Let's Define Pay to Win, then think about whether buying skill lines are really P2W

Raammzzaa

To be completely honest with you, I really don’t care what you call it. I can’t wait to give ZOS my money for this!

While discussing this and the rest of the patch notes in game last night everyone in our guild sounded very excited to buy these skill lines once they are available. I was working on undaunted and mages guild on my necro, but I may wait until they become available for purchase now.

Massacre_Wurm

idk wrote: »

P2W was defined long ago and OP has it wrong. P2W is being able to by something with real world money that is stronger than what you can get in game.

My guess is OP has never really played a P2W game based on how wrong they are here.

So you will be okay with BiS gear in store if you can grind it in , lets say , 6 months ?
I mean you can get it in game. So no big deal ?

Matthew_Galvanus

Jhalin wrote: »

If you don’t think maxed skill lines are pay to win because eventually you can get them through grinding, then you would logically have to also claim TES: Blades is also completely free of P2W

apples and oranges my man, you can't compare the two

kargen27

" P2W is about gaining strategic advantage that is not accessible without paying"

"You cannot level up these skills lines on a brand new toon without paying for it. So by definition, this is P2W."

Meaning you can level up these skills. So the skills are accessible by playing. They take longer to gain but they are accessible. So by your own definition this is not pay to win.

I don't like the change for other reasons. I don't think skipping content for convenience is good for the game.

ghastley

You're not making a distinction between the player and the character. The player has to gain everything in-game, and can't buy anything beyond that.

Allotting resources to his characters can make one play above his rank, but that's no different from crafting sets, knowing where the skyshards and lorebooks are, or any other in-game benefits an alt gets that the main had to earn for them.

The slippery slope here is that "impatience features" being sold just encourages the addition of time-gated advancement. Having to wait a day before you can train a mount, do an Undaunted pledge, or even longer for crafting research is what makes the scrolls, etc. sell. The mains have just about been mined out, now it's on to the alts.

ryzen_gamer_gal

Kawall

P2w to me means being able to buy stuff which directly effects gameplay with real money that otherwise cannot be acquired with in-game currency. I'm not ok with cosmetics too, since no one wants to look like default peasant. I much rather pay monthly fee to get all of the content.

Tommy_The_Gun

It is Pay-2-Progress, which is a form of Pay-to-Win, but not as drastic and less visible.
If you gain advantage by paying vs someone who is not paying & has to grind instead, then technically it is a P2W (But again, very subtle).

However (in the most drastic scenario), if you will start new character and immediately gain a whole skill line vs other player who has the exact same character & skill level as you, the other player wont have access to new skills immediately, meaning that if you will duel this player, you will be most likely to win.


What really worries me is this will only encourage ZOS to add new "Psijic Order" style painful grinds in the future, to squish more money from players, and slowly turn players into payers.

BrooksP

I do like cheese.

Massacre_Wurm

BrooksP wrote: »

I do like cheese.

Uncle Sheo have the best cheese and butterfies

yodased

Gronk wrote: »

I nominate Yodased for class game rep!!!!!!
Who seconds me !!!

No one wants that lol

Vandril

You're never going to get a single definition of pay2win. It simply won't happen. Opinions are everywhere on where the p2w threshold lies, each one with its own reasonable logic behind it. Everything from "it helps you accomplish ANY in-game task and you're paying for it" to "you can't get it in-game any other way" are all valid perspectives.

Not only one perspective on p2w is correct. The issue lies in that people tend to like having one primary definition per term, and so we're arbitrarily trying to fit a bunch of contradictory criteria under that single term. Quite frankly, we'd be better off considering P2W as a sliding scale, from "Mildly P2W" to "Extremely P2W"

Regardless, we should be considering the pros and cons and the general feelings of fairness/unfairness of what's purchasable in the cash shop instead of getting distracted by a buzzword. It ultimately doesn't matter if it's P2W. Is it acceptable? Is it healthy for the game? Is it healthy for the players? How might it effect the future of the game's design? Those are the questions we should be asking.

El_Borracho

Pay to Win in ESO is not really the same as P2W in a game like GTA Online. In ESO, its a shortcut to character attributes. Those attributes don't necessarily make the player better at the game. In other words, if you don't have a rotation, can't figure out mechanics, or are just plain bad at the game, no amount of paid-for skill lines is going to change that.

