Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Is Guild Wars 2 Pay2win?


Recommended Posts

@robertthebard.8150 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages in my previous post, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 393
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Some of the things i observed reading this thread:   1. Buying the full game when the game has what basically ammounts to a huge free demo is pay to win. 2. You can win at fashion wars

You can get into the game, cash up and be lvl 80 and fully equipped on your first day. I don't care if people try to stick the literal meaning of "pay to win" down somebodies throat, because in e

If GW2 is P2W, then I'm definitely doing something wrong. I have all the convenience items from the gem shop, but still can't kill another player in WvW.   Do you think it is too late to get

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@robertthebard.8150 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Ah, I see. You've cleverly left out:

  • ~~exp boosters (any boosters) ~~, which aren't P2W in your warped opinion about P2W, but definitely are P2W going by the original definition
  • the Infinite Continue Coin
  • revive orbs
  • easier access to ascended gear via LW
  • Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts)

because it directly contradicts your point. All of them give a paying player an advantage, even if that advantage is small.

  • the skyscale (requires LW unlocks)
  • the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock)

Are also not free. This is a common misconception some players make. You see, you only get the Living World episodes for free while they're recent. Any new player will still have to pay to get the same advantage. Even if you did get them for logging in, other players that didn't get them are still at a disadvantage.Oh, and let me repeat what you originally stated, again: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."

LW with the mounts, as well as the rest, sure sound like a buyable advantages to me. Also, this is not taking what's P2W to the absurd, I'm simply using the definition you originally gave (even if you yourself are using a warped, different one).

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Ah, I see. You've cleverly left out:
  • ~~exp boosters (any boosters) ~~, which aren't P2W in your warped opinion about P2W, but definitely are P2W going by the original definition
  • the Infinite Continue Coin
  • revive orbs
  • easier access to ascended gear via LW
  • Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts)

because it directly contradicts your point. All of them give a paying player an advantage, even if that advantage is small.
  • the skyscale (requires LW unlocks)
  • the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock)

Are also not free. This is a common misconception some players make. You see, you only get the Living World episodes for free while they're recent. Any new player will still have to pay to get the same advantage. Even if you did get them for logging in, other players that didn't get them are still at a disadvantage.Oh, and let me repeat what you originally stated, again: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."

LW with the mounts, as well as the rest, sure sound like a buyable advantages to me. Also, this is not taking what's P2W to the absurd, I'm simply using the definition you originally gave (even if you yourself are using a warped, different one).

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Currency_exchangeGems store items are not exclusive to people with money. You can farm the gold and buy the gems and items you want.These items are perhaps exclusive for the gemsstore, but not exclusive for those with a big wallet in real life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@mercury ranique.2170 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Ah, I see. You've cleverly left out:
  • ~~exp boosters (any boosters) ~~, which aren't P2W in your warped opinion about P2W, but definitely are P2W going by the original definition
  • the Infinite Continue Coin
  • revive orbs
  • easier access to ascended gear via LW
  • Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts)

because it directly contradicts your point. All of them give a paying player an advantage, even if that advantage is small.
  • the skyscale (requires LW unlocks)
  • the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock)

Are also not free. This is a common misconception some players make. You see, you only get the Living World episodes for free while they're recent. Any new player will still have to pay to get the same advantage. Even if you did get them for logging in, other players that didn't get them are still at a disadvantage.Oh, and let me repeat what you originally stated, again: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."

LW with the mounts, as well as the rest, sure sound like a buyable advantages to me. Also, this is not taking what's P2W to the absurd, I'm simply using the definition you originally gave (even if you yourself are using a warped, different one).

Gems store items are not exclusive to people with money. You can farm the gold and buy the gems and items you want.These items are perhaps exclusive for the gemsstore, but not exclusive for those with a big wallet in real life.

That's great, but misses the point I'm arguing completely. This is about if someone gains any advantage at all by paying with real money, which they do. So by @robertthebard.8150 initial definition, they'd essentially be paying to win.

