The Guild Wars 2 Thread

[Stokowski]

And where were Cantha (and Elona) racist? Any examples? (And no, expelling foreign barbarians is the sensible thing to do supporded by RL history so it's not racist in a fantasy world. Something more convincing, pls.)

The problem was that these settings were a melting pot of elements from different East Asian cultures ... and it turns out that those folk are annoyed by melting pots, even fantasy ones. (Why is my fantasy-Japanese character living in a fantasy-Chinese town in a fantasy-Cambodian jungle? This is insulting!)

 

[SuicideBunny]

which is hilariously ironic when you consider what they said in their Manifesto, which they refuse to comment on nowadays.

it's even more ironic when you consider that gw started with a few peeps having an idea for a fantasy counterstrikeish pvp game.

 

[Dire Roach]

Plenty of players if you run around Queensdale and Orr. The mid-level zones were practically deserted when I played last year.

They "solved" the population problem with megaservers. All non-WvW zones now work as cross-server overflows, so those that were usually empty are now full of players from other servers. Most zones appear to have a cap of 125-150 players though, so you'll never see more than that.

Now I am not saying GW2 is a good game, everything I have seen about it tells me it is a tardsole/WoWtard game with PTW that is only cleverly hidden for those too stupid to breathe and walk at the same time

I agree with everything you said, except you're pretty much talking out of your ass calling GW2 Pay2Win. 99% of the things you can buy with real money in GW2 are cosmetic, and the other 1% are shitty temporary boosts that are removed automatically in structured PvP matches. Perhaps if we consider winning to be dressing up your charr in a lovely gown, then I'd have to agree with you completely.

 

[Avellion]

I agree with everything you said, except you're pretty much talking out of your ass calling GW2 Pay2Win. 99% of the things you can buy with real money in GW2 are cosmetic, and the other 1% are shitty temporary boosts that are removed automatically in structured PvP matches. Perhaps if we consider winning to be dressing up your charr in a lovely gown, then I'd have to agree with you completely.

Early on in the game's life, the game was effectively Pay2Win though. At least in WvW.

 

[Dire Roach]

Early on in the game's life, the game was effectively Pay2Win though. At least in WvW.

How so?

 

[Avellion]

How so?

Not everyone had a truckload of money, so some guilds bought a lot of gems, to afford siege weaponry.

 

[Kane]

The franchise died when Anet was bought by NCSoft, and that's when this thread should've died too.

I don't understand what history has against Blizzard North.

 

[Xenich]

I agree with everything you said, except you're pretty much talking out of your ass calling GW2 Pay2Win. 99% of the things you can buy with real money in GW2 are cosmetic, and the other 1% are shitty temporary boosts that are removed automatically in structured PvP matches. Perhaps if we consider winning to be dressing up your charr in a lovely gown, then I'd have to agree with you completely.

Still P2W, just because you don't see the advantages as worthy doesn't change the fact. Now it has been a while since I have looked at it, but the system allowed you to buy currency to purchase items off the AH. You are going to say "but it doesn't allow you to purchase top end gear" and my response is, if you can purchase ANYTHING to improve your character to circumvent game play, it is P2W. The buff system is P2W, there is no way around it. Just because you think they aren't that much of a boost or that is is PvE only, doesn't change that fact. I remember reading a very detailed write up when the game was released concering this issue as all the fanboys (not calling you a fanboy) were adamantly denying it being P2W. The problem I see with people these days as it concerns P2W is that they have very loose definitions that change from person to person as to what is P2W.

 

[DramaticPopcorn]

You are not very familiar with pay2win, are you...

 

[Xenich]

You are not very familiar with pay2win, are you...

Quite familiar. In fact, I watched it come about in the gaming industry. I watched as iterations of redefining its meaning changed with each successive group who wanted to justify their money transactions.

Pay to Win is circumventing game play by paying real money. That is Pay to win. You can go on about some clever meaning about how... it is only P2W if you can't achieve it in game, or that if it is PvP, or if it is end game gear, etc... but you would be simply justifying your own acceptance of P2W.

BTW, that means exp potions are P2W, just as any RMT potion that increases ones ability to function in a game is. The problem with the later generation of gamers is that they began to rationalize that these aspects weren't actually, cheating, that they weren't P2W, they were just... "convenience" tools for those who claimed they didn't have the time to play, etc... It was a "convenience" all right, it was a convenient way to redefine what was once considered cheating and made acceptable by a mass of people who were just tools looking for easy entertainment.

The idiocy of such defenses are apparent. I especially like the one where people say "well, as long as you can obtain it in game. /derp /derp it isn't P2W". I wonder how those people would feel if we played monopoly and I were to pay real money to get as much cash from the monopoly bank as I liked? I mean... after all... since people can earn the money in the game, it isn't "Paying to Win" right? /derp /derp

 

[Xenich]

Not everyone had a truckload of money, so some guilds bought a lot of gems, to afford siege weaponry.

