part of the game.

part
pärt/Submit
noun
1.
a piece or segment of something such as an object, activity, or period of time, which combined with other pieces makes up the whole.

But you are free to disagree. Its your opinion. And opinions are subjective.

Incorrect. You consider it part of the game because you can buy things from it to use in game. This definition would also include any and all electronic retailers, brick and mortar stores that sell gemcards or copies of the game itself. Since this is obviously not true………..

So the Black Lion Trading Company (aka gem store) is not part of the game because you can buy things to use in the game just like you can buy the gemcards and the game itself from a brick & mortar store. Therefore by this logic since you can buy the game at a brick and mortar store makes the game not part of the game.

I do think your logic has flown out the window. The BLTC is part of the game and anything in there can be purchased with in-game currency. Or are we going to argue that any vendor that sells things in the game to improve your character is P2W? The gem store is as much part of the game as the vendor in Metrica that sells the “Golem in a box”.

ZudetGambeous.9573:

VOLKON.1290:

It’s really a pity to read all these posts using some watered down straw man definition of “pay to win” then claiming GW2 is pay to win because it violates their straw man definition.

It’s really a pity that even though GW2 is one of the most blatantly P2W MMO’s on the market that people keep using various straw man arguments to claim it isn’t P2W every time a new P2W item is introduced into the gem store.

Same can be said about those that take the side that it is P2W.

The original thread that was locked had like 600 posts, this one is getting close to 400. So we have 1,000 posts in two threads, and a handful of other threads with 50-100 posts in them. How many thousands of posts does it take for them to acknowledge that this is a problem and the players don’t like this.

Also here is the survey I made, out of 642 responses 64% of respondents dislike the pick.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/POLL-Do-you-like-the-new-Watchwork-Pick/first

VOLKON.1290:

Here’s a pretty good article on pay to win and what it means. Worth a read.

“If there are any unique purchases that positively impacts the game experience and are only available with premium currency (aka real money), then the game is considered Pay to Win.”

Perhaps you should read the entire article instead of just the bolded text. Context… context is everything.

khani.4786:

killcannon.2576:

AcidicVision.5498:

killcannon.2576:

It is indeed not subjective. It’s a store.

A store that is part of the game.

part
pärt/Submit
noun
1.
a piece or segment of something such as an object, activity, or period of time, which combined with other pieces makes up the whole.

But you are free to disagree. Its your opinion. And opinions are subjective.

Incorrect. You consider it part of the game because you can buy things from it to use in game. This definition would also include any and all electronic retailers, brick and mortar stores that sell gemcards or copies of the game itself. Since this is obviously not true………..

So the Black Lion Trading Company (aka gem store) is not part of the game because you can buy things to use in the game just like you can buy the gemcards and the game itself from a brick & mortar store. Therefore by this logic since you can buy the game at a brick and mortar store makes the game not part of the game.

I do think your logic has flown out the window. The BLTC is part of the game and anything in there can be purchased with in-game currency. Or are we going to argue that any vendor that sells things in the game to improve your character is P2W? The gem store is as much part of the game as the vendor in Metrica that sells the “Golem in a box”.

Incorrect. The vendor in Metrica does not rely on any outside source. The gemstore does. Also nothing is purchased with in game currency. Everything is being paid for in cash, if you buy gems with gold you are just using someone else’s money.

killcannon.2576:

khani.4786:

killcannon.2576:

AcidicVision.5498:

killcannon.2576:

It is indeed not subjective. It’s a store.

A store that is part of the game.

part
pärt/Submit
noun
1.
a piece or segment of something such as an object, activity, or period of time, which combined with other pieces makes up the whole.

But you are free to disagree. Its your opinion. And opinions are subjective.

Incorrect. You consider it part of the game because you can buy things from it to use in game. This definition would also include any and all electronic retailers, brick and mortar stores that sell gemcards or copies of the game itself. Since this is obviously not true………..

So the Black Lion Trading Company (aka gem store) is not part of the game because you can buy things to use in the game just like you can buy the gemcards and the game itself from a brick & mortar store. Therefore by this logic since you can buy the game at a brick and mortar store makes the game not part of the game.

I do think your logic has flown out the window. The BLTC is part of the game and anything in there can be purchased with in-game currency. Or are we going to argue that any vendor that sells things in the game to improve your character is P2W? The gem store is as much part of the game as the vendor in Metrica that sells the “Golem in a box”.