Your argument would also mean that any item in the gem shop is fine, as anyone is able to buy it. So any boost that enhances damage by 7777% would be fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That depends on what "winning" is. If we talk about looks, eg gemstore and/or blacklion exclusive skins, or buying your way through pve raids for the skins, the answer is "maybe".If we talk about good old fashioned "better stats aka advantage overy enemies", the answer is a big no.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Ah, I see. You've cleverly left out:
  • ~~exp boosters (any boosters) ~~, which aren't P2W in your warped opinion about P2W, but definitely are P2W going by the original definition
  • the Infinite Continue Coin
  • revive orbs
  • easier access to ascended gear via LW
  • Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts)

because it directly contradicts your point. All of them give a paying player an advantage, even if that advantage is small.
  • the skyscale (requires LW unlocks)
  • the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock)

Are also not free. This is a common misconception some players make. You see, you only get the Living World episodes for free while they're recent. Any new player will still have to pay to get the same advantage. Even if you did get them for logging in, other players that didn't get them are still at a disadvantage.Oh, and let me repeat what you originally stated, again: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."

LW with the mounts, as well as the rest, sure sound like a buyable advantages to me. Also, this is not taking what's P2W to the absurd, I'm simply using the definition you originally gave (even if you yourself are using a warped, different one).

Gems store items are not exclusive to people with money. You can farm the gold and buy the gems and items you want.These items are perhaps exclusive for the gemsstore, but not exclusive for those with a big wallet in real life.

That's great, but misses the point I'm arguing completely. This is about if someone gains any advantage at all by paying with real money, which they do. So by @robertthebard.8150 initial definition, they'd essentially be paying to win.

Your argument would also mean that any item in the gem shop is fine, as anyone is able to buy it. So any boost that enhances damage by 7777% would be fine.

Technically, that's exactly what it means. Anything available in the gem store is not pay-to-win by the traditional definition.

Originally pay-to-win meant:

  • paying to secure not in-game available benefits which secured the paying party is more powerful than via normal game play achieve-able
  • this extended to sever grind or near unattainable in-game upgrades, for example in case of upgrades which would be theoretically attainable but so expensive that this is not reflected in the game

The industry since has changed tremendously. For example, the items offered and incentivization has changed a lot (both for items which are beneficial as well as not beneficial, which blurs the lines and perception). Most often to more extreme measures. Any player who considers things in GW2 pay2win has lost touch with where the rest of the industry is at (especially in regards to expansions being considered pay2win, which was never the issue in the past and for most games still is not. Expansions used to be mandatory to be allowed to continue have access to a games endgame. The fact GW2 is different is being used against it here).

Link to post
Share on other sites

You ask this question in wrong section of the forums. Most people who read this section are PvE'ers - they don't "win" much really beside getting new content. Problem of p2w is in wvw and pvp - especs are straight upgrade to core in most cases which leads to even more imbalance since usually especs offer even more what class didn't have before which leads to never ending power creep.Then there is thing like food and buffs/gear that cannot be made or are hard to get without xpac.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Ah, I see. You've cleverly left out:
  • ~~exp boosters (any boosters) ~~, which aren't P2W in your warped opinion about P2W, but definitely are P2W going by the original definition
  • the Infinite Continue Coin
  • revive orbs
  • easier access to ascended gear via LW
  • Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts)

because it directly contradicts your point. All of them give a paying player an advantage, even if that advantage is small.
  • the skyscale (requires LW unlocks)
  • the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock)

Are also not free. This is a common misconception some players make. You see, you only get the Living World episodes for free while they're recent. Any new player will still have to pay to get the same advantage. Even if you did get them for logging in, other players that didn't get them are still at a disadvantage.Oh, and let me repeat what you originally stated, again: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."

LW with the mounts, as well as the rest, sure sound like a buyable advantages to me. Also, this is not taking what's P2W to the absurd, I'm simply using the definition you originally gave (even if you yourself are using a warped, different one).

Gems store items are not exclusive to people with money. You can farm the gold and buy the gems and items you want.These items are perhaps exclusive for the gemsstore, but not exclusive for those with a big wallet in real life.

That's great, but misses the point I'm arguing completely. This is about if someone gains any advantage at all by paying with real money, which they do. So by @robertthebard.8150 initial definition, they'd essentially be paying to win.

Your argument would also mean that any item in the gem shop is fine, as anyone is able to buy it. So any boost that enhances damage by 7777% would be fine.