If I remember right, they also allowed you to use those gems to by green items off the AH. I remember someone saying "Yeah, but they aren't as good as the dungeon items, which can't be bought with gems". The fact that such a claim doesn't dismiss the fact it is pay to win, doesn't one need to first obtain a fair set of gear before they can reasonably go into those dungeons in the first place? If one can do them without that gear, does that gear present an advantage? If it does, then wouldn't that mean pay to win? That is, a person can spend real money to get ahead of another in the game by buying gear to speed up the progress, circumventing the basic game rules, ie... cheating to get ahead?

 

[Riel]

You have no idea of GW2. That game has a lot of drawbacks, none of them is pay to win. Really the most useful cash buff you can get is a 50% karma booster from gem shop ... and karma sucks. In PVP pay to win is unheard off in each and every meaning of the word.

 

[Xenich]

You have no idea of GW2. That game has a lot of drawbacks, none of them is pay to win. Really the most useful cash buff you can get is a 50% karma booster from gem shop ... and karma sucks. In PVP pay to win is unheard off in each and every meaning of the word.

???

You didn't counter any of my arguments. You just claimed me wrong while confirming the points I made.

Are you fucking stupid or something?

 

[Average Manatee]

Temporal advantages are still advantages. Pay to Grind less is Pay to Win, even if its less PTW than many other PTW games.

 

[Dire Roach]

Not everyone had a truckload of money, so some guilds bought a lot of gems, to afford siege weaponry.

In that case, I guess you're right to say that there was a clear Pay2Win situation when the game originally launched in some of the first server matchups. We know that cost of siege blueprints is insignificant to guilds nowadays, though.

Pay to Win is circumventing game play by paying real money.

Sure, you're correct by your own definition, but I think calling it "Pay to Win" is a bit misleading, since the word "win" implies a competitive advantage against other players, not simply skipping gameplay. Like you said, people have widely different opinions of what they consider Pay2Win. Personally, I consider Pay2Win to be a situation where paying real money gives you a clear advantage over other players in a competitive scenario, and GW2 does not include that, at least during the time that I have played it.

 

[Xenich]

Sure, you're correct by your own definition, but I think calling it "Pay to Win" is a bit misleading, since the word "win" implies a competitive advantage against other players, not simply skipping gameplay. Like you said, people have widely different opinions of what they consider Pay2Win. Personally, I consider Pay2Win to be a situation where paying real money gives you a clear advantage over other players in a competitive scenario, and GW2 does not include that, at least during the time that I have played it.

There is only definition to Pay To Win, it is the literal and original definition. As I said, over time... people changed the meaning to fit their acceptance of cheating as they saw it. You are doing that very thing. For you, it is only cheating if it is against another person as that seems to be your moral dilemma of "cheating". You don't see it as "cheating" if the only victim is the game itself. In the end though, it is still cheating and no amount of excuses and conditions will change that. Pay to Win is circumventing game play with money. It is cheating and it doesn't matter if it is in a single player game, a multi-player game, or a competitive game. Cheating is cheating regardless of how many people want to redefine the meaning to make themselves feel better.

 

[RK47]

???

You didn't counter any of my arguments. You just claimed me wrong while confirming the points I made.

Are you fucking stupid or something?

You don't need karma in PVP.
The only pay to win is through buying Gold and using that gold to buy siege engines in WvW

 

[Avellion]

In that case, I guess you're right to say that there was a clear Pay2Win situation when the game originally launched in some of the first server matchups. We know that cost of siege blueprints is insignificant to guilds nowadays, though.

Correct, inflation alone has made that point null now. But back then, I remember there being some balnace issues with some guilds obtaining a large ammount of siege weaponry that were afforded through gems.

 

[Dire Roach]

There is only definition to Pay To Win, it is the literal and original definition.

Oh? According to which official glossary of pop vidyagame terminology? Be more accurate and call it Pay to Cheat instead of Pay to Win, since there is a clear distinction between the two.

Pay to Cheat has been around since the days of hint hotlines and magazine protips, and yes, it has grown to become more accepted over time in a wider variety of forms. However, while most people don't have major objections with Pay to Cheat situations, many are loudly opposed to games that feature microtransaction models that clearly disrupt any competitive balance in favor of those who are willing to pay more. Just because you consider both situations to fall under the same category doesn't mean you can call them by the same name and expect everyone to understand you.

 

[Average Manatee]

Well, GW2 is "pay to massively accelerate your acquisitions" but not exactly P2W, let's be fair here. The game has one billion problems but this isn't one.

Oh? According to which official glossary of pop vidyagame terminology? Be more accurate and call it Pay to Cheat instead of Pay to Win, since there is a clear distinction between the two.

This is the generally accepted definition of Pay to Win as applied to mobile and facebook games (pay to avoid tedium), which is where most games considered PtW originate.

The WvW is arguably Pay-to-Win as well, but also arguably Pay-to-be-just-as-mediocre-as-you-were-before, because WvW is about how many people show up, not their quality.

 

[Shannow]

This seems to have as much point as discussing "What is an RPG?".

There are no clear boundaries.
Is p2w if you can skip 1h of "tedious" gameplay to achieve equal power?
Is 1h so ridiculously low, that nobody in his right mind would argue it's p2w? What's the "right" boundary? 4h? 6h? 10h? What is "tedious"? What is "grinding"? No matter what it is, it's surely not the same for everyone.