Incorrect. The vendor in Metrica does not rely on any outside source. The gemstore does.

Ahh, but you can purchase gems with real money, then convert to gold and buy things from any vendor in the game.

Just as a player can grind to their heart’s content to get gold and convert to gems to buy things from the BLTC.

I know I’ll never convince you, but the mining pick is not P2W and I love mine.

killcannon.2576:

Majic.4801:

Arguing about logical fallacies and other ephemera misses the point that players are not required to act like robots.

If players feel like they’re being played, they will react in whatever fashion they will.

Logic need not apply, nor will sophistry of any form change anyone’s minds about what they will accept or not accept in an MMO.

True, perception will always trump definition.

Partly true. In this case, perception is reality for many of the people in this discussion. And given we’re talking about things which don’t even exist at all, it’s really hard to argue what’s “real” at all.

ZudetGambeous.9573:

It’s really a pity that even though GW2 is one of the most blatantly P2W MMO’s on the market that people keep using various straw man arguments to claim it isn’t P2W every time a new P2W item is introduced into the gem store.

Your hyperbole is likely why you aren’t getting a dev response. There are games where the only access to top tier weapons, or armor, or consumables, is literally through an integrated cash shop. It would be the equivalent of Anet making ascended gear only available through gem purchases. Special gems that you cant get by converting gold. And then allowing it in sPvP.

Your opinion on GW2 gemshop is that it is blatantly right up there with those games. That is in no way reasonable. And why try to communicate with someone that isn’t reasonable? I shouldn’t even be doing, but I wanted to point out that accusations like that have a factor in whether or not devs decide to even bother opening a dialog.

Also strawman doesn’t mean whatever you think it means. People are presenting that the argument that this pick is pay to win because its a gemshop item that gives another player more of something than the top tier picks available in game and it doesn’t matter what that something is. Because they want to keep things objective.

Everyone one else is countering that the item isn’t pay to win because cash isn’t required and you can use currency conversion. Which is a fact. A purely objective fact.

Once again, since we cant introduce subjectivity, since the people declaring the pick axe is pay to win want the conversation to remain objective, then the amount of gold or time it may take to get enough gems, or the definition of what “normal play” is can’t be part of their argument.

There is no straw man present. Plenty of landsliding cherry pickers. But no straw man.

killcannon.2576:

khani.4786:

killcannon.2576:

AcidicVision.5498:

killcannon.2576:

It is indeed not subjective. It’s a store.

A store that is part of the game.

part
pärt/Submit
noun
1.
a piece or segment of something such as an object, activity, or period of time, which combined with other pieces makes up the whole.

But you are free to disagree. Its your opinion. And opinions are subjective.

Incorrect. You consider it part of the game because you can buy things from it to use in game. This definition would also include any and all electronic retailers, brick and mortar stores that sell gemcards or copies of the game itself. Since this is obviously not true………..

So the Black Lion Trading Company (aka gem store) is not part of the game because you can buy things to use in the game just like you can buy the gemcards and the game itself from a brick & mortar store. Therefore by this logic since you can buy the game at a brick and mortar store makes the game not part of the game.

I do think your logic has flown out the window. The BLTC is part of the game and anything in there can be purchased with in-game currency. Or are we going to argue that any vendor that sells things in the game to improve your character is P2W? The gem store is as much part of the game as the vendor in Metrica that sells the “Golem in a box”.

Incorrect. The vendor in Metrica does not rely on any outside source. The gemstore does. Also nothing is purchased with in game currency. Everything is being paid for in cash, if you buy gems with gold you are just using someone else’s money.

The gem store doesn’t rely on any outside source. Also please explain how buying gems with your own gold is using someone else’s money?

EDIT: Meant to say doesn’t

Ayrilana.1396:

The gem store does rely on any outside source. Also please explain how buying gems with your own gold is using someone else’s money?

Pay close attention. You are about to see some La Nouba caliber mental gymnastics…

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

killcannon.2576:

Majic.4801:

Arguing about logical fallacies and other ephemera misses the point that players are not required to act like robots.

If players feel like they’re being played, they will react in whatever fashion they will.

Logic need not apply, nor will sophistry of any form change anyone’s minds about what they will accept or not accept in an MMO.

True, perception will always trump definition.

Partly true. In this case, perception is reality for many of the people in this discussion. And given we’re talking about things which don’t even exist at all, it’s really hard to argue what’s “real” at all.

