Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

World of Whorecraft: Battle for Asseroth

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104
I do understand,but you dont seem to. In game gold players have WILL get depleted fast and i think thats what Blizzard is trying to achieve.

Regardless of if this may happen or not, it doesn't change the fact of my point. People still end up buying gold with real money. That is my premise, that is what you have failed to attend to.


If it kills some gold sellers in the process ,even better. And to farm more gold you need game time. Get it now?

Again, irrelevant to my point. It is still PTW. That is the mention, that is the point, that is my premise. If you would simply accept that, this discussion is over, but you seem to be avoiding such by using unrelated points as a counter.


P.S. Those that dont have gold can buy it with cash now too.Dont need tokens for that.

Yes, but that wasn't officially sanctioned by Blizzard, this is.

Again, my premise is that if you can take real money and buy gold in the game, where gold can be used for any form of play advancement. It is PTW.

None of your comments attend to such.
 

Art Vandelay

Prophet
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
1,205
Location
traveling without moving
Ok,if you're so eager to call it PTW then do. What do i care lol...You still need to pay to play. And i still dont get it where that "pay to win" comes from. What do you really win? Gold is worthless in WOW and there's tons of it. Nothing to buy with that crap. Well,if you buy in game boosts with it ,you can call it pay to win haha( you can do that now too).
 

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104
Ok,if you're so eager to call it PTW then do. What do i care lol...You still need to pay to play. And i still dont get it where that "pay to win" comes from. What do you really win? Gold is worthless in WOW and there's tons of it. Nothing to buy with that crap.


Pay To Win came from back in the early days of MMO. In EQ, people bought plat and items online for real money. This allowed them to circumvent the effort of play (ie spending weeks or more trying to get a rare item to drop), ie they "payed" to "win" their advancement. People still sell items (nothing to buy doesn't mean, nothing of that people can use to advance themselves), people still buy them, which means while the value of gold has declined, its use is still there which means that buying it with real money can still provide such advancement.

Well,if you buy in game boosts with it ,you can call it pay to win haha( you can do that now too).


Now you are getting it. When you pay real money to circumvent game play, you are paying to win over the obstacles ((exp is a game play obstacle, by paying money to speed up its acquisition, you are paying to circumvent it). Think of it like this... You an another guy are out grinding exp, both of you want to get to the next level because that is when you get some cool spells/skills/etc... The game was designed for you to spend this time and effort. That effort is the obstacle. You and the other guy do this all day, and at the end of the day you are both at 1/2 way there. You don't want to keep doing this, you hate this... you want to get there faster as you think the grinding is a waste of time. So, you call up a GM and tell him that you will slip him 20 bucks if he goes ahead and levels you up the rest of the way. You just paid real money to circumvent game play. That is what PTW is no matter how many RMT people try to tell you it isn't.

Nothing wrong with people who want to play that way though. In the Nintendo days, those same types used to buy things like "game genie" cartridges which provided them all the cheats and features to play as they liked. Thing is, I never saw people use them and then try to claim they weren't cheating. I don't like to play that way, I avoid games that have PTW features in them (which is pretty must most MMOs these days), but others can, it is just rather pathetic to hear them try and make up silly excuses as to why it isn't.
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
I do understand,but you dont seem to. In game gold players have WILL get depleted fast and i think thats what Blizzard is trying to achieve. If it kills some gold sellers in the process ,even better. And to farm more gold you need game time. Get it now?
Why would those players get depleted fast? This is the same thing as PLEX on Eve. People who know how to earn gold aren't going to run themselves out of gold on this, they're just going to briefly hand their gold off to some guy who will sell them what amounts to PLEX for this, before bilking it back out of them in the Auction House. To people who regularly do this, this is a business.

If it kills some gold sellers in the process ,even better. And to farm more gold you need game time. Get it now?
You're kidding yourself if you think that'll happen. It won't kill gold sellers. If anything, they'll be happy as a pig in shit. From a gold-trader perspective, this is the greatest thing ever.

Pay To Win came from back in the early days of MMO. In EQ, people bought plat and items online for real money. This allowed them to circumvent the effort of play (ie spending weeks or more trying to get a rare item to drop), ie they "payed" to "win" their advancement. People still sell items (nothing to buy doesn't mean, nothing of that people can use to advance themselves), people still buy them, which means while the value of gold has declined, its use is still there which means that buying it with real money can still provide such advancement.
And, as you can see, the lack of a pay-to-win store does not necessarily prevent the existence of pay-to-win. Real life is pay-to-win. Why should games be different?

Now you are getting it. When you pay real money to circumvent game play, you are paying to win over the obstacles ((exp is a game play obstacle, by paying money to speed up its acquisition, you are paying to circumvent it).
In any major game of note, real money and game money are fundamentally interchangeable, much in the same way dollars and Bitcoins are.

Think of it like this... You an another guy are out grinding exp, both of you want to get to the next level because that is when you get some cool spells/skills/etc... The game was designed for you to spend this time and effort. That effort is the obstacle. You and the other guy do this all day, and at the end of the day you are both at 1/2 way there. You don't want to keep doing this, you hate this... you want to get there faster as you think the grinding is a waste of time. So, you call up a GM and tell him that you will slip him 20 bucks if he goes ahead and levels you up the rest of the way. You just paid real money to circumvent game play. That is what PTW is no matter how many RMT people try to tell you it isn't.
And it is it somehow less PTW if the that guy slips me gold to multibox him alongside me as I level myself? I've done it before. Remember, gold and bucks are interchangeable currencies. So is it pay-to-win when a guy buys an item from the auction house with gold? Is it pay to win when he buys it from a Chinese farmer instead? What if trades the gold to the Chinese farmer in exchange for it? Money and gold are interchangeable, remember.