Contrast that to a game like GTA Online, where weapons and/or vehicles matter almost as much as your skill level, and you have P2W. Where someone with very little skill could use real money to buy a weapon and compete on the same level as someone who learned the play the game from its inception. For instance, some players became adept early on with the heavy sniper and could kill from long range to the point of sniping players out of jets. Losers other players complained. The fix was to allow any joker with his mom's credit card to buy a flying motorcycle with homing rockets and go nuts. That is true pay to win.

Now, if all of a sudden ZOS put Maelstrom weapons on sale, that would be true pay to win. Or OP PVP sets, whatever those might be. Right now, buying skill lines or skyshards is a microtransaction for suckers who can't figure out that they can do both while leveling new characters.

Jeremy

msalvia wrote: »

Here again we have a language problem: like so many of these posts, we don't have a clear definition of what we're talking about. P2W is about gaining strategic advantage that is not accessible without paying. Unlocking a full skill line at level 3 is NOT ACCESSIBLE WITHOUT PAYING and it absolutely does give you a strategic advantage; therefore it's Pay to win.

It doesn't matter if you've done it before. It doesn't matter if it's convenient. Craft bag is convenient--it's NOT p2w. Skyshards is convenient--it's NOT p2w (since you can have all the skshards--your level 3 can only use a few right now, thus no strategic advantage). We need to recognize that buying a fully levelled skill line is ABSOLUTELY pay to win, even if it's not game-breaking. Have fun in those under 50 BGs, folks, if you don't think this is P2W, when your opponent has all their undaunted passives (impossible to get without paying for it), full Fighter's Guild skill lines (which you would necessarily have to level through, ya know, playing the game), etc.

FOr example, imagine 2 players on brand new toons in a duel. Both have the same cp alotted, the same gear, the same skill level. Which one has the strategic advantage? The one with fully levelled skills (BIS ultimate and great passives from FG, defense from psijic, mag recovery and total from Mage's Guild, 6% more stats from undaunted) that are impossible for a level 3 to get? Or the one who does not have these skills? Obviously, the first player has the strategic advantage. And is it possible for a level three to gain these skills WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT? WE just arrived at the definition of P2W.

Point being, P2W is about gaining strategic advantage that is not accessible without paying. You cannot level up these skills lines on a brand new toon without paying for it. So by definition, this is P2W.

Note: This is the first time I've ever agreed that anything in this game is P2W. My forum history is usually really different on this topic, but here we're finally getting into P2W territory. I invite constructive responses to my logic, fully expecting the typical forum fare.

That's what I consider "p2W" also. But in the end it's just semantics.

Jeremy

essi2 wrote: »

Attackfrog wrote: »

Is there a way to pay to win the forums?

The only way to win the forums is to get banned, not sure if mods take bribes for that sort of thing.

It's easy to win the forums then. I don't think bribes would be necessary. lol

exeeter702

Vandril wrote: »

You're never going to get a single definition of pay2win. It simply won't happen. Opinions are everywhere on where the p2w threshold lies, each one with its own reasonable logic behind it. Everything from "it helps you accomplish ANY in-game task and you're paying for it" to "you can't get it in-game any other way" are all valid perspectives.

Not only one perspective on p2w is correct. The issue lies in that people tend to like having one primary definition per term, and so we're arbitrarily trying to fit a bunch of contradictory criteria under that single term. Quite frankly, we'd be better off considering P2W as a sliding scale, from "Mildly P2W" to "Extremely P2W"

Regardless, we should be considering the pros and cons and the general feelings of fairness/unfairness of what's purchasable in the cash shop instead of getting distracted by a buzzword. It ultimately doesn't matter if it's P2W. Is it acceptable? Is it healthy for the game? Is it healthy for the players? How might it effect the future of the game's design? Those are the questions we should be asking.

There is nothing arbitrary about.

P2W literally was created to classify a cash shop practice that was very dominate throught numerous f2p games before f2p games was even acknowledged as a viable design practice in the west. It was a term specifically referring to game design revenue approach that most players accepted as ok throught pcbangs/lan centers in asian countries. It doesnt matter what the term deveolved into based on misinformation and the advent lf coorperate greed in the game industry. The term p2w is absolute, and anyone that experienced games in the past that incorporated it knows this full well, and those that never did, decided to leave this topic up to opinion.

