Have ESO become pay to win ?

anitajoneb17_ESO

exeeter702 wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

exeeter702 wrote: »

Stikato wrote: »

It was a lot more pay 2 win with uncapped CPs:

Cash -> Crowns -> Xp pots -> More CPs -> Stats -> Win

No...

Actually, yes, to a certain extent.
Take two people with the same game time.
Player A who uses XP scrolls will have 50% more CP
Player B1 who doesn't use XP scrolls nor ambrosia will never catch up
Player B2 who uses ambrosia will have to sacrifice some game time to collect ingredients for making ambrosia, or to collect gold for buying ambrosia.

Player B2 will be closer to player A than player B1 but he'll never catch up either.

But that's out now with cap anyway.

Again no. The advantage to spending cash to level up faster is not the argument. That is obvious.

The point is that none of which you said is in any way, shape or form p2w.

Player A gets it faster, this is a convenience plain and simple.

Player B has equal access to the exact same buff in game, wether he has to farm gold or mats to purchase it or has an unlimited supply via a generous guild, it does not matter, he is not excluded from said buff therfore is not at an inherent disadvantage for chosing not to spend real money.

By your logic, subscribing to eso plus is also p2w.

Again, yes... your arguments ignore the important part of my demonstration : "with the same amount of game time". Player A doesn't get anywhere FASTER, he gets FURTHER.

And yes, by that logic, ESO+ is pay to win.

But all this is IF CPs are not capped, which they are now, so the issue is inexistent. With the cap, your logic applies, people just get there faster and it's plain convenience.

.

Robo_Hobo

If you see buying DLC that allows you to get better gear through content, P2W, fair enough, but if so then a game being P2W doesn't have to be a bad thing in that case.

The alternatives are DLC never adds things that are in any way better than the base game, which would mean no one would bother wanting the new gear in the first place, and in the case of a lot of people, would mean they wouldn't even do the content (troubles finding groups for Craglorn anyone?)

Or all gear from the DLC would be tradeable, which, while in essence isn't necessarily a bad idea, but think of it from the perspective of other things you have to earn - do you really want to be able to the very best gear and everything with gold and not have to do anything else?

The new gear makes a nice reward at the end of new content, but like Craglorn has shown, if its not the best, no one wants to do it, and like buyable dungeon and PvP skill suggestions have shown, being able to straight buy things is very controversial too.

Marrtha

How do you even win in this game?

exeeter702

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

exeeter702 wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

exeeter702 wrote: »

Stikato wrote: »

It was a lot more pay 2 win with uncapped CPs:

Cash -> Crowns -> Xp pots -> More CPs -> Stats -> Win

No...

Actually, yes, to a certain extent.
Take two people with the same game time.
Player A who uses XP scrolls will have 50% more CP
Player B1 who doesn't use XP scrolls nor ambrosia will never catch up
Player B2 who uses ambrosia will have to sacrifice some game time to collect ingredients for making ambrosia, or to collect gold for buying ambrosia.

Player B2 will be closer to player A than player B1 but he'll never catch up either.

But that's out now with cap anyway.

Again no. The advantage to spending cash to level up faster is not the argument. That is obvious.

The point is that none of which you said is in any way, shape or form p2w.

Player A gets it faster, this is a convenience plain and simple.

Player B has equal access to the exact same buff in game, wether he has to farm gold or mats to purchase it or has an unlimited supply via a generous guild, it does not matter, he is not excluded from said buff therfore is not at an inherent disadvantage for chosing not to spend real money.

By your logic, subscribing to eso plus is also p2w.

Again, yes... your arguments ignore the important part of my demonstration : "with the same amount of game time". Player A doesn't get anywhere FASTER, he gets FURTHER.

And yes, by that logic, ESO+ is pay to win.

But all this is IF CPs are not capped, which they are now, so the issue is inexistent. With the cap, your logic applies, people just get there faster and it's plain convenience.

.

Paying to circumvent or cut down on grind or time gated feature is not p2w period. The term is not subjective.