I know you want to see things differently, and certainly I used to think that way, but I have seen the light. It's a moment of Zen enlightenment that perhaps you will have the fortune, or maybe misfortune, to achieve. Perhaps literally in more than one way. But the understanding that GOLD AND MONEY ARE INTERCHANGEABLE makes everything clear. Maybe you never, personally, ever buy or sell any gold. This changes nothing. Just because you don't have any euros doesn't mean that dollars and euros aren't interchangeable.
 

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104
In any major game of note, real money and game money are fundamentally interchangeable, much in the same way dollars and Bitcoins are.

No they aren't. Each is constrained by their own system. now if the game is designed to allow such, it is as you say but it doesn't change the fact that you are allowing real money to dictate game progression while in game money requires game play within the constraints of the game to acquire such.

And it is it somehow less PTW if the that guy slips me gold to multibox him alongside me as I level myself?

He is paying you in game gold. So, he had to use game play to earn the money, so it is constrained within the system. No outside monetary influence.



I've done it before. Remember, gold and bucks are interchangeable currencies. So is it pay-to-win when a guy buys an item from the auction house with gold? Is it pay to win when he buys it from a Chinese farmer instead? What if trades the gold to the Chinese farmer in exchange for it? Money and gold are interchangeable, remember.

As I said, no they aren't. It would be nice if it helped your point, but it doesn't. Sorry.




I know you want to see things differently, and certainly I used to think that way, but I have seen the light. It's a moment of Zen enlightenment that perhaps you will have the fortune, or maybe misfortune, to achieve. Perhaps literally in more than one way. But the understanding that GOLD AND MONEY ARE INTERCHANGEABLE makes everything clear. Maybe you never, personally, ever buy or sell any gold. This changes nothing. Just because you don't have any euros doesn't mean that dollars and euros aren't interchangeable.

Are you sure you aren't seen talking spirits? I mean, your reasoning slips from time to time, this is one of those cases. You keep claiming such, but that phrase is meaningless.

Regardless Norfleet, I don't want to sit here and derail the WoW thread with this stupid argument, this thread is stupid enough with me adding to it.
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
No they aren't. Each is constrained by their own system. now if the game is designed to allow such, it is as you say but it doesn't change the fact that you are allowing real money to dictate game progression while in game money requires game play within the constraints of the game to acquire such.
You say this, yet you cite Everquest gold-buyers. You can't have both, you know. Either gold and money are interchangeable, or you can't buy Everquest gold.

And it is it somehow less PTW if the that guy slips me gold to multibox him alongside me as I level myself?

He is paying you in game gold. So, he had to use game play to earn the money, so it is constrained within the system. No outside monetary influence.
And when I hail my local moneychanger and exchange this currency for some other currency, then what?

As I said, no they aren't. It would be nice if it helped your point, but it doesn't. Sorry.
You say this, but I know differently. I can quote you an exchange rate. I am so confident of this fact that I will accept your in-game funnymoney at that exchange rate in lieu of any real money you may potentially owe me.

Regardless Norfleet, I don't want to sit here and derail the WoW thread with this stupid argument, this thread is stupid enough with me adding to it.
Hah, too late, this thread went off the rails many, many pages ago.
 

abija

Prophet
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
2,891
So why cant you buy the game time directly with gold? Why go through the AH Bull Sh*t? I get it, if you could sell the game tokens for real money.
Btw there are cheaper sources for WoW game time in eBay then Bliz shop.
Because they would lose money on subs? With this system the money they get on subs doesn't change.

Xenich: So according to you any online game that allows trading of any kind is pay to win? Are you even aware that's your argument?
 

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104
No they aren't. Each is constrained by their own system. now if the game is designed to allow such, it is as you say but it doesn't change the fact that you are allowing real money to dictate game progression while in game money requires game play within the constraints of the game to acquire such.
You say this, yet you cite Everquest gold-buyers. You can't have both, you know. Either gold and money are interchangeable, or you can't buy Everquest gold.

Not in the sense that it justifies your conclusion. The fact that people can trade real money for in game money does not establish such part of the game play. If we are to accept your premise as intended and appropriate game play, then people killing off other players in RL to gain advantage in game is also an appropriate means of game play. I understand your argument, I just reject it as more of an argument that attempts to be correct in its point rather than practical to the discussion. If we accept your premise, sure.. fine... it is as you say, but I don't accept it, nor does a game system that objects to it. That is, if I make a game and say using outside money to trade in game resources is not a part of the game play, and therefore cheating. That IS what it is and no amount of your reasoning will change that fact.

Now if a game does allow such trade and claims it is the purpose of play, well... It is still my definition. It is just that the game company decided to allow people to use real money to influence game play. It still doesn't change that they are circumventing the game itself with real money.


edit:

This gives me an idea. How about a black market company that puts out hits for players in PvP games? You see, people would pay real money to have a hit man find and assassinate an in game competitor in RL. I mean, why only have game actions in game? What is wrong with showing up to the door of your nemesis and putting several holes in them? You win right? Its all good!!! Just think, a new service added to game play. /sarc

And when I hail my local moneychanger and exchange this currency for some other currency, then what?