Arrodisia

It's not P2W. The skill can be unlocked without money. It's just convenience to not need to do it 17 more times unless you want to do it. The skill is still available to level, and gives the same benefit as before.
For me, I get it. I went into standard PvP campaign at level 30 without undaunted unlocked in the past, and wrecked some of the players with maxed cp. People should concentrate more on honing their own skills, rather than calling for nerfs, while crying pay to win, just because skills can be unlocked earlier. Players die in PvP. It's just the way it is. Sometimes it's you. Sometimes it's someone else. Trying to avoid the ineveitable is just silly.

El_Borracho

Jeremy wrote: »

msalvia wrote: »

Here again we have a language problem: like so many of these posts, we don't have a clear definition of what we're talking about. P2W is about gaining strategic advantage that is not accessible without paying. Unlocking a full skill line at level 3 is NOT ACCESSIBLE WITHOUT PAYING and it absolutely does give you a strategic advantage; therefore it's Pay to win.

It doesn't matter if you've done it before. It doesn't matter if it's convenient. Craft bag is convenient--it's NOT p2w. Skyshards is convenient--it's NOT p2w (since you can have all the skshards--your level 3 can only use a few right now, thus no strategic advantage). We need to recognize that buying a fully levelled skill line is ABSOLUTELY pay to win, even if it's not game-breaking. Have fun in those under 50 BGs, folks, if you don't think this is P2W, when your opponent has all their undaunted passives (impossible to get without paying for it), full Fighter's Guild skill lines (which you would necessarily have to level through, ya know, playing the game), etc.

FOr example, imagine 2 players on brand new toons in a duel. Both have the same cp alotted, the same gear, the same skill level. Which one has the strategic advantage? The one with fully levelled skills (BIS ultimate and great passives from FG, defense from psijic, mag recovery and total from Mage's Guild, 6% more stats from undaunted) that are impossible for a level 3 to get? Or the one who does not have these skills? Obviously, the first player has the strategic advantage. And is it possible for a level three to gain these skills WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT? WE just arrived at the definition of P2W.

Point being, P2W is about gaining strategic advantage that is not accessible without paying. You cannot level up these skills lines on a brand new toon without paying for it. So by definition, this is P2W.

Note: This is the first time I've ever agreed that anything in this game is P2W. My forum history is usually really different on this topic, but here we're finally getting into P2W territory. I invite constructive responses to my logic, fully expecting the typical forum fare.

That's what I consider "p2W" also. But in the end it's just semantics.

Semantics, agreed. I'd say this is a close call, but I don't see it being the same as someone who can buy something like veteran trials gear, i.e. Perfected Relequen in divines, without running the content.

While the example given by the OP is valid, its a very, very specific example. I suppose you could extrapolate it to buying all the necessary morphed skills at Level 1, then go mash in Kyne. That would be quintessential Pay to Win, but I also don't know how much of an advantage it would bring.

Either way, this kind of shortcut is not something I will be partaking in. Its not hard to level the basic skill lines. Fighter's Guild is a pain and then there is the Psijic Line. I might consider the Mage's Guild, but they would have to make Meteor worthwhile again...

scorpius2k1

Really, it doesn't matter what it TECHNICALLY means. Pay to ... whatever.

The bigger point here is the more "game advancing" features they add, the less the game has replay value, and thus the more shallow, stale and boring it becomes. Sure, it's "optional", but most people given an option to do something faster will take that route. ZoS knows and exploits this in ESO which is why I think many have an issue with it which is the bigger picture here. I personally don't think a game is intended to work this way in any shape or form, otherwise it would just happen on every alt without another monetization scheme.

Some call it pay to win, others pay to advance, I like to call it pay to be bored with the more of this stuff they add. Is that why you bought it?

Why play, when you can just pay right?

To each their own, I guess.

Vandril

exeeter702 wrote: »

Vandril wrote: »

You're never going to get a single definition of pay2win. It simply won't happen. Opinions are everywhere on where the p2w threshold lies, each one with its own reasonable logic behind it. Everything from "it helps you accomplish ANY in-game task and you're paying for it" to "you can't get it in-game any other way" are all valid perspectives.

