These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Pay to win

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#101 - 2012-07-16 20:26:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Corina Jarr
DrSmegma wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Seems I'm being ignored...


Multiple accounts are not pay to win because those accounts can be free. End of arguments.


I think you're being ignored because nobody wants to touch your lack of understanding of the PLEX system with a 10 feet pole. But hey, I like wage slavery as much as you, and it's not like you're giving your ISK to someone whose main advantage over you is to have more real cash than you - oh wait..

I understand PLEX perfectly fine.


PLEX is not pay to win because ISK itself provides no direct advantage.

You can get everywhere in this game without PLEX. All PLEX does is shorten the amount of time you may have to grind/trade/scam. And increase the likelyhood that you will lose RL money by doing something stupid (PLEX in a shuttle).

Edit: and those accounts are are still free for the person who is using them (aside from time investment to get the isk to afford the PLEX).
And consider that CCP sometimes gives away PLEX, that even further undermines its potential as a P2W item.
EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#102 - 2012-07-16 20:29:58 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
Multiple accounts are not pay to win because those accounts can be free (including activation, which can be done via PLEX, ie free). End of arguments.

And Computers are not a factor because they are not part of the game. You might as well argue that having AC in your house makes you cooler and able to perform better, so that would be pay to win.



That would be the case if PLEX could only be bought with isk. But such is not the case.

Computers are a factor, all online games are designed so that lower-end comps can run them. They're not designed around best specs = advantage.


But that's not even the point. Your point is, EvE is not P2W. Why would you have a problem with EvE being really P2W? You accept spying, scamming and all kinds of meta, why don't you accept P2W?

It's trvly a cold and harsh universe, all the way up to its meta. You're a no-life welfare loser? Too bad for you.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#103 - 2012-07-16 20:30:33 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Numbers stem from accounts which have to be paid and funded. That's called payment.
…at which point all games become P2W because all games have “accounts” to provide the numbers that win the match.

You can't have it both ways.

Either numbers ≡ payment, in which case all games are P2W because for all games, numbers are win, thus payment is win.
Or numbers are not the same thing as payment, in which case it's not P2W in those games, nor is it P2W in EVE, because it's not payment that wins the fight but numbers.

Quote:
In EvE, you can have an offgrid boosting alt, and just let your falcon alt/remote repping alt orbit your ship, press F1 Fx once and you're done.
…and then the guy brings two friends, and you lose. Now what? He “paid” as much as you did, and yet you lost. He had the same numbers as you did (if we choose to dissociate the two), and yet you lost. The problem is that orbiting and pressing F1 doesn't help — in fact, it makes your superior numbers payment worth a whole lot less because just like in those twitch games that you claim aren't like EVE, you cannot effectively control all the numbers you brought.

Congratulations, you just invented P2L.

Quote:
"Dissociating numbers from payment": what you really mean is, "bring more friends".
No, what I mean is that payment isn't the same thing as numbers. I also mean that payment isn't a factor in winning in EVE — numbers are. You can have one without having the other, and having the wrong thing wins you nothing.
DrSmegma
Smegma United
#104 - 2012-07-16 20:31:18 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
DrSmegma wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Seems I'm being ignored...


Multiple accounts are not pay to win because those accounts can be free. End of arguments.


I think you're being ignored because nobody wants to touch your lack of understanding of the PLEX system with a 10 feet pole. But hey, I like wage slavery as much as you, and it's not like you're giving your ISK to someone whose main advantage over you is to have more real cash than you - oh wait..

I understand PLEX perfectly fine.


PLEX is not pay to win because ISK itself provides no direct advantage.

You can get everywhere in this game without PLEX. All PLEX does is shorten the amount of time you may have to grind/trade/scam. And increase the likelyhood that you will lose RL money by doing something stupid (PLEX in a shuttle).

Edit: and those accounts are are still free for the person who is using them (aside from time investment to get the isk to afford the PLEX).
And consider that CCP sometimes gives away PLEX, that even further undermines its potential as a P2W item.


Edited too Blink

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#105 - 2012-07-16 20:31:57 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:

PLEX is not pay to win because ISK itself provides no direct advantage.