Well, so far in this scenario you have taken in-game money for a service in game and then took that in-game money and traded it outside the game for... what? Real money? You haven't circumvented game play. Now the person who comes to that money changer and pays real money to gain gold to spend in the game, they have circumvented "game play". Lets be honest here Norfleet. We are talking about game play, within the game being affected by outside game means. Whether the game company allows this or not does not change the fact that it is allowing outside mechanics to affect game play.




You say this, but I know differently. I can quote you an exchange rate. I am so confident of this fact that I will accept your in-game funnymoney at that exchange rate in lieu of any real money you may potentially owe me.

I just misunderstood what your argument angle was initially. Yes, just about any game out there has a black market money exchange for in game monies. That however is irrelevant to the point. Not all game systems allow this, though doesn't mean people don't do it illegally. In EQ plat buyers were the scourge of the industry (and people refused to admit if they bought plat as opposed to now where people think it is a normal way to play), there were numerous statements and research done by Sony in the past claiming this sort of behavior severely damaged their game play, that harmed the economy and systems. Most of the game companies had this stance back then. They all changed, not because they had some epiphany , that it was better for the game, but because at the end of the day, money pays the bills, not principals and PTW is very lucrative (Game Genie cartridges, cheat guides, etc... are a HUGE industry, hell... Sierra made more profit on their phone hint lines than they did on their games during the Kings Quest days). That however would be an entirely different rant and discussion.

The point is, I understand your point, the premise and angle you argue from, but that doesn't negate my argument.
 
Last edited:

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
Not in the sense that it justifies your conclusion. The fact that people can trade real money for in game money does not establish such part of the game play. If we are to accept your premise as intended and appropriate game play, then people killing off other players in RL to gain advantage in game is also an appropriate means of game play.
Yeah, stuff like that happens in Eve. If you play that game, you'd better watch your ass.

This gives me an idea. How about a black market company that puts out hits for players in PvP games? You see, people would pay real money to have a hit man find and assassinate an in game competitor in RL. I mean, why only have game actions in game? What is wrong with showing up to the door of your nemesis and putting several holes in them? You win right? Its all good!!! Just think, a new service added to game play. /sarc
Like I said, this has happened before. However, it is not generally considered popular because MOST people are unwilling to resort to activities that are illegal in real life (Except Eve players, who are all deranged psychopaths). Gold-trading, on the other hand, is not actually illegal in real life. Game companies don't like it, but this hardly matters, because according to the in-game EULA, just being there violates the rules and is grounds for summary banning anyway. I'd know, this happens.

Well, so far in this scenario you have taken in-game money for a service in game and then took that in-game money and traded it outside the game for... what? Real money?
Anything, potentially. Real money, game money in another game...

Lets be honest here Norfleet. We are talking about game play, within the game being affected by outside game means. Whether the game company allows this or not does not change the fact that it is allowing outside mechanics to affect game play.
But outside mechanics always affect gameplay. Whether it's consulting the Wikka or messaging your friends via IM to circumvent in-game communications blocks, all these things have always existed, and always will. If I receive a sackload of gold from a friend in exchange for a sack of gold in a different game, is this not the same? Most players do not consider such an action to be even remotely questionable at all. So why is it different when said friend gives you something in real life for it, such as, say, real money?

there were numerous statements and research done by Sony in the past claiming this sort of behavior severely damaged their game play, that harmed the economy and systems.
I find this notion completely implausible, for the simple reason that the supply of in-game resources is not changed by any such transaction. Since such resources can be freely given, such a transaction is identical in effect to simply giving the gold to someone. That the person incurs some benefit elsewhere for it is entirely irrelevant to its effect on the economy. Effects don't care about motivations, only actions. If selling gold to someone harms the game, then so does simply giving him the gold.

From a game-economic standpoint, third-party gold-selling is a zero sum game. The amount by which someone gains is exactly equal to the amount someone else loses. Selling it from an official pay-to-win store, on the other hand, actually creates gold where none previously existed. Inflationary resource creation is necessarily harmful, while a zero-sum transaction cannot cause harm.
 

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104
Yeah, stuff like that happens in Eve. If you play that game, you'd better watch your ass.

Like I said, this has happened before. However, it is not generally considered popular because MOST people are unwilling to resort to activities that are illegal in real life (Except Eve players, who are all deranged psychopaths). Gold-trading, on the other hand, is not actually illegal in real life. Game companies don't like it, but this hardly matters, because according to the in-game EULA, just being there violates the rules and is grounds for summary banning anyway. I'd know, this happens.

Yeah, I watched a video on some large battle for EvE where thy said the combined loss of real money by the players was in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Yeah, not interested in such. I like early EQ before the plat farmers and mainstreamer mentality ruined it.

Actually, not illegal exactly, but civilly liable. Contract law is a bitch.

Anything, potentially. Real money, game money in another game...

like I said, your transaction has to effect the game play. You taking money out of game doesn't fit the term, you have to gain advantage in a game through outside influence (ie buying items/gold) for the purpose of circumventing required play.


But outside mechanics always affect gameplay. Whether it's consulting the Wikka or messaging your friends via IM to circumvent in-game communications blocks, all these things have always existed, and always will. If I receive a sackload of gold from a friend in exchange for a sack of gold in a different game, is this not the same? Most players do not consider such an action to be even remotely questionable at all. So why is it different when said friend gives you something in real life for it, such as, say, real money?
Nice try, but you position is wearing a bit thin here.

