These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Mag's
Azn Empire
#261 - 2012-07-17 15:27:04 UTC
Two characters living up to their names, funny funny stuff.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#262 - 2012-07-17 15:29:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
EpicFailTroll wrote:
This all has been answered for ten pages at least.
Yes, I suppose. You haven't shown that it is particularly relevant to EVE or that it says anything about the existence of P2W in EVE. You've implied plenty, but not shown that there is any actual connection between the two. I suppose this shocking lack of any kind of answer is, in and of itself, an answer.

Quote:
It can be P2W, so there's no P2W ?
No. Reading — learn it.
Just because something can be had by paying for it doesn't mean it's P2W, especially if the same thing can be had without paying for it, and if whatever you're paying for doesn't generate any kind of “win”. As luck would have it, in EVE, we have that exact situation: there is no special advantage that can only be had by paying for it, thus no P2W.

Quote:
What about the fact that funding alts with RL money is more efficient, faster, funnier -you get to keep the isk and spend it ingame-?
What about it? None of it is P2W.

Quote:
Shortcuts are very much win.
No. Shortcuts are shortcuts. Whether you win or not depends on whether you win or not. One is rather separate from the other. The shortcut in question doesn't provide any special advantages that can't be had without paying, thus no P2W.

Quote:
Alts couldn't be funded through plex, only RL money.
…but didn't provide any special advantage that couldn't be had without paying, thus no P2W.
DrSmegma
Smegma United
#263 - 2012-07-17 15:32:24 UTC
I suppose when CCP starts selling gold ammo for $$$ it isn't P2W either as you can just bring two friends to even the battlefield.

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#264 - 2012-07-17 15:38:38 UTC
DrSmegma wrote:
I suppose when CCP starts selling gold ammo for $$$ it isn't P2W either as you can just bring two friends to even the battlefield.
Does bringing two friends automatically spawn gold ammo? If it does, then no, it won't be.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#265 - 2012-07-17 15:43:06 UTC
DrSmegma wrote:
I suppose when CCP starts selling gold ammo for $$$ it isn't P2W either as you can just bring two friends to even the battlefield.


If CCP sold gold ammo and it was

A: Better than other ammo available.

and

B: Only available through cash transactions

That would be pay to win.

If it is available to anyone for either cash or for ISK, that would not be pay to win... it would simply be a bad idea. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#266 - 2012-07-17 15:43:14 UTC
Khergit Deserters wrote:
I still don't see how that's not paying to win. Consider as an example a wardec situation between corps. Attrition has wiped out each side's best ships. Corp A spends $100 RL money to buy isk (PLEX). It equips a new insta-fleet. Corp B's members are poor instant ramen eaters with no extra cash to spend on EVE. The can only fly the ships they still have, which are their crappier ones.
Who's going to have the advantage in this war? And where did it come from? In-game skill, or out-of-game cash? That sounds like pay to win to me.

Then what happens when corp C gets involved, and corp C is Goonswarm and can afford to send a 1000 man fleet indefinately to kurb stomp you, with everything payed for by items and materials acquired ingame?

You're using a flawed microcosm to try to draw larger conclusions, which is why it "looks" like it to you but is anything other than that in reality.

Again, you are describing a situation where someone has paid to avoid needing to acquire something in-game, and you are not acquiring something anyone else cannot also get WITHOUT paying.

Tell me how it can be "pay to win" when it's possible to NOT pay and actually be in a better position?

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

DrSmegma
Smegma United
#267 - 2012-07-17 15:44:10 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD TYPE40
Tippia wrote:
DrSmegma wrote:
I suppose when CCP starts selling gold ammo for $$$ it isn't P2W either as you can just bring two friends to even the battlefield.
Does bringing two friends automatically spawn gold ammo? If it does, then no, it won't be.


*snip*

Please refrain from personal attacks, thank you.