Perception is the biggest factor in most discussions of the real, regardless in what form it takes.

Your perception of the pick colors your reality of how it should be treated, the same as other’s perceptions color theirs.

The objective truth here is: There is a pick that is only available in the gemstore. The gemstore can only ever be accessed with real money, either your’s or someone else’s. The pick has greater functionality than any other pick outside of the gemstore. These are facts.

People’s perception will then color what this means to them. Is it too much? Is it o.k.? Does it make the pick they bought earlier obsolete? Is it o.k. since I can trade gold to get gems? Does the increased functionality break the game? What do people consider an advantage? What is your individual created goal line for what your definition of p2w is? These are opinions and perception. And in each individual case you may have different answers depending on any number of factors.

Perception trumps reality in almost any aspect of life, except where natural, inescapable laws come into play.

AcidicVision.5498:

Ayrilana.1396:

The gem store does rely on any outside source. Also please explain how buying gems with your own gold is using someone else’s money?

Pay close attention. You are about to see some La Nouba caliber mental gymnastics…

Edited my post. Meant to say doesn’t.

AcidicVision.5498:

Ayrilana.1396:

The gem store does rely on any outside source. Also please explain how buying gems with your own gold is using someone else’s money?

Pay close attention. You are about to see some La Nouba caliber mental gymnastics…

Just facts, sorry to disappoint.

Gems are created in the gemstore to buy with gold whenever someone trades gems for gold. They are a finite resource created from outside the system by people with real money. When you use gold to buy gems, you are not buying them from Anet. The only supply of gems in game comes from…..real money. Any and all purchases from the gem store use real money. Either yours or someone else’s.

killcannon.2576:

Gems are created in the gemstore to buy with gold whenever someone trades gems for gold. They are a finite resource created from outside the system by people with real money. When you use gold to buy gems, you are not buying them from Anet. The only supply of gems in game comes from…..real money. Any and all purchases from the gem store use real money. Either yours or someone else’s.

Anet had to create gems to populate the pool initially. In beta, headstart, and launch night there were gems available to buy via in game currency before enough transactions were made to create a surplus. Also, gems are given as rewards for achievement chests. Those chest rewards are a set value that is paid out at an undetermined time per player with no regard as to how many gems are in the “pool”.

So they are not created from outside the system, they are not created with only real money, they are not a finite resource and not all gem store purchases use real money.

killcannon.2576:

AcidicVision.5498:

Ayrilana.1396:

The gem store does rely on any outside source. Also please explain how buying gems with your own gold is using someone else’s money?

Pay close attention. You are about to see some La Nouba caliber mental gymnastics…

Just facts, sorry to disappoint.

Gems are created in the gemstore to buy with gold whenever someone trades gems for gold. They are a finite resource created from outside the system by people with real money. When you use gold to buy gems, you are not buying them from Anet. The only supply of gems in game comes from…..real money. Any and all purchases from the gem store use real money. Either yours or someone else’s.

Please provide a source otherwise your post is entirely speculation/opinion rather than “just the facts”.

killcannon.2576:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

killcannon.2576:

Majic.4801:

Arguing about logical fallacies and other ephemera misses the point that players are not required to act like robots.

If players feel like they’re being played, they will react in whatever fashion they will.

Logic need not apply, nor will sophistry of any form change anyone’s minds about what they will accept or not accept in an MMO.

True, perception will always trump definition.

Partly true. In this case, perception is reality for many of the people in this discussion. And given we’re talking about things which don’t even exist at all, it’s really hard to argue what’s “real” at all.

Perception is the biggest factor in most discussions of the real, regardless in what form it takes.

Your perception of the pick colors your reality of how it should be treated, the same as other’s perceptions color theirs.

My perception? It exists. The fact it exists is enough to make a bunch of people upset, even without taking into account an extra effect. It marks three distinct permanent, infinite picks with different animations; this is enough to make people upset.

My opinion of the pick is simply put: its extra effect is unimportant in the face of having 4 weeks to secure your very own source without spending Gems. This has to be how it managed to “sneak by” and get included. The precedent is irrelevant to the discussion, and hinges on assumptions of the future which cannot be proven, just suspected strongly.

The objective truth here is: There is a pick that is only available in the gemstore. The gemstore can only ever be accessed with real money, either your’s or someone else’s. The pick has greater functionality than any other pick outside of the gemstore. These are facts.