The only definition of p2w, that everyone can agree on, is that one can pay for a certain power-level and this level cannot be matched by non-paying players. Everything else is in the no-man's-land of shifting boundaries, conceptions and preferences.

Personally, I'd also consider it p2w if weeks or months of grinding can be skipped. But I wouldn't argue about it with anybody.

 

[Dire Roach]

This seems to have as much point as discussing "What is an RPG?".

Indeed, I just think it doesn't make sense to call it pay to "win" in situations where you're not actually "winning" anything. If you say it's because you "win the game" when you mean to say you completed it, then that's just retarded. Might as well call it Pay to Skip, or Pay to Not Play.

 

[Xenich]

Oh? According to which official glossary of pop vidyagame terminology? Be more accurate and call it Pay to Cheat instead of Pay to Win, since there is a clear distinction between the two.

Pay to Cheat has been around since the days of hint hotlines and magazine protips, and yes, it has grown to become more accepted over time in a wider variety of forms. However, while most people don't have major objections with Pay to Cheat situations, many are loudly opposed to games that feature microtransaction models that clearly disrupt any competitive balance in favor of those who are willing to pay more. Just because you consider both situations to fall under the same category doesn't mean you can call them by the same name and expect everyone to understand you.

It was the original terms way back since its consistent appearance in MMOs. I watched it evolve over the years. I have never heard it called "Pay to Cheat", but I have heard people stretch the acceptance of P2W in order to justify their cheating. They did this because P2W has extremely bad association and so everyone who does it tries to excuse why what they do is not P2W. A game is a set of obstacles to which a person is tasked with defeating/overcoming. The game is constrained by rules to which the player must adhere to in order to "win" the game. When a player pays money to circumvent the rules, they are paying to "win" over the obstacles. In MMOs, leveling (exp), run speed, etc... are all game rules to which a player is constrained to. When a player pays money to eliminate those rules, it is paying to win over them. That is what Pay to Win meant. Now fuck if I know as they have changed the meaning so many times, twisted it to the point it is a worthless word, it has no meaning and nobody can understand what anyone else means because the stupid word has been made into a stupid subjective "What it means to me" in order to make cheating idiots feel better about their behavior.

In the end, call it what you will. It is a bunch of cheating losers who can't play a game, so they have to pay to get past the rules, win, whatever... GW2 is Pay to win, Pay to cheat, "Fucktards paying for whatever". /shrug

 

[Xenich]

This seems to have as much point as discussing "What is an RPG?".

There are no clear boundaries.
Is p2w if you can skip 1h of "tedious" gameplay to achieve equal power?
Is 1h so ridiculously low, that nobody in his right mind would argue it's p2w? What's the "right" boundary? 4h? 6h? 10h? What is "tedious"? What is "grinding"? No matter what it is, it's surely not the same for everyone.

The only definition of p2w, that everyone can agree on, is that one can pay for a certain power-level and this level cannot be matched by non-paying players. Everything else is in the no-man's-land of shifting boundaries, conceptions and preferences.

Personally, I'd also consider it p2w if weeks or months of grinding can be skipped. But I wouldn't argue about it with anybody.

context is important, the historical context has changed. There was a context to it in the begining, it has changed due to the reason I said. IF nobody has a real meaning for it, well... then people can excuse why they aren't doing it. In the end, it is just fucktards trying to excuse cheating.

 

[Xenich]

Indeed, I just think it doesn't make sense to call it pay to "win" in situations where you're not actually "winning" anything. If you say it's because you "win the game" when you mean to say you completed it, then that's just retarded. Might as well call it Pay to Skip, or Pay to Not Play.

You can't win an MMO generally, so the taking "win" literally without context to the use is meaningless. What "win" meant was people could circumvent rules to get past obstacles (ie win past them). For instance, someone buying gold was paying to win because they no longer had to spend the time and effort to obtain the gold. They had an instant win button to get what they wanted. They wanted a new item... press the "I win" button someone brought you one for real cash. Wanted to be max level without doing the work yourself? Press that "I win" button and someone would level you to max for you. Don't want to take the time to earn a mount so you can move faster through the world? Why... just pull out some cash, call out "I win" and bam... here is a new mount for you!

That is what it means in the context of play. People just over time decided to change the meaning so they could justify such. Game studios began to adjust the meaning so they could claim they weren't selling "Pay to Win", they were selling "convenince" and the dreaded ignorant phrase of "what it means to me" trumped proper understanding to which the word now is completely meaningless. Go out and ask people and you will get multiple definitions, it is pointless. Even the GW2 team gave their own "version" of why their game is not Pay To Win with excuses as to what they term Pay to Win to really mean. It is a total Clinton style defense of "Well, that isn't technically sex" all to avoid the main issue.

I watched it over the years change and it was ridiculous to see one idiot after the next change the meaning of the word to fit whatever stupid social acceptance of it was at the time. So... sure... I can go with you and accept that the idiomatic meaning of the word is no longer its original one (similar to gay no longer meaning happy), but at the end of the day, it is still cheating and no amount of excuses can justify people who do it.