Poll for a game about Pay 2 Win

[Skarth]

I won't be mentioning the game, but some people should not have much trouble guessing what it is.

There is some debate in said game about whether it is pay 2 win or not, and even advertises itself as having "No pay to win".

This game is expected to have a economy and trading system, so that earning new ships requires trading and earning money to get better ones.

The game also is allowing players to buy in-game money and ships for real life dollars.

Does this make the game pay to win?

 

[mavrocket]

Obviously P2W.

Frankly, I'm starting to not like the direction the 'game' is starting to take.

 

[J Macker]

Who are you kidding? Why not mention the name of the game in your thread?
Star Citizen

As for your question; you must first define what it is to "win" in this game.
Is winning having the biggest, most expensive ship?
No. The Bengal Class Carrier has not ever been available for purchase.

Do you "win" the game by owning a Corvette? if so, then yes, it's P2W.
I'd say that's pretty dang boring.

Give a man a fish, he can eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he can eat for life.

Think of it like using cheat codes. What's your objective in game?
I could splurge and buy a Constellation without catching too much flak from my wife, but I think I will have more fun trying to earn the money for it.

But, I don't have endless amounts of time, so I chose to support the developer and bought a Freelancer. Did I win the game? Hardly. I also bought an Aurora LX just because. I may end up getting a 325p as well. But, I think I will try to earn the credits in game to buy that 325p or a 350.

Tell me, is it fun to have everything in game? It's just like cheat codes. Do you have fun in being wealthy in game? Or do you have fun building up a new character?

 

[limitedaccess]

I bring this up any time this is discussed but it ends up being a semantics argument regarding what "pay to win" means since the term itself has no real officially recognized meaning.

There are those who view pay to win as being able to affect game play through the use of real life money only or that real life money leads to an advantage that cannot be overcome. Those with these view point will not consider this pay to win and will argue around the literal meaning while avoiding the actual issue which is how much of an advantage real life money conveys.

Personally speaking I consider the term "pay to win" a catch all phrase that conveys the meaning of being able to exchange real life money in a way that affects game play regardless of whether or not this is directly or how much it affects game play. Being able to buy cosmetic items and trading it with players in game for currency which can be used to affect game play or having to spend $100 for a gun that does 1% damage or buying some sort of boosts to speed leveling time to me are all pay to win.

With that being said pay to win by itself is not a black and white deal as a turn off due to the extent of which it actually affects the game. Being able to to buy an item to level to maximum in 10 hours of play time versus 20 hours of play time in a PVE/coop oriented game versus being able to buy a stronger gun in a PvP oriented game would receive different considerations from me. For example is BF3 pay to win? I would say yes but not to the extent it would put off me from buying the game.

In conclusion my main point would be the term "pay to win" by itself is meaningless as there is no established meaning. I do not really consider what a game may or may not be advertised or perceived as but the actual mechanics present.

 

[Stiletto]

Can you pay to make the game easier for yourself?

The easier the game is, the easier it is to win. Simple.

 

[J Macker]

OP, what do you think about League of Legends?

Do you think LoL is P2Win?

A skilled player can beat me with Ashe or Master Yi on a level 1 account. Sure, the masteries and runes give me a slight edge, but I would definitely bet I'd lose a 1v1 if I were playing against a pro.

In Star Citizen, right now anybody can buy as many Constellations as he/she wants. Oh, and each one comes with 10k game credits. So if he/she starts the game with 100k in game credits, does he "win"?

What is the fun in having so much money in game? There's no challenge and no appreciation for what you do have. I'm sure i have more appreciation for a $100 bill than a millionaire.

Can you pay to make the game easier for yourself?
The easier the game is, the easier it is to win. Simple.

Easier? What is the definition of easy in a open sandbox space sim? Sure, money can buy a bigger ship and you can make more game credits than I could with a small Aurora. Does that mean you have more fun doing it?

Or, am I having more fun earning my way up to buy that Constellation?