If I accept these as facts, does that mean I can only subscribe to your interpretation of them, or do I get to make my own mind up?

People’s perception will then color what this means to them. Is it too much? Is it o.k.? Does it make the pick they bought earlier obsolete? Is it o.k. since I can trade gold to get gems? Does the increased functionality break the game? What do people consider an advantage? What is your individual created goal line for what your definition of p2w is? These are opinions and perception. And in each individual case you may have different answers depending on any number of factors.

Well at least we can agree there are myriad definitions of “pay to win” and not one unified, immutable one. Even if it keeps creeping into a thread intended to be more about the extra effect precedent and not about the actual item.

Perception trumps reality in almost any aspect of life, except where natural, inescapable laws come into play.

This is why I stopped trying to pursue anything other than honest hard work for a career. I prefer things such as making sure product is available or acting as a register-operating counter monkey to blogging, writing opinion columns, or trying to sell services people don’t really need or want.

But back on topic. Again.

With the question I raised many many times before:

If this pick was available in the Gem Store for 1000 Gems and also available as a rare drop during a Living Story segment, or as a meta achievement reward, would we be having this discussion? Would it be permissible to create an item like this which was either available in game through luck or earning it versus “ah screw it I don’t want to participate in the LS this month, I’ll just buy it”.

[Gems Available for Exchange (gold)] is a subset of [Gems Available]

[Gems Available] = [Exchange Gems at Launch] + [Achievement Chest Gems] + [Gems Purchased with $] – [Gems Spent in Store]

The majority of [Gems Available] come from [Gems Purchased with $], but there are some available “for free”.

I’ll say this much: If this game becomes a Pay-2-Win gem store-apalooza….I will quit. I love the game and love that what I have is based on the effort I put into it. If we start seeing P2W items on the gem store, I’m out. No point trying to compete with people who like to drop real money for in-game advantages.

I hope they give us an axe and sickle too.

AcidicVision.5498:

killcannon.2576:

Gems are created in the gemstore to buy with gold whenever someone trades gems for gold. They are a finite resource created from outside the system by people with real money. When you use gold to buy gems, you are not buying them from Anet. The only supply of gems in game comes from…..real money. Any and all purchases from the gem store use real money. Either yours or someone else’s.

Anet had to create gems to populate the pool initially. In beta, headstart, and launch night there were gems available to buy via in game currency before enough transactions were made to create a surplus. Also, gems are given as rewards for achievement chests. Those chest rewards are a set value that is paid out at an undetermined time per player with no regard as to how many gems are in the “pool”.

So they are not created from outside the system, they are not created with only real money, they are not a finite resource and not all gem store purchases use real money.

Wow, you’re right. Here, I’ll change it.

99.99999% of all gems are made from real money.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

killcannon.2576:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

killcannon.2576:

Majic.4801:

Arguing about logical fallacies and other ephemera misses the point that players are not required to act like robots.

If players feel like they’re being played, they will react in whatever fashion they will.

Logic need not apply, nor will sophistry of any form change anyone’s minds about what they will accept or not accept in an MMO.

True, perception will always trump definition.

Partly true. In this case, perception is reality for many of the people in this discussion. And given we’re talking about things which don’t even exist at all, it’s really hard to argue what’s “real” at all.

Perception is the biggest factor in most discussions of the real, regardless in what form it takes.

Your perception of the pick colors your reality of how it should be treated, the same as other’s perceptions color theirs.

My perception? It exists. The fact it exists is enough to make a bunch of people upset, even without taking into account an extra effect. It marks three distinct permanent, infinite picks with different animations; this is enough to make people upset.

My opinion of the pick is simply put: its extra effect is unimportant in the face of having 4 weeks to secure your very own source without spending Gems. This has to be how it managed to “sneak by” and get included. The precedent is irrelevant to the discussion, and hinges on assumptions of the future which cannot be proven, just suspected strongly.

The objective truth here is: There is a pick that is only available in the gemstore. The gemstore can only ever be accessed with real money, either your’s or someone else’s. The pick has greater functionality than any other pick outside of the gemstore. These are facts.

If I accept these as facts, does that mean I can only subscribe to your interpretation of them, or do I get to make my own mind up?

People’s perception will then color what this means to them. Is it too much? Is it o.k.? Does it make the pick they bought earlier obsolete? Is it o.k. since I can trade gold to get gems? Does the increased functionality break the game? What do people consider an advantage? What is your individual created goal line for what your definition of p2w is? These are opinions and perception. And in each individual case you may have different answers depending on any number of factors.