I find this notion completely implausible, for the simple reason that the supply of in-game resources is not changed by any such transaction. Since such resources can be freely given, such a transaction is identical in effect to simply giving the gold to someone. That the person incurs some benefit elsewhere for it is entirely irrelevant to its effect on the economy. Effects don't care about motivations, only actions. If selling gold to someone harms the game, then so does simply giving him the gold.

From a game-economic standpoint, third-party gold-selling is a zero sum game. The amount by which someone gains is exactly equal to the amount someone else loses. Selling it from an official pay-to-win store, on the other hand, actually creates gold where none previously existed. Inflationary resource creation is necessarily harmful, while a zero-sum transaction cannot cause harm.

Sony was big on it that time, they had long written out studies and arguments on it. It did have an effect on the game. Plat farmers in EQ excessively farmed money, pouring in plat as if it was a job, with teams of farmers collecting 24/7 in shifts. I know you farm like such as a habit of play, but you are an extreme minority. EQ had many in game vendors who sold items that were gated by plat amounts and never were intended to be mass purchase products. With the excessive influx of bought platinum, these plat gated items became extremely affordable. Few people would be able to earn the needed money to justify continued expense on these items (heal potions and the like). Sony had to make extensive changes to the game to limit this imbalance. The entire vendor plat gating system was overcome far too quickly that Sony had to make quick decisions. Inflation went stupid quickly.


Because of the sheer brute force the plat farmers had, items in the game were greatly reduced in vendor sale price to combat this behavior.

edit: quick point

Keep in mind that a single person could not "reasonably" earn plat to such a level that it could be indefinitely dispensed as such. Even guilds could not sustain that level of expense, but with plat farmers, a player had an entire army of farmers at their disposal. That is, what might take a guild of 200-300 weeks of excessive hard farming to obtain a level of cash, the plat buyer could obtain in seconds and keep obtaining as fast and as long as they chose to spend real money. This doesn't happen in game play.


So, it became harder and harder to earn money due to their basically "over fishing" certain camps and areas. In less than 12 months, you had items being traded between players for 2-3 plat to being traded for 100's of thousands and even eventually millions of plat. Dupe hunting became a common focus of the Chinese farmers. They would find an abuse and dupe plat to the point where it caused serious imbalance in the economy. Not only that, but as you well know, plat sites have a very common way of trying to steal account information to which would allow them to farm cash without risk of losing money from being banned.

Add in the fact that the farmers seriously pissed off players (training them, kill stealing, loot stealing, etc...) and it was detrimental to the community as well. Thing is, Sony couldn't do anything about it other than stand there shaking their fist at them. They had no power over another country in this matter. All they could do is ban it and those who participated. Eventually, as popularity for this type of cheating grew (ie fucking WoWtards and their mainstream mentality), Sony changed stances with the old saying "If you can't beat them, join them" to which the EQ/EQ2 full on RMT store was created to facilitate full on PTW server. They figured, why fight it? These idiots will pay money for digital items to get ahead in a game? Bleed the dumb asses dry. PROFIT off the stupid!
 

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
Oh man he's still at it. For someone who hates WoW you sure do spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about it.
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
Actually, not illegal exactly, but civilly liable. Contract law is a bitch.
Given that their rules state EVERYTHING is actually forbidden, this doesn't mean much. The practicality of trying to sue nameless Internet persons is similarly questionable, especially given the chance that they will lose.

Keep in mind that a single person could not "reasonably" earn plat to such a level that it could be indefinitely dispensed as such.
And yet funding a guild, or even yourself, pretty much demands that you do. When the reasonable fails to deliver the results, the unreasonable becomes reasonable.

So, it became harder and harder to earn money due to their basically "over fishing" certain camps and areas. In less than 12 months, you had items being traded between players for 2-3 plat to being traded for 100's of thousands and even eventually millions of plat. Dupe hunting became a common focus of the Chinese farmers. They would find an abuse and dupe plat to the point where it caused serious imbalance in the economy.
Okay, so now we're blaming the players for the failure of the developers to create a balanced economy or properly debug and test their own games? Not buying that one.

Not only that, but as you well know, plat sites have a very common way of trying to steal account information to which would allow them to farm cash without risk of losing money from being banned.
I actually used to believe that, too. However, firsthand experience with both sides of the equation have led me to believe that this is simply fearmongering propaganda spread by the establishment: That the company is FAR more likely to steal your account than the gold sites are. In fact, such sites have pretty much ironclad privacy protection. At no point are you ever required to so much as reveal what your account *IS*, let alone expose it to theft. The company, on the other hand, routinely bans without any trial or right of appeal. Indeed, their very terms state that just being in the game at all is a violation of their rules.

On the flipside of the coin, not once have I ever had an account stolen by HACKERS, not even on accounts where I take some of the worst security precautions imaginable because I simply did not value those accounts at all. NOT ONCE. EVER.

In short, direct, hard personal experience, NOT merely horror stories from others, have forced me to conclude that these claims are nothing more than fear-mongering propaganda spread by the agents of the establishment, and have basically zero basis in truth. Yes, hackers exist that try to steal accounts. Yes, they will strip and loot your account and sell it to gold traders. But the two have no little or no direct affiliation at all. Reputable gold traders are, in fact, the only honest people in the entire MMO business. It's much like how I have learned to trust a patch from some Russian hacker over an official Microsoft fix.