Not only one perspective on p2w is correct. The issue lies in that people tend to like having one primary definition per term, and so we're arbitrarily trying to fit a bunch of contradictory criteria under that single term. Quite frankly, we'd be better off considering P2W as a sliding scale, from "Mildly P2W" to "Extremely P2W"

Regardless, we should be considering the pros and cons and the general feelings of fairness/unfairness of what's purchasable in the cash shop instead of getting distracted by a buzzword. It ultimately doesn't matter if it's P2W. Is it acceptable? Is it healthy for the game? Is it healthy for the players? How might it effect the future of the game's design? Those are the questions we should be asking.

There is nothing arbitrary about.

P2W literally was created to classify a cash shop practice that was very dominate throught numerous f2p games before f2p games was even acknowledged as a viable design practice in the west. It was a term specifically referring to game design revenue approach that most players accepted as ok throught pcbangs/lan centers in asian countries. It doesnt matter what the term deveolved into based on misinformation and the advent lf coorperate greed in the game industry. The term p2w is absolute, and anyone that experienced games in the past that incorporated it knows this full well, and those that never did, decided to leave this topic up to opinion.

It's entirely arbitrary that we're trying to fit a bunch of contradictory criteria into a single definition under the term P2W.

The only strict thing about the definition of P2W is that something is being paid for that gives a boon toward "winning". This has ALWAYS been the way to term was accepted since its conception, which you spoke of and I was around for. As you stated, it was a term meant to describe a type of monetization for games. The problem with that definition is the same as it's always been: what can be considered a boon toward "winning" is solely an opinion, as opposed to fact, and varies from person to person. In a genre of games that tends to have a multitude of activities like MMOs, "winning" can apply to so, so many different activities.

Thorvik_Tyrson

Massacre_Wurm wrote: »

idk wrote: »

P2W was defined long ago and OP has it wrong. P2W is being able to by something with real world money that is stronger than what you can get in game.

My guess is OP has never really played a P2W game based on how wrong they are here.

So you will be okay with BiS gear in store if you can grind it in , lets say , 6 months ?
I mean you can get it in game. So no big deal ?

That's not the same. Your comparing Apples and Aardvarks. This whole subject is a grey line. If they put BIS gear in the crown store, that is what I would call pay to win. The rest that we seem to be discussing is what I call pay to advance faster.
Some people have more money to spend that time, and this is what the gaming companies are targeting. That convenience of pay to advance faster.

Keeping in mind that someone needs to pay for everything that keeps the company running. I want to say thanks to all of those players that have more money than time/sense that do purchase all of these things that I personally would not. There spending on these advancement items is what allows me to play the game.


Here is another theoretical case for you.
So Player "A" is a student on summer break and can grind the skills all day during the week. No one is currently complaining about that. Player "B" has to work and chooses to buy the crown store upgrade so that he can keep up with Player A that didn't have to work like he did. (Player B would have had to do this on another character in the past to be able to do this)

So in this situation, Player B is skipping the grind in trying to keep up with player "A" that did not have Real Life time commitments outside of the game. No one wants to argue about the time the some people have the luxury of spending on the game.


Thorvik

Canned_Apples

It's pay2win for SUB-50 PVP, not so much for anything else since CP covers most of it.

driosketch

yodased wrote: »

So basically its

pay to win in baby pvp.

Its pretty dirty, but the people who would pay all that money to be that much stronger in baby pvp, how many of them are there?

They already grind up meteor and soul-strike and have fully golden gear for every 10 levels.

I understand what you are saying, but I disagree it is going to make a large difference

This is it pretty much. And once I realized it's also temporary, per character, I didn't feel that concerned about it.

Vandril

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

Here is another theoretical case for you.
So Player "A" is a student on summer break and can grind the skills all day during the week. No one is currently complaining about that. Player "B" has to work and chooses to buy the crown store upgrade so that he can keep up with Player A that didn't have to work like he did. (Player B would have had to do this on another character in the past to be able to do this)

So in this situation, Player B is skipping the grind in trying to keep up with player "A" that did not have Real Life time commitments outside of the game. No one wants to argue about the time the some people have the luxury of spending on the game.