Well at least we can agree there are myriad definitions of “pay to win” and not one unified, immutable one. Even if it keeps creeping into a thread intended to be more about the extra effect precedent and not about the actual item.

Perception trumps reality in almost any aspect of life, except where natural, inescapable laws come into play.

This is why I stopped trying to pursue anything other than honest hard work for a career. I prefer things such as making sure product is available or acting as a register-operating counter monkey to blogging, writing opinion columns, or trying to sell services people don’t really need or want.

But back on topic. Again.

With the question I raised many many times before:

If this pick was available in the Gem Store for 1000 Gems and also available as a rare drop during a Living Story segment, or as a meta achievement reward, would we be having this discussion? Would it be permissible to create an item like this which was either available in game through luck or earning it versus “ah screw it I don’t want to participate in the LS this month, I’ll just buy it”.

Again. There are not multiple definitions of pay to win. Only where you move the goal post in it’s relation to what you value.

People want to use a subjective definition for an objective reality.

If the gem store sells Ascended armor +1 to all stats…is that pay to win?
If the gem store sells Ascended armor +100 to all stats…is that pay to win instead?

Both are.

If the gem store next week sells a pick that gives 1 sprocket per hit….is that pay to win?
If the gem store next week sells a pick that gives 100 per hit…..is that pay to win?

Both are.

People want to argue what is value.

In regards to what you mentioned: If the pick itself is available in game through normal gameplay mechanics…then it can not be p2w. I’m sure you want to bring up the home instance node….but it’s not a pick. And content lockouts that things like the instance nodes are a part of are also bad.

Naqaj.6219:

Shakkara.2641:

This. I’m not going to let this thread die until a dev has answered some questions.

Prepare to stay here a long time then. Developers tend to not react to silly threats like this, as they shouldn’t.

Threat is the wrong word. That was a statement of intention. You may agree or disagree with this thread but its not ending.

killcannon.2576:

Again. There are not multiple definitions of pay to win. Only where you move the goal post in it’s relation to what you value.

No.

There are multiple subjective definitions, because as we established – perception is reality.

If the gem store sells Ascended armor +1 to all stats…is that pay to win?
If the gem store sells Ascended armor +100 to all stats…is that pay to win instead?

Both are.

But as neither are real, then does it matter?

If the gem store next week sells a pick that gives 1 sprocket per hit….is that pay to win?
If the gem store next week sells a pick that gives 100 per hit…..is that pay to win?

Both are.

Only if the sprockets have a value which makes them significantly unbalancing. Otherwise, it’s a neat little extra which doesn’t trip the “pay to win” definition because other activities generate more over time than swinging the pick.

People want to argue what is value.

Okay, as the other guy said, I’ll bite.

Value isn’t a simple definition by any means, even when talking of monetary value. You have to know this, because your conversations show you to at least study whether something is objective or subjective.

Heck, even monetary value is incredibly subjective and has goal posts moved all the darn time. Something which is worth $1.00 US today is not necessarily worth $1.00 US tomorrow, or was worth $1.00 US a year ago. Or ten years ago. You can point to a tag and say “this is a fact this gallon of milk costs $2.73 US”. You’d be right. But that value is fluid and mutable – that same gallon of milk costs $4.21 US at my corner store, most likely.

While there is a fact about what value is set at in one moment, there is no concrete, completely objective monetary value any object has set on it.

Value is subjective.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

killcannon.2576:

Again. There are not multiple definitions of pay to win. Only where you move the goal post in it’s relation to what you value.

No.

There are multiple subjective definitions, because as we established – perception is reality.

If the gem store sells Ascended armor +1 to all stats…is that pay to win?
If the gem store sells Ascended armor +100 to all stats…is that pay to win instead?

Both are.

But as neither are real, then does it matter?

If the gem store next week sells a pick that gives 1 sprocket per hit….is that pay to win?
If the gem store next week sells a pick that gives 100 per hit…..is that pay to win?

Both are.

Only if the sprockets have a value which makes them significantly unbalancing. Otherwise, it’s a neat little extra which doesn’t trip the “pay to win” definition because other activities generate more over time than swinging the pick.

People want to argue what is value.

Okay, as the other guy said, I’ll bite.

Value isn’t a simple definition by any means, even when talking of monetary value. You have to know this, because your conversations show you to at least study whether something is objective or subjective.