If CP cap was higher for those that paid some sort of cash shop unlock that was not obtainable via in game methods then thst would be p2w. If player A reaches 600 CP and player B only has 300 CP and will never catch up to player A due to less exp gain, that is not p2w plain and simple. It is a pretty bum situation having no catch up mechanic and one that has been rectified partially with the CP cap implementation but prior to that it was never p2w at any point. Those that spent more time playing the game were going to be statistically stronger regardless of an exp scroll.

anitajoneb17_ESO

exeeter702 wrote: »

Paying to circumvent or cut down on grind or time gated feature is not p2w period. The term is not subjective.

Paying to get a progression speed that cannot be reached another way (and cannot be caught up over time) AND gives a substantial benefit in game is P2W. It's basic arithmetics. Period.

EdmundTowers

Bossdonut wrote: »

Until I can buy gear for real cash it's not pay to win. I don't consider xp boosts pay to win, or that food they sell. All that does is make you take less time to hit max level.

If you consider DLC/Expansions pay to win well then sadly you are an idiot.

If you have a different opinion than mine well the sadly you are an idiot.

Volkodav

EdmundTowers wrote: »

Bossdonut wrote: »

Until I can buy gear for real cash it's not pay to win. I don't consider xp boosts pay to win, or that food they sell. All that does is make you take less time to hit max level.

If you consider DLC/Expansions pay to win well then sadly you are an idiot.

If you have a different opinion than mine well the sadly you are an idiot.

I have a different opinion than you do,EdmundTowers,and I an NOT an idiot.

EdmundTowers

The OP had a justified complaint that he had to compete against players who have access to gear that he cannot get until he forks over cash. However, if its being changed so that he can buy it from a merchant with in game gold, then problem fixed.

exeeter702

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

exeeter702 wrote: »

Paying to circumvent or cut down on grind or time gated feature is not p2w period. The term is not subjective.

Paying to get a progression speed that cannot be reached another way (and cannot be caught up over time) AND gives a substantial benefit in game is P2W. It's basic arithmetics. Period.

What the hell are you talking about? P2w has a very simple definition. It is not up for discussion, you are either sticking to some false definition that you decided was right in your head or were never exposed to actual legitimate p2w games in the mid 2000s.

The only thing a non cash spending player loses out on is 10 percent exp gain. Every other boost is obtainable in game.

Your entire argument hinges on the assumption that both players have the same amount of time to play and that player B by default has to farm for exp pots thefore setting him back? How circustantial are you trying to make this?

Okay here is my ridiculous example. Player B is brand new to said game but has friends who are vets and easily grant him exp pots. Now he is on equal terms with player A for the exception of a 10 percent boost from eso plus. So he will therfore obtain a couple more CP ASSUMING they both play the same time.

In a nut shell, you are stating that subscribing is P2W as long as there is no CP cap....

"arithmetics"

are you #&! $%*& serious right now?

Cherryblossom

Difficult question -

Firstly depends on some things, will the DLC's we currently bought be free in the future! Many games which are free to play make the expansions available to other players at the point another expansion is released. So in this case those that paid for the DLC have exclusive content for a set period of time, but at some point those which have not paid will get this content. So this is an advantage based upon paying for continued development and a disadvantage to players whom don't wish to pay for the continual development for a set period of time.

If the DLC's are never free in the future and all new items are locked behind a DLC pay wall, then at somepoint yes it will become Pay to Win.

But in ESO it's possible to craft items and in the next update to buy some of the items for gold and AP, so the items will be available!

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Depends what you call "win".

All content in the game is doable with standard available, non-PtW stuff/gear. Thus the game is NOT P2W.

Now if "win" means "reaching the leaderboards", then yes, you'll need specific gear to get there, and join specific guilds.

Now WHAT gear is concretely behind a paywall ?
- maelstroem weapons
- Kena helmet
- vICP helmet (not sure that one is compulsory in competitive endgame).

and... THAT'S IT. All the rest is available in the vanilla game.

Do you need the Kena helmet ? I'd say : yes. As a DPS, especially as a magicka sorc, you might be rejected for insufficient DPS in an endgame competitive guild, if you don't have a Kena helmet. Or a Maelstroem weapon.