It does not misses the point you are trying to make, but it actually counters it fully.The definition you are using is excluding a very important element, meaning it is exclusive to those paying with real money. This is not the case. There can be some debate when the amount of effort put into it in other ways is so big it is not realistic to gain the same result. This could only count for the revive orbs, but the benefit of revive orbs over waypointing is so minor this would not count either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Ah, I see. You've cleverly left out:
  • ~~exp boosters (any boosters) ~~, which aren't P2W in your warped opinion about P2W, but definitely are P2W going by the original definition
  • the Infinite Continue Coin
  • revive orbs
  • easier access to ascended gear via LW
  • Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts)

because it directly contradicts your point. All of them give a paying player an advantage, even if that advantage is small.
  • the skyscale (requires LW unlocks)
  • the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock)

Are also not free. This is a common misconception some players make. You see, you only get the Living World episodes for free while they're recent. Any new player will still have to pay to get the same advantage. Even if you did get them for logging in, other players that didn't get them are still at a disadvantage.Oh, and let me repeat what you originally stated, again: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."

LW with the mounts, as well as the rest, sure sound like a buyable advantages to me. Also, this is not taking what's P2W to the absurd, I'm simply using the definition you originally gave (even if you yourself are using a warped, different one).

Gems store items are not exclusive to people with money. You can farm the gold and buy the gems and items you want.These items are perhaps exclusive for the gemsstore, but not exclusive for those with a big wallet in real life.

That's great, but misses the point I'm arguing completely. This is about if someone gains any advantage at all by paying with real money, which they do. So by @robertthebard.8150 initial definition, they'd essentially be paying to win.

Your argument would also mean that any item in the gem shop is fine, as anyone is able to buy it. So any boost that enhances damage by 7777% would be fine.

Technically, that's exactly what it means. Anything available in the gem store is not pay-to-win by the traditional definition.

Originally pay-to-win meant:
  • paying to secure not in-game available benefits which secured the paying party is more powerful than via normal game play achieve-able
  • this extended to sever grind or near unattainable in-game upgrades, for example in case of upgrades which would be theoretically attainable but so expensive that this is not reflected in the game

Not sure if that is actually the "traditional" definition, but that's beside the point, as I'm arguing about @robertthebard.8150 "actual definition".This one: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."Going by that definition many things could be considered P2W.

The industry since has changed tremendously. For example, the items offered and incentivization has changed a lot (both for items which are beneficial as well as not beneficial, which blurs the lines and perception). Most often to more extreme measures. Any player who considers things in GW2 pay2win has lost touch with where the rest of the industry is at (especially in regards to expansions being considered pay2win, which was never the issue in the past and for most games still is not. Expansions used to be mandatory to be allowed to continue have access to a games endgame. The fact GW2 is different is being used against it here).

Exactly, that's why I stated that the term P2W has warped from it's initial definition over time. @robertthebard.8150 is trying to argue that it's definition didn't change over time and that it's "actual definition" still holds up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@mercury ranique.2170 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Ah, I see. You've cleverly left out:
  • ~~exp boosters (any boosters) ~~, which aren't P2W in your warped opinion about P2W, but definitely are P2W going by the original definition
  • the Infinite Continue Coin
  • revive orbs
  • easier access to ascended gear via LW
  • Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts)

because it directly contradicts your point. All of them give a paying player an advantage, even if that advantage is small.
  • the skyscale (requires LW unlocks)
  • the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock)

Are also not free. This is a common misconception some players make. You see, you only get the Living World episodes for free while they're recent. Any new player will still have to pay to get the same advantage. Even if you did get them for logging in, other players that didn't get them are still at a disadvantage.Oh, and let me repeat what you originally stated, again: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."

LW with the mounts, as well as the rest, sure sound like a buyable advantages to me. Also, this is not taking what's P2W to the absurd, I'm simply using the definition you originally gave (even if you yourself are using a warped, different one).

Gems store items are not exclusive to people with money. You can farm the gold and buy the gems and items you want.These items are perhaps exclusive for the gemsstore, but not exclusive for those with a big wallet in real life.

That's great, but misses the point I'm arguing completely. This is about if someone gains any advantage at all by paying with real money, which they do. So by @robertthebard.8150 initial definition, they'd essentially be paying to win.

Your argument would also mean that any item in the gem shop is fine, as anyone is able to buy it. So any boost that enhances damage by 7777% would be fine.

It does not misses the point you are trying to make, but it actually counters it fully.The definition you are using is excluding a very important element, meaning it is exclusive to those paying with real money. This is not the case. There can be some debate when the amount of effort put into it in other ways is so big it is not realistic to gain the same result. This could only count for the revive orbs, but the benefit of revive orbs over waypointing is so minor this would not count either.