Heck, even monetary value is incredibly subjective and has goal posts moved all the darn time. Something which is worth $1.00 US today is not necessarily worth $1.00 US tomorrow, or was worth $1.00 US a year ago. Or ten years ago. You can point to a tag and say “this is a fact this gallon of milk costs $2.73 US”. You’d be right. But that value is fluid and mutable – that same gallon of milk costs $4.21 US at my corner store, most likely.

While there is a fact about what value is set at in one moment, there is no concrete, completely objective monetary value any object has set on it.

Value is subjective.

Yeah… value is subjective. I’ve been saying that.

Reality has no place when the discussion is about games, because we don’t follow the same natural laws. You would have to compare it to fantasy in real life then, which would be another huge topic.

You can not use perceived value as a basis to determine p2w. It’s simple.

If it is offered in the gemstore and not in game and makes anyone more proficient than anyone else at anything than someone without it….it’s p2w. Objective.

You’re the one arguing value….not me.

killcannon.2576:

Yeah… value is subjective. I’ve been saying that.

Reality has no place when the discussion is about games, because we don’t follow the same natural laws. You would have to compare it to fantasy in real life then, which would be another huge topic.

Reality has no place? We’re not talking about reality, I was talking about value. You’re the one who decided to make it about reality and move the topic again.

You can not use perceived value as a basis to determine p2w. It’s simple.

. . . and yet people do. Perception is reality. We went over this.

If it is offered in the gemstore and not in game and makes anyone more proficient than anyone else at anything than someone without it….it’s p2w. Objective.

See, now you changed the description of Pay To Win again. And if you want to be honest about that definition being objective, the whole game is pay to win since I bought the game via the store and since I am better at the game than someone without it, it must be Pay To Win. Or I’m better at having used the “Mistfire Wolf” skill since I paid for digital deluxe, so Pay To Win. Or I have a mini nobody else can have thanks to paying for it. Pay To Win.

How far does this definition actually go before we need to inject some subjectivity to keep it from being interpreted with that above insanity?

For the people who want to say p2w is subjective based upon perceived value.

If it that is indeed how you feel, then none of your arguments can ever hold any weight. If it is subjective for you, then it is subjective for everyone. The game is both p2w and not p2w depending on who you ask and you are no more correct than anyone else.

You can not have it both ways. If you feel it is based upon a perceived notion of subjective value, you then can not set any goal post for anyone else and there is no value in your opinion in an objective discussion except in telling people how your opinion is right and their’s is not. Which makes no sense.

There is either an objective definition (which there is) or there is a subjective definition for everyone and you can’t say it’s not p2w. An objective, fact based, definition can not include a subjective term. If allowing a single sprocket per hit of a pick is not p2w, neither is being able to buy a more powerful armor than anything else available in game.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

killcannon.2576:

Yeah… value is subjective. I’ve been saying that.

Reality has no place when the discussion is about games, because we don’t follow the same natural laws. You would have to compare it to fantasy in real life then, which would be another huge topic.

Reality has no place? We’re not talking about reality, I was talking about value. You’re the one who decided to make it about reality and move the topic again.

You can not use perceived value as a basis to determine p2w. It’s simple.

. . . and yet people do. Perception is reality. We went over this.

If it is offered in the gemstore and not in game and makes anyone more proficient than anyone else at anything than someone without it….it’s p2w. Objective.

See, now you changed the description of Pay To Win again. And if you want to be honest about that definition being objective, the whole game is pay to win since I bought the game via the store and since I am better at the game than someone without it, it must be Pay To Win. Or I’m better at having used the “Mistfire Wolf” skill since I paid for digital deluxe, so Pay To Win. Or I have a mini nobody else can have thanks to paying for it. Pay To Win.

How far does this definition actually go before we need to inject some subjectivity to keep it from being interpreted with that above insanity?

I didn’t bring reality into it…you started going on about the cost of milk for whatever reason you had. You did read your own post? If you can’t keep it in game terms, it’s not my problem.

People are using perceived value, like yourself, to try to define p2w. Not me.

The definition of p2w has not changed at all since I started typing. I would welcome you to show me where I changed what I gave as the objective definition? Not sure what you are seeing.

I love your little rant though, very amusing.

Does a new item in the Gemstore have to be pay-to-win to be a really stupid/irritating idea?