EDIT: Personal attack removed - ISD Type40

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#268 - 2012-07-17 15:44:23 UTC  |  Edited by: EpicFailTroll
Tippia wrote:
No. Reading — learn it.
Just because something can be had by paying for it doesn't mean it's P2W, especially if the same thing can be had without paying for it, and if whatever you're paying for doesn't generate any kind of “win”. As luck would have it, in EVE, we have that exact situation: there is no special advantage that can only be had by paying for it, thus no P2W.
Shortcuts are shortcuts. Whether you win or not depends on whether you win or not. One is rather separate from the other. The shortcut in question doesn't provide any special advantages that can't be had without paying, thus no P2W.


The special advantage is : not having to spend time grinding isk to fund your alts, which is very much win, as anybody would agree.
Somebody with little time to play and little RL money can not realistically fund alts.

Tippia wrote:
Quote:
What about the fact that funding alts with RL money is more efficient, faster, funnier -you get to keep the isk and spend it ingame-?
What about it? None of it is P2W.


All of it is P2W. You win on all fronts: you keep the isk, and you have the added advantage of alts, vs. someone who cannot fund them, through RL money or time spent.

Tippia wrote:
alts didn't provide any special advantage that couldn't be had without paying, thus no P2W.


But that's wrong: since alts couldn't be funded through plex, only RL money, the clear advantage they gave couldn't be acquired through ingame means -we're talking about a even playfield, same number of RL players vs. same number of RL players-. Still it wasn't P2W?


And still, in Derkastan, you can get a high post in the government, either through giving money to the president (corruption), or working your way up: what is the state of the regime? Is it corrupt? Is it not corrupt?
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#269 - 2012-07-17 15:44:24 UTC
DrSmegma wrote:
I suppose when CCP starts selling gold ammo for $$$ it isn't P2W either as you can just bring two friends to even the battlefield.

This would be pay to win, as you are acquiring something which you cannot acquire with ISK.

I ....I just don't know yet how you guys are not seeing this.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#270 - 2012-07-17 15:46:30 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
I'm going to talk about another game again and miss the point

If you're not able to argue your case by referring to EvE Online then your argument is not about whether EvE online is pay to win but whether using multiple accounts in some other game is pay to win, which I frankly don't give a flying **** about.

If you can point out an advantage you can acquire in EvE by paying, which you cannot earn in game, then you have a case and we can continue.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#271 - 2012-07-17 15:46:42 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD TYPE40
DrSmegma wrote:
Tippia wrote:
DrSmegma wrote:
I suppose when CCP starts selling gold ammo for $$$ it isn't P2W either as you can just bring two friends to even the battlefield.
Does bringing two friends automatically spawn gold ammo? If it does, then no, it won't be.


*snip*


Went right over your head, didn't it...


Big smileBig smileBig smileBig smile




EDIT: Personal attack removed from quote - ISD Type40

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.
#272 - 2012-07-17 15:49:53 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
I'm going to talk about another game again and miss the point

If you're not able to argue your case by referring to EvE Online then your argument is not about whether EvE online is pay to win but whether using multiple accounts in some other game is pay to win, which I frankly don't give a flying **** about.

If you can point out an advantage you can acquire in EvE by paying, which you cannot earn in game, then you have a case and we can continue.


They know that, but since they are so obviously trolling they really don't care.

They just want their 15 pages in the spotlight.

Give it to them, they need it (as they really aren't very good at this). Blink

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#273 - 2012-07-17 15:50:29 UTC
DrSmegma wrote:
Does me bringing my alt automatically spawn you an alt too?
No. But your brining an alt doesn't give you any advantage that I can't gain through other means.

EpicFailTroll wrote:
The special advantage is : not having to spend time grinding isk to fund your alts
That's not an advantage or any kind of win. In terms of game abilities, it doesn't offer anything that can't be had without having to pay for it. Thus no P2W.

Quote:
All of it is P2W.
Nope. None of it is any kind of advantage that can't be had without paying for it. Thus no P2W.

Quote:
But that's wrong: since alts couldn't be funded through plex, only RL money, the clear advantage they gave couldn't be acquired through ingame means
No. They gave an advantage that could be had just fine through in-game means: by having people in those roles. The advantage that creates the “win” is numbers, not payment. Thus no P2W.
DrSmegma
Smegma United
#274 - 2012-07-17 15:51:30 UTC  |  Edited by: DrSmegma
Ok I think I figured the problem in this thread out: Some people are posting to say the truth, while others are just posting for attention and don't care about making sense or being wrong or right. They just want you to reply.

