Originally posted by zekeofev

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by snapfusion

It's really about math, and math really isnt that hard to understand.

P2P - everything the game has to offer equals 14.99 per month

F2P - everything the game has to offer equals 100's a month and up

Sounds great. Can you link the source to that data? The reason I ask is because I haven't seem many, if any, F2P games that cost "100's a month and up" to access everything. I also haven't seen but a small handful of subscription MMOs where you get everything for 14.99 a month as there are also extra services and expansion packs that you pat for as well.

Since both of your claims seem they may possibley be a tad bit, y'know... completely made up numbers being passed off as fact right after saying "math really isn't that hard to understand" it would be great to see the source of your data.

Note: Yes, we all know you're going to pull out Runes of Magic or War Rock. Yes, they are off the charts. No, they are not representative of the average Free to Play game.

With that out of the way, it would be awesome to see some numbers that support your two claims, especially due to the snarky lead-in you had to it.

 

Sure I can offer some examples.

 

Aika- offered weapon synthing where each successful synth gave a HUGE damage boost. The problem was the break chance versus the success chance was extremely low. You could get to +6 with relative ease but after that, the break chance was greater then the success chance. The item to do the synth and the item to prevent your weapon from being destroyed were sold in the cash shop. On average it took about 200 dollars to synth the best item. When they expanded the game, new weapons were created released that you can to replace your weapon with...and synth to max again.

 

Battle of the Immortals has zodiac pets the best of which had to be found randomly in a cash shop box (these pets auto attack during combat, and they basically can do about the same damage you do, very important to have and huge difference between bad and good pet). The drop rate of these are incredibly low and people would spend 500 dollars and not get one.

 

If you want to be competitive in one of these games you will pay an arm and a leg to do so. Also both games were designed to have the best compete against each other to increase the drive to be better then others.

On the flip side,  I think EVE gives free expansions and costs $15 a month. 

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Bossalinie
@Blasphim umm...you just described pretty much every hobby that involves money...

Posts like Blasphim's lead me to believe it's an entitlement thing for some people.

It is and its just like real life.  You make 35k a year so you buy a Civic.  I make 200k a year so I buy a Hummer.    Is it rig

This generation thinks life is fair its not and just like life games are not fair.   This whole im entitled to be given free stuff is whats wrong with this country what happen to the hard working american way of life ?  I guess that died in the 60s.

Originally posted by Blasphim

 

---

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

---

Originally posted by Arclan MMO companies are taking a huge gamble; and enduring significant losses. All in the hopes that P2W becomes increasingly accepted every day. MMO companies don't mind losing a generation (the anti-P2W crowd of UO, EQ, etc) as long as the incoming generation accepts P2W as the norm. The result is you will be paying a lot more for less entertainment. MMOs are engineered, it seems, to last a few months. They want you to spend as much P2W money as possible in that time frame.

---

You'll spend as much as you choose to, nothing or lots.  It's your choice.

 

More choices re good.

---

 

Except when those choices provide a rift based on economic situations. If player A only has $15 a month to spare for his gaming hobby, but player B has $115 to spare, why should player A be "punished" cause he can't spend more in the cash shop?

Welcome to the Real World.

Isn't that the way our world is? Why wouldn't that eventually manifest in our virtual worlds? We humans have been conditioned for this type of world, so it is only a logical progression. As younger players come into games, they are even more conditioned to it.

There will be no backlash. You will just have to find a small niche community somewhere else if you don't like where the mainstream is heading. 

Originally posted by zekeofev

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by snapfusion

It's really about math, and math really isnt that hard to understand.

P2P - everything the game has to offer equals 14.99 per month

F2P - everything the game has to offer equals 100's a month and up

Sounds great. Can you link the source to that data? The reason I ask is because I haven't seem many, if any, F2P games that cost "100's a month and up" to access everything. I also haven't seen but a small handful of subscription MMOs where you get everything for 14.99 a month as there are also extra services and expansion packs that you pat for as well.

Since both of your claims seem they may possibley be a tad bit, y'know... completely made up numbers being passed off as fact right after saying "math really isn't that hard to understand" it would be great to see the source of your data.