Is it easier for a Vanduul Fighter to kill a 325a ship? I hope so.
Does that mean he's having more fun? Nope.


I think some of the folks posting about P2win in Star Citizen are making too big a deal of it.
Don't be butthurt because you couldn't afford to buy an Idris Corvette. You can still have a ton of fun. Isn't that what the game is for?

 

[Thuleman]

What is the fun in having so much money in game? There's no challenge and no appreciation for what you do have. I'm sure i have more appreciation for a $100 bill than a millionaire.

I think what you meant to write is that you don't find any appreciation in just having purchased in-game currency. This is not universally true.

When I used my RL personality, skills, and intelligence to position myself such that I have financial security and plenty of disposable income IRL I do have appreciation for that. If I then take part of that disposable income and put it toward an entertainment expense (much like going to see a movie, or a dinner out) then I have appreciation for that as well.

I earned that RL money and doing so was much more challenging than farming any computer game currency will ever be.

When I game I want to be entertained and I don't mind at all to drop a bunch of cash on a game to skip the boring/tedious parts.

 

[KaOTiK]

As long as you can earn everything (besides cosmetic stuff) in game with in reason (not having to spend 10 hours to unlock a gun for example) I don't consider it pay to win if others wish to just purchase the item with money instead. Now if stuff takes a long time to earn for whatever reason, then I would say yes it is P2W.

 

[tyguy]

I think the better question for Star Citizen is will it cost a lot of money to play this game as i'm not sure winning is what you do in this game?

 

[dremic]

I think the better question for Star Citizen is will it cost a lot of money to play this game as i'm not sure winning is what you do in this game?

exactly. technically you dont even have to play with other players. you can play with just npcs..

there is also a limit to how many in game credits you can purchase. it also means that the biggest ship doesnt always win.

all ships that have been bought are still obtainable in the game.

the OP is trolling extra hard. hope this gets closed.

 

[MrGuvernment]

Friend said this and it does make sense.

...all i know is i have a job and a family... i dont have the time the kids do to play constantly and level up... i consider the "pay 2 win" aspect as a chance to level the playing field with the die-hards that power level up by playing 24 hours a day until they max out

 

[Sycraft]

Friend said this and it does make sense.

The problem with his logic is that he'll be even more angry if someone with a shit-ton of disposable income decides to spend and spend just to be able to beat up on people. Any work he does will be for naught.

That's the problem. People have this idea like "Oh it'll just let me even it out," but what it really does is let some people more or less "cheat". They have more, or are willing to spend more, than anyone else and thus get to be better.

It also rather cheapens the experience. If you can just buy stuff, and don't have to work for it, then what's the point? That is why many people find cheating in single player games ruins the experience for them: If they can have everything at the click of a button, then nothing is worth having.

 

[WAR2K]

The question is if these ships that you pay for are vastly superior to one that you would start out with of the same type? Even then, we also don't know how long it will take to get any of those other ships that people are buying too. What if the large majority of the price of a ship is in its upgrades instead of just the ship itself? I personally think it is way to early to tell at this point. The guy could have a trick up his sleeve that will appease most of us.

 

[dremic]

The problem with his logic is that he'll be even more angry if someone with a shit-ton of disposable income decides to spend and spend just to be able to beat up on people. Any work he does will be for naught.

That's the problem. People have this idea like "Oh it'll just let me even it out," but what it really does is let some people more or less "cheat". They have more, or are willing to spend more, than anyone else and thus get to be better.

It also rather cheapens the experience. If you can just buy stuff, and don't have to work for it, then what's the point? That is why many people find cheating in single player games ruins the experience for them: If they can have everything at the click of a button, then nothing is worth having.

hence the restriction on how much you can buy. you also cant buy ships once the game is released everything will be in game. so you may be able to buy in game funds to help you work towards a ship but you wont be able to just buy ships with rl money.

 

[Gorankar]

Is it pay to win? Yes.

Is that a bad thing? Not always. And I am not sure if it is bad in this case, or just annoying.