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#275 - 2012-07-17 15:51:52 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD TYPE40
Tippia wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
The special advantage is : not having to spend time grinding isk to fund your alts
That's not an advantage or any kind of win. In terms of game abilities, it doesn't offer anything that can't be had without having to pay for it. Thus no P2W.
None of it is any kind of advantage that can't be had without paying for it. Thus no P2W.

Not having to spend time to get stuff is win, as any person gifted with a semblance of common sense would agree.


Tippia wrote:

Quote:
But that's wrong: since alts couldn't be funded through plex, only RL money, the clear advantage they gave couldn't be acquired through ingame means
No. They gave an advantage that could be had just fine through in-game means: by having people in those roles. The advantage that creates the “win” is numbers, not payment. Thus no P2W.


Snipping again?
"But that's wrong: since alts couldn't be funded through plex, only RL money, the clear advantage they gave couldn't be acquired through ingame means -we're talking about a even playfield, same number of RL players vs. same number of RL players-. Still it wasn't P2W?"

Same number of players vs. same number of players.


*snip*

Please try to stay on topic, thank you.

EDIT: Removed off topic portion of post - ISD Type40
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#276 - 2012-07-17 15:54:08 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
in Derkastan, you can get a high post in the government, either through giving money to the president (corruption), or working your way up: what is the state of the regime? Is it corrupt? Is it not corrupt?

Khanh'rhh wrote:
If you're not able to argue your case by referring to EvE Online then your argument is not about whether EvE online is pay to win

Round and round we go . . .

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#277 - 2012-07-17 16:05:52 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Not having to spend time to get stuff is win
Nope. Spending less time just means you've spent less time. It doesn't let you win anything.

Quote:
But that's wrong: since alts couldn't be funded through plex, only RL money, the clear advantage they gave couldn't be acquired through ingame means
…except that the advantage comes from numbers, which can be had through in-game means, not from some out-of-game payment. It's not snipping — it's showing what the actual advantage comes from (viz. not payment). The same advantage could be had without paying for it, thus no P2W.
EpicFailTroll
Doomheim
#278 - 2012-07-17 16:12:08 UTC  |  Edited by: EpicFailTroll
Tippia wrote:
EpicFailTroll wrote:
Not having to spend time to get stuff is win
Nope. Spending less time just means you've spent less time. It doesn't let you win anything.


Spending less time, or none at all, is having a clear advantage, as any rational person would agree. It's win, in general terms.


Tippia wrote:
Quote:
But that's wrong: since alts couldn't be funded through plex, only RL money, the clear advantage they gave couldn't be acquired through ingame means -we're talking about a even playfield, same number of RL players vs. same number of RL players-. Still it wasn't P2W?
…except that the advantage comes from numbers, which can be had through in-game means, not from some out-of-game payment. It's not snipping — it's showing what the actual advantage comes from (viz. not payment). The same advantage could be had without paying for it, thus no P2W.


But for an equal number of RL players on each side, the side with the most alts has the advantage, therefore it was P2W according to your very tunnel-visioned definition, since alts couldn't be funded through ingame means.

I took the liberty to reestablish my sentence in full, just to show how trollish of a troll you are.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#279 - 2012-07-17 16:20:19 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:
But for an equal number of RL players on each side, the side with the most alts has the advantage, therefore it was P2W

Except in EvE, you can get that same advantage without paying for it, therefore it is not pay to win.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#280 - 2012-07-17 16:20:41 UTC
EpicFailTroll wrote:

But for an equal number of RL players on each side, the side with the most alts has the advantage, therefore it was P2W according to your very tunnel-visioned definition, since alts couldn't be funded through ingame means.

I took the liberty to reestablish my sentence in full, just to show how trollish of a troll you are.


Before PLEX you just bought a timecode with ISK but it was a nightmare for CCP to administer and moderate. So now we have PLEX. Buying gametime with ISK has been allowed for as long back as I can remember.