By your own words, it actually counters nothing.Those who do pay with real money don't use the ingame gold. This is already an advantage. If you're gaining the same result with less effort it is still an advantage. The benefit of revive orbs may be minor, but it is still a benefit. So going by @robertthebard.8150 definition, it would still be P2W, since those things still offer an advantage, no matter how minor that advantage may be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Ah, I see. You've cleverly left out:
  • ~~exp boosters (any boosters) ~~, which aren't P2W in your warped opinion about P2W, but definitely are P2W going by the original definition
  • the Infinite Continue Coin
  • revive orbs
  • easier access to ascended gear via LW
  • Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts)

because it directly contradicts your point. All of them give a paying player an advantage, even if that advantage is small.
  • the skyscale (requires LW unlocks)
  • the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock)

Are also not free. This is a common misconception some players make. You see, you only get the Living World episodes for free while they're recent. Any new player will still have to pay to get the same advantage. Even if you did get them for logging in, other players that didn't get them are still at a disadvantage.Oh, and let me repeat what you originally stated, again: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."

LW with the mounts, as well as the rest, sure sound like a buyable advantages to me. Also, this is not taking what's P2W to the absurd, I'm simply using the definition you originally gave (even if you yourself are using a warped, different one).

Gems store items are not exclusive to people with money. You can farm the gold and buy the gems and items you want.These items are perhaps exclusive for the gemsstore, but not exclusive for those with a big wallet in real life.

That's great, but misses the point I'm arguing completely. This is about if someone gains any advantage at all by paying with real money, which they do. So by @robertthebard.8150 initial definition, they'd essentially be paying to win.

Your argument would also mean that any item in the gem shop is fine, as anyone is able to buy it. So any boost that enhances damage by 7777% would be fine.

It does not misses the point you are trying to make, but it actually counters it fully.The definition you are using is excluding a very important element, meaning it is exclusive to those paying with real money. This is not the case. There can be some debate when the amount of effort put into it in other ways is so big it is not realistic to gain the same result. This could only count for the revive orbs, but the benefit of revive orbs over waypointing is so minor this would not count either.

By your own words, it actually counters nothing.Those who do pay with real money don't use the ingame gold. This is already an advantage. If you're gaining the same result with less effort it is still an advantage. The benefit of revive orbs may be minor, but it is still a benefit. So going by @robertthebard.8150 definition, it would still be P2W, since those things still offer an advantage, no matter how minor that advantage may be.

You keep talking about someone's definition, but when the definition is wrong, that is something that should not be ignored. GW2 is not pay to win by far. You make it sound as if. This is the same as saying that games with monthly fees are pay to win, just cause when you do not pay with real money, you do not get to be able to play.

Pay to win means what it means. You have to pay real life money in order to win the game you are playing. This is not the case. Just that you can buy things that give you an advantage doesnt make it pay to win unless the advantage is exclusive and big enough to make it unfair to those not paying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@mercury ranique.2170 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:The definition of P2W has been warped in the last few years, so it depends on what definition you're applying to the game.

Nah, it just requires that players stick to the actual definition, instead of lumping anything they don't like into same wheelhouse. I mean, I've seen cosmetic skins listed as P2W on these forums. So no, the best idea is to reject the "but I want it, and can't buy it, so it's P2W" arguments.

But that's the problem. There is no "actual definition" of P2W.

There is, actually: Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it. Some examples, from actual P2W games, in Rappelz, you can enchant your gear. If that attempt fails, the item can break, and can't be used until it's repaired. The items to protect against breakage, and to repair items are both CS exclusive items. They aren't bound, so they can be traded amongst players, but their source is the cash shop. This is important because Rappelz has open world non-consensual PvP. So someone that laid out the cash to fully enchant their gear has a distinct advantage over those who don't.

Setting aside that that definition is just your own definition, and not an "actual definition", that would mean that only things that can be used or affect PvP count as P2W. Is that what your definition of P2W is?

If that is the case, it definitely isn't the definition everyone else uses.

No, it's not my personal definition. It's the definition that's applied for 15 years, or more. That I only listed a couple of examples doesn't mean it's just "well, it doesn't count because it's only PvP"... The problem is, the definition "everyone else uses" includes purely cosmetic items, which I've seen on these very forums. "Ooo, he got a mount skin I don't have, P2W"... It seems to me like the last thread along these lines wasn't all that long ago, where the whole CS was predatory, etc. etc.