And despite using unauthorized Russian OS patches, somehow, NONE OF MY ACCOUNTS, literally hundreds if not thousands, worth thousands, have EVER been stolen by hackers, and these unofficial patches and modifications are what is keeping my system CLEAN of dodgy spyware, while OFFICIAL company installs actually ADD SPYWARE.

In conclusion: Don't believe anything the company says, they LIE. Of course Sony would malign the plat farmers. THEY LIE. I know this firsthand. I've seen both sides of the fence now, and it wasn't by choice.

Now, different question: What do you think of things sold in a cash shop which do NOT benefit the purchaser, instead benefitting everyone ELSE? I know there's a game (TSW, maybe?), that has a "money bomb", which, when purchased from the store and used, strews fabulous prizes in around the detonation site (okay, realistically, probably vendortrash), but with one catch: The one using it cannot pick them up, only the other players can. Is this "acceptable" by the Laws of Xenich, or is it still filthy pay-to-win?
 

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104
Given that their rules state EVERYTHING is actually forbidden, this doesn't mean much. The practicality of trying to sue nameless Internet persons is similarly questionable, especially given the chance that they will lose.

I didn't say it was practical, I even mentioned later that they caved due to the fact there wasn't much they could do about it in a practical nature.

And yet funding a guild, or even yourself, pretty much demands that you do. When the reasonable fails to deliver the results, the unreasonable becomes reasonable.

Guild funding and gold farming companies are nowhere near the same level. Even so, guilds farm for the sake of the guild. Good luck getting an entire guild to constantly farm for your own personal use. A person who buys gold is like having an army of people providing you all the gold you want at any moment that you want it.


Okay, so now we're blaming the players for the failure of the developers to create a balanced economy or properly debug and test their own games? Not buying that one.

Players? No. Gold farmers aren't players. They are employees of a company whose primary purpose is to extract as much resources from the game as possible to profit through RMT. The responsibility of this is the developers as it concerns dupes, but... if players trash the game and act like it wasn't their fault? Well.. they could have reported it right? The EQ dupes were not "oops, I accidentally made 10k potions ", they were deliberate hacks that had to be deliberately abused many times over to reach the level of inflow that happened. These guys knew what they were doing and maliciously did so. So yeah,I am not buying your excuse.

I actually used to believe that, too. However, firsthand experience with both sides of the equation have led me to believe that this is simply fearmongering propaganda spread by the establishment: That the company is FAR more likely to steal your account than the gold sites are. In fact, such sites have pretty much ironclad privacy protection. At no point are you ever required to so much as reveal what your account *IS*, let alone expose it to theft. The company, on the other hand, routinely bans without any trial or right of appeal. Indeed, their very terms state that just being in the game at all is a violation of their rules.

Well.. in my experience over the years, I personally know people who have had this happen. So I guess we are at an impasse here. Though I do not think companies are always honest, this whole "anti-establishment" excuse is a bit of a "occupy" style of argument. Foreign gold sellers (people who are protected because of international laws and barriers) are more honest with your money and accounts than a major corporation who isn't immune to lawsuits of such mishandling? Next your are going to tell me the moon landing was faked?


On the flipside of the coin, not once have I ever had an account stolen by HACKERS, not even on accounts where I take some of the worst security precautions imaginable because I simply did not value those accounts at all. NOT ONCE. EVER.

My experience and education says otherwise, but hey... its the internet and claims like these are worthless.

In short, direct, hard personal experience, NOT merely horror stories from others, have forced me to conclude that these claims are nothing more than fear-mongering propaganda spread by the agents of the establishment, and have basically zero basis in truth. Yes, hackers exist that try to steal accounts. Yes, they will strip and loot your account and sell it to gold traders. But the two have no little or no direct affiliation at all. Reputable gold traders are, in fact, the only honest people in the entire MMO business. It's much like how I have learned to trust a patch from some Russian hacker over an official Microsoft fix.

And despite using unauthorized Russian OS patches, somehow, NONE OF MY ACCOUNTS, literally hundreds if not thousands, worth thousands, have EVER been stolen by hackers, and these unofficial patches and modifications are what is keeping my system CLEAN of dodgy spyware, while OFFICIAL company installs actually ADD SPYWARE.

In conclusion: Don't believe anything the company says, they LIE. Of course Sony would malign the plat farmers. THEY LIE. I know this firsthand. I've seen both sides of the fence now, and it wasn't by choice.

Anecdotal evidence. Also, worthless to this discussion.


Now, different question: What do you think of things sold in a cash shop which do NOT benefit the purchaser, instead benefitting everyone ELSE? I know there's a game (TSW, maybe?), that has a "money bomb", which, when purchased from the store and used, strews fabulous prizes in around the detonation site (okay, realistically, probably vendortrash), but with one catch: The one using it cannot pick them up, only the other players can. Is this "acceptable" by the Laws of Xenich, or is it still filthy pay-to-win?

My position is simple.

If game play is circumvented due to RMT, then it is pay to win. Period. Regardless of who does it and who specifically benefits.

I know this is hard to accept for a generation of gamers who are big PTW fans and have spent years convincing themselves that it isn't cheating, it isn't bad, etc... I know my position is not popular, which is why the definition of PTW has been bastardized into a mainstream idiom of pointless meanings.