 

[pcjunkie]

I thought the OP was talking about Diablo 3...yes that is P2W!

 

[Thuleman]

hence the restriction on how much you can buy. you also cant buy ships once the game is released everything will be in game. so you may be able to buy in game funds to help you work towards a ship but you wont be able to just buy ships with rl money.

The system to limit the amount of in-game currency you can buy with RL currency will simply not work. There are a bazillion ways to get around any kind of limitation. EVE Online has shown that there's also no real purpose in limiting the purchase amount. If someone wants to drop 1 million dollars on it, let them. So what.

 

[Stiletto]

Easier? What is the definition of easy in a open sandbox space sim? Sure, money can buy a bigger ship and you can make more game credits than I could with a small Aurora. Does that mean you have more fun doing it?

Now you're using red herrings. Winning a game and having fun with a game are two different things. Having fun is irrelevant. We're discussing whether or not a game is "pay to win", not "pay to win and fun".

Can you pay to make the game easier? If the game becomes easier, it becomes easier to win. Pay to win. Simple. Stop trying to claim basic terms like "easier" are convoluted. They're not. Can you pay money to avoid tedium, frustration, or difficulty in the game? If so, then it is pay-to-win.

You seem very uptight with people talking about Pay-to-Win games, or with people calling Star Citizen one of those. Perhaps you should spend less time picking apart words to redefine them to your tastes...and instead explain why Pay-to-Win is a good thing. Otherwise, you're just nit-picking because you can't stand people being uncomfortable with a payment model that you think is good.

Don't be butthurt because you couldn't afford to buy...

One of the most douchey comments I've ever seen. The only butthurt here appears to be yours.

 

[Stiletto]

Friend said this and it does make sense.

That's entirely fair. Just expect some people to avoid the game because they know some others with money AND time to burn will simply abuse the system to become a god ahead of everyone else.

 

[J Macker]

Now you're using red herrings. Winning a game and having fun with a game are two different things. Having fun is irrelevant. We're discussing whether or not a game is "pay to win", not "pay to win and fun".

Your definition of "winning" is lousy at best.
Let me show you a neat website:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/

Win:
1 a : to get possession of by effort or fortune
b : to obtain by work : earn <striving to win a living from the sterile soil>
2 a : to gain in or as if in battle or contest <won the championship>
b : to be the victor in <won the war>
3 a : to make friendly or favorable to oneself or to one's cause &#8212;often used with over
<won him over with persuasive arguments>
b : to induce to accept oneself in marriage <was unable to win the woman he loved>
4 a : to obtain (as ore, coal, or clay) by mining
b : to prepare (as a vein or bed) for regular mining
c : to recover (as metal) from ore
5: to reach by expenditure of effort
Synonyms
delight, distraction, diversion, divertissement, entertainment, pleasure, recreation

Easy
1 a : causing or involving little difficulty or discomfort <within easy reach>
b : requiring or indicating little effort, thought, or reflection <easy clichés>
2 a : not severe : lenient <hopes they'll be easy on him>
Synonyms
cheap, downhill, effortless, facile, fluent, fluid, hands-down, light, painless, ready, royal, simple, smooth, snap, soft


Comparing "Win" and "having fun" isn't throwing out a red herring. What's the point of playing to win if you're not having fun?

Go ahead and play an "easy" game if you want to "win".
I'd rather have "FUN".

But, it is painfully obvious that simply paying for a large ship in Star Citizen doesn't mean that you have "won". Sure, you may be able to control a single sector, or a small region of space. But a small fleet of 6 hornets could probably take out a $1000 corvette and "win". It may not be easy, so if you don't like it, go spend the money on a big ship.
Oh wait, you can't. The Corvette isn't for sale anymore.

Here's another way for you to think about it:
What if they made a package available for a mere $5 that would make your ship invincible? That would most definitely be P2Win then, right?

Who would play the game? Probably nobody. Because it wouldn't be FUN.
It's a exaggerated scenario, but you get the idea. We play games to have FUN. Not to win.