That... 0.05% of the gear... that's required for 1% of the "winners" that aim at leaderboards. Rest is available to vanilla players.

Calling it "P2W" in those very particular cases is strictly speaking true, but it's such a smaaaalll portion....

Now the two only fair-and-real measurement for "winning" are both behind a paywall : vMSA and vMoL. If you like to call it P2W, but IMHO, it's pretty much like crying "P2W" if your national athletics competition doesn't pay your travel and hotel bill for participating to the tournament. Makes no sense.

I think ZOS is remaining remarkably far away from p2w. It could be much worse.

.

I agree and would add that if you are a player without access to the newest content, you would not be welcome within the type of elite guild you require this DPS as they would be running the content from the DLC!

Cherryblossom

flubber77 wrote: »

Technically it's also pay 2 win because of the champion system and being able to spend real money on exp scrolls to gain advantage through real money. Having a free option does not suddenly make it not pay 2 win either before someone says it. [/quote]

Well its not, u gain nothing that u cant gain if u play without the scrolls. u only use a bit longer time. and if u crying that u need to do 1 more day that your mate to reach lvl cap then stop playing games like this [/quote]

Also you can craft XP Potions!

exeeter702

EdmundTowers wrote: »

The OP had a justified complaint that he had to compete against players who have access to gear that he cannot get until he forks over cash. However, if its being changed so that he can buy it from a merchant with in game gold, then problem fixed.

The issue is that mmos naturally give some kind of progression, eso muddied the water a little bit due to its update nature and slight lean towards a more horizontal progression. But at the end of the day, if you chose not to stay up to date with your mmo of choice, eventually you will be left out in the cold.

Fortunately getting to v16 does not require IC or Orsinium, and most, if not all challenges that would exist for a player not in possession of those dlc, can be easily completed with crafted gear + monster sets.

The only loose argument is that maelstrom weapons do provide a nice edge for alot of builds in pvp.

anitajoneb17_ESO

exeeter702 wrote: »

What the hell are you talking about? P2w has a very simple definition. It is not up for discussion

Of course it is. Unless you show me your "universally" accepted definition and proof that it is "universally accepted".
(Arithmetics is universally accepted though )

exeeter702 wrote: »

In a nut shell, you are stating that subscribing is P2W as long as there is no CP cap....

Yes. I've said that already.
So are riding lessons scrolls (in PvP) and the imperial edition upgrade right now.

exeeter702 wrote: »

are you #&! $%*& serious right now?

Yes.

I'm not saying all P2W is evil or shouldn't be here, and I've stated already that ESO is extremely fair with the cash shop. Still a couple of items are P2W. And as I also stated earlier, for a role-player or "fashion-show" player, whose goals are to represent his various situations and outfits in the game, nearly the entire crown store is P2W.
For a player whose goal is to have fun with friends, nothing is P2W.
For competitive players either in PvP or in PvE, some items are truly P2W.
But I wrote all of this already.

exeeter702

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

exeeter702 wrote: »

What the hell are you talking about? P2w has a very simple definition. It is not up for discussion

Of course it is. Unless you show me your "universally" accepted definition and proof that it is "universally accepted".
(Arithmetics is universally accepted though )

exeeter702 wrote: »

In a nut shell, you are stating that subscribing is P2W as long as there is no CP cap....

Yes. I've said that already.
So are riding lessons scrolls (in PvP) and the imperial edition upgrade right now.

exeeter702 wrote: »

are you #&! $%*& serious right now?

Yes.

I'm not saying all P2W is evil or shouldn't be here, and I've stated already that ESO is extremely fair with the cash shop. Still a couple of items are P2W. And as I also stated earlier, for a role-player or "fashion-show" player, whose goals are to represent his various situations and outfits in the game, nearly the entire crown store is P2W.
For a player whose goal is to have fun with friends, nothing is P2W.
For competitive players either in PvP or in PvE, some items are truly P2W.
But I wrote all of this already.

You have formulated your own definition of what p2w means so I'm not going to bother, especially when the argument comes to the point of vanity being a "win".

Once upon a time p2w existed and it had a single use and it was not a debate. Over the years younger generations came up, f2p games grew popular in the west and the very meaning of P2W was warped and mangled by an entitled mind set of players, I'm not sure what else to say.

Developers ultimately set the win conditions for their games after all is said and done. P2w was always a negative term associated with providing an unambiguous, very literal stat boost in a multiplayer game that is not achievable by any means via in game methods.

Glamour and convenience are not elements of p2w regardless if Timmy and Bob exclusively care only about collecting outfits and racing to the last boss of thier preferred games.

If you want to spread the meaning of P2W so utterly and complete thin and broad then have at it.

anitajoneb17_ESO

exeeter702 wrote: »

Once upon a time p2w existed and it had a single use and it was not a debate. Over the years younger generations came up, f2p games grew popular in the west and the very meaning of P2W was warped and mangled by an entitled mind set of players, I'm not sure what else to say.

Developers ultimately set the win conditions for their games after all is said and done. P2w was always a negative term associated with providing an unambiguous, very literal stat boost in a multiplayer game that is not achievable by any means via in game methods.

Glamour and convenience are not elements of p2w regardless if Timmy and Bob exclusively care only about collecting outfits and racing to the last boss of thier preferred games.

If you want to spread the meaning of P2W so utterly and complete thin and broad then have at it.

Having a sort of "industry standard" about what's acceptable or not and where to draw the line is fine. However, people having their own feeling and thoughts about this issue has nothing to do with being entitled.

Developers ultimately set the wins conditions for their games ? True, but by doing so they have to take into consideration the fact that people ultimately decide what's worth it or not for them, what's fun or not for them, what they spend money for - or not, and if they will stick to the game or not. What people consider acceptable or not is NOT and should not be determined by an external or universal definition of it.

The multiple threads about "P2W" in this very forum prove that there is nothing objective about it and that people's mileage vary considerably. Especially in a game where there are so many multiple possible goals that "win" means so many possible things that it is impossible to list.
ESO isn't all about stats.

Didgerion

Axorn wrote: »

Have ESO become pay to win ?

It is getting there...

exeeter702

Many people can remember the time of pc gaming when f2p was not even a thing in west whatsoever. It was a time when the only "Free to play" games in existence were awful Asian market pc multiplayer games. These games literally sold the strongest items or boosts via real money, there were no in game alternatives. Players that opted out of spending cash were never under any circumstance able to compete on equal footing with those that did spend cash, no matter how much time investment they committed. Nexon titles were particular offenders at that time.

This is where the term p2w was born from. There were literally no other games in existence of this type at that time to draw comparisons too. That was it, done deal. P2w was exclusively used to describe those games and only those type of games. That is where it's proper definition comes from.

Eso is not and never will be p2w.

Didgerion

exeeter702 wrote: »

Many people can remember the time of pc gaming when f2p was not even a thing in west whatsoever. It was a time when the only "Free to play" games in existence were awful Asian market pc multiplayer games. These games literally sold the strongest items or boosts via real money, there were no in game alternatives. Players that opted out of spending cash were never under any circumstance able to compete on equal footing with those that did spend cash, no matter how much time investment they committed. Nexon titles were particular offenders at that time.

This is where the term p2w was born from. There were literally no other games in existence of this type at that time to draw comparisons too. That was it, done deal. P2w was exclusively used to describe those games and only those type of games. That is where it's proper definition comes from.

Eso is not and never will be p2w.

It is a subjective matter.

Depends what does a person consider a win.

If top level horse is a win then ESO is pay to win
If the max bank size is a win then ESO is pay to win
If the Orsinium gear is a win then ESO is pay to win
And so on....and more are coming with each DLC...

If non of the above is pay to win to a person then ESO is not pay to win to him.

Xellos77

There's so much crying it's really sad.


Expansions were released with gear included within them to hunt for.

Lesson: buy the damn expansion.

"I can't be competitive unless I have XXXX gear, only available in XXXX DLC!"

Lesson: buy the damn expansion, then join a leet guild.