It is what is, they can change the meaning, they can stick their head in the sand and believe whatever they like, but they can't change the past. It is what it is.
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
Well.. in my experience over the years, I personally know people who have had this happen.
Sure, so have I. Each and everyone of those people I've known who had their accounts stolen were not exactly keen on securing their computers. What's more, based on my now firsthand knowledge of how the gold-trading sector even WORKS, this simply cannot be blamed on them. The people who hack accounts and strip them to unload to the gold dealers are not the gold-dealers themselves. When a man robs your house and unloads the stuff at a pawnshop, the pawnshop isn't the party responsible for robbing your house. When it's impossible to even track or suspect whether or not goods are stolen, because it's a straight numeric, it is simply unreasonable to blame an honest gold merchant for it. The fact that hackers occasionally pretend to be gold merchants, demand things that no honest gold merchant would ever ask for or need to know, and take in suckers. Quite simply, a lot of these people asked for it. They download dodgy third-party programs, and make no effort to secure their computers. I also wouldn't be surprised if elements of the company are involved. After all, THEY have access to all this data, so any disgruntled or corrupt employee could trivially "hack" your account.

So I guess we are at an impasse here. Though I do not think companies are always honest, this whole "anti-establishment" excuse is a bit of a "occupy" style of argument. Foreign gold sellers (people who are protected because of international laws and barriers) are more honest with your money and accounts than a major corporation who isn't immune to lawsuits of such mishandling?
Gold sellers operate on trust. In the underworld, reputation is everything. There are no legal recourses one can turn to, no authorities that can be bought, no intimidating barriers that can stop a bad word from spreading about you. If my dealer rips me off, I'm out a handful of gold, he's out every supplier I have contacts with and every supplier THEY have contacts with. His business lives or dies on the spreading word of mouth that he's good for it. He may never face legal prosecution like a drug dealer might, but his business depends just as much on his reputation. The company? Sure, they're TECHNICALLY susceptible to lawsuits, but between multiple layers of obfuscatory paperwork and the fact that individual players generally cannot afford to mount a legal challenge, the odds of this are remote. They've erected heavy layers of legal shielding around themselves and have the perceived advantage of being "aboveground". Their reputation with players is nearly always mud, but they persist anyway because they offer what amounts to a monopoly product in many cases. Reputation simply does not matter for them. In the underworld, though, reputation is everything.

My experience and education says otherwise, but hey... its the internet and claims like these are worthless.
Anecdotal evidence. Also, worthless to this discussion.
Sure, we can discard both our observations. That reduces this to a he-said-she-said. But there's a difference. My claims aren't worthless. My claims have a hard dollar value attached, and as such, have a directly quantifiable value. I can tell you exactly how much my claims are worth. As they say, money talks.

If game play is circumvented due to RMT, then it is pay to win. Period. Regardless of who does it and who specifically benefits.
See, that's interesting, because your definition of pay-to-win excludes actual literal pay-to-win! Let us propose the simplest example of a game, which we shall call "Pay To Win". Your score, the "win", is determined by one thing: How much money you give the operators. Since gameplay is not circumvented due to RMT, as the gameplay *IS* RMT, without which none occurs, it is not circumvented. This game is as literally pay-to-win as it gets. You literally pay to win. Your definition of pay-to-win excludes this.

Furthermore, your definition of pay-to-win encompasses basically every game, ever. There is no major game where you cannot find those purporting to provide power-leveling services. I've never actually partaken of these services, nor do I see any reason I ever would, so I cannot vouch for their integrity, and I, like you, have heard nasty things about them (plus, giving your account data to strangers seems deeply unwise), but they exist. Thus, pretty much every game with levels is pay-to-win by your definition.

Given that your definition is vague enough to encompass nearly every extant game and yet fails to actually cover literal pay-to-win, I can't help but see this definition as critically flawed. It's as if you've created a definition of atmosphere that asserts that the Earth is an airless rock.

Now, I define pay-to-win as simple: As a verb, the act of paying real money to achieve win (gold, advancement, items, etc.) in the game. As an adjective describing a game, a game is pay-to-win when there is non-cosmetic quantitative benefit (win) that cannot be reasonably achieved by a committed player without paying the operators or owners of the game for it over and above any pay-to-work (read: subscription, box purchase cost) already attached. Suffice it to say I am not a big fan of the pay-to-work model, it violates the basic rules of economic common sense.

Unlike your definition, it covers actual pay-to-win and isn't so broad as to paint basically every single game in existence, rendering it meaningless as a descriptive qualifier.
 

Avellion

Erudite
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
756
Location
This forum
Sure it is... Same as EvE. I pay real money, get a token, go on to the AH sell it for gold, then buy all the crafting/purple/etc... gear/materials/content I can get to speed me along and make me powerful.

Pure Pay to Win.
Crafted epics? Sure you can buy 3 of them, but no more, you cannot really deck yourself out in epics by buying epics off the AH.

3 Epics will not get you very far in PvE though.

WoW is not pay to win. Furthermore, pay 2 win would typically imply some kind of exclusive advantage for those who pay. In WoW, all you get are some mounts and companion pets and now some gold, which ammounts to fuck all in raiding. Convenience at best.
 

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104
Sure it is... Same as EvE. I pay real money, get a token, go on to the AH sell it for gold, then buy all the crafting/purple/etc... gear/materials/content I can get to speed me along and make me powerful.

Pure Pay to Win.
Crafted epics? Sure you can buy 3 of them, but no more, you cannot really deck yourself out in epics by buying epics off the AH.