Note: Yes, we all know you're going to pull out Runes of Magic or War Rock. Yes, they are off the charts. No, they are not representative of the average Free to Play game.

With that out of the way, it would be awesome to see some numbers that support your two claims, especially due to the snarky lead-in you had to it.

Sure I can offer some examples.

Aika- offered weapon synthing where each successful synth gave a HUGE damage boost. The problem was the break chance versus the success chance was extremely low. You could get to +6 with relative ease but after that, the break chance was greater then the success chance. The item to do the synth and the item to prevent your weapon from being destroyed were sold in the cash shop. On average it took about 200 dollars to synth the best item. When they expanded the game, new weapons were created released that you can to replace your weapon with...and synth to max again.

Battle of the Immortals has zodiac pets the best of which had to be found randomly in a cash shop box (these pets auto attack during combat, and they basically can do about the same damage you do, very important to have and huge difference between bad and good pet). The drop rate of these are incredibly low and people would spend 500 dollars and not get one.

If you want to be competitive in one of these games you will pay an arm and a leg to do so. Also both games were designed to have the best compete against each other to increase the drive to be better then others.

That's nice and all, but it has nothing to do with what we were talking about.

Originally posted by zekeofev

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by snapfusion

It's really about math, and math really isnt that hard to understand.

P2P - everything the game has to offer equals 14.99 per month

F2P - everything the game has to offer equals 100's a month and up

Sounds great. Can you link the source to that data? The reason I ask is because I haven't seem many, if any, F2P games that cost "100's a month and up" to access everything. I also haven't seen but a small handful of subscription MMOs where you get everything for 14.99 a month as there are also extra services and expansion packs that you pat for as well.

Since both of your claims seem they may possibley be a tad bit, y'know... completely made up numbers being passed off as fact right after saying "math really isn't that hard to understand" it would be great to see the source of your data.

Note: Yes, we all know you're going to pull out Runes of Magic or War Rock. Yes, they are off the charts. No, they are not representative of the average Free to Play game.

With that out of the way, it would be awesome to see some numbers that support your two claims, especially due to the snarky lead-in you had to it.

 

Sure I can offer some examples.

 

Aika- offered weapon synthing where each successful synth gave a HUGE damage boost. The problem was the break chance versus the success chance was extremely low. You could get to +6 with relative ease but after that, the break chance was greater then the success chance. The item to do the synth and the item to prevent your weapon from being destroyed were sold in the cash shop. On average it took about 200 dollars to synth the best item. When they expanded the game, new weapons were created released that you can to replace your weapon with...and synth to max again.

 

Battle of the Immortals has zodiac pets the best of which had to be found randomly in a cash shop box (these pets auto attack during combat, and they basically can do about the same damage you do, very important to have and huge difference between bad and good pet). The drop rate of these are incredibly low and people would spend 500 dollars and not get one.

 

If you want to be competitive in one of these games you will pay an arm and a leg to do so. Also both games were designed to have the best compete against each other to increase the drive to be better then others.

OK, let's take the Aika example, I have some experience in this game.

Yes, they have items that can help crafting go easier. but...each of those items that can be bought in the store can also drop in the world, are given away by the devs in many MANY rewards programs,  and can also be sold to other players. And usually that is exactly what they are being done with from folks who buy them in the shop.

So Pay to Win?  So guy who grinded tons of money in-game can buy the same items, isn't he pay to win as well?

I think the term P2W is mired in the wrong idea. Here's an example I look for...If you can Pay the devs for the best weapon/armor the game allows, and/or pay the company for a toon that is max in level and skills...that is P2W.

Everything else is pretty much ways to influence a game's economy and the devs' paycheck.

Personally I think buying gems in GW2 is one of the closest P2W schemes I have seeen in a long while, but that's just a personal opinion. It's innovative, but shady.

It has pretty much always been a factor in online games.  You will have a hard time trying to sell me on the UO crowd not partaking in "P2W' ethics with how many accounts were sold that had castles and houses with ideal real estate and 6x GMs and millions of gold on it.  I know people who spent upwards of $20,000 just for an account with a couple castles, of which he sold for hundreds of millions of gold.  Equally I know people who sold their accounts for about $5,000 to 10,000 every year or so with the same results.  Indeed, there was a large crowd that considered MMOs to be an investment, especially with UO.  Though I guess you could say that it is a peer to peer transaction and not corporate greed that encourages it.

When it comes right down to it you have people who have time to play games endlessly, and you have people who work multiple jobs and only have an hour or two a day (or week even) to play a game.  I hear all the time "why should someone with $10 be given a disadvangate over one with $100" in terms of a monthly gaming budget, all the time.  Though it creates a double standard and violates the economic (or business) principle of "Time is money".  Why should people who have the money and or time have an advantage over those who don't and are out making money?  Someone who plays a game 16 hours a day has a definitive advantage over one who does not -- and by the beforementioned saying, they are sacrificing time they could be making money for the power they get.

Now, I am not condoning P2W practices in any way, but simply pointing out that things just aren't black and white.  It is one reason why some people consider items that are easily acquirable in game (with a little time played) okay to be in a cash shop and are dead set against unique items only being available in the cash shop.  In both circumstances players are giving up money -- either through lack of working, or using the money they worked for and in the end they get equal benefits.

If you take a good look at Diablo III's action house (minus the cut Blizzard takes), it is quite literaly one person selling the time he worked on the game to another for the time they worked at a job.  There are even a few who turned it into an actual job and have been making hundreds per day (not counting whatever they make if they stream).  I'm all for peer to peer transactions, and less so when it comes to the company selling it regardless if it's easy to get in game or not.  It comes down to games telling me what I can't or can't do with the items I spent time on getting.  In truth, it's the same principle I have with being unable to sell used games (although I do support the industry in trying to find a solution so they make more money for their work).  I should not be told by a game that fears "P2W" phobia people, or the people themselves that I cannot do what I want with the item I spent the time getting.

It's not even an issue of Rich vs. Poor:  The rich will always find a way to get an advantage.  Whether it is 40x multiboxing, hiring someone to play on their computer to do their dailies on multiboxing (undetectable as it's on their computer), or just buying a guild's time to carry them.  This is flat out middle class vs. middle class and people dictating how others should spend their money and live their life just because they don't believe in spending money on virtual items.  It's absolutely disgusting and appaling to some of those who experienced the Industry when the auction market in UO flourished between peers.

I'm all for a company outright banning something just because that's what they want to do, and it's their game.  But when it's because they fear a certain crowd, it's just a darn shame in general, and these same people think their beliefs should be opposed on every one and every single game -- leaving nothing for those who are acclimated to such a gaming culture.  I don't know about you, but if a large group of people said that violence is bad in video games, and that blood should outright be banned in every single game (which won't happen unless people stop buying them), then it would be a sad day for gaming in general.  Games are supposed to be different, and have options.

/sadface

Originally posted by Rider071

Originally posted by zekeofev

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by snapfusion

It's really about math, and math really isnt that hard to understand.

P2P - everything the game has to offer equals 14.99 per month

F2P - everything the game has to offer equals 100's a month and up

Sounds great. Can you link the source to that data? The reason I ask is because I haven't seem many, if any, F2P games that cost "100's a month and up" to access everything. I also haven't seen but a small handful of subscription MMOs where you get everything for 14.99 a month as there are also extra services and expansion packs that you pat for as well.

Since both of your claims seem they may possibley be a tad bit, y'know... completely made up numbers being passed off as fact right after saying "math really isn't that hard to understand" it would be great to see the source of your data.

Note: Yes, we all know you're going to pull out Runes of Magic or War Rock. Yes, they are off the charts. No, they are not representative of the average Free to Play game.

With that out of the way, it would be awesome to see some numbers that support your two claims, especially due to the snarky lead-in you had to it.

 

Sure I can offer some examples.

 

Aika- offered weapon synthing where each successful synth gave a HUGE damage boost. The problem was the break chance versus the success chance was extremely low. You could get to +6 with relative ease but after that, the break chance was greater then the success chance. The item to do the synth and the item to prevent your weapon from being destroyed were sold in the cash shop. On average it took about 200 dollars to synth the best item. When they expanded the game, new weapons were created released that you can to replace your weapon with...and synth to max again.