So please, redefine what you think the word "WIN" means in the context of Star Citizen. Do you really think that Pay-to-make-the-game-easier is a good stance?


If you think it's Pay-2-win, make you own multiplayer server or DON'T PLAY.
Problem solved. Everybody starts with the same ship.

 

[Pringle]

I fucking love the civil back and forth in this thread. +sub


Posted from Hardforum.com App for Android

 

[J Macker]

Can you pay to make the game easier? If the game becomes easier, it becomes easier to win. Pay to win. Simple. Stop trying to claim basic terms like "easier" are convoluted. They're not. Can you pay money to avoid tedium, frustration, or difficulty in the game? If so, then it is pay-to-win.

You seem very uptight with people talking about Pay-to-Win games, or with people calling Star Citizen one of those. Perhaps you should spend less time picking apart words to redefine them to your tastes...and instead explain why Pay-to-Win is a good thing. Otherwise, you're just nit-picking because you can't stand people being uncomfortable with a payment model that you think is good.

Please don't stuff words in my mouth. I did not say pay-to-win is a good thing. If I liked the pay-2-win model, I'd go play Farmville or the latest Zynga game. I just disagree that you think Pay-2-win actually means "pay-to-make-it-easy".
I'm simply making a case of how the "pay-2-win" doesn't apply to Star Citizen because there is no "win".

Here's a good philosophy for you to think about:

It&#8217;s not about getting there, it&#8217;s not about how quickly one can arrive. It&#8217;s about what you take away from your experiences on the way there. Growth and learning has no limit. It&#8217;s about the journey, not the destination.

Go have a name-calling contest with somebody else, if you want to go that direction. I'm not in middle school.

 

[BallerX]

Every game that has micro transactions for anything that isn't totally cosmetic is "Pay To Win." It's pretty simple.

The game you speak of will be pay to play and also pay to win. This guy has you all by the short and curly.

I am sure that over 9000 fanboys will try to explain away all of those pay to win things. They can't. The game isn't even out and I've already heard of people spending hundreds.

Take for instance the post above mine. Somehow this person thinks that being able to ram his 100% free for life insured ship, into mine over and over and occurring no penalty for said actions, is most certainly not pay to win. That is totally pay to win.

 

[mesasone]

There is only one kind of Pay 2 Win I (mildly) approve of, and that is PLEX in Eve Online. The concept being there at everybody needs gametime(monthly sub), and being able to buy, sell and trade PLEXes (which can be turned in for game time) basically allows one player to trade their (real life) time to another.

Somebody still has to grind the ISK, all the raw materials to build the ships/goods purchased with that ISK, nothing is created out of thin air. It simply allows people to make the rational economic choice of spending their time grinding ISK, or basically paying somebody else to do it (in exchange for gametime). The real life value of that game time is fixed, the in-game (ISK) value fluctuates with supply and demand (and speculation).

It also has the added bonus of controlling, and legitimizing, real money trading which is going to happen in any online game anyway. I think it's better for it to be brought out into the light, and monitored rather than taking place on a black market.

 

[Nytegard]

I don't mind Pay 2 Win provided it's not artificially inflated to make you want to pay (i.e. Diablo 3).

The problem with time though is that what one person considers reasonable, another might not.

But as others stated above, if you can purchase anything which makes the game easier, it's Pay 2 Win. And while a few games skill can compensate for lack of items, most games like this are designed that it's not about skill, but free time.

 

[Stiletto]

Go have a name-calling contest with somebody else, if you want to go that direction. I'm not in middle school.

Your use of the "word" "butthurt" is very indicative of that. Expect how you speak to affect the way to which you are spoken.

 

[MavericK]

Umm...so just because you can buy things with real money means it's P2W? Even if you can earn everything in the game with in-game currency?



Retarded thread with a thinly-veiled attempt to discredit a game that isn't even out yet.

 

[BravO)))]

This thread has went is way and is getting a little too uncivil to continue.