3 Epics will not get you very far in PvE though.

WoW is not pay to win. Furthermore, pay 2 win would typically imply some kind of exclusive advantage for those who pay. In WoW, all you get are some mounts and companion pets and now some gold, which ammounts to fuck all in raiding. Convenience at best.

Pay To Win is when someone pays real money to circumvent game play. That is, by paying money, they are able to obtain progression (anything that progresses them however slight or insignificant you may think) which otherwise would require game play to obtain. That is pay to win. You are rationalizing that the reward of paying isn't as much as you would term to be truly advantageous. You are arguing semantics in order to avoid the reality of what is happening.

If the AH did not provide people a means to progress in game play, to circumvent having to spend time, effort, etc... themselves to obtain the items. Nobody would buy anything on the AH. The problem with your argument is that you do not deny that it is an advancement, that it is short cut in progressing, you simply argue it is not a sufficient enough advantage in your opinion. That is like arguing to a judge that partial rape isn't really rape because you didn't get to finish. /shrug
 

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104
See, that's interesting, because your definition of pay-to-win excludes actual literal pay-to-win! Let us propose the simplest example of a game, which we shall call "Pay To Win". Your score, the "win", is determined by one thing: How much money you give the operators. Since gameplay is not circumvented due to RMT, as the gameplay *IS* RMT, without which none occurs, it is not circumvented. This game is as literally pay-to-win as it gets. You literally pay to win. Your definition of pay-to-win excludes this.

That only means the game IS pay to win literally, it doesn't change my premise. All games are PTW if they meet the criteria I provided, the difference between your example is one is legally a game element while one is not.


Furthermore, your definition of pay-to-win encompasses basically every game, ever. There is no major game where you cannot find those purporting to provide power-leveling services. I've never actually partaken of these services, nor do I see any reason I ever would, so I cannot vouch for their integrity, and I, like you, have heard nasty things about them (plus, giving your account data to strangers seems deeply unwise), but they exist. Thus, pretty much every game with levels is pay-to-win by your definition.

No, you again are trying to win an argument regardless of if you are right or not (it is your nature as you have admitted in your game play style). You are purposely confusing concepts to obtain your validation. Pay to win is a simple action to a result. A game may encompass it in its rules, or it may not. Your use here is to ignore that difference. Every game is not Pay To Win because not every game approves of such. You attempt to claim that the fact that a game is cheated classifies it as a game that supports cheating. That is an invalid assessment.

Given that your definition is vague enough to encompass nearly every extant game and yet fails to actually cover literal pay-to-win, I can't help but see this definition as critically flawed. It's as if you've created a definition of atmosphere that asserts that the Earth is an airless rock.

My definition is very specific. I have clearly established such, yet you keep arguing fallaciously, changing context, inferring meanings that are not there. Pay to win is as I said, "paying real money to circumvent game play". Whether the game accepts this as a part of its rules or not does not invalidate the definition. Keep in mind we are talking about MMOs and this definition encompasses WoW to EvE. Both of them fit the definition. Both allow real money to be spent to circumvent game play.



Now, I define pay-to-win as simple: As a verb, the act of paying real money to achieve win (gold, advancement, items, etc.) in the game. As an adjective describing a game, a game is pay-to-win when there is non-cosmetic quantitative benefit (win) that cannot be reasonably achieved by a committed player without paying the operators or owners of the game for it over and above any pay-to-work (read: subscription, box purchase cost) already attached. Suffice it to say I am not a big fan of the pay-to-work model, it violates the basic rules of economic common sense.

Unlike your definition, it covers actual pay-to-win and isn't so broad as to paint basically every single game in existence, rendering it meaningless as a descriptive qualifier.

Your definition is specific to the conditions you wish to allow that fit your acceptance of it. As I said previously, people like you (and the guy I responded to above) rationalize the meaning to fit your desire to approve of its practice. You don't like my definition because it encompasses all games that meet that basic requirement and you, like many gamer who use or approve of such services refuse to admit this because to admit it also means that you approve of forms of cheating the game system for your own benefit. To admit that would be detrimental to peoples view of themselves. I mean, how many people come here bragging about how they beat a game using the cheat codes? Yeah... so not many want to admit that the money they spent to bypass having to level or that item they bought to make them a bit more powerful, or that crafting component they bought so they didn't have to farm for it, etc.. why admitting that would be too much for them.

Edit:

Norfleet, you are extremely biased on this topic. You may not "use" the services of such to cheat games like many here who try to rationalize it, but you play games specifically with such features as a means of enjoyment. You have said many times you love to work the AH systems and you profit off these types of people in RL, That is, you make money on these idiots buying gold and inflating the markets as such. Gold selling is a very important part of your game play. If it is removed, then that element of play you seek is also removed. I think that is why you argue the way you do (invalid inferences, out of context arguments, omitting facts or surface glancing them to strengthen a point). You and I have discussed this over several threads and it just comes down to the fact that you want PTW, I don't and no amount of attempting to try an convince me to deny proper logical reasoning to accept your premise will be accepted. You are wrong, I am right. Discussion is over.
 
Last edited:

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104
Wow is not pay to win,you narrow minded retard.

I think it might help if you fall to the floor and start kicking and screaming to get your way. I mean, that is what all the kiddies do right? I know you are, but what am I?

I am rubber, you are glue, anything you say bounces of me and sticks on you. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me!

My daddy can beat up your daddy!

Shall we continue with your kiddie reasoning or are you done?

Lets really look at your argument here.