Of course, the other problem with you're denial of the definition is that, initially, P2W meant literally that, paying to win. I used the PvP example because it's very clearly "winning". The example from Vindictus, of being able to reset what's supposed to be dailies is another example, they also had actual gear with bonuses in their CS, Tera does as well. swtor requires either a sub, or for you to purchase an unlock to equip artifact grade equipment. It also has a lockout for activities that require unlocks, or a sub, to bypass. So instead of me going on and on with examples of actual P2W scenarios, how about this: Lay out what you feel is P2W here.

Except it is your personal definition that GW2 isn't P2W while using the definition you gave. And this is a wrong statement to make if we're applying your definition.

Let us use the definition you gave: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."If we are strict in the usage of the definition you gave, many things will give an advantage, no matter how small that advantage may be and no matter the gamemode.

This includes things like exp boosters (any boosters), the skyscale (requires LW unlocks), the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock), the Infinite Continue Coin, revive orbs, easier access to ascended gear via LW, Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts). All of those items give an advantage to a player compared to a player that doesn't have them.

So strictly using the definition you gave, GW2 would count as a game with P2W items in the shop, unless you're denying that any of those items give an advantage that is non-cosmetic.

By saying "No", you are actually going against the original meaning you gave, ignoring items that are not cosmetic items. So you're already using a warped P2W definition.

(For the record, I don't think GW2 is P2W, but going by the "15 years definition", it would be, as there are items that give advantages in the shop. That's what my original post was about, that people don't use the original meaning anymore, but a warped version of it which allows soft-advantages like exp-boosts etc.)

Because this is the definition. It is exactly the situation that the term was coined to define. What has become the norm is "microtransactions == P2W", no matter what those transactions are. This includes cosmetics, that add absolutely nothing but appearance changes, mount skins, or even mounts, even when the mount doesn't do anything differently from one readily obtainable in game, except for how it looks. It's even carried over to SP games in the same fashion, where it makes absolutely 0 difference what a player buys, or doesn't buy. So yes, I'd prefer we stick to what P2W actually means, instead of this cobbled together excuse to run at microtransactions. It's not like I'm a big proponent of microtransactions either, I haven't spent fifty bucks on them in the last year, let alone the last few weeks, unlike some players that will. I'm not a fan of loot crates either, to the point where I don't even buy them with a game's stipend of cash shop currency that comes with a sub. However, just the existence of a cash shop does not equate P2W, and you can bet that that's where this thread was wanting to go.

So if you'd prefer to stick to what P2W "actually" means ( "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."), why did you answer "No"? I've listed some things that do give advantages, so going by your definition, GW2 would be P2W.

You're not adhering to your own definition. Instead you're using a warped personal one.

Such as? How does my bank space give me an advantage over you? Are you incapable of selling off items because your inventory space is lower? Will your reaching level cap adversely affect my game play? What's being warped is "advantage", and I'm not the one warping it. Instead, we're looking at exactly what I listed in my last post: But microtransactions are P2W.

Skyscale LW unlocks: Just LoL? I got the LW for free. I guess logging in is now P2W? This is using your own example here, and you list having it as P2W, so if all one did was log in, it's P2W? This is exactly what I'm talking about with taking what's P2W to the absurd. Congratulations for proving my point?

Ah, I see. You've cleverly left out:
  • ~~exp boosters (any boosters) ~~, which aren't P2W in your warped opinion about P2W, but definitely are P2W going by the original definition
  • the Infinite Continue Coin
  • revive orbs
  • easier access to ascended gear via LW
  • Candy Corn Gobbler (stat boosts)

because it directly contradicts your point. All of them give a paying player an advantage, even if that advantage is small.
  • the skyscale (requires LW unlocks)
  • the rolling beetle (requires LW unlock)

Are also not free. This is a common misconception some players make. You see, you only get the Living World episodes for free while they're recent. Any new player will still have to pay to get the same advantage. Even if you did get them for logging in, other players that didn't get them are still at a disadvantage.Oh, and let me repeat what you originally stated, again: "Anything you can buy from the game's cash shop that gives you an advantage over a player that doesn't buy it."

LW with the mounts, as well as the rest, sure sound like a buyable advantages to me. Also, this is not taking what's P2W to the absurd, I'm simply using the definition you originally gave (even if you yourself are using a warped, different one).

Gems store items are not exclusive to people with money. You can farm the gold and buy the gems and items you want.These items are perhaps exclusive for the gemsstore, but not exclusive for those with a big wallet in real life.