OR don't buy the expansion, and let the tears flow.

wskill

Its pretty stupid to argue that it wouldnt be pay to win if you can only get specific optimal gear by first paying for dlc, that is pretty much the most obvious version of pay to win there is so how anyone can defend that is beyond me.

Luckily i dont give a *** about endgame content, im just enjoying the quests.

exeeter702

Didgerion wrote: »

exeeter702 wrote: »

Many people can remember the time of pc gaming when f2p was not even a thing in west whatsoever. It was a time when the only "Free to play" games in existence were awful Asian market pc multiplayer games. These games literally sold the strongest items or boosts via real money, there were no in game alternatives. Players that opted out of spending cash were never under any circumstance able to compete on equal footing with those that did spend cash, no matter how much time investment they committed. Nexon titles were particular offenders at that time.

This is where the term p2w was born from. There were literally no other games in existence of this type at that time to draw comparisons too. That was it, done deal. P2w was exclusively used to describe those games and only those type of games. That is where it's proper definition comes from.

Eso is not and never will be p2w.

It is a subjective matter.

Depends what does a person consider a win.

If top level horse is a win then ESO is pay to win
If the max bank size is a win then ESO is pay to win
If the Orsinium gear is a win then ESO is pay to win
And so on....and more are coming with each DLC...

If non of the above is pay to win to a person then ESO is not pay to win to him.

Lol ok I'm done

anitajoneb17_ESO

Xellos77 wrote: »

There's so much crying it's really sad.


Expansions were released with gear included within them to hunt for.

Lesson: buy the damn expansion.

Pretty much this.
People cannot refuse to buy the expansions and require an up-to-date game and gear at the same time.

.

JamilaRaj

Axorn wrote: »

People say eso is not pay to win but it is, thats what im getting at and if we have to pay subs or buy DLCs why they switched to buy to play model then ? To continue grabbing cash and not fixing anything while stall people with false promises ?

Welcome to the promise-based business model. That is the next big thing; what a Ponzi scheme is to investment, early access, kickstarter and perpetual promising is to the video gaming industry. There sure are honest companies, but if a company can make profits by promising alone, why would it deliver an actual (and costly) game afterwards? Especially if, when an old promise is not cutting it anymore, it can make another. Eventually, honest companies will fold, because they will be simply unable to promise as much and upon delivering a finished, working game, players will have little money left, because they will have spent their money on promises.

Duiwel wrote: »

Are you telling me if you board a plane with an economy class ticket and walk past first class & business class you will make a scene and say you are denied access because you paid for a plane ticket and want the same treatment?

Remarkably, you can not take your first/business class ticket, enter an economy class and make someone vacate his seat or take his lunch, as though your ticket granted you more power on board.

JD2013 wrote: »

You pay for the base game and nothing else when you buy the game. The devs don't work on DLC for free. Upkeep of the game is not free.

That is their problem. If they offer the base game for a one time payment, to be played for an indefinite time, they can not whine about recurring upkeep costs without making it a fraudlent offer, where its biggest draw, the indefinite play, is not really indefinite.

JD2013 wrote: »

If you buy the base game and nothing more, then that is cool. But don't expect new things for free, because you're not entitled to it. You haven't paid for access to it, either by subscribing or by purchasing it. That includes any sets or weapons that they make BOP. If you want them, and the new areas, don't be cheap.

That is the catch there. If a player buys the base game, is not interested in new stuff, let alone for free, he is not even entitled for the base game, because new stuff and changes to game mechanics to suit and promore DLC affect him regardless and render the base game unplayable over time, e.g. he will be eventually unable to compete without paywalled gear (hence DLC-induced pay to win) in Cyrodiil, which, as a bonus, is on a damage roller coaster as ZOS tweaks battle spirit and battle levelling to promote DLC to the underleveled.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Someone doesnt know what pay to win means. Pay to win means you pay for something that you cannot get any other way. This does not include the purchase price of the game nor DLC price or expansion price. So lets say they sold a weapon better than any you could find or craft. Its only available in the store. THAT is pay to win. Not xp boosts or anything like that.

You can not get instantly available, no effort required items any other way (if you could, cash shop items would become unsellable); people buy items with cash precisely for that quality, which in-game apparent counterparts lack.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO

You can not get instantly available, no effort required items any other way (if you could, cash shop items would become unsellable); people buy items with cash precisely for that quality, which in-game apparent counterparts lack.

I dont understand what your point is to me. What instantly available items are available from the store that are not available in game. Granted it wont be instant but you can get it.

Elsonso

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Again, yes... your arguments ignore the important part of my demonstration : "with the same amount of game time". Player A doesn't get anywhere FASTER, he gets FURTHER.

And yes, by that logic, ESO+ is pay to win.

But all this is IF CPs are not capped, which they are now, so the issue is inexistent. With the cap, your logic applies, people just get there faster and it's plain convenience.

This is my problem with this line of discussion: I do not think you have demonstrated that "equal amount of game time" resulting in "FURTHER" is "Winning" something that matters and is exclusive to those who do it with XP Boosters.

That might be the case if everyone in the game had time limits and could only spend, for example, an hour per day in the game. As it stands today, the wide variety personal time that people can spend in the game means that those two people may be spending significantly more, or significantly less, than other players in the game. Those other players may, or may not, be using XP Boosters, and may be getting more or less XP than the two.

On top of that, people will never be identical in how efficiently they use time to gain XP. The person using the XP Booster may or may not get more XP than the person who does not, over the duration of any given XP Booster item. A person with 1000 hours in the game may have less total experience than a person who has spent 500 in the game, with or without XP Boosters being used.

This is why CP do not matter to XP Boosters, even when uncapped. The only person who could possibly "win" in this scenario is the person who is using them to get to 3600 CP. To do this, they would have to optimize XP earning and be willing to spend the time in the game in order to maximize the XP/hour over the course of 3600 CP. At this point, are they winning because they are using 12 XP Boosters every day, because they are in the game 12 hours/day, or because they have an XP pipeline that can feed them the XP they need to get to 3600 CP fast?

When I add to this the fact that players can get XP Boosters outside of the Crown Store, for gold or effort, the P2W aspect of XP Boosters pretty much vanishes. I see nothing to indicate that any XP Boosters in this game result in "winning" anything significant over those who are simply willing to put in the time and effort.

vyrusb23

Holy sheet, you people need to go outside.

ragespell

Axorn wrote: »

For example i usually do 25-27k dps with my sorc he only uses crafted items but other dps in the party was doing 32k dps cuz he/she was wearing molag kena.

Sustained single target? No way or you just spam overload

Inarre

Guys. The DLCs are cheap. Are you seriously whining about DLC content being p2w? Do you even p2w bruh?


Play anything by perfect world entertainment you will understand, young grasshopper.

TERMINAT0R_XVII

Inarre wrote: »

Guys. The DLCs are cheap. Are you seriously whining about DLC content being p2w? Do you even p2w bruh?


Play anything by perfect world entertainment you will understand, young grasshopper.

I'm betting all the whiners in this thread aren't any older than 18 because they technically get free stuff and their parents didn't tell them any better, So they are expecting everything to be free. That's why you don't see very many adolescent WoW players, a lot of the content is gated by money. I'm even willing to bet a lot of the whiners also come from the console versions. PC gamers should be used to a games like WoW and ESOTU. You wouldn't see a PC gamer whine about things like this.

hedna123b14_ESO

Axorn wrote: »

Best weapons drops from vMSA best dps monster set Molag Kena drops from vWGT and other items and they all bound and all DLC content so how come someone can compete againts a dps having these items ? And we know all DLC items will be bound in future too. Raid leaders always choose the best DPS for trials without these items there is no way to compete. For example i usually do 25-27k dps with my sorc he only uses crafted items but other dps in the party was doing 32k dps cuz he/she was wearing molag kena.

Lol each DLC has to improve on the quality of items and generate new content for the game to have a future. Thus each DLC will bring items that are considered best in the game. The development of such DLC's takes time. Time costs money, you have the option of not having to spend the money and settle for substandard gear. This is not pay to win, this is logical...why would anyone work for free especially ZoS?