 

Battle of the Immortals has zodiac pets the best of which had to be found randomly in a cash shop box (these pets auto attack during combat, and they basically can do about the same damage you do, very important to have and huge difference between bad and good pet). The drop rate of these are incredibly low and people would spend 500 dollars and not get one.

 

If you want to be competitive in one of these games you will pay an arm and a leg to do so. Also both games were designed to have the best compete against each other to increase the drive to be better then others.

OK, let's take the Aika example, I have some experience in this game.

Yes, they have items that can help crafting go easier. but...each of those items that can be bought in the store can also drop in the world, are given away by the devs in many MANY rewards programs,  and can also be sold to other players. And usually that is exactly what they are being done with from folks who buy them in the shop.

So Pay to Win?  So guy who grinded tons of money in-game can buy the same items, isn't he pay to win as well?

 

I think the term P2W is mired in the wrong idea. Here's an example I look for...If you can Pay the devs for the best weapon/armor the game allows, and/or pay the company for a toon that is max in level and skills...that is P2W.

Everything else is pretty much ways to influence a game's economy and the devs' paycheck.

Personally I think buying gems in GW2 is one of the closest P2W schemes I have seeen in a long while, but that's just a personal opinion. It's innovative, but shady.

But in Aika I can. I can buy items from the cash shop to get unbreakble synthing to get a better weapon. Are some of these items sellable in game? sure but they are the hand me downs of whales who wanted a small upgrade on a slightly better weapon.

It does not change the fact that if I want to compete and have the best avaliable options to me I need to pay up.

In battle of the immortals you had a in game gold currency to in game premium curency exchange so you could buy premium money with gold thus making a time to premium conversion for everything. Does this make the game not pay to win because you could technically earn anything with enough grinding? IMO no. I believe I calced out 80 hours of grinding gold in order to buy what 5 bucks would get you. And there were a lot of things to buy to be competitive.

I am aware that some people will defend this style of system (you can buy anything with in game currency, np!). But realize this is pay to win in my book and I regret spending time on this type of game.

Originally posted by Yaevindusk

 

It has pretty much always been a factor in online games.  You will have a hard time trying to sell me on the UO crowd not partaking in "P2W' ethics with how many accounts were sold that had castles and houses with ideal real estate and 6x GMs and millions of gold on it.  I know people who spent upwards of $20,000 just for an account with a couple castles, of which he sold for hundreds of millions of gold.  Equally I know people who sold their accounts for about $5,000 to 10,000 every year or so with the same results.  Indeed, there was a large crowd that considered MMOs to be an investment, especially with UO.  Though I guess you could say that it is a peer to peer transaction and not corporate greed that encourages it.

When it comes right down to it you have people who have time to play games endlessly, and you have people who work multiple jobs and only have an hour or two a day (or week even) to play a game.  I hear all the time "why should someone with $10 be given a disadvangate over one with $100" in terms of a monthly gaming budget, all the time.  Though it creates a double standard and violates the economic (or business) principle of "Time is money".  Why should people who have the money and or time have an advantage over those who don't and are out making money?  Someone who plays a game 16 hours a day has a definitive advantage over one who does not -- and by the beforementioned saying, they are sacrificing time they could be making money for the power they get.

Now, I am not condoning P2W practices in any way, but simply pointing out that things just aren't black and white.  It is one reason why some people consider items that are easily acquirable in game (with a little time played) okay to be in a cash shop and are dead set against unique items only being available in the cash shop.  In both circumstances players are giving up money -- either through lack of working, or using the money they worked for and in the end they get equal benefits.

If you take a good look at Diablo III's action house (minus the cut Blizzard takes), it is quite literaly one person selling the time he worked on the game to another for the time they worked at a job.  There are even a few who turned it into an actual job and have been making hundreds per day (not counting whatever they make if they stream).  I'm all for peer to peer transactions, and less so when it comes to the company selling it regardless if it's easy to get in game or not.  It comes down to games telling me what I can't or can't do with the items I spent time on getting.  In truth, it's the same principle I have with being unable to sell used games (although I do support the industry in trying to find a solution so they make more money for their work).  I should not be told by a game that fears "P2W" phobia people, or the people themselves that I cannot do what I want with the item I spent the time getting.