That's great, but misses the point I'm arguing completely. This is about if someone gains any advantage at all by paying with real money, which they do. So by @robertthebard.8150 initial definition, they'd essentially be paying to win.

Your argument would also mean that any item in the gem shop is fine, as anyone is able to buy it. So any boost that enhances damage by 7777% would be fine.

It does not misses the point you are trying to make, but it actually counters it fully.The definition you are using is excluding a very important element, meaning it is exclusive to those paying with real money. This is not the case. There can be some debate when the amount of effort put into it in other ways is so big it is not realistic to gain the same result. This could only count for the revive orbs, but the benefit of revive orbs over waypointing is so minor this would not count either.

By your own words, it actually counters nothing.Those who do pay with real money don't use the ingame gold. This is already an advantage. If you're gaining the same result with less effort it is still an advantage. The benefit of revive orbs may be minor, but it is still a benefit. So going by @robertthebard.8150 definition, it would still be P2W, since those things still offer an advantage, no matter how minor that advantage may be.

You keep talking about someone's definition, but when the definition is wrong, that is something that should not be ignored. GW2 is not pay to win by far. You make it sound as if. This is the same as saying that games with monthly fees are pay to win, just cause when you do not pay with real money, you do not get to be able to play.

Pay to win means what it means. You have to pay real life money in order to win the game you are playing. This is not the case. Just that you can buy things that give you an advantage doesnt make it pay to win unless the advantage is exclusive and big enough to make it unfair to those not paying.

And here's the problem. There isn't actually a current definition of P2W everyone supports. That's why I said the definition of P2W has warped.As you can see @robertthebard.8150 has his own definition.@Cyninja.2954 has his own definition.You have your own definition.There's another definition on Wikipedia.And another one on Urban Dictionary.And many more, depending who you ask.And they all don't match.

What you probably have missed is that I myself also don't consider GW2 P2W by my definition. I'm purely arguing with @robertthebard.8150 initial "actual" definition and what that would mean for the current shop, as he brought up this "actual" definition that apparently is the alpha and omega in his case.

@robertthebard.8150 said:I'm referring to the 7777% dmg increase item you cited in your post. You know, you're evidence for P2W?

Guess it wasn't obvious enough that that was an example for an item that wouldn't be P2W based on @mercury ranique.2170 and @Cyninja.2954 definition of P2W, as anyone would be able to buy that from the cash shop with gold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Cynz.9437" said:You ask this question in wrong section of the forums. Most people who read this section are PvE'ers - they don't "win" much really beside getting new content. Problem of p2w is in wvw and pvp - especs are straight upgrade to core in most cases which leads to even more imbalance since usually especs offer even more what class didn't have before which leads to never ending power creep.Then there is thing like food and buffs/gear that cannot be made or are hard to get without xpac.

Agreed.

We should have a similar system as other MMORPGs have: denied access to accounts which do not own the latest expansion. That would immediately solve the issue of pay2win.

Think about it: if you can't access the content, no one else can win against you. That's how other MMORPGs handle this and maybe it is time GW2 followed suite (technically most MMORPGs also increase the level cap, add an entire new leveling section and make you run a lot of hoops before even being able to access endgame again, but we don't have to go full 100% in GW2. Forcing players to buy the latest expansion will suffice).

Funny how a developer being LESS generous and more restrictive could suddenly change which terms apply to its game isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

@robertthebard.8150 said:I'm referring to the 7777% dmg increase item you cited in your post. You know, you're evidence for P2W?

Guess it wasn't obvious enough that that was an example for an item that wouldn't be P2W based on @mercury ranique.2170 and @Cyninja.2954 definition of P2W, as anyone would be able to buy that from the cash shop with gold.

What it was was trying to argue with hyperbole, because you're short on actual facts. You run around this topic, claiming I have ignored your points, all while totally avoiding answering any of the questions I have asked. Don't fret, though, I understand why. If you answered them, you'd find your argument is falling flat.

  1. How does how fast you level affect me?
  2. How does what mount skins you're using affect me?
  3. How does you having an expansion I don't have affect me?
  4. How does my getting a LW for free, by logging in at the appropriate time, affect you? Why does it affect you?
Link to post
Share on other sites

This game is most definitely not pay to win, by any stretch of the imagination. It's pointless to argue with people who think it is, because they're wrong, full stop, end of discussion. There's literally nothing that backs up their "arguments". "But E-specs provide an advantage!" E-Specs are part of an entire expansion. If we're going to argue that expansion content is P2W, then every gave, ever made, that has had expansions is P2W.