‘Cause I’m thinking the Watchwork Pick is evidence that an item can be a bad idea regardless of its win-y-ness…

The new version of the Flame Kissed armor would be a perfect fit to tune up the look of my character “Ivory Phoenix” who already wears a mix of the Phoenix and Feathered sets. And every time I open the black Lion store to get it I think, “No. I’m still ticked about that stupid pick after spending $240 to outfit all my 80s with infinite tools. No more monies for ArenaNet ’til I see which way their going to go on that, and if they go nowhere, then no more monies period…”

killcannon.2576:

For the people who want to say p2w is subjective based upon perceived value.

If it that is indeed how you feel, then none of your arguments can ever hold any weight. If it is subjective for you, then it is subjective for everyone. The game is both p2w and not p2w depending on who you ask and you are no more correct than anyone else.

It is subjective for everyone, or it has an objective definition which can be turned into insane conclusions which don’t make sense.

You can not have it both ways. If you feel it is based upon a perceived notion of subjective value, you then can not set any goal post for anyone else and there is no value in your opinion in an objective discussion except in telling people how your opinion is right and there’s is not. Which makes no sense.

And yet, here we are again and again about the topic of pay to win. Not just you and I, but everyone else discussing it like it matters.

There is either an objective definition (which there is)

Says you. And it still can be twisted through interpretation into making no sense at all by anyone with half a brain. An objective definition on the same wavelength of “this is the objective definition of ‘cantaloupe’.”

(Which, incidentally, is also one thing which is attributed wrongly when talking about the produce . . . )

or there is a subjective definition for everyone and you can’t say it’s not p2w. An objective, fact based, definition can not include a subjective term. If allowing a single sprocket per hit of a pick is not p2w, neither is being able to buy a more powerful armor than anything else available in game.

There is a difference and you’re throwing it away because . . . in your esteemed opinion . . . it doesn’t matter to the interpretation of the definition.

The sprockets are available through the “Sprocket Generator” resource node still available for two weeks (minus two days right now). They are available to anyone who plays the game and completes that meta achievement. In this instance, there isn’t “pay to win” since any person can earn themselves Sprockets if they do this. Considering they can also be traded between players, it is difficult to get the definition to stick without some considerable extra clauses which renders 90% of the game also “pay to win”.

A more powerful armor (“introducing the new Cash Shop Tier”) not available elsewhere in the game purchased only through Gems is more decidedly “pay to win” since it gives an advantage not available elsewhere through other means. Though if that tier was made available at a later date through normal play, then perhaps it could be argued to have been P2W once but not anymore.

There is a notable difference between these two. Discarding them is doing a disservice to a proper analysis.

killcannon.2576:

I didn’t bring reality into it…you started going on about the cost of milk for whatever reason you had. You did read your own post? If you can’t keep it in game terms, it’s not my problem.

There is milk in the game though so to be pedantic, we are using game terms. And if we accept each copper has a US dollar value then it’s very definitely using game terms transferred into actual currency with the same result: the price/value of the object in question differs.

The definition of p2w has not changed at all since I started typing. I would welcome you to show me where I changed what I gave as the objective definition? Not sure what you are seeing.

I’m not sure what you’re seeing either if you want to put forth there is an objective definition of something nobody seems to be able to objectively apply the definition to. Of course, if the problem is in interpretation of an objective definition, it’s still a problem about subjective and not objective, and trying to work with an objective definition defeats the purpose.

Especially since it can be interpreted to absurdity.

Nike.2631:

‘Cause I’m thinking the Watchwork Pick is evidence that an item can be a bad idea regardless of its win-y-ness…

It’s not a bad idea of an item.

How it was presented and the availability of it? That was what set things off.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

killcannon.2576:

For the people who want to say p2w is subjective based upon perceived value.

If it that is indeed how you feel, then none of your arguments can ever hold any weight. If it is subjective for you, then it is subjective for everyone. The game is both p2w and not p2w depending on who you ask and you are no more correct than anyone else.

It is subjective for everyone, or it has an objective definition which can be turned into insane conclusions which don’t make sense.

You can not have it both ways. If you feel it is based upon a perceived notion of subjective value, you then can not set any goal post for anyone else and there is no value in your opinion in an objective discussion except in telling people how your opinion is right and there’s is not. Which makes no sense.

And yet, here we are again and again about the topic of pay to win. Not just you and I, but everyone else discussing it like it matters.