It's not even an issue of Rich vs. Poor:  The rich will always find a way to get an advantage.  Whether it is 40x multiboxing, hiring someone to play on their computer to do their dailies on multiboxing (undetectable as it's on their computer), or just buying a guild's time to carry them.  This is flat out middle class vs. middle class and people dictating how others should spend their money and live their life just because they don't believe in spending money on virtual items.  It's absolutely disgusting and appaling to some of those who experienced the Industry when the auction market in UO flourished between peers.

I'm all for a company outright banning something just because that's what they want to do, and it's their game.  But when it's because they fear a certain crowd, it's just a darn shame in general, and these same people think their beliefs should be opposed on every one and every single game -- leaving nothing for those who are acclimated to such a gaming culture.  I don't know about you, but if a large group of people said that violence is bad in video games, and that blood should outright be banned in every single game (which won't happen unless people stop buying them), then it would be a sad day for gaming in general.  Games are supposed to be different, and have options.

/sadface

 

One of the interesting aspects of this is SWG accounts. You were limited to one character on a world per account. This was so that you could not specialize in everything.

So what did people do? Played multiple accounts. Yes I CAN have a battle character, a dancer a merchant and a crafter!

And why would the mmo ban these accounts? They made 4x subscription fees......

Originally posted by zekeofev

Originally posted by Rider071

Originally posted by zekeofev

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by snapfusion

 

I am aware that some people will defend this style of system (you can buy anything with in game currency, np!). But realize this is pay to win in my book and I regret spending time on this type of game.

In Aika, they are not hand me downs, they are in fact a way to make in-game currency for real-world money, like any game.

In fact, I whole-heartedly support it, as it is a decent means for a F2P company to make money and keep the development of the game going. In no way do I feel it's P2W, because of the very political system of Aika allows for huge amounts of in-game money to be made by each of the 5 ruling alliances. Those alliances (if smart) spend their money to buy the cash shop items from their citizens, keeping everyone very profitable and geared. All you have to do is put in the effort, it's not an easy game to master even for a whale, and definitely not P2W as any alliance can keep up with any amount of whales purely by pvp.

Originally posted by Yaevindusk

 

When it comes right down to it you have people who have time to play games endlessly, and you have people who work multiple jobs and only have an hour or two a day (or week even) to play a game.  I hear all the time "why should someone with $10 be given a disadvangate over one with $100" in terms of a monthly gaming budget, all the time.  Though it creates a double standard and violates the economic (or business) principle of "Time is money".  Why should people who have the money and or time have an advantage over those who don't and are out making money?  Someone who plays a game 16 hours a day has a definitive advantage over one who does not -- and by the beforementioned saying, they are sacrificing time they could be making money for the power they get.

I understand your idea that pay rate and character advancement should have some kind of common value because they are both dependent upon time, but I will tell you why your assumption is wrong.  Those players that "sacraficed" their time gaining advancement through the game did so while interacting with other players.  A players time spent in the game  should not only be valued with their own advancement, but also include the value that they gained by interacting with other players.      

Originally posted by Rider071

I think the term P2W is mired in the wrong idea. Here's an example I look for...If you can Pay the devs for the best weapon/armor the game allows, and/or pay the company for a toon that is max in level and skills...that is P2W.

Everything else is pretty much ways to influence a game's economy and the devs' paycheck.

Personally I think buying gems in GW2 is one of the closest P2W schemes I have seeen in a long while, but that's just a personal opinion. It's innovative, but shady.

I dont get this at all. You're saying that if you can buy weapon/amor or buy a toon max level for some real cash it is pay to win, but if you buy gems in GW2 that allows you to to buy some cosmetic stuff, its still pay to win? Sure you're going to say that you can trade gems for ingame gold, but that just plain stupid since getting gold ingame is really easy. Why would anyone pay like 1$ to get 1 gold?

P2W is when you can buy something from the cash shop that gives you more power than the ones who doesn't, in PvP. Like some HP potions, scrolls that gives you some increased stats for X amount of time, stuff like that. Anyone saying otherwise don't know that P2W means at all. Also, P2W in PvE doesn't exist. You know why? Because you can do just fine without having to spend a single dime in the cash shop. Sure some games will lock some content until you gives them money, but that's a complete different thing. P2W is a PvP thing, where you will absolutely need to spend some cash in the cash shop for those P2W items to stay competitive.