Some people will nitpick until the heat death of the Universe. They're not worth the time or effort to argue with. They're wrong; you know it, I know it, ignore them and move on. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@robertthebard.8150 said:

@robertthebard.8150 said:I'm referring to the 7777% dmg increase item you cited in your post. You know, you're evidence for P2W?

Guess it wasn't obvious enough that that was an example for an item that wouldn't be P2W based on @mercury ranique.2170 and @"Cyninja.2954" definition of P2W, as anyone would be able to buy that from the cash shop with gold.

What it was was trying to argue with hyperbole, because you're short on actual facts. You run around this topic, claiming I have ignored your points, all while totally avoiding answering any of the questions I have asked. Don't fret, though, I understand why. If you answered them, you'd find your argument is falling flat.

Except I have already answered those questions. For some reason you're mentioning questions on things that I've never mentioned, though. Also, the only fact I'm using is your own "actual" definition, so I'm rather baffled how I should be short on facts? It's your own definition. So if anything is falling flat, it is the definition you initialy mentioned about there being an "actual" definition of P2W. But sure, move the goalpost a little more, I'm interested.
  1. How does how fast you level affect me?Someone that lvls with an exp boost technically has an advantage over someone that doesn't lvl with an exp boost. This would be considered P2W by your "actual" definition.
  2. How does what mount skins you're using affect me?I've never mentioned mount skins, so why do you ask?
  3. How does you having an expansion I don't have affect me?I've never mentioned expansions, so why do you ask?
  4. How does my getting a LW for free, by logging in at the appropriate time, affect you? Why does it affect you?This has nothing to do with getting it for free or not. Would giving a streamer a completely maxxed character for free in any P2W game make the game any less P2W?Someone that has the LW will have an adventage over someone that doesn't have access to the LW. The paying player does have access to things like the Skyscale and the rollerbeetle, which both are better than any of the other mounts in their own niche. LW also offers easier access to ascended gear. So it is considered P2W by your "actual" definition.

But I also have a question for you:Would you consider that fictional 7777% damage enhancement item P2W if it was only usable in PvE? After all, it wouldn't affect you.

Edit: Anyways, heading out for a bit, don't expect another answer too soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A whole bunch of people who chose "No" arguing back and forth for no reason lol

Technically and semantically, yes, GW2 is P2W. This mental gymnastics to try and not lump it in a group it is in is mainly due to not wanting to link the negative connotations of such a system with GW2. Rather than stewing in cognitive dissonance, why not just accept that P2W isn't automatically negative. It's a byproduct of games that are F2P needing to monetize their game to continue to make content for the game. Simple as that.

The whole point of the video I linked is to point to how P2W COULD ruin a game and then things you should avoid so it doesn't, but don't get it twisted, the elements still exists in GW2. Overall, it's a tolerable level of P2W that can only get you so far but it will definitely get you that distance very quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Parasite.5389" said:"You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means"

I laughed at this, summarized what I was thinking with a nice reference. Pay for some optional QoL items? Yes. For those out there who think expansions count as p2w....what????? Most games offer new and improved things with expansions, it's a drawing card and why people buy them. If it makes you feel left out that you don't have them/can't afford them/etc, but it's not there to make you feel sad. You can not purchase weapons/armor/skills for base game that give you an advantage over your fellow player...it's cosmetic. World boss device hardly counts as paying to win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gw2 is pay to play. If you consider it pay to win, then games like diablo 2, skyrim, and WoW are also pay to win. If you dont buy gw2 xpacs, you arent playing a complete version of the game. If you dont buy D2 or wow xpacs, you arent playing a complete version of the game. Pay to win generally means micro-transactions giving players more power, so the people who pay the most money become the most powerful. When everyone pays a flat amount to access the same content, its not pay to win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Cynz.9437" said:You ask this question in wrong section of the forums. Most people who read this section are PvE'ers - they don't "win" much really beside getting new content. Problem of p2w is in wvw and pvp - especs are straight upgrade to core in most cases which leads to even more imbalance since usually especs offer even more what class didn't have before which leads to never ending power creep.Then there is thing like food and buffs/gear that cannot be made or are hard to get without xpac.Core engineer dumps grenade barrage and instakills holosmith

Holosmith: "P2W REEEEEEEEEE!!!"

Wait.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...