That's really intredasting
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#106 - 2012-07-16 20:34:01 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Tippia wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
So when a player running multiple alts engages a player running a single character, the single character player has the same amount of characters as the player running multiple characters?
When multiple characters engage a single character, the single character is at a disadvantage. The single character can fix this by having multiple characters on his side.

Payment is not a factor in who wins, thus there is no “pay to win”.


Two players engage each other ingame. The multiple characters ran by a single player engage the single character ran by a single player and the single character is at a disadvantage, I get it so far.

The single player and single character can fix this by having multiple characters, that is, multiple accounts that cost money to fund, and possibly other computers to run. Payment is not a factor...

Then those accounts and computers are free! Isn't this neat? Thanks Tippia!


"Herp derp it's an mmo just get friends lol u suck at social skills no-life casual gamer that only plays on evenings just brings friends to the engagements and then the multiboxer brings his friends who may or may not multibox then everyone brings friends who may or may not multibox then in the end it's all a matter of who can field the most alts... well anyway you're just a friendless no-lifer unsociallyskilled casual entitled highsec dweller lol"


I underlined one of the parts where your argument falls apart.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#107 - 2012-07-16 20:34:23 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
PLEX is not pay to win because ISK itself provides no direct advantage.
That's really intredasting
Many a Hulk miner wish it were some other way, but as luck would have it, Corina is correct.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#108 - 2012-07-16 20:35:05 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Multiple accounts are not pay to win because those accounts can be free (including activation, which can be done via PLEX, ie free). End of arguments.

And Computers are not a factor because they are not part of the game. You might as well argue that having AC in your house makes you cooler and able to perform better, so that would be pay to win.



That would be the case if PLEX could only be bought with isk. But such is not the case.

Computers are a factor, all online games are designed so that lower-end comps can run them. They're not designed around best specs = advantage.


But that's not even the point. Your point is, EvE is not P2W. Why would you have a problem with EvE being really P2W? You accept spying, scamming and all kinds of meta, why don't you accept P2W?

It's trvly a cold and harsh universe, all the way up to its meta. You're a no-life welfare loser? Too bad for you.

I'm a minor, at the mercy of my parents when it comes to EVE.

Would I have a problem with EVE being P2W. A little bit. Mostly because every P2W game I've ever been a part of was crap (even WoT has some glaring issues).
May or may not be a correlation. But it seems that once a company goes for the P2W design, everything revolves around them bleeding you dry.


So, computers are a factor in P2W.
Is the AC in my room that may not be in yours?
Is the breakfast I ate that you may not have?
Is it the comfy chair you sit in that I may not?
DrSmegma
Smegma United
#109 - 2012-07-16 20:35:52 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Tippia wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
So when a player running multiple alts engages a player running a single character, the single character player has the same amount of characters as the player running multiple characters?
When multiple characters engage a single character, the single character is at a disadvantage. The single character can fix this by having multiple characters on his side.

Payment is not a factor in who wins, thus there is no “pay to win”.


Two players engage each other ingame. The multiple characters ran by a single player engage the single character ran by a single player and the single character is at a disadvantage, I get it so far.

The single player and single character can fix this by having multiple characters, that is, multiple accounts that cost money to fund, and possibly other computers to run. Payment is not a factor...

Then those accounts and computers are free! Isn't this neat? Thanks Tippia!


"Herp derp it's an mmo just get friends lol u suck at social skills no-life casual gamer that only plays on evenings just brings friends to the engagements and then the multiboxer brings his friends who may or may not multibox then everyone brings friends who may or may not multibox then in the end it's all a matter of who can field the most alts... well anyway you're just a friendless no-lifer unsociallyskilled casual entitled highsec dweller lol"


I underlined one of the parts where your argument falls apart.


EVE accounts are for free! More news at 1! Big smile

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#110 - 2012-07-16 20:37:52 UTC
DrSmegma wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Tippia wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
So when a player running multiple alts engages a player running a single character, the single character player has the same amount of characters as the player running multiple characters?
When multiple characters engage a single character, the single character is at a disadvantage. The single character can fix this by having multiple characters on his side.

Payment is not a factor in who wins, thus there is no “pay to win”.


Two players engage each other ingame. The multiple characters ran by a single player engage the single character ran by a single player and the single character is at a disadvantage, I get it so far.