Originally posted by SirFubar

Originally posted by Rider071

I think the term P2W is mired in the wrong idea. Here's an example I look for...If you can Pay the devs for the best weapon/armor the game allows, and/or pay the company for a toon that is max in level and skills...that is P2W.

Everything else is pretty much ways to influence a game's economy and the devs' paycheck.

Personally I think buying gems in GW2 is one of the closest P2W schemes I have seeen in a long while, but that's just a personal opinion. It's innovative, but shady.

I dont get this at all. You're saying that if you can buy weapon/amor or buy a toon max level for some real cash it is pay to win, but if you buy gems in GW2 that allows you to to buy some cosmetic stuff, its still pay to win? Sure you're going to say that you can trade gems for ingame gold, but that just plain stupid since getting gold ingame is really easy. Why would anyone pay like 1$ to get 1 gold?

P2W is when you can buy something from the cash shop that gives you more power than the ones who doesn't, in PvP. Like some HP potions, scrolls that gives you some increased stats for X amount of time, stuff like that. Anyone saying otherwise don't know that P2W means at all. Also, P2W in PvE doesn't exist. You know why? Because you can do just fine without having to spend a single dime in the cash shop. Sure some games will lock some content until you gives them money, but that's a complete different thing. P2W is a PvP thing, where you will absolutely need to spend some cash in the cash shop for those P2W items to stay competitive.

let's revist my statement:   If   you   can  buy  the  best  weapon and  armor  with   real  money  = pay to win

what part of that was so hard to get?

As far as gems went in GW2, the first 2 months, gems were insanely cheap and giving gold for ridiculous amounts. So much so, that the prices skyrocketed because so many folks spent real money to get that gold deal.

nowadays I assume there is more balance, but...the fact remains you can purchase gems from ANet to then trade with ANet for actual currency to spend in game.  That is the very definition of pay to win. Like I said, it's shady, but it's what it is.

Originally posted by Rider071

Originally posted by SirFubar

Originally posted by Rider071

I think the term P2W is mired in the wrong idea. Here's an example I look for...If you can Pay the devs for the best weapon/armor the game allows, and/or pay the company for a toon that is max in level and skills...that is P2W.

Everything else is pretty much ways to influence a game's economy and the devs' paycheck.

Personally I think buying gems in GW2 is one of the closest P2W schemes I have seeen in a long while, but that's just a personal opinion. It's innovative, but shady.

I dont get this at all. You're saying that if you can buy weapon/amor or buy a toon max level for some real cash it is pay to win, but if you buy gems in GW2 that allows you to to buy some cosmetic stuff, its still pay to win? Sure you're going to say that you can trade gems for ingame gold, but that just plain stupid since getting gold ingame is really easy. Why would anyone pay like 1$ to get 1 gold?

P2W is when you can buy something from the cash shop that gives you more power than the ones who doesn't, in PvP. Like some HP potions, scrolls that gives you some increased stats for X amount of time, stuff like that. Anyone saying otherwise don't know that P2W means at all. Also, P2W in PvE doesn't exist. You know why? Because you can do just fine without having to spend a single dime in the cash shop. Sure some games will lock some content until you gives them money, but that's a complete different thing. P2W is a PvP thing, where you will absolutely need to spend some cash in the cash shop for those P2W items to stay competitive.

let's revist my statement:   If   you   can  buy  the  best  weapon and  armor  with   real  money  = pay to win

what part of that was so hard to get?

As far as gems went in GW2, the first 2 months, gems were insanely cheap and giving gold for ridiculous amounts. So much so, that the prices skyrocketed because so many folks spent real money to get that gold deal.

nowadays I assume there is more balance, but...the fact remains you can purchase gems from ANet to then trade with ANet for actual currency to spend in game.  That is the very definition of pay to win. Like I said, it's shady, but it's what it is.

There's nothing P2W in this at all. If you pay for something someone else can get ingame, its not P2W. P2W is when you bought something in the cash shop that will give you more power than someone else and that you can't get ingame. That is P2W. P2W = pay to be more powerful than the ones who can't spend money in the cash shop. That is the real definition of P2W.

Problem is, there are too many cheap players. If they only offer fluff stuff, the majority of gamers will say "sweet i can play for free and never pay a dime!" and then the company says "Well damn, we're not making enough on the fluff items, lets offer a minor boost in the cash shop" then they start hitting their mark but the free players say "this is bs! P2W! I quit!"

And they only really lose the free players.

So the truth is, it won't ever end. Because they don't care if the cheap/poor/free players don't like the p2w. They want to stay in business.

Originally posted by SirFubar

P2W = pay to be more powerful than the ones who can't spend money in the cash shop. That is the real definition of P2W.

If you REALLY stretch this definition, this could also apply to paid expansions in general. If you don't pay for the expansion, your character is permalocked at a lower level, which means less stats, poorer gear, and no access to higher level raids.

Originally posted by Yakkin

Originally posted by SirFubar

P2W = pay to be more powerful than the ones who can't spend money in the cash shop. That is the real definition of P2W.

If you REALLY stretch this definition, this could also apply to paid expansions in general. If you don't pay for the expansion, your character is permalocked at a lower level, which means less stats, poorer gear, and no access to higher level raids.

I've been saying the same thing for years! But of course everyone always shoots me down and says it's different.

To which I say, P2W games should just sell the best gear but make it a "new 20 second dungeon run that drops the best gear" lol. Its not P2W its a single dungeon expansion with the best gear.

Originally posted by Yakkin

Originally posted by SirFubar

P2W = pay to be more powerful than the ones who can't spend money in the cash shop. That is the real definition of P2W.

If you REALLY stretch this definition, this could also apply to paid expansions in general. If you don't pay for the expansion, your character is permalocked at a lower level, which means less stats, poorer gear, and no access to higher level raids.

Kinda yeah. But that pushing the thinking wayyy to far IMO. Because we're talking about F2P games here. F2P games doesn't make you pay for expansions. Games that have expansions that you need to pay usually don't have a cash shop.

edit : Also, bear in mind that with an expansion, usually the level cap increase, so in some games you can't even play against the people who have bought the expansion. Like I've said, P2W is something you can call out in PvP, not PvE. There's no such thing as P2W in PvE.

Originally posted by Arclan

MMO companies are taking a huge gamble; and enduring significant losses. All in the hopes that P2W becomes increasingly accepted every day. MMO companies don't mind losing a generation (the anti-P2W crowd of UO, EQ, etc) as long as the incoming generation accepts P2W as the norm. The result is you will be paying a lot more for less entertainment.

MMOs are engineered, it seems, to last a few months. They want you to spend as much P2W money as possible in that time frame.

Your logic is flawed. Companies last longer than those few "months" as long as they are obtaining surplus. In most cases, you get what you pay for. It is known how Free to play games work, I'm not sure if you are new or not to this, but this is how it has always worked. They don't hide behind a thing in the free to play model. Cash shops can and always will offer things that people want or think they have an advantage over having. Get to used to it, this model is not going anywhere.

Originally posted by Fendel84M

Problem is, there are too many cheap players. If they only offer fluff stuff, the majority of gamers will say "sweet i can play for free and never pay a dime!" and then the company says "Well damn, we're not making enough on the fluff items, lets offer a minor boost in the cash shop" then they start hitting their mark but the free players say "this is bs! P2W! I quit!"

And they only really lose the free players.

So the truth is, it won't ever end. Because they don't care if the cheap/poor/free players don't like the p2w. They want to stay in business.

You left out "My crazy idea of how the model works is..." because that's not at all how the F2P model has worked or ever will work.

1) Boosters sell well because people like them, not because people feel they need them. The typical talking point is that the 'grind' is made harder so that people buy boosters. This is often based on some fictious weak-willed persona. It's done from the stance that the author is smarter than the 'masses' and they are blind to the truth that the author sees. It's one of the most egotistical and least logical of the arguments against Free to Play. 

2) The only reason that paying 10% is there is because the other 90% is there, so the devs definitely do care if they are there and do care that they are having fun.