There is either an objective definition (which there is)

Says you. And it still can be twisted through interpretation into making no sense at all by anyone with half a brain. An objective definition on the same wavelength of “this is the objective definition of ‘cantaloupe’.”

(Which, incidentally, is also one thing which is attributed wrongly when talking about the produce . . . )

or there is a subjective definition for everyone and you can’t say it’s not p2w. An objective, fact based, definition can not include a subjective term. If allowing a single sprocket per hit of a pick is not p2w, neither is being able to buy a more powerful armor than anything else available in game.

There is a difference and you’re throwing it away because . . . in your esteemed opinion . . . it doesn’t matter to the interpretation of the definition.

The sprockets are available through the “Sprocket Generator” resource node still available for two weeks (minus two days right now). They are available to anyone who plays the game and completes that meta achievement. In this instance, there isn’t “pay to win” since any person can earn themselves Sprockets if they do this. Considering they can also be traded between players, it is difficult to get the definition to stick without some considerable extra clauses which renders 90% of the game also “pay to win”.

A more powerful armor (“introducing the new Cash Shop Tier”) not available elsewhere in the game purchased only through Gems is more decidedly “pay to win” since it gives an advantage not available elsewhere through other means. Though if that tier was made available at a later date through normal play, then perhaps it could be argued to have been P2W once but not anymore.

There is a notable difference between these two. Discarding them is doing a disservice to a proper analysis.

It’s your perceived value again.

35 copper a sprocket is not worth anything, but powerful armor is. Both are something you can only get through the gemstore, but you only see the armor making a difference in game.

What does the armor do? Makes the game easier. What does getting more money per hit on ore do? Makes the game easier.

For some, p2w mechanics are o.k. as long as it’s just a little p2w. If my tank has just a little more armor. If my plane just flies a little faster. If my gun only does a little more damage. If I only make a little more money. If I can sprint, but others can’t, we still all get there eventually so it’s o.k.

The people who like to use the goal post argument, or shifting sands fallacy all believe this. It’s only p2w when they say it’s p2w, and never before. They have a self imposed value on it.

You’re trying to make things much more complicated than they really are.

Anywho, I’m done. Got more than my share of discussion in for the week. I enjoyed talking with you. Have a good one.

Pay to win is subjective, some may try to define it, but due to the subjective nature it will always be slightly different to each person. Nit picking over the terminology is fruitless and yes regardless of the term the pick does have some glaring issues.

It you few people continue to nit pick and argue over each others words and definitions then this topic will be locked. This is a hot topic but treat each other with respect and please try to stay on point, picking and poking over each others words is not constructive or helpful.

Yes you can say it is pay to win, yes you can say it is not.

But lets get down to it, does either of those view points resolve the fact that the best pick in the game can only be purchased in a store? (Gems or gold it should have a basic equivalent should be in the basic game.)

Is the introduction of a better pick after the previous being advertised as “The last pick you will ever need” fair for players that parted with actual money? Personally I do not think so, it is false advertising and in no way morally right.

So how many months till we get a better pick with 20% ecto drop? Fact is this could be a worrying trend and frankly needs some clarification. Arena Net has stated they do not want to have vertical progression and this quite plainly is a cash shop exclusive form of vertical progression with harvesting tools, where will it stop?

Try to be respectful to each other, you may or may not agree but state your reasons, be constructive. Do not just pick at each others posts over silly definitions telling each other they are wrong, people are allowed personal opinions.

I DO think there is a fairly simplistic answer of “Pay to Win” that most people can agree on; an item that can only be purchased with actual cash dollars that gives an advantage that is not available in any other fashion.

Now, where the problem resides is that it’s not nearly that black and white in most games, and where it starts getting subjective.

For example: an item that can be bought, but its analogue in game so prohibitively expensive or accessible to reasonably acquire (for example having an absurdly low drop rate or requiring more in game currency than currently exists in game). Technically, that wouldn’t be “Pay to Win”… but for all practical purposes, yeah, it would be.

Then you have this case. Is the Watchwork Pick REALLY granting an advantage; considering sprockets are more easily acquired in at least two different ways (and currently more while Scarlet’s events are still active)? Or is the simple possibility that it MIGHT provide an advantage at some indeterminate time down the road enough to qualify?

chemiclord.3978:

Or is the simple possibility that it MIGHT provide an advantage at some indeterminate time down the road enough to qualify?

That and there might be a slippery slope of increasing effectiveness of picks at some point where it becomes more blatant.