These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Now that the botters and RMTers are banned...

Author
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#41 - 2012-04-04 21:13:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Steel Wraith wrote:
I submit to you the following:

Pay to Win:
- Handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold/isk/whatever.

Pay for Plex:
- Some guy grinds missions/incrusions/whatever for isk.
- You hand the developers $$ and receive plex.
- Some guy passes grinded isk to you and receives plex.
- Some guy spends plex for another month of play, thus keeping his own $$ in his pocket.

Net ISK gains: None. Or a small -isk to tax.
Net $$ gains: None.

Where is the Pay to Win? It's still play to win, it's just that some other player is doing the playing.

All it does is shift who pays the subscription, and encourage people to open more accounts.



This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added.

Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".


Jaboc, an example of Pay to Win would be the more powerful gold ammo only available for cash in WOT. Another, but different example from the same game are the available only for gold Premium tanks, as they have a much higher in game currency potential.

Niether of these items are obtainable by the rest of the players unless they pay real currency for them, and both give a significant advantage in game.

Anything other than this type of item YOU are lumping under the self proclaimed Pay to Win tag are in fact NOT Pay to Win. They simply have more than one way to obtain the same item, with no restrictions on who can or cannot obtain the item. Pay TO WIN by definition indicates that if you pay cash you can obtain an advantage that people who do not pay cash can not obtain.

This does not apply to EVE.

Perhaps YOU should stop imposing your purposely vague definitions, which make literally NO sense, on terms simply to try and make a nonsensical point. The worst term you could possibly use to describe PLEX use in EVE would be Pay to Save Time... and I think most of us can live with that quite happily.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#42 - 2012-04-04 21:15:59 UTC
Steel Wraith wrote:
Then we have different definitions of Pay to Win.

In my mind, Pay to Win is a design model that seeks to encourage massive amounts of microtransactions by spawning items in exclusive stores for players too stupid to realize the game they are playing is wallets online.

In your version it seems Pay to Win is any single player receiving a reward for spending cash no matter where the reward comes from? Am I way off?

Whether more isk really means in-game advantage or not is debatable, I don't want to get into that. Maybe it's unfair to players not willing to pay for others' subscriptions in order to avoid the grind, but I don't see it as having a negative impact on game design. Game-crushing Pay to Win with microt-ransactions and exclusive cash stores is the real evil, and we don't have that here.


Here's a question:

What's the difference between someone who buys ISK from another player for $$ vs a player who buys PLEX with $$ and sells it to another player for ISK? Excluding the entire "CCP doesn't like that because they want their slice of the pie, too."

??
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
#43 - 2012-04-04 21:17:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Micheal Dietrich
I think he's purposely avoiding my questions now.

Edit: To answer your question, RMT is buying straight up isk. Plex is buying account time. But they have created it so that you may sell that account time or use it on your own however you like.

Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel **IG OOPE **

Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#44 - 2012-04-04 21:18:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Jacob Staffuer
Ranger 1 wrote:
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Steel Wraith wrote:
I submit to you the following:

Pay to Win:
- Handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold/isk/whatever.

Pay for Plex:
- Some guy grinds missions/incrusions/whatever for isk.
- You hand the developers $$ and receive plex.
- Some guy passes grinded isk to you and receives plex.
- Some guy spends plex for another month of play, thus keeping his own $$ in his pocket.

Net ISK gains: None. Or a small -isk to tax.
Net $$ gains: None.

Where is the Pay to Win? It's still play to win, it's just that some other player is doing the playing.

All it does is shift who pays the subscription, and encourage people to open more accounts.



This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added.

Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".


Jaboc, an example of Pay to Win would be the more powerful gold ammo only available for cash in WOT. Another, but different example from the same game are the available only for gold Premium tanks, as they have a much higher in game currency potential.

Niether of these items are obtainable by the rest of the players unless they pay real currency for them, and both give a significant advantage in game.

Anything other than this type of item YOU are lumping under the self proclaimed Pay to Win tag are in fact NOT Pay to Win. They simply have more than one way to obtain the same item, with no restrictions on who can or cannot obtain the item. Pay TO WIN by definition indicates that if you pay cash you can obtain an advantage that people who do not pay cash can not obtain.

This does not apply to EVE.

Perhaps YOU should stop imposing your purposely vague definitions, which make literally NO sense, on terms simply to try and make a nonsensical point. The worst term you could possibly use to describe PLEX use in EVE would be Pay to Save Time... and I think most of us can live with that quite happily.


Obviously your made up definitions of P2W (based on one paltry example - lol) are correct because you put the word "fact" in CAPITAL LETTERS.

In case you're confused: I was being sarcastic, and you're an idiot.
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#45 - 2012-04-04 21:19:31 UTC
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Vanir Tsero wrote:
You clearly don't understand what "Pay to Win" actually is.

Pay To Win is where you pay real money for ships that are not obtainable in game with Isk.

For Example:

If CCP Sold a Tech 4 Battlecruiser for $25.00 That is considered Pay to Win.
If CCP Sold Tech 3 Ammo for $15.00 for a count of 5,000 That is considered Pay To Win.

If CCP Sold an In-Game item for $20.00 that can be traded in game for in-game currency... That is NOT Pay To Win.
Why? Because it gives noone an advantage. The 600,000,000 ISK I got from selling the Plex on the market, 7,000 other players just made by running Incursions for a few hours.

Your ignorance bothers me for some reason. :(


hi i have no brains and then make stuff up to try and sound smart.



actually plex ISN't pay to win
because basically all you are doing is selling someone else game time for isk.
any other item though would be pay 2 win ( exception to vanity items) because even if CCP sold titans for $ it messes with the market
plex is just an item representative of 30 days of game time, it has no other purpose... heck for a while iirc you couldn't undock with them in cargo.
also the in game advantage is that of isk only, and it fluctuates based on supply and demand as with any item that can be farmed in game.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#46 - 2012-04-04 21:22:51 UTC
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Steel Wraith wrote:
I submit to you the following:

Pay to Win:
- Handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold/isk/whatever.

Pay for Plex:
- Some guy grinds missions/incrusions/whatever for isk.
- You hand the developers $$ and receive plex.
- Some guy passes grinded isk to you and receives plex.
- Some guy spends plex for another month of play, thus keeping his own $$ in his pocket.

Net ISK gains: None. Or a small -isk to tax.
Net $$ gains: None.

Where is the Pay to Win? It's still play to win, it's just that some other player is doing the playing.

All it does is shift who pays the subscription, and encourage people to open more accounts.



This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added.

Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".


Jaboc, an example of Pay to Win would be the more powerful gold ammo only available for cash in WOT. Another, but different example from the same game are the available only for gold Premium tanks, as they have a much higher in game currency potential.

Niether of these items are obtainable by the rest of the players unless they pay real currency for them, and both give a significant advantage in game.

Anything other than this type of item YOU are lumping under the self proclaimed Pay to Win tag are in fact NOT Pay to Win. They simply have more than one way to obtain the same item, with no restrictions on who can or cannot obtain the item. Pay TO WIN by definition indicates that if you pay cash you can obtain an advantage that people who do not pay cash can not obtain.

This does not apply to EVE.

Perhaps YOU should stop imposing your purposely vague definitions, which make literally NO sense, on terms simply to try and make a nonsensical point. The worst term you could possibly use to describe PLEX use in EVE would be Pay to Save Time... and I think most of us can live with that quite happily.


Obviously your made up definitions of P2W (based on one paltry example - lol) are correct because you put the word "fact" in CAPITAL LETTERS.

In case you're confused: I was being sarcastic, and you're an idiot.


Ahhh, for a moment I thought you were serious. Now I realize you are simply a troll.

Well actually, we all knew you were trolling, but it was fun watching to do the dance for our amusement.

Are we done with this guy yet, or do you guys want to let him caper about a bit longer?

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#47 - 2012-04-04 21:23:11 UTC
INB4 "no ur wrong because FACT: *insertmadeupfact*"
Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#48 - 2012-04-04 21:25:15 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
My logic is inferior. I'll just say condescending things instead.

Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#49 - 2012-04-04 21:25:33 UTC
Ranger1, you may refer to me as Mr. Daddy from now on, because yes, you are now my bizatch.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#50 - 2012-04-04 21:33:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Urban Dictionary

1. pay-to-win
Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying.
Dude, you've spent like 400 bucks on this game so you can beat everyone who hasn't spent any money. Pay-to-win noob!
Ranger 1 win's and humiliates the simpleton. Big smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#51 - 2012-04-04 21:43:26 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Urban Dictionary

1. pay-to-win
Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying.


I highlighted an important part that your tiny mind conveniently glossed over.

(also: lol@urbandictionary, because using someone else's made up definition to support your made up definition is double-fail)
THE L0CK
Denying You Access
#52 - 2012-04-04 21:46:05 UTC  |  Edited by: THE L0CK
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Urban Dictionary

1. pay-to-win
Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying.


I highlighted an important part that your tiny mind conveniently glossed over.

(also: lol@urbandictionary, because using someone else's made up definition to support your made up definition is double-fail)


Fixed

Do you smell what the Lock's cooking?

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#53 - 2012-04-04 21:48:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Urban Dictionary

1. pay-to-win
Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying.


I highlighted an important part that your tiny mind conveniently glossed over.

(also: lol@urbandictionary, because using someone else's made up definition to support your made up definition is double-fail)


It's a commonly used slang phrase, which Urban Dictionary collects into a central repository.

So, tell me, what items can you obtain in EVE that are better than those obtainable by those that do not pay cash directly? By the way, many players (myself included) can easily generate the ISK to pay for any ingame item you would care to name faster than you can earn the money to pay for them with cash.

We can put that to the test any time you like. Smile

But yes, back to the point, what BETTER items can you obtain than I?

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Steel Wraith
#54 - 2012-04-04 21:54:52 UTC
Jacob Staffuer wrote:


Here's a question:

What's the difference between someone who buys ISK from another player for $$ vs a player who buys PLEX with $$ and sells it to another player for ISK? Excluding the entire "CCP doesn't like that because they want their slice of the pie, too."

??


Okay I'll bite. Buying plex is a one-way transaction of $$ to isk as far as real currency is concerned and flows to CCP.

RMTing (obviously what you are getting at), however, is against the EULA/TOS and involves a very similar mechanic of receiving isk that someone has grinded for cash. But in this case the cash flows directly to a player. In other words, a player is now doing the reverse transaction to buying plex and is receiving real world cash for isk.

This means there is a real incentive for some people to play the game, or bot, solely to generate isk and convert to real world cash. With plex, however, you can only really get $10-$15 per month "back" in subscription fees per account that you are playing. The Plex system only incentivizes grinding to pay for your subscription and pvp or for your station full of faction fit bling tengus.

Parting shot: Your argument is becoming the convoluted one.
Minabunny
Bogus Brothers Corporation
#55 - 2012-04-04 21:56:51 UTC
Plex is hardly 'pay to win'. It's good for the players and it's good business for CCP. there is no need to remove it.
DonHel
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2012-04-04 21:59:06 UTC
Once there was a time before plex, that people met on a place on these forums called the game time bazaarr or some crap.. which is still there..
Raisa Mole
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#57 - 2012-04-04 22:00:34 UTC
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Urban Dictionary

1. pay-to-win
Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying.


I highlighted an important part that your tiny mind conveniently glossed over.

(also: lol@urbandictionary, because using someone else's made up definition to support your made up definition is double-fail)


While I fully recognize at this point that you're just trolling, I'll jump in anyway and agree with everyone who said you have a severe misunderstanding of what P2W actually is. As has been repeatedly stated, pay to win games are games where the items available ONLY from the cash shop give you a clear advantage over anything that you can actually get ingame.

Example of a pay to win game : Dragon Nest, or in fact most games made by Nexon. The items available exclusively from the cash shop give you bonuses not available anywhere else, making it impossible for a non cash shop user to compete (assuming equal skill).

Now, the fact is, there are plenty of people who legitimately believe that ANY form of cash shop is pay to win, regardless of whether it's true or not, and they bandy the term around to try to bring more people to their side. Fortunately these people are a minority, since there are plenty of good microtransaction games out there that are not pay to win.

Example of microtransaction game that is not pay to win : League of Legends. Skins are available only through cash purchase, but they give you no ingame advantage. You can also purchase characters or runes through cash, but you can also get those through IP, which requires just grinding games.

The difference here should be obvious. Moreover, real pay to win games don't exist for long, since they are almost universally hated. If you are actually being sincere in your arguments, then it is unsurprising that you have never played one, since there aren't many around. Most respectable game companies learned a long time ago that you can sell fluff items like skins and hats and it doesn't bother many people, but if you sell anything that buffs your character in a way that a non-spender can't, it will kill the game.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#58 - 2012-04-04 22:00:54 UTC
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Vaal Erit wrote:
Jacob Staffuer wrote:


This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added.

Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".


I dare you to try this. I could use another guy who plans to "outplay me" while I get a 1.2 B tengu kill that drops 600m worth of loot. Not only are you paying to lose but you are paying me to win. Thanks.


Roll

You're missing the point entirely but cool let's play "make stuff up" only let's spin it another way:

One character has been playing for years. He is flying a Rifter. Another character has only been playing for a couple of months, and he purchased his Hurricane through PLEX transactions. The two meet up in a lonely asteroid field...

See, I can make up stuff to support my argument, too.


Bet you a PLEX that the Rifter wins.
Raisa Mole
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#59 - 2012-04-04 22:02:33 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Vaal Erit wrote:
Jacob Staffuer wrote:


This is just the "masking P2W with layers of complexity" argument. You're still handing the developers $$ and receiving spawned gold and ISK despite the cute little middleman they added.

Also: Pay to win does not preclude play to win. You can still outplay a person who bought their shiny gear with $$. This is an example of "taking the terminology too literally".


I dare you to try this. I could use another guy who plans to "outplay me" while I get a 1.2 B tengu kill that drops 600m worth of loot. Not only are you paying to lose but you are paying me to win. Thanks.


Roll

You're missing the point entirely but cool let's play "make stuff up" only let's spin it another way:

One character has been playing for years. He is flying a Rifter. Another character has only been playing for a couple of months, and he purchased his Hurricane through PLEX transactions. The two meet up in a lonely asteroid field...

See, I can make up stuff to support my argument, too.


Bet you a PLEX that the Rifter wins.


True that. Or he finds out that he can't break the tank and just wanders off, no harm no foul.
Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#60 - 2012-04-04 22:12:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Jacob Staffuer
Ranger 1 wrote:
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Urban Dictionary

1. pay-to-win
Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying.


I highlighted an important part that your tiny mind conveniently glossed over.

(also: lol@urbandictionary, because using someone else's made up definition to support your made up definition is double-fail)


It's a commonly used slang phrase, which Urban Dictionary collects into a central repository.

So, tell me, what items can you obtain in EVE that are better than those obtainable by those that do not pay cash directly? By the way, many players (myself included) can easily generate the ISK to pay for any ingame item you would care to name faster than you can earn the money to pay for them with cash.

We can put that to the test any time you like. Smile

But yes, back to the point, what BETTER items can you obtain than I?


First of all, you're still operating from a false premise; ie, that P2W is defined by buying items that are not normally available in the game. Unfortunately I'm not going to validate your false premise by humoring it. However, if you reread the (unofficial, slangy) definition you posted, there's these words: "at a faster rate". An example of this would be a first day player buying Battleships his first day on EVE by slinging PLEX around, vs someone who ran missions for 6 months because they couldn't afford PLEX2WIN.

Basically I own your face, kid.