The single player and single character can fix this by having multiple characters, that is, multiple accounts that cost money to fund, and possibly other computers to run. Payment is not a factor...

Then those accounts and computers are free! Isn't this neat? Thanks Tippia!


"Herp derp it's an mmo just get friends lol u suck at social skills no-life casual gamer that only plays on evenings just brings friends to the engagements and then the multiboxer brings his friends who may or may not multibox then everyone brings friends who may or may not multibox then in the end it's all a matter of who can field the most alts... well anyway you're just a friendless no-lifer unsociallyskilled casual entitled highsec dweller lol"


I underlined one of the parts where your argument falls apart.


EVE accounts are for free! More news at 1! Big smile


If you haven't figured out how to fund multiple accounts easily without spending a dime yet you should probably stop posting now. Big smileBig smileBig smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#111 - 2012-07-16 20:38:07 UTC
DrSmegma wrote:
...
EDIT: Of course you could argue that it would be the same if you a friend and he said "I'll pay for your account and you give me 500m", but let's face it, that guy on the market isn't your friend and he isn't just doing you a favour, he's doing 20 people a favour and with the ISK he buys his next titan or outpost.

Now say again that he isn't gaining an advantage with his dollar and euros.

Gaining an advantage: yes.

Gaining an advantage that could not be gotten without paying: no.

That is the key. He is paying to have an advantage that someone else will have who did not pay. That is why it is not P2W. Because the advantage is not exclusive.
EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#112 - 2012-07-16 20:40:38 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…at which point all games become P2W because all games have “accounts” to provide the numbers that win the match.

You can't have it both ways.

Either numbers ≡ payment, in which case all games are P2W because for all games, numbers are win, thus payment is win.
Or numbers are not the same thing as payment, in which case it's not P2W in those games, nor is it P2W in EVE, because it's not payment that wins the fight but numbers.

The guy brings two friends, and you lose. Now what? He “paid” as much as you did, and yet you lost. He had the same numbers as you did (if we choose to dissociate the two), and yet you lost. The problem is that orbiting and pressing F1 doesn't help — in fact, it makes your superior numbers payment worth a whole lot less because just like in those twitch games that you claim aren't like EVE, you cannot effectively control all the numbers you brought.

Congratulations, you just invented P2L.

What I mean is that payment isn't the same thing as numbers. I also mean that payment isn't a factor in winning in EVE — numbers are. You can have one without having the other, and having the wrong thing wins you nothing.



Numbers are characters, which are accounts. Whomever brings the most accounts has a clear advantage, whatever the number of playing rl dudes on either side. How is that hard to understand?

EvE is not like a twitch game, because you don't have to manually control nor spam skills on your offgrid boosting alt, and you only have to do very little your falcon alt, your remote repping alts, as you would in any mmos, to have a clear advantage.
You can effectively control multiple accounts, and just cast a glance on your scout alts to see if reinforcements are coming in the vincinity of the engagement.


You can't have numbers without having paying RL persons paying for them. It all boils down to whichever side brings the more accounts, which is really P2W.


Now this all asks for this quesiton: why do you have a problem with EvE being P2W? I personally think it's a shame, but I can live with it. Can't you?
DrSmegma
Smegma United
#113 - 2012-07-16 20:41:33 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:

If you haven't figured out how to fund multiple accounts easily without spending a dime yet you should probably stop posting now. Big smileBig smileBig smile


Just because YOU don't spend money on them doesn't mine that nobody spends money on them. Just biomass. The guy who sells the PLEX that you pay your account with uses your ISK to fly his next titan or run an outpost. Just gtfo. Srsly.

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
DrSmegma
Smegma United
#114 - 2012-07-16 20:44:22 UTC  |  Edited by: DrSmegma
EpicFailTroll wrote:

Numbers are characters, which are accounts. Whomever brings the most accounts has a clear advantage, whatever the number of playing rl dudes on either side. How is that hard to understand?


Very hard for someone whose whole life is centered around the belief that he's playing a major role in a game where sheer skill and personal awesomeness matters, when really, it does not (as much).

Even if 50 ships meet 50 ships in space - as long as one side has to put 10 people in front of the pc while the other side is controlled by 50, that's a clear advantage for one side.

But meh. You know. Meh. The wall is strong in this one. ;)

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
#115 - 2012-07-16 20:44:55 UTC
The game is pay to win....
Has been for years, you can convert money to plex, plex to isk.
You can buy characters with isk.


The game is won with isk, skill/ability no longer matters. (CFC has proven this) Lol






Signature removed - CCP Eterne
Kadl
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#116 - 2012-07-16 20:45:28 UTC
Look at the incentives for the company making the game. The incentives in pay to win are for the MMO company to make things bad and unbalanced. If they do that then you will be encouraged to pay money to make things unbalanced in your favor.

Plex is different from pay to win. From a monetary perspective the company is still selling just one thing: time. That means the company's incentives are focused on playability and a general desire to play.

Cosmetic Items pose a problem. They can divert the attention of the company because they offer an alternative revenue besides time. So long as the cosmetic items do not effect game play the incentives for that aspect of the game (vs dress up aspect) remain focused on playability and good design.

I want my money to go towards good game design so that I can play something fun.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#117 - 2012-07-16 20:46:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Numbers are characters, which are accounts. Whomever brings the most accounts has a clear advantage, whatever the number of playing rl dudes on either side. How is that hard to understand?
It's not. The problem is that you equate numbers to payment, when payment isn't what wins the fight — the numbers and their organisation does.

EVE requires you to pay attention to the fight to high enough a degree that multi-boxing means you only really have one character doing the fighting (and he'll be fighting at less than his full potential). Thus, the same number of characters played by individual humans will make mince-meat out of those alts. In addition, a third guy in the field is worth a hell of a lot more than a third guy off-grid.

Quote:
You can't have numbers without having paying RL persons paying for them.
…but that still doesn't mean that payment ≡ numbers, or that payment = win. All you're saying is that numbers win, and you can have those without paying for it.

Quote:
Now this all asks for this quesiton: why do you have a problem with EvE being P2W?
Because it's better if the game is self-contained.

DrSmegma wrote:
Even if 50 ships meet 50 ships in space - as long as one side has to put 10 people in front of the pc while the other side is controlled by 50, that's a clear advantage for one side.
Indeed. The advantage for the latter side is quite large.
Quaaid
Phoenix Foundry
#118 - 2012-07-16 20:46:33 UTC
Nothing in EVE is pay to win. Everything of consequence in the game is accessible with in game time/resources.


What your problem is, is that EVE is not (in any way shape or form) balanced around being fair. If you are lacking in resources or support, then you are failing at the Meta Game. Those who do that compensate by pumping in extra currency to balance back in their favor. That does not mean that you could not have secured the same thing through being either tangibly or socially efficent (or both).


Tackle what endeavors you can within the scope of your resources, support and scope of influence. This will always vary with the individual behind the keyboard. Compensate with real currency where you are lacking or otherwise reaching beyond your means.
DrSmegma
Smegma United
#119 - 2012-07-16 20:47:31 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
DrSmegma wrote:
...
EDIT: Of course you could argue that it would be the same if you a friend and he said "I'll pay for your account and you give me 500m", but let's face it, that guy on the market isn't your friend and he isn't just doing you a favour, he's doing 20 people a favour and with the ISK he buys his next titan or outpost.

Now say again that he isn't gaining an advantage with his dollar and euros.

Gaining an advantage: yes.

Gaining an advantage that could not be gotten without paying: no.

That is the key. He is paying to have an advantage that someone else will have who did not pay. That is why it is not P2W. Because the advantage is not exclusive.


Come on....... just sit down for a minute. Really? Do you really believe what you just wrote? An advantage isn't an advantage because you can make the same ISK if you spend time instead of money on achieving the same thing?

Really?

You're just grasping for every straw, aren't you?

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#120 - 2012-07-16 20:49:31 UTC
DrSmegma wrote:
Come on....... just sit down for a minute. Really? Do you really believe what you just wrote? An advantage isn't an advantage because you can make the same ISK if you spend time instead of money on achieving the same thing?
Good thing that he didn't write that. Maybe you should read what he actually wrote instead of pulling out your strawman.

He's saying that an advantage isn't P2W if you can have the same win without paying for it.