Ok,if you're so eager to call it PTW then do. What do i care lol...You still need to pay to play.

How does "you still need to pay to play" invalidate that it is PTW? Please, run me through your reason process here. So far, I got nothing. Sorry, it is kind of a problem I have of not being able to think like an idiot, so honestly I need you to step me through how your damaged mind works.

And i still dont get it where that "pay to win" comes from.
So you are ignorant, but then felt you should argue a topic you know nothing about. Yep... that mind is working real well there.


What do you really win?

Ah, the curse of a diminished IQ. The limitation that forces you to see everything as a literal meaning without context and specifically to the only definition that your small mind first was able to grasp. You must have extreme difficulties with language. I assume the word context is not even in your vast vocabulary of single syllable words and slang. You must be an absolute delight at cocktail parties!


Gold is worthless in WOW and there's tons of it.

Yep, so worthless that gold sellers no longer sell gold, the AH is shut down and nobody trades anymore. Yes sir, yep.

(hint: just in case you are struggling with understanding the point, that means if that isn't true, then your point is invalid, oh.. and invalid means wrong basically).

Nothing to buy with that crap.

That literally or figuratively? Because we know one to be false and the other doesn't invalidate the premise.

Well,if you buy in game boosts with it ,you can call it pay to win haha( you can do that now too).

It is. See, what people with brains that are not the size of walnuts do is they first evaluate the premise of the opposing argument and then measure it according to their own. If you had done this from the start, your entire line of reasoning would have been shown for what it is... comon, you know what it is right? It is one of those short slang words that I am sure you are an expert of... you know... shit.

Don't take it so hard though. I never really considered you to be much of an argument anyway, after all... you do find WoW enjoyable.
 
Last edited:

Angthoron

Arcane
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
13,056
Also:

vNyhU7t.png
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
That only means the game IS pay to win literally, it doesn't change my premise. All games are PTW if they meet the criteria I provided, the difference between your example is one is legally a game element while one is not.
Exactly. It *IS* literally pay to win, and yet your definition of pay-to-win would say it isn't! This clearly puts the validity of your definition into question. It's as if you defined "dog" in a way which excludes dogs.

My definition is very specific. I have clearly established such, yet you keep arguing fallaciously, changing context, inferring meanings that are not there. Pay to win is as I said, "paying real money to circumvent game play". Whether the game accepts this as a part of its rules or not does not invalidate the definition. Keep in mind we are talking about MMOs and this definition encompasses WoW to EvE. Both of them fit the definition. Both allow real money to be spent to circumvent game play.
So your definition excludes games where this exists, but is not formally allowed?

Your definition is specific to the conditions you wish to allow that fit your acceptance of it. As I said previously, people like you (and the guy I responded to above) rationalize the meaning to fit your desire to approve of its practice. You don't like my definition because it encompasses all games that meet that basic requirement and you, like many gamer who use or approve of such services refuse to admit this because to admit it also means that you approve of forms of cheating the game system for your own benefit.
Actually, I don't like your definition because I find it logically faulty and excludes the most trivial case of pay-to-win. That a loose interpretation would see it encompass everything doesn't help either. And my approval or disapproval does not really have any impact, since I, personally, don't care whether or not a game is pay-to-win, as my preferred behaviors, even as you define them, are not pay-to-win. I am just pointing out that your definition is not coherent as defined.

Norfleet, you are extremely biased on this topic. You may not "use" the services of such to cheat games like many here who try to rationalize it, but you play games specifically with such features as a means of enjoyment. You have said many times you love to work the AH systems and you profit off these types of people in RL, That is, you make money on these idiots buying gold and inflating the markets as such. Gold selling is a very important part of your game play. If it is removed, then that element of play you seek is also removed. I think that is why you argue the way you do (invalid inferences, out of context arguments, omitting facts or surface glancing them to strengthen a point). You and I have discussed this over several threads and it just comes down to the fact that you want PTW, I don't and no amount of attempting to try an convince me to deny proper logical reasoning to accept your premise will be accepted. You are wrong, I am right. Discussion is over.
And your position is just as argued from the other direction: You hate it. But the difference is, I have a logically consistent definition that, frankly, has little to do with my tastes, as the existence or lack thereof of "pay-to-win" as implied, but not consistently defined, by you, has only limited impact on my tastes. I don't actually have "likes", I have dealbreakers, as I don't believe in positivity, only negativity. I consider a game to be acceptable if it fails to contain enough undesired elements and doesn't include any dealbreakers, and none of these are related to pay-to-win or lack thereof.

So while it's true, that I do happen to tolerate things that you might consider pay-to-win, and you see my definition of it as being permissive, that isn't the point: The point is that my definition is internally consistent, and yours fails to cover the trivial case. When you ask someone to define "dog", and their definition ends up excluding an actual dog, that definition is obviously faulty. That the definition is simultaneously loose enough to possibly include cats doesn't help.
 

Xenich

Cipher
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
2,104

You are using fallacious means, your argument is invalid (you use intended and unintended interchangeably to keep your point afloat, that is an invalid premise), I have shown it to be so, you are just thrashing about like a person drowning whose body has yet to accept it is dying (much like Art, the difference being that you are being stubborn, he is just stupid) . Again, you are wrong. I am right. /shrug

Lets drop this, how about head back over to the Pantheon forum and discuss game features good/bad, workable/unworkable. More productive than arguing over this stupid shit. Though I know you won't, because you have to "win"!
 
Last edited:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom