These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#61 - 2012-04-04 22:16:19 UTC
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
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."

??



Why I believe I can answer that! In fact I already did, quite a while ago: http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1542767

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#62 - 2012-04-04 22:18:02 UTC
dude you bought isk, you cheated.. suck it up and
A quit, play wow
B make a new account and ply fair.
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#63 - 2012-04-04 22:18:21 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
PLEX is not pay to win.

It's pay to skip working for the ISK to buy that titan.
It's pay to buy a titan pilot to fly it.
It's pay to fill your wallet while doing nothing.
It's pay in lieu of grind.

I guess we're all fine with that except me.

Mr Epeen Cool

the thing is, it would eb P2W if it GENERATED ANYTHING... the only change PLEX ahs to the game after ebing purchased is that it ahs the ent efect fo REMOVING isk through transaction fees, because there are NO NPC buy orders for PLEX, if you sell it, t is to another player. if it is to another player, then there ahs been no isk introduced, simply isk trading ahnds, therefore it is NOT pay-to-win, as you are simply trading the commodity (plex) the same as you would trade a ship or module for someone elses isk, the difference ebing that when someone uses plex ccp gets more money than if they just used a subscription.

SUPPORT EVE, BUY MORE PLEX
Ai Shun
#64 - 2012-04-04 22:31:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Ai Shun
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Even worse than ignorance is when people make up convoluted, ad-hoc definitions of things to fit their arguments.

Whether you by the item directly from CCP or indirectly via the middleman of a PLEX, it is still paying real money for an in-game advantage. Therefore, it is P2W.
Yeah, no. That's not P2W for the simple reason that you're not buying any "win" — you're trading the exact same things that everyone else already have. That's, at best, RMT or just plain old MT (but not really, since you're not converting money to items).

So yes, it's pretty stupid when people make up their own ad-hoc definitions of things.


Except there's just one problem: you're wrong.

The first argument was: "It's not P2W because you don't actually buy the items themselves." This was debunked by explaining how you are - you're just using a middleman. Adding layers of complexity to the transaction does not change the fact that it's P2W.

Now the argument is: "It's not P2W because you can only buy items available to everyone else in the game." But... that's exactly what P2W is. Buying items in the game with real life money. Whether those items are available to other players or not has no bearing on what P2W is; this is just another "made up definition". And actually in most games that offer P2W options ("item shops") you'll notice that the items in the shop are the very same items that can be gained via gameplay by everyone else. P2W offers a shortcut; instead of working for what you have in the game, you just pay for it. Hence, "pay to win".

Here's a good way to determine if something is pay to win. Ask yourself "By spending this (real life) money on the game, will I gain an advantage over a player who didn't spend (real life) money on the game in this manner?" If the answer is "yes", then you've payed to win.

It's cute how people who don't know anything about the gaming industry think they have the authority to come into a discussion and make definitions up about it, though. So yeah, keep talking out your ass.

:)


When you can define how having ISK means you have "won" in EVE you may have a point. Keep trying though 'Baby' Brent.
Killer Gandry
The Concilium Enterprises
#65 - 2012-04-04 22:33:41 UTC
Reminds me of another game I played.

Some guy in Earth&Beyond had an awesome character which had the best of the best gear on his ship.
At some point he sold his account on E-Bay and cashed in.
Now one would assume that the one who bought the account did a P2W action.

Howmuch more fun it was seeing his distress beacon all over the place because one thing he didn't buy with that character was the ability to actually know how to use it.

So you see. It doesn't matter howmuch you invest in a game that has no store specific ingame items. In the end you can buy a titan character and a titan to match and the first action you make is instead of creating a bridge to jump your attackgroup in is jump in yourself and die horribly.
Richard Aiel
The Merchants of War
#66 - 2012-04-04 22:34:06 UTC
AureoBroker wrote:
ISK does not garauntee "Win".
PLEX-selling ISK is not different than normal-earned ISK.
And earning ISK is a competitive challenge (can be, though), it's just time-consuming.
The day CCP sells something that can't be attained through ingame methods in any way, that's P2W.
We could even draw the line onto "Not produce-able in game, better than it's normal correspective" and still sellable on market (That giving an effective advantage would depend on the players - if the $$-bought thing is readily avaiable, then who cares where it spawns; if it's hilariously costly, AND has no do-good on the economy, perhaps...)

PLEX is just a way to trade one's money into another's time. And both sides are happy enough to keep the agreement.

Also, ISK is not power. It's not like MD united could blow ten trillions and gain control of a meangingful portion of 0.0.
In another game, you call someone in the best avaiable gear (not righfully earned) going around PVPing a cheater.
in EVE, you call someone going around in Officier gear and Vindicator, doing small-scale pvp.. a pinata. With a giant "shoot me for goodies" painted on it.


unlimited amounts seem to help though, see 0.0

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/buddahcjcc/SOA-3-2.jpg
Richard Hammond II
Doomheim
#67 - 2012-04-04 22:35:53 UTC
Raisa Mole 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)


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.


Dungeons and Dragons Online and Star Trek Online come to mind when ppl say "pay to win"

Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you.
Richard Hammond II
Doomheim
#68 - 2012-04-04 22:37:38 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
dude you bought isk, you cheated.. suck it up and
A quit, play wow
B make a new account and ply fair.


They cheat in that too for some reason I dont understand

Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you.
Virgil Travis
Non Constructive Self Management
#69 - 2012-04-04 22:40:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Virgil Travis
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
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.


I just read your post in New Citizens, I don't hink you have much of a clue about EVE in general, never mind how PLEX works, so you don't own anyone's face, kid

Unified Church of the Unobligated - madness in the method Mamma didn't raise no victims.
MadMuppet
Critical Mass Inc
#70 - 2012-04-04 22:40:31 UTC
PLEX = Hiring someone else to help you through a transaction involving payment via isk. Plex isn't 'pay to win' it is 'pay to hire'. You are effectively paying someone else to play for you in return for paying for their subscription for them.

This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.

"If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed." -MadMuppet
knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#71 - 2012-04-04 22:42:01 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. :(


Even worse than ignorance is when people make up convoluted, ad-hoc definitions of things to fit their arguments.

Whether you by the item directly from CCP or indirectly via the middleman of a PLEX, it is still paying real money for an in-game advantage. Therefore, it is P2W.

End of story.

Feel free to argue little boy - mere words will not spare you from being wrong and dumb.



Its not pay to win though. Pay to win is a business model used by world of tanks for instance I.e gold ammo.
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
#72 - 2012-04-04 23:08:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Micheal Dietrich
At this point I am going to assume that Ranger1 royally pissed somebody off in another thread because this guy is avoiding commentary with the rest of us and is only responding to Ranger1 with a fair amount of hostility.

Edit: Also, excellent read through by Malcanis and his link. I was actually going to make a post with an example of subbing an alt and making him work to fund a main and ask if it were any different from what we see with plex.

Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel **IG OOPE **
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#73 - 2012-04-04 23:16:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
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.


Still overlooking the fact that it has to be better as well I see.

I've given a widely accepted source that defines modern terms, you have provided nothing.

By the definition from the only credible source presented, you fail to meet the criteria of "Pay to Win".

In your example the first day player certainly wouldn't win, and obviously doesn't lend any weight to your Pay to Win argument.

If your old enough to call me "kid" you're in your 70's, congratulations you old fart but I suggest you start taking your meds again.

Quote:
I just read your post in New Citizens, I don't hink you have much of a clue about EVE in general, never mind how PLEX works, so you don't own anyone's face, kid


Classic. Smile

If you want any tips on how basic EVE works, I'll be happy to assist you... for a fee. However, if you want to easily surpass my knowledge, I'm sure all you have to do is buy some PLEX's to "win" at EVE. Blink

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#74 - 2012-04-04 23:20:12 UTC
Micheal Dietrich wrote:
At this point I am going to assume that Ranger1 royally pissed somebody off in another thread because this guy is avoiding commentary with the rest of us and is only responding to Ranger1 with a fair amount of hostility.

Edit: Also, excellent read through by Malcanis and his link. I was actually going to make a post with an example of subbing an alt and making him work to fund a main and ask if it were any different from what we see with plex.


I think it's because he believes I'm the only one with patience to actually put up with his attempt at trolling... and he's probably right.

Malcanis always makes insightful posts, and is one of the more level headed posters on the forum.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Aranakas
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#75 - 2012-04-04 23:53:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Aranakas
If PLEX isn't pay to win and isn't unfair, why is RMT banned?

All I hear is the regurgitation of the exact same BS CCP puts out.

I bet that if it weren't for Mittani telling you to think otherwise, you'd all be sitting comfy in your $200 space pants in a custom vanity ship bought with AUR.

Aranakas CEO of Green Anarchy Green vs Green
Richard Hammond II
Doomheim
#76 - 2012-04-04 23:55:55 UTC
knobber Jobbler wrote:
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. :(


Even worse than ignorance is when people make up convoluted, ad-hoc definitions of things to fit their arguments.

Whether you by the item directly from CCP or indirectly via the middleman of a PLEX, it is still paying real money for an in-game advantage. Therefore, it is P2W.

End of story.

Feel free to argue little boy - mere words will not spare you from being wrong and dumb.



Its not pay to win though. Pay to win is a business model used by world of tanks for instance I.e gold ammo.


Yeah forgot that one

Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you.
Raisa Mole
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#77 - 2012-04-05 00:16:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Raisa Mole
Aranakas wrote:
If PLEX isn't pay to win and isn't unfair, why is RMT banned?

All I hear is the regurgitation of the exact same BS CCP puts out.

I bet that if it weren't for Mittani telling you to think otherwise, you'd all be sitting comfy in your $200 space pants in a custom vanity ship bought with AUR.


For most MMOs, the campaign against RMT is really little more than a PR thing. For example, Blizzard has no real reason to care about RMT or farmbots, since it's not losing them revenue, and the auction house is not one of the major draws of the game, since like most MMOs the ingame economy is laugable. In some countries there would be potential legal problems if RMT were allowed by the EULA too (note below).

CCP is the exception here, they have a couple reasons to care. First, RMT actually does impact their bottom line, at least in a hypothetical way, since a player purchasing from a farmshop on the net is not giving CCP any money. At least in theory, if they couldn't RMT on the net, they'd be buying PLEX for sale, giving CCP more income. This sometimes holds true and sometimes doesn't in reality, but it is an incentive they have that most MMO companies do not.

The bigger incentive is that, unlike most other MMOs, the EVE economy is a big draw of the game, and is a reasonable facsimile of how a real economy works. Nearly all RMT sellers are botters, and it is the botters that are the problem in terms of the economy. Keeping nonsanctioned RMT clearly illegal helps deter those bots, though only by a little bit. Really, when you get right down to it, if they continue on the new path of being effective against bots, they will almost accidentally eliminate nearly all RMT anyway.

Note : The legal concern for legalizing RMT is that it attaches a sanctioned monetary value to ingame goods. This raises the risk that an MMO company could be seen as an employer and the players employees, since they are obtaining things that have a real monetary value. They would then be subject to taxes and laws covering the employer-employee relationship. While in most circles these worries are considered unlikely, the prevailing opinion is that they are best avoided. An MMO companies nighmare scenario goes like this :

1) They legalize RMT
2) Some few people start to make an actual living doing nothing but selling ingame stuff
3) Story runs on the evening news about a player that makes a living like this
4) Idiot Politician X (there are plenty of these out there) pushes through a law forcing MMO companies to track the monetary value of all the stuff players farm ingame and report it for tax purposes

Unlikely, sure, but why take the risk when you don't need to.
Nub Sauce
State War Academy
Caldari State
#78 - 2012-04-05 00:24:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Nub Sauce
PLEX is, without a doubt, a form of pay to win.

In EVE, money is a form of power. Power via better ships/modules/rigs, power via market manipulation, power via hiring mercs, ect.... This is a well known fact. (ISK = in game power) Even if it is not the only form of power, it still is a form of power in EVE.

PLEX is purchased with real $$ then can be sold for ISK in game. (Real $$ = PLEX = ISK)

Transitively through PLEX, $$ can quickly and easily become power wthin the game. (Real $$ = in game power)

The fact that PLEX is a legal and easy vehicle for real $$ to become in game power which can and does provide an unfair advantage, it is pay to win. Perhaps not to the degree of an instant win weapon, but it does still provide an in game advantage.

The only fair way to judge it would be to compare two players or corps/alliance with all things equal at war with each other. Skill, skill points, ships, pilots, ect... all equal. Then one side purchases a huge pile PLEX and sells them for ISK. This side now has an in game advantage due to real $$ being paid for it. This ISK could be used to purchase better/more ships, allies, mercs, supplies, ect...

Sure, the underdog may just pull ahead and win it in the end with luck or some outside factor. However, that does not negate the fact that one side purchased an in game advantage with real $$.
Ai Shun
#79 - 2012-04-05 00:27:41 UTC
Nub Sauce wrote:
PLEX is, without a doubt, a form of pay to win.

In EVE, money is a form of power. Power via better ships/modules/rigs, power via market manipulation, power via hiring mercs, ect.... This is a well known fact. (ISK = in game power) Even if it is not the only form of power, it still is a form of power in EVE.

PLEX is purchased with real $$ then can be sold for ISK in game. (Real $$ = PLEX = ISK)

Transitively through PLEX, $$ can quickly and easily become power wthin the game. (Real $$ = in game power)

The fact that PLEX is legal and easy vehicle for real $$ to become in game power which can and does provide an unfair advantage, it is pay to win. Perhaps not to the degree of an instant win weapon, but it does still provide an in game advantage.

The only fair way to judge it would be to compare two players or corps/alliance with all things equal at war with each other. Skill, skill points, ships, pilots, ect... all equal. Then one side purchases a huge pile PLEX and sells them for ISK. This side now has an in game advantage due to real $$ being paid for it.

Sure, the underdog may just pull ahead and win it in the end with luck or some outside factor. However, that does not negate the fact that one side purchased an in game advantage with real $$.


You could equally replace PLEX with time.
Nub Sauce
State War Academy
Caldari State
#80 - 2012-04-05 00:29:11 UTC
Ai Shun wrote:
Nub Sauce wrote:
PLEX is, without a doubt, a form of pay to win.

In EVE, money is a form of power. Power via better ships/modules/rigs, power via market manipulation, power via hiring mercs, ect.... This is a well known fact. (ISK = in game power) Even if it is not the only form of power, it still is a form of power in EVE.

PLEX is purchased with real $$ then can be sold for ISK in game. (Real $$ = PLEX = ISK)

Transitively through PLEX, $$ can quickly and easily become power wthin the game. (Real $$ = in game power)

The fact that PLEX is legal and easy vehicle for real $$ to become in game power which can and does provide an unfair advantage, it is pay to win. Perhaps not to the degree of an instant win weapon, but it does still provide an in game advantage.

The only fair way to judge it would be to compare two players or corps/alliance with all things equal at war with each other. Skill, skill points, ships, pilots, ect... all equal. Then one side purchases a huge pile PLEX and sells them for ISK. This side now has an in game advantage due to real $$ being paid for it.

Sure, the underdog may just pull ahead and win it in the end with luck or some outside factor. However, that does not negate the fact that one side purchased an in game advantage with real $$.


You could equally replace PLEX with time.


Yeah, that is pretty much my point. You can either play (time) to win or pay (real $$) to win. PLEX falls into the 'pay (real $$) to win' side of things.