Thorvik

The main problem with this example, as true as it is, is as follows:

Player C has both time and money, and so chooses to purchase the crown store upgrade and then play all week. Player C is now ahead of both Player A and Player B.

When time and money are not mutually exclusive - which is somewhat common - the example breaks down. Player C gains a clear advantage from being able to purchase from the crown store. I imagine this is what bothers many players about what people call "pay to advance" purchases.

Massacre_Wurm

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

Massacre_Wurm wrote: »

idk wrote: »

P2W was defined long ago and OP has it wrong. P2W is being able to by something with real world money that is stronger than what you can get in game.

My guess is OP has never really played a P2W game based on how wrong they are here.

So you will be okay with BiS gear in store if you can grind it in , lets say , 6 months ?
I mean you can get it in game. So no big deal ?

That's not the same. Your comparing Apples and Aardvarks. This whole subject is a grey line. If they put BIS gear in the crown store, that is what I would call pay to win. The rest that we seem to be discussing is what I call pay to advance faster.
Some people have more money to spend that time, and this is what the gaming companies are targeting. That convenience of pay to advance faster.

Keeping in mind that someone needs to pay for everything that keeps the company running. I want to say thanks to all of those players that have more money than time/sense that do purchase all of these things that I personally would not. There spending on these advancement items is what allows me to play the game.


Here is another theoretical case for you.
So Player "A" is a student on summer break and can grind the skills all day during the week. No one is currently complaining about that. Player "B" has to work and chooses to buy the crown store upgrade so that he can keep up with Player A that didn't have to work like he did. (Player B would have had to do this on another character in the past to be able to do this)

So in this situation, Player B is skipping the grind in trying to keep up with player "A" that did not have Real Life time commitments outside of the game. No one wants to argue about the time the some people have the luxury of spending on the game.


Thorvik

Thats not the same ? What exactly ? I am not comparing anything. It was an example i made using another person's definition of P2W.

Sure. Using your logic we can start selling emperors ( we can even have an auction ) or AP boosters. To ADVANCE FASTER , you know. Or pve-only potions of invincibility to ADVANCE FASTER in vMA and vet trials.

I mean they are busy people and do not have time to learn and practice. So they should buy it.

Marcus684

Lol at people here trying to redefine words. “Pay to Win” literally means use money to gain an advantage in a competition over another person that isn’t available without purchase. Buying max skill lines on alts is pay to win in lowbie pvp and that’s it. ZOS just needs to make the purchasable skill lines only active for level 50 characters, and it’s no longer pay to win. Cosmetics aren’t a competition. Furnishings aren’t a competition. The number of *** flames coming out of your mount’s ass isn’t a competition. Some people just need to get a grip.

Vandril

Massacre_Wurm wrote: »

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

Massacre_Wurm wrote: »

idk wrote: »

P2W was defined long ago and OP has it wrong. P2W is being able to by something with real world money that is stronger than what you can get in game.

My guess is OP has never really played a P2W game based on how wrong they are here.

So you will be okay with BiS gear in store if you can grind it in , lets say , 6 months ?
I mean you can get it in game. So no big deal ?

That's not the same. Your comparing Apples and Aardvarks. This whole subject is a grey line. If they put BIS gear in the crown store, that is what I would call pay to win. The rest that we seem to be discussing is what I call pay to advance faster.
Some people have more money to spend that time, and this is what the gaming companies are targeting. That convenience of pay to advance faster.

Keeping in mind that someone needs to pay for everything that keeps the company running. I want to say thanks to all of those players that have more money than time/sense that do purchase all of these things that I personally would not. There spending on these advancement items is what allows me to play the game.


Here is another theoretical case for you.
So Player "A" is a student on summer break and can grind the skills all day during the week. No one is currently complaining about that. Player "B" has to work and chooses to buy the crown store upgrade so that he can keep up with Player A that didn't have to work like he did. (Player B would have had to do this on another character in the past to be able to do this)

So in this situation, Player B is skipping the grind in trying to keep up with player "A" that did not have Real Life time commitments outside of the game. No one wants to argue about the time the some people have the luxury of spending on the game.


Thorvik

Thats not the same ? What exactly ? I am not comparing anything. It was an example i made using another person's definition of P2W.

Sure. Using your logic we can start selling emperors ( we can even have an auction ) or AP boosters. To ADVANCE FASTER , you know. Or pve-only potions of invincibility to ADVANCE FASTER in vMA and vet trials.

I mean they are busy people and do not have time to learn and practice. So they should buy it.

I understand why you're reaching to extreme examples, because this isn't typically made clear, but... The difference between what most people mean when they say "pay to advance faster" as opposed to "pay to win" is that, with the former term, paying only allows skipping content of trivial difficulty - leveling, skill grinding, etc. This is content that practically everyone can do with ease, but that takes substantial amounts of time. Being able to purchase gear sets and other rewards that come from content of non-trivial difficulty is indeed a different beast entirely. The logical distinction is there, whether or not you feel it is strong enough of one.

Massacre_Wurm

exeeter702 wrote: »

Massacre_Wurm wrote: »

exeeter702 wrote: »

Massacre_Wurm wrote: »

idk wrote: »

P2W was defined long ago and OP has it wrong. P2W is being able to by something with real world money that is stronger than what you can get in game.

My guess is OP has never really played a P2W game based on how wrong they are here.

So you will be okay with BiS gear in store if you can grind it in , lets say , 6 months ?
I mean you can get it in game. So no big deal ?

One *** thing doesnt not make it the same as all *** things. Stop with the ridiculous strawmans. Putting BIS gear would be terrible for numerous reasons, but that doesnt qualify it as P2W. This mindset is precisely why over the years, threads like this pop up in game discussions because people dont have the first clue what P2W actually means and just wants to slap P2W on anything that undermines the spirit of a game through cash shop offerings.

Strawmans ? I have made a simple EXAMPLE using YOUR DEFINITION of P2W and asking a simple question : are you okay with it ?
You really should google definition of strawman.

And no , P2W nowadays is not a sword of a Thousand Truths in the store. Noone will buy it anymore. Now they selling inventory slots , potions for restoring job points , ingame currency , etc. They selling the same sword just indirectly.

In no way shape or form was the definition described likened to selling bis gear on the cash shop. The strawman was you using that question as a rebuttal when it was not relevant whatsoever in an attempt to form a argument out of something that was never said.

BiS gear on the crown store is absolutely a *** move but it does not qualify as P2W because said gear is not exclusive to the cash shop and is fully obtainable within game. You are conflating two different cash shop issues. They are both terrible and most developers stray from your ridiculous example for very obvious reasons but that does not make it p2w.

Dude , just read what you have wrote :
P2W is being able to buy something with real world money that is stronger than what you can get in game

I dont see here "No BiS gear in shop" part. So you can sell BiS gear in store if you can get it in game and it will be not P2W according to you. You also didnt say anything about TIME that you will need to get items from shop.

And then i have made my EXAMPLE using YOUR DEFINITION.

If you cannot understand this - i cant help you and will not bother with reading the rest of your post.

idk

Jhalin wrote: »

If you don’t think maxed skill lines are pay to win because eventually you can get them through grinding, then you would logically have to also claim TES: Blades is also completely free of P2W

I have no idea of silly phone games like blades so will only speak to ESO. If you think being able to purchase a secondary skill line that you have already leveled up and could level up in a day or two (and I have) then you have clearly not played a P2W game. That much is obvious.

MasterSpatula

There's a wealth of goals and a plethora of ways to prioritize them, so basically everyone can have their own definition of what win means. One person't win is another person's pointless waste of time. That means the definition of P2W varies from person to person.

Of course, the ESO community positively teems with people so self-involved that they cannot conceive of anyone's priorities but their own having value, which is how we get into snide pissing matches like what this thread has already devolved into.

For me, coming to this game as an RPG enthusiast, your character's growth has to be earned by that character or you're playing a bad game. If this feature had been in the game at launch, there's a good chance I'd never have played. (Of course, they promised us it would be Sub-Only with no cash shop at launch, and a lot of us only ever played because of that promise.)

Allowing you to just pay RW money to skip your character's growth is a thing good RPG developers are quite literally incapable of doing. So, for me, this isn't so much P2W as "Pay to actually diminish the game itself." Others, who don't value the character-growth experience, wouldn't see it that way at all.